It's Wednesday, December 10th, and I will call the finance committee meeting to order at 7 PM. Um, this meeting is being recorded. Um, with me in the room are Andy Oldman, my
Kraton, Peter Twining, Gar Morris, myself, Sarah Melish, and also the town administrator and finance director, Andrea Mayo. Uh, I don't see
any member of the board on Zoom. It like looks like it's only Gail. Okay. So
tonight, I was hoping we could look at the capital budget, not to necessarily finalize it, but to look at the various funding sources
and look and see if there's items that we feel it's appropriate to delay for another year. I I think I sent an email out which indicated that the school budget our appropriation is slated to go
up 7.86%. >> And that was a level services budget. So I'm not expecting it to come. It wasn't an inflated budget. Hi Ann. >> Hi. >> Um it wasn't an inflated budget what I could say. So that makes me nervous.
>> Yeah. Um, I think that traditionally with our our capital items, well, we also have used up all almost all the levy capacity, excess levy capacity. We have between a half and 3/4 of a percent. Is
that right, Andrea? Um, and we've used up almost all of the excess reserves. So we need to discuss whether we want to dip into the excess reserves pull it below 8%. >> Including the close out of this past
fiscal year. >> Yeah. What do we have to spend approximately for the um for the reserves? Yeah. 155,000. >> Last year we spent 1.5 million. >> Yeah. >> So that's not good. >> Um
>> that's what we get for on on target budgeting. That's right. >> Um, so let's first look at the spreadsheet on the
bonding projections for the items were targeted >> for long-term debt. If you look in the obviously the first project, the first column is the
project. The second column is the amount of the bond in millions. The third column is the length of the bond. And then across the years, Andrea has
calculated what she expects the payments to be, taking into consideration how long it would take to do the projects. >> On the theory that you're you're not bonding long-term till the project's
completed. Mhm. >> So if we were to see the whole if we see out to 42, we'd see in the first one entries for debt service all the way across, right? If that work. >> Yeah. >> Right. And this is just this is just
looking at fiscal year 27 through 34 and just showing the impact on the tax rate which is and so but I wanted to kind of concentrate on the projects we were talking about bonding
>> this year >> and I also want to discuss bonding April town meeting versus a fall town meeting. >> Because traditionally we have not done capital items in the fall town meeting,
>> right? >> Um why would I'm sorry. What would you be thinking with respect to next a year from now you would be possibly thinking of expanding the bonding questions to the fall?
No, I'm I'm I'm inclined to say if we're going to have if we're going to have a capital item in this year's in the fiscal year 27 budget, it should be in the April time meeting. And if it's not going to be in the fiscal year 27 budget, then we should be pushing it off till April next
year. Okay. >> And not try to have do it Yep. >> twice. I think the only exception might be um the council on aging stuff based on how long it takes them to raise donations.
>> May I ask a question? >> Yes, sir. >> How much debt does the town have outstanding at this time? >> Maybe that's a inappropriate question. >> No, very appropriate.
>> Key question. I say it's six million, but let me give you a little louder. >> It's about six million. I can give you >> We have not done long-term bonding in a while. >> Okay,
sounds good. >> Well, this is and how much of that is about to mature? >> I have the little chart here, >> right? Okay. which is showing that in fiscal year 27
there's a drop off in the total bonding. We had a drop off from 26 to 27. >> When you say a drop off in the total bonding >> amount bonded >> our debt goes down. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Roughly how much? >> Maybe half a million.
>> Okay. Small. >> Yeah. You're looking at the same thing, right? Yeah. >> Yeah. or if you want to look at this. >> Okay, >> this is basically a chart that best shows it dropping off >> and that's based on uh calendar scheduling of payments that would occur
in those various years >> fiscal years. >> Okay. >> And that I believe also Andrew includes uh school the high school dropping off >> and >> I believe so. Yes, >> it's combined school in town.
