This is John. Can you guys hear me? This is John. Can you guys hear me? >> Yep, we can hear you. >> John, we can hear you. >> Cool. >> All right, I lost the agenda, so let me pull that back up. All right. So, this is the stormwater
task force meeting of Tuesday, March 3rd at 7 PM. Um, the agenda lists all topics which may be discussed at the meeting and are those reasonably anticipated by the chair. Votes may be taken as a result of these discussions. Not all items listed may be in fact be discussed
and other items not listed may also be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by open meeting law. Following information is provided for members of the public that would like to participate in the meeting remotely. I'm not going to read that cuz if you're here, you're here. Uh, please note that while an option for
remote attendance and or participation is being provided as a courtesy to the public, meeting hearing will not be suspended or terminated if technological problems interrupt the virtual broadcast unless otherwise required by law. Members of the public with particular interest in any specific item on this agenda should make plans for inerson
versus virtual attendance accordingly. We are only meeting virtually tonight, so that doesn't really apply. Um, gonna call to order. Roll call. Uh, Tim Wilsmer, that's your last name, right?
>> Yeah. >> John V. >> Hi. >> And I am here. Renee Mi and Mark Muzzy are not here tonight. Um, Mark may join us at some point. Okay. Um
I don't think we have public comment since we don't have any members of the public. Uh we don't have any announcements. Does anyone have any announcements? >> No. >> Uh and then just going to move on to our board discussion which is the discussion of the stormwater utility draft handout
that Jarice has prepared for us which is lovely by the way. >> Yep. Kudos. >> All right. So, do you I actually went over it and um I I would think that I had a note and then
it would be further down. So, I really had no notes on it. Um any what what are other people? >> Um yeah, I
>> comments on some of the slides. Wait, let's go with Tim first. >> Sorry. I I had one minor note about uh on one page saying that the price the fees given are not decided yet. This is just for like demonstrative purposes,
but that was it. Everything else was good. >> Yeah. And Tim, I did add that note to that slide. So, just >> I saw the email. Thank you. >> That's a good point. So, >> Okay. Awesome. I didn't see that draft. I only saw this draft because I have been busy all week, so I only saw this
one, which you must have updated. >> Oh, I actually I apologize. I didn't send out a new draft yet, but I will. Um, but I I did address Tim's comments and I addressed Bill's com comments. So, >> wait. So, is it I'm looking at the draft that was sent out a couple hours ago.
>> Okay. That's the FAQ's document you're talking about. Okay. >> Oh, okay. >> No, I should have clarified what we were talking about. I wasn't sure when you said handout. I was thinking FAQs, but then I know we started talking about the presentation. So, >> okay. Yeah. So, you take over. >> Oh, so, so I guess Yeah, I guess you
brought up the FAQ's document. I don't know if I know I sent that out kind of late. I don't know if everyone has seen that document. >> Well, so I missed >> I have not looked at that one yet. >> Okay. >> All right. So, each of us has one base covered. >> So, yeah, that was just sent out today.
Um, and of course that can we can add to that and you know even throughout this process even if we hand it out as it is Thursday night we can continue to add to it as we get more questions and stuff. But yeah, so this was just kind of some definitions up front and then kind of dived into some of the questions we've been getting. Um, and just some general
information about stormwater utilities. >> Yeah, I really liked this. I think I missed the other one. I thought that this was the an updated version of that. So it's been a week at work. >> Oh, no. It's okay. The other one I I didn't send you guys till Saturday morning. That was the presentation that
you had to download which I have to share and we can certainly walk through tonight, but that was Yeah, the other item was the presentation. So, it's just been the kind of the two things in the last few days. >> Okay, >> we're going to quickly look at that. >> I thought the FAQ was great. It
basically says here's the problem. We got a need. We're not meeting it. We're behind schedule, under budget, and this is our this is our proposed solution which will work has worked for other towns. Where is Here it is.
John, I agree the um FAQs that that was very good. >> All right. So, were we planning on just looking at the the other one or do you want us to just I I'm going through it right now. Would you just like to I wish I had looked at it before. I thought if I had
known there was two, I would have >> Are there going to be hard copies of the FAQ and hand it out at the meeting or something or how's that going to work? >> Yeah, I think that was definitely the attention intention. Do you want me to bring some hard copies with me? I can certainly do that if that would be helpful. >> Um, yeah, I would recommend that. Yeah.
>> Okay. Um, but ultimately I was thinking of course you'd post it on the, you know, on the town's website and um, >> yeah. Who who does that typically? Is that Bill? Do you do that or Yeah. >> Who does that? Okay. >> Yeah, there's a woman that does it. Carara, I just send it over to her.
>> Okay. >> So, I'm on slide seven and I'm just curious. So, Mulpus Brook uh next to where it says pollutants causing potential health impacts. Is there really nothing that we have that we know of on record for Mulpus Brook? So, if we
can if you zoom in a little bit. So, what happens with some of these receiving waters is not all designated uses have been assessed. So, I'm trying to remember if we see if I can look at my version and just zoom in a little bit more and see if I can figure out if that was the case with Mopus. I'm thinking that probably is, but it's hard to see
on that map cuz it's tiny. Um because the different colors kind of show what the designations are. So like if it's a category, you know, you know, five, it requires a TMDL. Um because they found an impairment associated with that receiving water. Um
why is it it jumping out to me on here? So I'm thinking it might not it might not be that it >> is the source of the mercury contamination. >> Yeah. Is the source of mercury contamination the fist tissue is that a storm water thing or is that like a atmospheric thing. I thought it was the
>> coaly. Yeah, the mercury is really atmospheric deposition. >> Um, and that mercury, there's a mercury TMDL that pretty much covers most of Massachusetts. So, we added that there just because I mean, there is an impairment, but is it associated with storm water per se? No. So, I also thought about leave that off. I mean, I
don't want to be misleading either. >> Um, and also most >> in my opinion, it makes people think about making sure that the environment is clean and healthy so that there's no contamination. So even if it's not particularly storm water at least gets people we're thinking about >> uh this is really in the context of a
broader scope thing which is pro protecting the environment. >> So maybe maybe it's wise to leave it in there. Yeah. >> Let me just look again at Musl Brook. I mean I can see it up at the top of the map and it's blue and I don't know if that's showing as a category 3 um or if it isn't on the 303D list. So let me
just check because I don't want to I I guess we don't want to act like it's oh it's perfectly fine, right? doesn't have any issues. Um because if it's that it hasn't been fully assessed then I might you know just put a note about that on there too just to make that clarification. >> Jerry in one of the documents I have
from CI >> it says Musbrook has lack of cold water assemblage >> and temperature >> and it looks like a category five. >> Okay. So it's saying that it does need something. So, I think the issue there with the lack of cold water assemblage,
um, it probably, if we check the integrated list of waters, it probably says that it's a it's like a non either it might say it's a non-pollutant or it might say I have to look again on that. Um, it might say that it's not um,
some of the it's weird. Some of the impairments it says in the permit to contact EPA for clarification. So, it's kind of interesting, but I'll I'll look at that and see what it says. >> Question. What is cold water assemblage? What does that mean? >> I That's a good question. I've seen that
a lot, but again, we haven't linked it to anything related to to storm water. So, I have to >> Yeah, look that up. >> Definitely heard it. It's not unfrequent in terms of, you know, other receding waters having that designation, but we haven't linked it to storm water. I
haven't I guess yeah um >> looked at it in depth but I can certainly follow up on that. >> Yeah I can tell you I take my dog walking through the lane property and the hickory woods and that's really the source of like all these tributaries that feed mulpus and it's all conservation land and woods. There's not
a whole lot of industry or commercial or residential. So it wouldn't shock me if there's no >> impairment of lessly. >> Yeah. I I from heard from people who live on the lakes though that they feel like Mulpus is bringing stuff into the lakes.