We're paying about a million eur service on that. I think >> more than that. >> Is that when you say debt service that include the interest and the principal? >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Yeah. Generally what we do in town is she generally does bond anticipation notes which is interest only during the project and then at the conclusion of the project >> does the long-term debt. Um yes that's different than what the school did for
the memorial school. for the memorial school. This the school district actually entered into long-term debt during the project >> and then they had to reinvest the unused proceeds during that period of time. >> I mean yeah >> they incurred the debt after they had
incurred the expenses I believe but because the interest rates were low they wanted to lock in long-term debt. >> Yeah. >> They issued a ban after all that. >> Okay. So, I believe it should have gone longterm this past like this fiscal
year. Hopefully, those numbers are fine. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And is there, excuse me, I'll stop. Is there a a perceived total amount of debt that the town of
Manchester in order to maintain its wonderful bond rating uh could have? In other words, is that >> I think it's >> 60 million. >> I think it's based on the 8 million. >> I think it's based on the debt service. >> Okay.
>> Of 10% of the operating budget. Correct. of the revenues presume >> the budget. >> The budget. Okay. >> That would be our policy. >> But isn't that what the auditor said is reasonable also? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> And what is that number? >> Yeah. >> Of debt service. Our budget, our operating budget excluding the schools is about 30 million. >> 30 million. So we could spend 3 million a year >> to repay debt >> and that would support what principal
amount of outstanding bonds >> assuming you know municipal bond rates are >> 4% or something that is 3 million in debt service >> about $89,000 per million
go >> so 3 million 89,000 33.7 million. >> Okay. So, >> but we're way under. >> We have some >> at this moment breathing room. >> Let's not get too giddy >> because it gets things get pretty dark
as you go through. >> What's our What's our current >> 6 million a bit? So it's about 6.3 and we're paying about a million in service of that a year which is about 5%
of our operating budget. >> But I was just >> the town side,000 we can we can afford up to 3 million 89,000 million 33 million of debt. >> We could theoretically, >> right? But what's our debt that we have
right now right now? Yeah. It's just >> okay. >> Not just the town side. >> You could do you could do more just for >> Thanks. >> Okay. One person talk at a time, please. Okay. And Andy, you asked a question.
>> I did. I was trying to make sure I was understanding where we were, you know, relative to the 89,000 and the 3 million and the >> and what was the answer? >> So that so that the 89,000 per million translates to $33 million of debt
capacity that we could have, but we're currently at >> in rounded numbers. Yes. >> Oh, yeah. Even that >> so >> even that amount even that is you know a lot of assumptions based into
that as far as what other costs in the operating budget are increasing at what rate. So as health insurance climbs, as waste disposal climbs, as school climbs, the
amount of the percentage of your operating budget that you can dedicate towards debt service starts to reduce unless you start cutting other expenses. So there's some assumptions built >> or do an override
>> or do overrides >> or Yeah. Right. Correct. >> Because the debt is excluded from the regular tax rate. So that's already an override. So it's not impacted by the operating budget. >> My assumption is that the auditor that
put that together was assuming a just a 2 and a.5% increase, you know, living under the prop 2 and a half. >> No, no. I I think that it is a town should to be prudent shouldn't
spend more than 10% of its total operating budget on debt service. It has nothing to do with a 2 and a half% increase a year or anything. It's just as a percentage of the operating budget and it's not casting concrete. And I
think that when we've met with our auditors, they haven't been as concerned about things adversely impacting our bond rating as in some other towns on the
basis that our town has a history of funding projects when asked. >> Isn't that right? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That and that like we're proactive in funding our oped. um you know investing
in downtown like all those things um looked favorable for us >> so far. >> Okay. So we have this spreadsheet of capital idols
with a first pass at including it in the tax rate capital exclusion CPC fund balance enterprise funds ret fund retained earnings from enterprise funds
and borrowing. And then some of them have been highlighted as deferring. So when I look at this, doesn't appear to me This is showing 30 living minute of borrowing.
>> It is, but um I know we were still talking about the um council on aging, the ratunda and then the central street culvert. Originally I had not included those. >> Right. And I think that we were saying defer the Council on Aging
because we didn't want to have an appropriation before they'd raise money because it kind of loses their incentive to >> raise money. I think that with
so the situation with the culvert and the rotunda, did you decrease the rotunda by the amount we' previously funded? >> I did not and I reached out to see what the total project cost was um just to be sure whether it was this addition to
that what we've already requested or the total project. I haven't gotten that answer yet. >> Okay. So, just to refresh people's minds, last year, fiscal year 26 at town meeting,
>> we approved 800,000 for the rotunda because we'd lost a grand. >> Yes. >> And CPC approved 500,000. So, we had lost a grant of 1.3 million and we thought we still had the second
grant, but but we're nervous about the grant. So, we wanted to have something an appropriation in this year's budget in case we don't have a grant to cover that second portion,
but we're not clear what that second portion is. Does Chuck know? He was looking for name. >> Fine. Okay. Um, and with the covert,
>> same thing. We feel >> real quick. Sorry. It was three 3.5 million. >> Excuse me, what, Chuck? >> Sorry. 3.5 million for the ratunda is the total project costs. >> So, I'm not sure. So, the 1.3 that would
mean that there's a 2.2 gap. Right. And >> okay. >> And the SEC grant is for up to three now I think. >> So this 2.2 to is the balance of the project.
And and I guess the feeling was is if we included the covert and the rotunda as an appropriation, if the grants actually came in, it never
hit the tax rate, >> right? But they need to start the projects in the fall and without the appropriation they can't
send it out to bid. >> Is that accurate? >> And there's potential I might find out about the brands before. >> Yeah, >> maybe hopefully. um the retunda SEC grants, you know, typically
we would have already heard, but the application timeline got pushed back a month or two. So, we were expecting to hear about SEC grants mid December. We haven't heard yet. So, it's possible
that we could hear early by early January and this issue comes off of our plate. Uh for for the culvert, we have the brick money. Uh it expires in April. Uh
there's no timeline to provide as to when we'll hear if the federal government will potentially give an extension on the contract for the brick money. Uh we are applying for
a regional MVP action grant uh through the state that is going to the application process will be the RFR is going to be released in January. um
we're going to apply for that and we're going to say if we get that grant we would uh you know withdraw from the brick and we would utilize the state money. um kind of kind of have to put that in
there that basically if we find out that we got the MVP money before we hear about brick, we're going to just withdraw from brick and move forward under >> What's the total amount we need for the cover? >> Well, the uh brick grant was for 4
>> That sounds right. 4 4.5 4.6 six and we're applying for 5 million through MVP >> and that's the total cost. >> No. >> Well, there's also there's a Noah grant and there's a Massock grant and there's some town appropriation for the Palmer
project as well. >> So, we need to make sure that the number that's down here is exactly what's left of unknown That's right. unknown resources because we don't want to go in at a higher number.
You just want it to be the net amount because it's my understanding that we've been spending some of the brick money >> like $1,000. >> I thought that we had ordered those concrete arches.
>> It's on the street. It's We put a procurement out on the street. We haven't received the or or awarded anything yet. Um, I don't even know if we've received the bids bids yet. >> Monday, Monday is the bid opening. >> Monday. And a big element of that is can
you deliver before >> April 27th, 2026? >> And Chuck, is it likely that people can deliver by then or not? >> It's likely that we will be able to do like a partial opponent. Um, so that's what we're planning on. they won't be
able to deliver. But basically the yeah there there's a lot that goes into it but the chapter 85 review is like substantial completion like going to pre-cast and so therefore we think that's like the value of that is 80% of the contract value. So we can do definitely do that by the time we get to
April 27th. So as long as MIMA and FEMA play ball and allow us to do a partial then we're good. But regardless it's the right way to move forward. >> Okay. So this culvert number hopefully will come down by the time we >> What is the total anticipated cost of
the culbert? I know this question was asked a moment ago. What what do we think the total cost of that project is? >> It used to be seven or eight million. >> Yeah. If you include like brook restoration and and >> so that that big that big number does
include the sawmill brook. So the 4.6 six that you guys were talking about that brick that's generally what we consider the culvert portion of the project and then the balance of it is the Noah and DOT and everything else and so that's like you know total allin cost 7 twoish something like that you know in
that range >> to do the project you do it or you don't do it >> is the number 4.8 or is it more like seven >> 7.2 >> 7.2 too. Okay. >> Yeah. Is that right? >> That seems high, but it's in that it's
that seems high now that we're saying all that. No, it's around seven. Yeah, it's seven sounds about right. >> Yeah. I thought we were talking seven. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, you don't start unless you have seven, right? >> Right. Andrea can't sign the contract uh unless we have the money. And so, the
money would be all of these buckets that we're talking about for 7 million. >> What a deal. Yeah, um I have a irrelevant question, but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Okay. >> What's going on in the harbor right now?