>> So that's why I was surprised by um >> were they specific? >> I know it's bringing a lot of sediment because there's like a where Maltra was a source or the mouth, what do they call it? There's enormous amount of deposits and the people that live on that end of the lake are losing the lakefront
because it's filling in slowly over time. >> Yeah, >> that may be what they're referring to. Not sure. >> I think people were talking about also just like the stuff from lawns and just making their way >> making its way down. >> Um there was I forget who it was.
I think it was Hickory Hills. Um it wasn't this year's lake report. I think it was LA last year's lake report. They were saying that where Hickor Mulpus empties into Hickory, they have a lot more issues. where milkus feeds into Hickory. There
are a lot more issues in other parts of the lake. Like that was like Hickory 5 or something. There's like all different parts of Hickory Hills. You live on Hickory Hills, right? >> Yeah, I'm down the street from Alpus. >> Okay. So, it might have been this year's
where they were talking about, you know, how Hickory is segmented into different areas. >> Yes. >> For all of the treatment plans. And I think that that area where Mulpus comes in was the
the the most impacted part of Hickory Hills as far as issues go and that the thinking was >> because of the things that Malus brings in there. But >> yeah, there's a lot of sentiment that comes in there. >> Yeah. >> And the people that live down there are
losing a lot of fun. Yep. >> I was just looking at the draft integrated list. I think it's the 24 2026 draft. I don't know that's finally yet. And it actually does list list bacteria from Opusbrook, but that's we might have pulled from the final list, the earlier list, but it might be. Looks like it's on the draft list as as
bacteria. Yeah, these lists get updated every two years, but they take forever to get final. So, um, but let me I'll look in that a little closer and we can add that just to make sure we're being comprehensive there. Even if it's even if it's on the draft, I'll still add it and make a
note. >> Um, I just finished going through the FAQ. Uh, I liked everything I saw there. It looked pretty good. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean feel free if you, you know, look at it in more detail after this meeting and you want to um, you know, send me anything you think that's
missing or add on to any of those answers or or if there's new questions you think we should address that we haven't, then I can certainly, you know, make any updates needed until the meeting. >> Sure. >> Uh, do you want to go to slide six, which I think is the one before this?
>> Okay. Just a suggestion. Um, the EPA requirements, you could highlight which of the EPA requirements we're currently not meeting so people can see identify exactly what our deficiencies are in our budget and our what our requirements are.
>> Maybe. >> Yeah. No, we can definitely do that. >> Color code them green and yellow and red. Red means we're just completely falling flat on our face. Green is yeah, we're doing that. Or yellow is we're making good attempt or falling short. I don't know. Just a suggestion. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I feel like some of it kind of gets and I know on another
slide, Bill, I think you had a comment. I think some of it kind of gets a little lumped in together and I think maybe it's important because it it really is a very long list of requirements and so I don't want to short change you know what compliance looks like for communities and the level of effort associated with that. >> I think the storm water sampling I don't
think we're doing any of that right that be a red line item. >> No, we are doing some probably be yellow pollutant identification and removal. any of that. >> Uh identification. Yeah. Removal. No.
>> Okay. Hatch basic cleaning. That's the one that you're really doing not too good on, right? Sweeping. Yeah. >> Infrastructure inspection. Yeah. So, a lot of those line items. I don't think anything's green there. >> I haven't I'll look at your year 7 annual report, Bill. I haven't looked at
that in a little bit. I know you sent it to me previously. So that kind of just CI I think puts that together for you, right? I don't think or do you do it you have them do it right. So yeah, so it kind of really highlights where you're kind of curling out with progress and so I think we can highlight some of the more you know some of the kind of short
shortfalls there as well. >> Okay. >> So you had a slide 25 and then it was a table and had a bunch of numbers on it. We can talk about that. we couldn't. >> Yeah, I think that was the one where we were trying to show what the impact was
going to look like. Um, yeah, like this one, right? >> So, the residential A, B, and C, are these hypothetical or did you actually pull those from like the uh assessor's report or assess? >> So, so the average um the average home
in Lunberg costs around 530,000. So, that's why we made that kind of be and then we were trying to pull from either side of it just to capture other homes. If it's if it's for illustration purposes only, it doesn't have to be tied to a particular property. You could
put hypothetical impervious areas there and say maybe half of 4,200 for the for the little guy and one in the middle you could put 4200 and the one on the top side put twice 4200 and each one would still have a $100 storm water budget. >> Right. Right. Show that's not going to change.
>> They'll kind of drill home the fact that independent of who you are, where you live, how much in service area you have, you'd have $100 if you're residential. >> Right. Yeah. And I think I think Bill, you were working on this a little bit today because I saw the communication back and forth between you and Renee and I had been working on this one and I did flesh
it out a little bit more, but it didn't quite send the message that I wanted it to send. Um, what generally what I want to show is that, you know, and and I don't know where there was some discussion about like, well, what budget number are we using? Because I had used the 500,000 that you had sent me, but again, I know Renee was concerned that
that included some overhead costs as well. Um, but I guess I was just trying to look like, okay, if we need to raise 500,000 additional in funding, how does that get aortioned among these different, you know, these different properties and to show that, >> oh, residential's paying, you know, more
than the fee would be and the commercial are paying less than their fee would be and just kind of showing that. Um, >> so your very last chart has like a a really cute schedule on it and in the summer of this year if this gets voted in then we would be meeting and basically go over the budget and try to
nail this down exactly. So you might put a little caveat there that basically says this is um projected and um over the summer of this year the task force would uh finalize it or come up with a proposed budget which is present at the town
>> at the town. Yeah. Yeah. No, it's a little >> I give I can give you numbers for the uh the yellow to be added >> if you like them. >> So, I I added some numbers myself. I just wasn't I need to look at it again and I can I can certainly, you know, share that with >> I can tell you what I think I would put
there if this were my table. So, if the residential a fund storm water budget via property taxes, I would put 23 there for residents A, 28 for residents B, and 34 for resident C. And that's based on a simple formula. You take the number of thousands and multiply by 14.39 which is
our tax rate and then our um storm water budget represents about about 0 or 371% of our of the tax levy which is what the residents and the commercial properties pay through taxes >> and that's where that came that's where
that came from. >> Yeah. So I think I did a similar analysis John. I think the only difference was that I assumed I think you were assuming a much smaller storm water budget, right? Of like 125,000. >> Yes. >> My numbers are higher. So I think >> Oh, okay. So you're saying the new budget, not the old budget.