There's there's some there's a a rig >> in the harbor right now sort of off of Tops Point. >> Can you tell me what what that is? >> So, that's work that they're doing on Baker's Island. So, it has nothing to do with any town project. >> Thank you. Good.
>> They parked it here because it's safe. >> Good. Okay. So, can I ask the for the cover the five million shown on this other spreadsheet? >> Yeah, >> at the bottom >> that. So, I think we put five in here
for this because that's what we're applying for through MVP. >> That's a not enough cover cost kind of thing. >> Okay. I mean every we're we can only really do this project between
you know September and March. Uh so every time and then you know we need permits in order to we need permits and we need the money in order to you know procure and award a contract. So every time we kind of and that all
needs to be ahead of schedule so that the project can get done in as quick of a time period as possible between September and March. Uh so it's like every time we kind of miss a window, it's bumping out and adding costs.
>> And that and that time frame is was purely just to avoid summer. >> No smell. >> It's the it's the fisheries. >> Yeah. the little fishies going on. >> That's all part of the permanent. >> In reality, the March, the March is definitely the fisheries element.
There's a >> Chuck would be able to speak to it better than me, but I think it's March to June. >> Yeah. >> You can't be in the water. >> No. >> Um, so, you know, ideally we would want to do it between Labor Day and Memorial Day when there's
not as much activity. So, I think if I just to make sure we're on the same page, the delay on this has not necessarily been the town not wanting to spend this money. I think hasn't it been a permitting issue? And is that permitting issue resolved at this point?
>> No. >> Okay. >> Uh but ask me again soon, >> Monday. >> So, I I know I not I mean I've been we've been it's like an echo. We've actually been hearing this for probably
24 months and I know it's a really complicated issue, but I point it out because it's a bigger question. If we allocate $5 million and the permitting continues to be delayed and then a grant comes in or a
grant doesn't come in, that 5 million flows down to basically our levy limit. Well, no, it's clear the le wouldn't be bonded. So we pay for it. >> So it just sort of >> it's authorization. We wouldn't actually borrow for
>> So would that that essentially be like capital projects where we anticipate doing something and after two or three years we don't do it and then it just gets cancelled. >> You'd have to rescend it. So you have a town meeting to resend the authorization. >> Okay. So that then becomes a vote a town
meeting to resend that. And if if we allocate that for say the Central Street Dam, but we decide we want to reallocate it at some point toward like a DPW building, that obviously has to be a vote. >> We can't do that. We have to >> that that has to go to town meeting.
>> We have to have a new vote for the DP. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> There have to be a new vote. >> And if we used a grant instead of the authorized borrowing for the project, technically you'd rescend it. you you would need a res like a vote to rescend
it, but since it's for that same project, you really couldn't >> borrow for it anyways because the project's already done, >> right? >> We use grand money. So, while it's still kind of living, it's really not usable.
>> So, but you can do the resending, you know, within the boat and just to clean it up. >> Well, it looks better on the balance sheet, >> right? If you don't have it hanging out there, it seems to me. >> Y >> on the on the rotunda, we talked, you know, the what what we had originally
thought about was going through CPC bonding for the total amount of the cost of the project, giving CPC back their 500,000 that they've appropriated for the Runda
project. um giving back the 800,000 uh that the town has appropriated and just do the whole thing through a bond through CPC. Um Andrea put together some of the debt
calculations on that. It does it would have a uh you know negative impact on CPC's ability to fund projects in the future because a significant amount of their annual allocation would be
dedicated to paying that debt. Alternatively, what Sarah was just speaking to is we hold on to the 1.3 and we just ask, you know, to borrow for the delta.
>> That also could be a CPC. You know, the delta could go through CPC as well or on, you know, the town side. >> Yeah. I I guess I have couple of concerns about the issue is we went to
town meeting last year and we asked for the 1.3 million between the town and CPC because we'd lost a grant, >> right? >> I don't want to go back to town meeting for the full amount again. I I I think
that's way too complicated and I am reluctant to our our long-term borrowing. This sheet shows that is not o overly burdensome um and we may get more grants in. So I
would be reluctant to tie up the CPC money to that extent merely to bond it through the CPC when we can bond it through the town. I don't think we gain anything by bonding it through CPC. >> Does the CPC match apply at all to this?
>> But we already Yeah, but we already get the matching. We get 16%. >> Okay. >> So, we're not talking about increasing, >> right, >> the CPC total amount. We're talking about taking the one and a half with the 16% match we
already have and reallocating it to a bond for the rotunda instead of spending it on other things. >> Right. >> So it's not like it's it's not like increasing the CPC money in order to cover the bond.
>> So if but it is we talked a little bit about this. I'm still kind of confused that your thought on that is so you're still reducing the cost to the taxpayers. No, >> for the to for the project. >> We're not because we're already
receiving that 16% in as a match to CPC money. So, we're not getting any extra, >> right? >> So, it's not reducing the cost. It's just moving it from this pot to this pot. Well, >> isn't the cost of the ratunda project to taxpayers, but it's eliminating the
ability to spend it on something else. >> Well, is the difference? It's those something else, you know, and we often talk about that, you know, sometimes the projects that they get in because they're like anybody, anybody they want to do, right? So, we end up doing these, >> but we're at the point we're at the
point now where they've spent down they were carrying excess for a long time, right? And they're at the point now where they've pretty well spent it down. Isn't that correct? >> So, did the CPC have the million three in cash? >> No. >> Okay.
>> So, it's so it's it's it's meaningless to try to like and and possibly damaging to go back to town meeting and recast it. >> Yeah. We don't need this. We want that instead. And why don't we just kind of continue on and do it? >> I think it's an easier cell to say
we need the 2.2 2 million appropriation. >> Yeah. >> Um we're hoping it never hits the tax rate because we're hoping to get grants in to cover it, >> right? >> But if we don't, you know, in order to go forward with the project, we need to have this appropriation.
>> Yeah. Hopefully hope best case scenario, which we find out about the grants before we're in front of >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> Right. Yeah. If um the bond that you're talking about either through the town or through CPC, what how many years should that be? Ba um or the roundo?
>> They have it down for um 15. >> I mean just as a just say 15 >> 15. >> I mean the town again I always try to think long term here. the town might have a different opinion about CPC in two or three or
five years and want to do something different about how we do work with CPC and and kind of roping ourselves into a 15-year bond commitment. I I think we ought to think really carefully about that. Right.
>> In general. So, >> so can you remind me the money that we did get through town meeting last was that for design and >> No, it was to offset the grant we had lost. >> Okay. Well, and but and I'm seeing now
so there's the money that the 2.2 that's carried inside the spreadsheet >> is the additional so the total cost for the rotunda was 3.5. >> Yeah. Right. Last year before town meeting we found out that we had lost the CZ CZA whatever that
>> um of 1.3. >> Yeah. >> So we went before town meeting to get that money. >> Right. Right. >> We're hoping to get a grant for the 2.2. >> But given the status of grants, we have no assurance that we'll get it. And so
if we don't put it don't put it on the town meeting unless we get the grant before town meeting then we can't move forward with the project. >> Okay. >> Because we can't go out to bid. >> Do we have all the permits for that
project? >> Do we have all the permits for the rotunda? >> Sorry, looking for my mute button. Uh I don't believe we have them in hand, but they're all submitted and we're just awaiting them to be issued. Like there's no back and forth remaining or anything like that. We just
>> challenges >> on the we're on the clock. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. So the answer is practically yes. >> Yeah. >> Practically speaking, yes. >> Yeah. And Sarah, if I follow all this discussion, basically the thought comes down that it's for simplicity purposes
and other purposes, it is better for the town to borrow the 2.2 than any of the CPC involvement. >> Yeah. >> Take it to the town meeting in April and look to the whole funding and hopefully move beyond to this endless project.