>> Yeah, I was using the new budget, I guess. >> So if you go the new budget, yeah, just instead of using 125 over like 35 million, use the new budget over 35 million and you get a different percentage. >> Yep, I get it. >> That's fine. I just didn't know people like typically with this we're trying to show that >> you know that they're going to be paying
you know for residential like the fee will be less and be more you know consistent across the board. Yes. >> Um but it does show for whatever reason like when I calculate small residential a we're at about $80. So for that population it is showing that under the utility they're going to pay more. So I felt like then maybe that's not a point
we want to make in that sense either. But um I also thought about taking out the residential piece of this and just showing how it impacts the commercial because is a big difference there in terms of what they're current paying because I think you had I think these are your scenarios, right, John? The the
10 million was a parcel that you had pulled out, right? >> Yeah. >> Yep. Yep. I recognized those numbers. I looked them up to see which properties they were and I saw them in the in the assessors. >> Yeah. So they came from Yeah. >> Yeah. Uh the only the only other number that I want to come I want to mention is
I I don't think you were around when we were talking about the tiers. So I think maybe the tier information that you got was maybe something that CI CI had published and we really haven't gotten an update on that. But we had talked about having like upper tiers because when you get to those like over like
500,000 square feet properties we capped it at 10,000. CI had proposed capping it at 10,000 but we we didn't want that. >> Okay. So if you extrapolate, yeah, the tiers up, um, then I think you'll get a number for commercial property B, which is on the order of almost 20,000. And I
think we want to do that because we're going to talk about giving partial abatements to like encourage, you know, good housekeeping practices. Um, we're going to end up cutting that back from 10,000. I think it's one of our our our more significant properties and I don't want to give up that money, especially if we give them a partial payment.
>> Okay. Okay. No, I appreciate you pointing that out because we were pulling from CI's table because we don't have our tables finalized at this point. So, that's a good point. I don't want to give Yeah. misinformation as if commercial B again and we don't have property. So, I guess that's good. But, >> um, >> but yeah. Okay.
>> Yeah. The tax exempt, I'm not criticizing. I'm just saying when I looked at the tax exempt one, that's the uh I think it's a city church which used to be called Twin City Baptist. >> Okay. >> That's uh $3,800. That's I hate to ask them for that money because it's church, you know what I
mean? And they're going from a zero budget to a 3,800. So people the the the message we're trying to communicate is there's a source of revenue there which we should be tapping into and it's crazy not to because you know they're using our storm water system and we they need to contribute >> but that's a big hit. So
>> yeah I know and some people do take issue with that. I've had you know municipalities feel bad for like you know cemeteries or churches and want to provide a little bit of a >> cutback for them. So do you think we should >> we have we have to get it out there? You know what I mean? And get feedback.
>> So how are you feeling about this slide? I mean do we feel like maybe we don't include the slide at this point? You don't have >> I like it a lot. I like it a lot. So it basically is and I like including the res or the the column that you have to be added. I think it's important information so people can make see the
tradeoff. >> Okay. All right. All right. Well, let me add in the numbers that I have and then I'll probably resend it just so you guys can take another look at it. >> All right. >> Um, and make sure you're you're comfortable with it and we'll modify it a little bit just to, you know, >> Yeah. It was interesting that you said that these like the chart that you had
on the previous slides, the the the one shopping complex in Denim, they're really paying 100 over $100,000 in store water fees. >> Yeah. So, that's I believe actually no, you know what? I was gonna say that's place and I don't think it is. >> Holy. >> Yeah. Wow. And that eru rate is
different from all the other properties. It's like twice as much or more. Is is there a reason for that? Well, I was going to say with Denim, the one thing to note is that um they have a tiered structure for their small residential and it is their fees are
higher than any other community in Massachusetts because they're trying to raise about >> So when you get to million when you get to the upper >> the rate fee well if you divide the uh annual fee by the >> number of square feet it's just a bigger number for this property than the other properties. I just thought that was
interesting >> of how it's structured. Yeah, I'd have to look back. This was a Obviously with the billing tier shown, >> but if that's what if that's what these big properties are paying and the physic only manager is aware that this is what they have to do in order to appease the town because there is a big infrastructure they're taking advantage
of and they need to maintain it. Maybe right >> maybe they're going to be okay with $20,000 at Walmart. I don't know. >> Yeah. No, this is this is what they are paying in denim. And I can certainly ask the client if he's had any, you know, I'm sure any push back. I'm glad you put that out there. Let the manager at Walmart Mountain see this and say, "Holy
cow. And I didn't know if you wanted to show all those different denim parcels or if that's too much information you want to focus on. You know, >> I think it's interesting. It's >> okay. I'll I'll re look at those numbers though and just make sure. But yeah, those are pulled from the billing tier table. I don't know what the ranges were for each tier. I'd have to go look that
information up. So, can you go to slide 26? That's 26. I think so. >> Okay. Okay. I don't know why but on slide when I reviewed this I had the comment that we do not expect the fee to exceed $100 for at least the first three
years maybe longer. So you have a bullet there that says fee will not exceed $100 per year but within what time frame? >> Right. >> So I think you had said the last time you talked that when you established this you really don't want to give everybody an abatement right away because you really need to grease the
you know you need to build up your funds. So that makes sense and we'll probably do that. But we don't but we are promise we want to get this process in place where the commercial and industrial look at their properties and say well we got to do something to mitigate this otherwise we're going to pay through the nose and we're going to
it's we should do something. Um so does it make sense to put something in it that says for a short period of time and then we'll reassess it after all the abatements get processed. I think the other big issue here too is that we're in a place where we're staring down a new permit becoming
final. So if I if it was kind of like, oh, a new permit came out last year and we've already fully assess what the compliance costs are and we can lay all that information out. We're not in that, you know, that position. And I could see where some people might say, oh well, if we're looking at a new permit, why don't we hold off on this and, you know, look at this when we get the new permit out.
But, I mean, it could take, who knows? I mean, you know, EPA has this draft permit out. They're saying now, last I heard was, "Oh, hopefully by the fall they'll have the final permit out." But I think, you know, there's just a lot going on, I think, with the administration. And so it's it's very much like an unknown at this point. Um, but I agree with you. I think if say a
permit, new permit comes out in a year and we it's very costly and you don't have the money and you want to relook at your fees at that point. I don't want to Yeah, I agree with you. I think we need to have some kind of caveat on that so people aren't, you know, expecting it >> to be stable for, you know. >> Yeah,
>> we're we're going to I guess it's a good talking point. So once this is up there stimulate discussion, we basically tell people that we're trying very hard to make the cost stable, but because there is a dynamic here that we have no control over. We don't know who's going to apply for abatements. We don't know what the new requirements are going to be, expect some kind of turbulence,
>> but we're going to try to manage it to the best of our ability. >> Right? And I think I think once we have that, you know, for instance, if that new permit comes out and get a handle on, I mean, still the expectation is not to keep the, you know, increasing this fee annually. It's to plan ahead and and keep this fee stable for, you know, like
a 5-year period, I would think. >> Yep. Yep. Yep. >> What's slide 27 say? I have a note on that one, too. >> Okay. So, if we have 3711 properties and each one has on average
4,200 ft, then you can just multiply those together and get a number like 15,526. >> That's fine. Yeah. And Bill mentioned that too. And I and I did I did add that in. I just those 37 some are multifamilies too bit off but >> and yeah so it using those numbers I got
a little tiny bit different percentage is 58.9 instead of 565 and >> 411 instead of 40 so if you do that math and maybe you can fill in that table >> yeah I think I think the goal here is what we were trying to show so the percent of revenue actually I think came from the proposed fee structure from the
CI report because we're trying to correlate like okay >> we want to make sure that there's an association between how much impervious surface area is associated with the small residential and how much of the revenue is being generated just to make sure it's it's you know fair and equitable. So I think that's what we were kind of kind of showing not
necessarily that the percent of revenue is going to exactly equal you know the previous surface area but that there's there's a pretty good correlation there. >> Yes. Yes. I I guess in order to help sell this, if we somehow the store works out in a manner such that the residents don't pay
any more for the utility and the the excess additional revenue comes from commercial and other properties, then I think that'll be a selling point. At least I like to think it's a selling point. >> Yeah, exactly. Yeah, definitely.
>> All right. Uh slide 32 was the last one I had comments on. So, so I don't want to be the tail that wags the dog, but I think I give up the 50% number. Um, I like it because I think it'll diffuse a lot of the push back because some of the fees are going to be
so high and people don't want to pay this. Um, but I don't want to, you know, speak for the whole task force. Um, that's just my opinion. It it also kind of makes sense to me that the first year we should not give abatements unless
unless there maybe exceptions maybe nonprofits. What do other people do other towns give nonprofits special treatment or is are they across the board? >> No, I was going to say um regarding the 50%. So that's based on just what other communities are doing. So there's no, you know, when I look at all the credit
programs for other Massachusetts municipalities that have utilities, nobody's offering a credit of more than 50% because obviously there's the cost associated with usage of the roadways. >> So 50% is actually what other towns are doing, too. >> Yes. Yeah. So 50% is is like based on all of the data we have from Massachusetts. So nobody
>> that was that was my guts talking when we came up with that number. And it really you got to admit when you cut the price expense of something in half, that's pretty significant savings. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And that that makes a that packs a punch when you deliver when you present this to people and say, "Yeah, well, you cooperate with us and we'll uh you'll
cut back your fees a lot." >> So, all right. Well, I'm perfectly okay with sticking with that. It makes sense that we should um do other towns give them like full abatements after the first year or do they kind of phase them in? >> So, I have some clients that have been
like, you know, I want to start getting revenue and I don't want to start taking away revenue. So, they've chosen not to have an abatement program available >> um right at the onset where other communities have felt like nope, I feel like we need to be as transparent as possible. This is an incentive. I think we need to roll this out together. Um
and the the rule of thumb is to assume about you're going to lose about 10% of your revenue through the abatement process instead of >> do they deliberately increase their budget on the first year by 10% because they expect they're going to >> Yeah. when when we did we did look at that for a couple communities. Yeah. We
were like all right we need to this is what you really want then we need to assume 10% higher if we're going to get you know >> okay >> if those funds you know taken away. >> So all these details we can work out over the summer. >> Yeah. >> If everybody approves >> a lot of the nuances.
>> Okay. All right. You know you know what program kind of this reminds me of is the safe driver insurance point with of the insurance companies for the cars. You know what I'm talking about. So if you get a ticket, you get a drive, you get a point on your on your right.
>> And you have to pay a bigger fee. You have to pay a penalty. So the the bad drivers are actually subsidizing the good drivers. So this is kind of like the good housekeepers are subsidizing the or the bad housekeepers are subsidizing the good housekeepers. Another
question I guess I I was just thinking Bill about your questions that you had um which I think I mostly addressed but I one I know you had me we talked about like maybe the sewer commission was going to be taking the lead on some of this. It looks like we reverted to the select board or is that how we're putting it forth at this point?
>> Yeah. So, I talked to town council and to it's not impossible to get the the sewer commission to be a sewer/storm commission, but first it has to go to
the Massachusetts general law. So, it's got to go there first and then town meeting. So, it's probably a two-year process, right? So, at this point, I think just leave it at select board. >> Okay,
>> sounds good. Well, were there any other com I'm trying to remember what all your comments were and I feel like I addressed most of them, but I didn't know if there was Trying to think what else you had on your list. If there was anything worth talking about, I guess. Yeah, you said you addressed them, but
let me let me look. >> Gonna pull up your was Monday, right? Yeah. Um >> Oh, slide nine. I had more catch basins, right? We've been
>> doing inventory, so we found more. >> Also, on slide nine, you had a range of 32 million to 68 million. Yeah. So, we use the higher just use the higher range for that. Yeah. >> Yeah. I just thought it was too big of a range. So, let's go with the high number.
>> Yeah. If you told me it was a hund00 million infrastructure network, I would believe you. I can't help but feel like there's $100 million invested in storm water and stuff. >> That was that slide 10.
Capital funds are used for projects and and for equipment. Uh what was the next one? Oh, we talked about slide 25. I think you questioned whether we should keep it or or not. I said keep it, right? That's the one we just talked about.
>> Yeah. So, I'll refine that one and we'll we'll keep that. >> Slide 27. Same comment Sean had about um calculating this impervious. Uh Whoops. Slide
28. I said, "Should we add IDE requirements?" Well, >> I did add that. I think I think it was kind of captured in that MS4 consulting support, but it's kind of buried in there. So, I think I added that afterward as being like kind of a key >> kind of and again, this is about maybe
trying to be more explicit in terms of um you know, kind of what's required under the permit and what we're trying to accomplish. >> Yeah, >> I guess that was the other thing. this slide. I didn't know if if you know I feel like we're saying oh it's going to be used for like drainage improvement projects but right now we don't really
have a line item in the budget for that and I it's tough too because earlier like I'm trying to make the argument with the chapter 90 funds that and you are using I think a good amount of chapter 90 funding for drainage improvements and you know but really we haven't capt we don't we're not funding those through the utility yet because
it's not in our budget right so it's hard to say that that's going to change I guess immediately anyway right maybe down the Yeah, my gut says take that out. Take out the drainage improvement >> improvement. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> What does everybody else think? >> Uh yeah, that seems uh like a reasonable course of action. >> Yeah, I think you ought to make the call. That's you're you're the guy who's going to be in charge of the funds and what to do with them. So, it's really your discretion, honestly. Do you think by adding the
responsibilities of the stormwater program manager that helps sell that position better or I I'm just curious how you what you guys thought of the table. >> Uh which table specifically? >> I think it's the slide before this, right?