>> Right. And hopefully we won't need it. >> Yeah, I understand that. bust. I don't not very >> Okay. Why wouldn't we have asked for the 3.5 bust? >> Because we were sure we were getting the other grade.
>> Just because the picture was different. Okay. All right. So, you should know we did submit a CPC application for the full amount because the deadline for applications was >> early December. They're still going through a process.
We can change that. Don't be alarmed if you see that uh in front of them. >> Well, we're just still awaiting an answer. Is that That's >> No, no, >> this is CPC. >> Oh, we're sorry. I'm sorry. CPC, excuse me. >> We put an application in to CPC for the
Tund project, but that's okay. We can >> Yeah, >> it's local. We can we can adjust that. I just want you guys to be aware that was before we had this convers. So just thinking about options here if that is awarded >> the grant. >> The grant
>> SEC >> uh through CPC. >> No, no, >> through SEC. >> SEC. I'm sorry. Okay, never mind. Okay. >> No, that's all right. My mistake. Sorry. Um so the Rotunda is not on um your
spreadsheet. This guy right here. >> Yes, it is. >> Andrew shaking your head. >> The main one. Oh, it's on the main one, not on this one. Right. Right. Right. >> So, theoretically, the 330
um So, I guess we're talking fiscal 27. >> Well, would they be bonded in 27 or 28? Would we start paying in 27 or 28? >> Wouldn't be in 27 start paying in 28. Yeah.
>> Okay. So then the one 1.162 1.163 million would go up by 2.2 to 3.34 something. >> No, it would be just the 89,000. >> Right. Right. It' be the service for that year. Sorry.
>> Always good to confirm this consultation. >> Absolutely. >> I don't do this. So, one of the things kind of wanted to look at is our biggest challenge and be staying within Prop 2 and a half
on the operating budget. And we do have capital items that we're paying through taxation. >> Mhm. >> Um I'm reluctant
to borrow for those types of items because they're really like annual expenses. >> Like a police car. >> Yeah. Right. >> We do that every year. Um the one question I have is how much wiggle wiggle room we have on
drainage and sidewalks and roadway improvements. I mean, are are we in a big enough bind potential bind this year that we may need to consider dropping those and not
doing as much? >> Yeah, >> they're big numbers. >> Yeah, >> they're 2% of the tax rate. you know, >> they're they're they're not going away anytime soon and they don't get they don't get less expensive, >> right? >> It's always good to keep chipping away
at them, I feel. But, um, but if we, you know, if we're a snake swallowing a buffalo, you know, um, you know, we may need to bring some of those, >> maybe something we need to discuss at some once we see the overall picture >> if there are other needs that that take
precedence. Now the other thing on this spreadsheet is a fire engine replacement >> which was moved to the deferred column which makes me nervous. >> How much do we have in the fire engine? How much do we have now? >> 300,000.
>> And the plan was to fund it last year 300,000 this year 350 and next year 350. So >> the total cost like a million dollar. >> Yeah. and the film doing this. >> We have an ambulance coming. >> Yes. Which we've already appropriated for. >> Right.
>> So that's not included in this fund. >> And the next the next major item is an engine. Right. >> Right. And has that been ordered? >> And that's a million or so. Right. >> That's why we did this to fund it for a million. So this essentially pushes off
the fire engine for a year. >> A year. >> We're still borrowing. >> We still have the limit. I think so >> as a backup. >> Okay. So that I guess we need to continue to think about that line. Adam,
right? >> Um dredging we have for 1.9. >> Yeah, >> that's this year. But there's more coming, right? >> Whoops. >> Looking there. There's more area to
drive, >> but the 1.9 covers the area we plan on dredging this time around. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, that's >> the total for this project. Um I I just know from somebody who was involved with the planning board that
the number that was they voted on last night or the night before was 4 million. >> So I'm just wondering is 1.9 the end here or is there more coming for other parts of >> why was the planning board voting on >> the amount of
>> permit that they had to talk about? I think it was Monday night. It's one of the items on their agenda. >> Yeah. But they wouldn't have been voted or not. They maybe >> it was an approval or something. But but the number that that was mentioned was
four. So that's why I was just wondering if there's more here. If 1.9 is it, that's good. Then that's where our spreadsheet is. >> And um there's some grant money that goes into the dredging.