>> I'm all confused here. I can't get back to Zoom. Come on. you got too many things open. >> I think people if you're going to add a a body, I think you're going to have to sell it to Finn. Uh they're going to want to know that he's fully gainfully employed and he's actually very
productive and he's not there's isn't any downtime. So I think if you have a chart there to basically this is what the guy's going to be doing, that's kudos. So you really need to see that. >> Yeah. So that's what that's what we're trying to do is just to really be like there's a lot of different hats this person's going to wear. >> Um and and make sure that's that's
clear. >> Yeah. Maybe there's other things too that aren't even there that we want to add, but I just wanted to Yeah. >> This one right here. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Which of those line items are things that you would have to pay for if we did
not have utility out of your budget? Like you had to hire a consultant to write reports and things like that. Right. >> Right. So some of them would just never get done if we didn't Right. >> Yeah. >> I mean, who's really doing who's going
to do construction oversight? Obviously, the building inspector will inspect things, but that's not not for drainage. Um, you know, I just feel like a lot of this stuff kind of doesn't happen
>> if you don't have somebody >> who signs off on new constru new storm water construction on a project. >> Planning right now, right? >> Well, if it would have to be like a new road or something, right? Because
nobody's putting in new storm water stuff on the roads except for me, right? Are you talking about just on the roads? >> I thought we were talking about >> Well, there must be a new development storm water. >> Like on Townson Harbor right off 2A,
there's five houses going in. So, someone must have done a storm water plan for the hat. >> Yeah. So, that goes through the planning board and they use a consultant. >> Okay. So, someone must inspect it after it's um constructed or in the process
and sign off on it, >> right? So usually the final inspection they'll call me. I try to meet him because it's my last chance to get anything corrected, right? So >> Okay. So he would do that. >> Yeah. >> So I think I tried to capture that with the permitting oversight for reviewing
like the storm water permit applications, the plans, right? And then helping with site inspections like as needed. There might be smaller projects maybe that you wouldn't use an outside consultant for, you know, that you might be able to handle in-house like you said or a bill would help you with the inspections that you currently do. And then construction oversight would just
be Yeah. more complex drainage projects or not not even necessarily complex, I shouldn't say that, but other drainage improvement projects that you might lead um where you want to have your own, you know, this person can act as the resident inspector rather than hiring that work out. >> Right.
>> The other thing is like the the administration like reviewing the storm water utility credit and fee abatement applications. Obviously, that's kind of a you know, we need to have somebody in that role. And I guess initially I was thinking, oh, if you have the I just don't see it being anyone but a you know, I don't see like even if the sewer commission took the lead on this,
they're probably not doing that. The select board's definitely not doing that, I would think. But so I feel like you need Yeah, you need someone to be kind of overseeing that part of it. Yeah. Would he help design work if anybody of the residents came and asked him for design
um tips for the or the commercial properties if they wanted some uh review of the property and recommend? Would he be able to do that? >> To Yeah. To review plans. Definitely. Yeah. Oh, or help design, you know, rain gardens and drainage systems on
>> commercial properties and residential properties. >> Yeah, most engineers aren't going to come looking for help for that. But, >> but they might come in and say, should we put it on this piece of the property or this piece or a question like that
and be able to work with them on a question like that. >> Okay. But he's kind of sort of on call for the residents and commercial properties. Is that a true statement? >> Yeah, I guess so. I mean, like I am, right? I get calls all the time.
>> Yeah. All right. So, what do you Okay. Focus on the storm water aspect of >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay, I think it looks good. >> It's funny. I was just thinking if there's any community I can think of that we've worked with where they don't have some type of, you know, like storm
water engineer or something, you know, to support the utility. And I would say probably most do. Um, I was just thinking of Rutland. Rutland doesn't currently, but they actually just said that they're hiring. they have, you know, just a DPW director and now they're going to be hiring um for a town engineer position which they hope to,
you know, they plan to partially fund through the utility. >> Can you go to that slide that has the five towns and how many people there are and >> what their fees are and stuff? >> What slide is it? >> He went out to play.
>> Yeah. >> Okay, that was it. That was it. >> I like that United States chart, by the way. That's a really good one. Mhm. >> Yeah. Go back to the one that has like the five towns. >> It was that
>> one more. Two. One. Two more. Maybe. >> Next one. Next one. All right. Fine. >> It's there some place. I saw you just went >> the other direction. >> Yeah. >> And next one. texture.
>> Yeah, that's it. So, which of those towns have a dedicated storm water manager or engineer? >> Chsford definitely does. We help them with their utility and they >> Okay, but they're big. We're like 11,000 12,000. How about >> Right. Rutland, I said, is hiring looking to hire an actual town engineer,
which they don't have currently. >> Who is that? >> Rutland. >> Oh, okay. And they're about our size. Okay. Yeah. >> And Debbie full-time. >> Yes. Yeah. Pepperel has one. >> Oh, who did you say? >> Pepper has one.
>> I don't know about Pil. I know they had >> I can look that up. >> Pepper is like very um at the forefront of all this stuff, I feel like. So, I wouldn't be surprised if they did. >> They did. Yeah. PEPL actually had so
that when they unrolled their utility at first they had a flat fee for everyone which is kind of what Rutland has right now which is kind of not very equitable but um but it's a way to kind of get something in place and and get started right so that's what they did and then they went back and they relooked at their rate structure and that's when
they kind of made it more equitable by you know doing that tiered structure so but yeah I can look at I don't I don't know too much about their current program but I can certainly look into that if you think that's a good you know a good comp because I think that's important for this because sometimes we get people standing up saying, you know, you're trying to say, you know, Newton has this utility. Well, we're nothing like Newton. You know, we want to make
sure people feel like, you know, um, you know, communities are similar. Um, and Westward's been very progressive. I mean, from the beginning, >> Pepper is a lot like us with population wise and sort of like ratio of residential to commercial. I would think it seems like
>> um, if they had a dedicated storm water, that would be a good example to to use. When did Pil pass their storm water? Um, it was several years ago now. I want to
say, gosh, I remember it was before CO. So, >> it looks like they have a town engineer that's been there since 2021. >> Yeah, I would say >> they also have another one that's been there since 2023. Yeah, I say it's
probably 20 I bet it's like 2018 if I had to guess that they've had it in place. Um, yeah, I can definitely do a little more research on, you know, just what how they're using their funding and and whatnot, and we can have that to, you
know, offer if anything comes up. I like that chart. I have a whole list pulled together that I had someone update recently that hope it might be missing some, but the ones that we know of of every community in in Massachusetts that has a utility, I can certainly send that along just to
see if anything else pops out in terms of another community that you wanted to highlight. Um, if you think there might be better ones, we can certainly swap out, you know, some of these other ones. If denim were there, what would their
what would their fees be? >> Um, so denim >> has >> some of the some of the fees that you're getting from those commercial properties just blew me away. >> Yeah. Would you like to show that in this table just so they have an overview of that or can certainly add it where
we're talking about their parcels later on? I >> It's just me. I'm curious. >> Yeah. In in contrast, it might be like somebody on the high end of uh the luxury option. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Know I mean we did we did that all
their information. They're definitely >> I don't think we need to go down that path. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. He looks like you have room to fit another line item there if you wanted to. >> Yeah, I'll look at the list. See if there's another good comp in there. Yeah, Denim again, they have the the phosphorus control plan for the Charles
and so that's been the driver um through that. So, um, Well, one question I had was on slide four. Um, I didn't know if you had any photos, Bill, of anything in town that you wanted to highlight instead of these
other communities. >> Um, yeah, let me look. >> Maybe like Yeah, I think I got from that September 11 storm. I should have a few pictures. Okay. Yeah, that'd be great. These are ones we just like I said >> September 11 storm. Yep. September 11.
People will remember that. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It was actually is the same storm that triggered the Lumpster event. The Lumpster damage. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Was that 2022 or
>> 23? because it was as I moved here. >> We had just Brett Ramson had just finished doing all of our drainage work like like the like the week before >> it's dormant and he sent me a text to say I'm afraid to ask what does your property look like and we looked every square corner of the basement and all
around the property and then we're dry all the way around. >> So So Brett did a good job. How much rain was I was trying to remember. Lemonster got hit >> 11. >> 11 inches. It was. Wow. >> 11 in. You're kidding me. >> Yeah.
>> In like very short period of time. >> That was crazy. >> Yeah. It was over like not even a day, I think. Right. >> Like an evening. >> Yeah. >> And it never stopped raining either.
Like we moved here, our basement flooded and we moved here and then like it just kept raining and it would keep flooding. We flooded like five times when we moved here. The Hickory Hills Dam over topping project was in response to Ty and Bond
is like a civil engineering firm that was like our consultants we hired >> and they designed it for a 500year maximum probable event with 15 inches of rain over our watershed over a 24-hour period that would cause the dam the Hickory
Hills Lake to overflow the Earth & Dam and could uh breach it. So we had to put uh geo web on over the dam to protect it in in case that happened. >> And the dam held up >> during that rain >> uh that during that rain there was it
went over the auxiliary spillway but it didn't go over the dam so it was not an issue. See 11 across the whole watershed 11 may have been localized. So, but they're they're saying if you have 11 15 inches where the whole
watershed, which is seven and a quarter square miles, then mulus will the ground will saturate and mulus will look like the Nile River and the Hecky Hill basin will just fill up and overflow the Earth and Dane. But we haven't seen an event even close to that. That's like I said,
a 500y year event. That's what they're planning for. Yeah. I feel like 500 years event 500 year events are really 100year events now though >> nowadays. Yeah. >> Yeah. The only other time I can think of
that Vermont had a rain event where they just had horrible flooding and that was some kind of a tropical storm. Maybe the remnants of a hurricane blew through and then just dumped a ton of rain and there was like huge. That's the kind of thing that if it was if it hit us, maybe that's the kind of event that would have triggered that kind of a, you know,
water dam storm water. >> Yeah, that was Barry. They did it twice. Same day, two years in a row. That's what you're talking about. A friend of mine is from Barry >> and she went back and helped with
cleanup and um they had the same thing on the same day. Not as bad the second year, but yeah, that was really hard on them. I guess Bill, as far as the setup for
the presentation, um I was going to plan to bring my laptop, but do I need to do you do I need to bring like a screen or a projector or anything? >> Good question. I'll ask. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I don't remember if they have that or not. >> Which room is it in there?
>> Uh I think we're going to be in the uh the larger room. Uh >> okay. Yeah. >> Can somebody reach out to the library tomorrow to find out? >> Uh, yeah, sure. I can take care of that.
>> Yeah, I will too. >> Oh, okay. Yeah, Bill, just on that last slide, sorry, the numbers there. So, it said 60 to 80 miles of storm drain pipe and then 40 to 50 miles of road with storm water
infrastructure. So I I think I came with those numbers and I need to build a bill to verify them. >> Okay. >> So I know not every stretch of road has a storm drain because a lot of them just have like swailes on the side of the road or it just kind of like the road is
crowned and it just goes to the side of the road and it trickles along side of the road and it goes to a a lake or something like that around here. Okay. Where I live anyway. >> So I know there's less miles of storm water alongside the road, but there's some storm water drains that take it from the road to wherever it takes it. Right. Right. Yeah.
>> So, it was just it was just me just, you know, just trying to estimate what >> Okay. >> But at least it gets you in the ballpark of what the at value of our storm water infrastructure is. >> I could take a look. I don't know. >> The more accurate the numbers are better because someone might spit on them and
>> and if they're not 100% accurate, that's some people are weird. They kind of jump on inaccuracies like that. But the whole purpose is is just to give you a concept of how valuable this network is, this infrastructure is it's definitely the $50 million park.
>> No, and I think that I think it's a great point to make like we have this system and it's but we're not what are we doing to maintain it, right? And and and reinvesting in it and Yeah, I like that slide right there. >> Yeah, me too. >> Somehow we need to
I think I I think the takeaway is all these properties are going to start managing their storm water. They'll be at least they'll be aware of the storm water and do things to try to control So how far along are you estimating or calculating how much impervious there
area there are on the on the properties? >> Yeah. So that that analysis is done. It's that's all complete and we have all the data. We've reviewed the data. Yeah. It's all final. Um we've gone through the data. we were just getting to a point where we were trying to um I wasn't sure if we were keeping the rate
structure and just updating the data or if we were looking at a potentially a different rate structure. So, um I think that's the next step is to kind of kind of dig into that with the group a little bit more and talk about um >> so they'll refresh my memory. Who's going to do that? Who's going to calculate
like the the new rate structure? Is that something that I think it was in the original contract with uh WNS, but then we kind of backed and said, "Well, we know what we want to do. Is there any contribution from WNS or is it something a collaborative effort or?"