And the planning board was involved because the channel is adjacent to town land, >> right? >> And they need permission from the town from the planning board to to do that directly. At least that's what I understand is going on. So 1.9 is not
the total. >> It's what we need to come up with. >> It's what we need to come up with. >> So can we validate that, >> Andrea? just to make sure that there's not more grants that have gone puff puff in the night. >> Um
is on here I see no reason to defer that. Which one is this again, please? >> 12 million. >> There you go. Thank you. >> PFAS 13. >> That's PMS.
>> Um, that is for the Lincoln Street. >> Yes. >> Now, I did believe I believe that Chuck told me that at one point we thought we were going to have to expand the water treatment facility for phase
two, but I think we think now we don't need to. So originally we were talking a total of 20 million between Lincoln Street and the water treatment plant. It sounds like maybe the total will come in a little less, but they have to be done as separate projects because you have to
keep one water source online. >> Chuck's got his hand up. >> Mr. Damn, Chuck. >> I'm sorry. I can't get the mute button. Uh, no. So, you're you're definitely in the ballpark and you're definitely right
about the uh water treatment facility up at Grley Pond. We won't need to do an expansion, but we will still have a project there. And it's still Lincoln Street will go first and then we will do um you know Grley Pond in the next year
or two thereafter. Um I'm not sure what Andrea is showing in the spreadsheet but um you know we will do SRF funding for the Lincoln Street project and there will be some amount of debt forgiveness as well as a 30-year uh borrowing
eligibility if we so choose at 0%. So pretty favorable numbers. >> That doesn't change the amount of the appropriation. That just changes the amount it costs us. Is that correct on the repayments? >> Uh well, there will be some debt forgiveness, which will be good news on
the the total, you know, the we will need to authorize it, but we won't need to pay for it all. And then it will be 0% not, you know, for whatever the bonding rate is. >> Oh, we have we have 13 million. over 30 years.
>> Yep. >> So it could be 15 >> 12 million above it should be moved down into >> whatever. >> But so when you did this repayment on the PAS, did you take that into
consideration the zero interest or not? >> I did not. >> Okay. >> And I only did it for 15 years. Not 20. When you say 30. >> Yeah. I was told by the trust that 30 years is eligible for PAS projects.
>> Okay. >> So that we'd have to make a decision of whether we really want to go out that far. How long do we want to pay be? >> Historically, we've always tried to stay within 15 years. >> Okay. Yeah. Do the auditors is there a sensitivity
about 15 years versus more? Is that kind of a magic number? >> Um, not really. It's it's more of a like us rotating like the debt of like, okay, how much can we pay for and like um to get through the next thing? >> Yep. >> Not have stacking of too many over the
course of the decades. >> Does the practical life of these facilities enter into this discussion? those for the borrowing purposes. >> No, I think >> yeah. So like you know if something you know useful life was 10 we can't go up
15 >> obviously right >> but we can do the opposite if it has a useful life of 30 or more then we can go for 10 we can go 15 the question would then be what is the useful life of a fast facility
>> who knows I guess >> well I think most of the cost is expanding the size of the building >> no but but I guess the question goes to like and 15 years or we're going to have to replace it at some other cost. >> The building >> the
system the filtration system >> the filtration system is a small piece of the total cost. Isn't that correct, Chuck? >> Well, I mean it all it all adds up. They're all several million dollars. Um so I would say the the building and the vessels and the the piping is all 30 30
plus years for sure. uh the media itself within the facility which will be part of the initial capital cost that will be uh rotated out on a a much more um you know >> very very quickly
>> like once or twice a year >> that that becomes an operating cost >> right so that that will shift to operating so that's not you know but that that's part of the initial capital but not the you know long-term viability or whatever we're looking at so and then
I would just They the idea is the the trust is the bonding authority that we're using and so they are allowing us to go 30 years based on that fact that it's a has a you know at least a service life of 30 years if not more. Um and at
0% um that's why that makes that much more attractive. That's true. Then we have Harbor Last. These lines are kind of messed up. >> I would just say we we put a pin in
that. We still have that's an ongoing discussion with the harvesters with the harvester with that department. um will be I'm sure there's going to be adjustments there. >> Okay.