>> No, we did we I did have some hours in there for us. I was I was thinking, Bill, that and we talked about this and I was like, "Oh, I think we should put a little bit, you know, we won't put like a full scale." Okay. >> Um and I did have our team kind of start looking at that already because I mean, we can do a lot of that pretty quickly, but I think
>> I think we wanted to get feedback. Maybe we'll put together a rate structure, send you all the data and everything, get your buy in on it and see. >> So, what I would like to do since I'm the engineer >> and I'm >> like all the data, >> if you give me the impervious area data
based partial number or the or the address uh identify the properties some you said was there 700 if I remember is there 700 properties? >> Yes, there's 700 that we did. Not all of them had impervious surface area in the end. But okay, we basically defined the
700, you know, we knew that was what was included in the budget and so we looked at land use code and tried to, you know, part. >> So I would go through the assessor's spreadsheet which has like 5,000 plus parcels and those 700 line items I would enter in previous area associated with
each one of them. Then I can start playing with the spreadsheet and figure out do trade-offs on different ways of >> of uh you know assigning the fees and what the different tier structures. >> So begin to I can begin to kind of do that kind of work but I don't want to do it if somebody else is going to do it
but I might do it independently and just kind of compare notes to see uh if it makes sense to me. >> Yeah. No, I think I think that sounds great. We can definitely get that all that data over to you. You have all of that >> in a spreadsheet. I think there's just a lot of like nuances, you know, obviously that always come up that it's worth kind of talking through. I know we talked a
little bit about condos and how you want to approach those. >> I started looking at nuances yesterday. There's a bunch of nonprofits and some of them from what I can tell are just open land. >> Um some of them are very admirable and I almost don't want to give them a storm
water fee like it's it's a bridges and it's assisted living for you know people in the town. Yeah, that's you know it' be kind of nice to give them an instant abatement honestly. Um so so it's it's it's all over the map. Um, so there's all kinds of special considerations for a lot of these properties. So I think
someone's going to have to like pour over it and try to be equitable. >> Yeah. One of the actually two scenarios that came up I actually have on my screen. I'm just looking at then the Jaclyn Drive area. It seems like you know and these are things kind of we drill down into a little bit but like
217 White Street right in Lunberg. I think initially maybe that was a house with a large plot of land and then I believe maybe the land was sold off to create Jaclyn Drive properties which are basically look like kind of like duplexes in some cases. Um
but I think they didn't have like a land use code associated with them or something. So they were kind of missed. So I was having our GIS team go back and delineate those. Um, >> yeah, >> but >> I know my wife and I used to live on 2527 Williams Drive. We converted the duplex into a condex,
>> but there's a piece of property there that I recognized because we established it as Williams Drive Condominium Trust. >> Okay. >> And it's just the trust and there is no land associated with it. It's listed as a nonprofit. So, it doesn't make sense to give them a uh assess a fee right there. So, there's
there's probably going to be dozens and dozens like that that just don't make sense to give them a fee. >> Yeah. Yeah, like for instance like Jaclyn Drive like so it's like one big plot of land, right? But you have all those kind of duplexes or um you know so do you build them each like a single family
property? Do you look at the whole land area collectively and the amount of pvious surface area associated with the entire parcel and do they get build as part of like a large residential property? >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. That's the kind of stuff we have to hash out. >> Yeah. So there's a lot of Yeah. when you
go to actually roll this out a lot of things to think about or or there might have been I think another property there was an instance where the the footprint of the property crossed over into another parcel >> and so when we get this delineated obviously they want to segment it but it is just one building so we want to you
know align that one building with the the property owner >> I think that one was but yeah there's just these it was like a it was uh 493 Massab I think property I don't know what one that Oh, as as part of what you're going to deliver, it's going to
be like like a piece of paper for each one of these properties that has a like a an illustration of the outline of the property and where the impervious areas are and a sum total of all the imperous areas. >> So, you're going to see um well, you're going to see yeah, you're going to get the delineation for each parcel and then
you'll get like a spreadsheet that includes the imperous surface area for each parcel. And we can certainly it you know and they've been we can certainly you know usually we're totaling it up and that's how we're looking at it but it does >> divide it based on the type of imperous surface area too like a building would
be a separate number versus like a driveway and so >> one big map that has all the imperial surface identified on a particular color or something. So it would be through um you know through GIS which I guess um
typically that's how we I guess share the data is like a shape file which you would want but I guess yeah it might be more challenging if not everyone has GIS that they typically use. >> Um >> will this actually be layered into the town's GIS? I thought or is that an
option that we chose? Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, one of the things >> Yeah. So, one of the things we talked about is doing like a GIS like data viewer so you could make this information available on your website. That was one of the things Bill we did cut from the scope unfortunately. >> That's what I thought. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, that was the other piece was so that people could just go in and they could we'd set it up. They could look up their property and and and that's where you would see John like that the exact delineation. I mean, you still have all that data. It's just not set up in that easy to view kind of format, I guess. >> Okay. All right. >> Yeah. So the resident shouldn't complain
because there's a flat fee, but some of the commercials may come back and say, "I don't, you know, I don't agree." >> Right. >> So we'll just have to address those individually once Bill gets his guy. >> Yeah. And hopefully they have GIS capabilities, right? Make you see And that'll say select board. Now that
was modified, >> right? >> The fee structure will go to the select board for approval, right? That's what we're thinking at this point. >> Yeah. >> So, quick question. So, refresh my memory. What is the process to get the fee structure approved? Is it going to
be select board approval or is it going to be the town residents approval? It's town meeting like any budget. >> All right. So, so we're going to present an independent budget for the storm water utility to the town and everybody votes on it. >> Correct.
>> Okay. What happens if people don't want don't like our budget? >> If they deny it, then we don't bill, right? >> I guess. Yeah. >> Yeah. And I guess that's the piece where you try to could use the approach of
okay, this is the budget we're trying to get approved that would be collected through a storm water utility. If you're not going to approve it, then it's going to here's the line item in our general fund, >> you know, budget. >> It has to get approved one way. How are we approving it? You know, and I I kind of like how that, you know, another community did that and it kind of was
like, all right, they didn't get the storm water utility, but they did get their funding that year. Um and typically too the whole thing is um you know the the budget goes forth for approval but really the I guess at town meeting you're not approving the rate or the fee structure. You're just approving
the budget typically, but you want transparency and so usually you're showing, oh, this is the fee structure we're looking at that would correspond to this budget and this is the rate. You know, >> does it get voted on it in the spring meeting next year? >> I don't I haven't seen that it I haven't
seen that piece of it get voted on at town meeting. It's usually set by the you know, the sewer commission votes on it at a meeting. If it's the sewer commission, like in Shrewsbury, that's how it was done. We were at a sewer commission meeting and they voted on the rate structure and the the fee. Um, >> I saw something that says that has to be
available by March 1st someplace in one of the Massachusetts govern websites that this our budget has to be available March 1st for public review of next year.
>> Does that make sense? >> Maybe prior to town meeting if it if the budget's going. >> I think I think so. Yeah, that would make sense. >> Yeah, >> but you're trying to get the budget passed potentially in the fall, right? Still, you're thinking if we can get past >> um
>> that makes sense. Or or or are you thinking next spring instead because we can update this? >> I might be wrong, but the impression I got from reading the mass.gov website on storm on enterprise funds that whatever budget you present has to become available by March 1st. So, >> okay.
>> But you might know more than me. I don't know. That's >> well usually um I was going to say usually a lot of the budgeting is done in the spring. So I would think you know you know even but I I guess we were trying to see if we could push to get something done for fall town meeting but
I don't know maybe that doesn't make you know >> they tied I think they tied I think they tied it to fiscal year budget which starts 1st of July 120 days before that is March 1st. Yeah, >> I think that was that's what the numbers were. >> Yeah, if we try to type Yeah, I know
that makes sense. >> But I I like I like your schedule. So there's something wrong with it. I like to stick with your schedule. >> I mean, I don't think I guess I was just I guess this is just came to mind, too. And I don't know as much about like town meeting, you know, like what usually happens at a fall town meeting, right?
That's like a supplemental town meeting usually. So is there still some budget approving that's done there or is it really all done at spring town meeting? mostly spring, but there can be some in the fall. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And John, I I don't think you have
to have your budget ready by March 1st. >> Okay. >> Like right now, we're in budget season, right? So, the um finance committee is looking at all the budgets and I'm not presenting the sewer budget until next week.
>> Okay. So >> maybe there kind of guidelines maybe in terms of the process you know knowing that there's that kind of that upfront transparency of people being able given an opportunity to look at the budget ahead of time. >> So who reconciles that just in case I don't you know I don't want to break any
laws >> town council be savvy is that what his job is to work out those details or >> Yeah. And like the the the town's budget that's still under review now. We they won't have it finalized for a few weeks. So,
>> okay. >> I guess that's a good question though, Bill. I'm just thinking about the timing like if if the you know, because I had just said to you, oh, if it's not going to get approved through the utility, we want to make sure you're getting it out of your regular, you know, budget. But so, are you trying to put something
knowing that we're not going to get the budget approved at Springtown meeting? Are you trying to put something in your budget now for storm water? Right. I'm assuming that that would get approved at town meeting. >> Yeah. So, we put it in. >> Yeah. >> The DPW operational budget, we put in an
extra $340,000. It's there now. >> Yeah. >> Is it going to make the final cut? My guess is no. So, it won't make it to town meeting floor, but it might. Who knows? When did those cuts happen? That that's
that's in March when you in a couple weeks. You said you're presenting that budget and next >> next few weeks. Yeah. >> You'll know. >> And so if that goes into the town budget as the line item, then the utility gets approved. So that money comes out of the town budget and gets put into Where does
that money go? >> Well, right now fiscal 27, right? is that's what the budget we're looking at. We won't have the utility in place and until then, right? >> Okay. >> We won't be collecting until >> All right. So, it's so it's for fiscal year 26 and that's your budget for
fiscal year 26 >> seven 27 we're now >> I never get that straight. Okay, I get it. Okay. And so I guess, yeah, I guess the whole purpose is, yeah, we're trying to allow time because we know it's going to take a while to get everything up and running
in place even if your budget gets approved. So you're right. I mean, your budget would go forward in the fall, but technically you wouldn't start utilizing that bud budget till well, you're not even collecting fees till July 1st, 2027. So like you said, it would be >> it really be fiscal year it really would
be like a fiscal year 28 budget, wouldn't it? Because that's what be collecting. Yeah. So, I guess you you could push the, you know, getting the budget approved at spring meeting in 2027, but then it doesn't give you much time to get things up and running to start collecting fees
after that. So, it's nicer to have that longer period of time where you're like, "Okay, the budget got approved and we have time to get this set up and in place. So, Chase, let me share Whoops. that um what Renee and I were looking at today.
Let's see. How do I get this to share now? So that was like the prop two and a half calculator you said that you utilized to try to >> Yes. Right. So
the state has this website where you can put in a an amount. Right. So I um we said 340,000 basically was for pet basic cleaning and sweeping but we need more money for
engineering and stuff. So I bumped it up by $75,000. So I meant 415. So if we increase the tax levy by $415,000,
the average person is going to pay 8794, right? So we were hoping to be under that for the average single family home, right? But you can see >> 80 to 90 bucks per person. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So if you have a a bigger house that's assessed higher, you're going to be paying a lot more, >> right? If you have a million dollar home, you're going to be paying like 175 bucks. >> Yep. >> But under our structure, you're only
going to pay whatever it is, 60, 70, 75, whatever we land at. So, I think this ties well back to that slide 25 that we're trying to show because when I calculated the fee for I think it was one of the parcels, I don't know, it came up to like $80. And I guess the only thing I was concerned
about is people that have smaller properties, you you know, that have smaller assessed values. Will they come back and say, "Oh, I'm going to be paying more under the utility if I end up paying $100." >> But >> I don't think there's too many homes with 250 lower. Yeah.
But I guess I'm just thinking we I think we said the average is like what 530 in Lunberg the average home. So that equates to like 90 $90 say right? >> Yeah somewhere in there. Yeah.
>> Yeah. The average single family assessed value is 517 which would be an $87.94 bill. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> And you ran this for the commercial properties as well.
>> Does it include that? >> Um the total tax levy I think is on the order of 35 million. So that yeah the total is 35 million. I think that's everybody. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Includes commercial. Yeah. >> Okay. So, it's just showing you what the assessed value. So, assuming a
commercial property obviously has a larger assessed value potentially depending on the size of it. So, that's just going to be reflected in that somewhere. >> Yeah. They'd be paying a lot less than we would be charging them. So, >> Right. Right. >> Good point. All right. Does anybody else have
anything to add or >> I do not? >> So, is it we have it defined? Go ahead, Tim. >> Oh, no. That was it. I was just saying I think I like where we are. >> Yep. Um, did we talk about the format of
this? Is it going to be justice kicks it off and starts going through the slides and should we have people interject or should we just wait for and tell them to wait till the end for questions? >> Wow. I know at the town meetings there's a
format and it's kind of because people get heated at the town meeting and they kind of start screaming and stuff and Tim Murphy's there to keep everybody under control and he does a very good job. I don't know if it's going to get like that but it it I have no clue what to expect honestly.
>> Yeah, good point. Yeah, maybe we should hold questions to laugh that we finish the slideshow. Yeah. >> Is it going to be a microphone that we kind of like hand to the person that wants to ask a question or it's just people? It's going to be small enough a venue where we can just everybody will hear everybody.
>> I think it's small enough that everybody will hear >> everybody even in the bigger room there. >> Okay. Okay. >> I was going to say typically with these meetings we've had we haven't had a ton of people. Um, so it' be great if we have a good turnout and and because we
haven't had a lot, sometimes it becomes a little more informal the process, you know, in terms of like asking questions. But I agree for a larger audience, I think we want to make sure we get through the material. Well, I don't have anything else. >> Nor do I. >> Thank you so much for going through that
with us. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Thank you. So, are you going to send out a final revision uh be uh Wednesday afternoon or something or Thursday morning? >> Yes. Yes. I'll try to get that out by end of day tomorrow just so you guys can do last look based on all the great comments. So, I appreciate everyone's feedback. All right.
>> It sounds like right now the FAQ's document, I'm not making any changes to that right now. That's going to we're going to sit tight with that. >> Okay. >> Yeah, we're good to >> I am. >> Okay. I'll just um print out copies so we have that for the meeting. >> Okay.
Well, should someone make a motion to adjurnn? >> Oh, sure. Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Uh, roll call. Uh, Timmer. >> Uh, I >> John Beiel. >> Hi,
>> Mark Muzzy. Mark secretly joined. >> Are you there, Mark? Oh, it's funny because you weren't muted and then you muted. I'm wondering can he chat it if he can't get his sound
to work? >> He should be able to chat. >> That would that count if he chatted it? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, it's it's part of the the like >> software package we're using.
>> Yeah. Well, you have a majority anyway. >> Yeah, I was going to say and he wasn't here for the beginning. So, I for myself um meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m. on March 3rd, 2026.
Thank you.