>> Hopefully. So, so the DPW facility was pushed off in the spreadsheet. >> Can I just ask one other thing? Are the the harbor master safety boats
about 200,000. Is that dependent upon grants that are potentially at risk? >> I believe that's our match >> towards those potential grant funds. >> Do we know the timing of those grants? I mean, are they likely to fall after town
meeting or the knowledge of whether they'll be awarded or not? >> I think we'll know before then. is the same grant coming that we heard about in the last fiscal year. There was a >> Yeah, let's not discuss the harbor. >> Okay.
>> Because he's going to go back with the harbor master and kind of figure out what we need for boats, kind of re-examine what's on the list. So, let's not spend a lot of time. >> Okay. Well, just >> talking about something we don't know exactly what's going to come before us
anymore. It sounds like it's changing is what I'm saying. I might not necessarily have the answer for you on on that question anyway. >> So people agree with the items that are deferred. >> They do.
And people agree with the items that are borrowed. Borrowing involved. >> I'm sorry. Good point. >> Where borrowing is involved. Do we agree with the fact that those items would be subject to long-term debt rather than
>> I don't know that I I sort of thinking Bennett Street just I feel like don't we usually try to incorporate road work and pipe work and tour work in our annual capital >> that that's the design for the project.
>> It's a $4 million project. That's That's Tap, right? >> You're talking Tapen or Bennett? >> Bennett, >> isn't that correct, Chuck? >> Tapens the 4.1, >> right? >> What we wanted design.
>> Yeah, they're they're both complete reconstruction of everything. So, drainage, sewer, water, lighting, sidewalk, roadway, all that. So, that's that's why those are the bigger numbers. So Bennett, so Bennett is 150 is for
engineering only or is it >> correct? >> Okay. >> That's just to get the design out to bid over the next, you know, year after town meeting. >> Why would why would we borrow for the 15? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Just because it's lumped in with I
>> mean it's kind of like regular, right? >> Yeah. We can't we can't >> we can't afford >> 150 without lumping it into a larger
bar. You know, we're we're so squeezed >> on the alternative option as it is. So, you could wait, but then Bennett Street gets pushed off. The idea is to have Yeah. >> design happen this coming year. So, then for town meeting next year, we're asking
for the construction. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I and I'm I'm I'm not proposing that we wait. I I just it seems like a a manageable number. >> And and you you could change the line item to be one line item of
Tapen Street and Bennett Street design for a total of 4.25 instead of having separate items on the town meeting. >> And is the 4.1 also design work? >> No. No. That's the work work. >> Yeah. >> Right. I would just >> pay for design work another year.
>> I see. That's >> I would assume it'd be a 4.25 total ask >> for two together. >> The two >> construction and design construction of tap and design of Bennett just lump them together. >> Why would does it make sense to do that?
As Andy was saying, why don't we just fund design work out of operating money and then when it comes to doing this hard work of repaving and ripping it up and all that kind of that's what we borrow. >> Yeah. >> Doesn't that make more sense? >> So, let's put that design work back
under taxation. >> Yeah. >> And when we get to actually working on the budget, >> including operating, then we're going to have to >> look at things again based on what the total is. Yeah. >> Well, I mean, first first of all, you
know, what we're doing tonight is likely to change, >> right? >> Understand? Yeah. >> All right. Um, >> but just as a starting point. >> Yeah. To I guess it's good for us to understand where you guys are comfortable or uncomfortable.
>> Um, >> because I >> we're but I'm telling you, we're we are very tight on the operating side. We're very tight on the taxation side. >> And I and I think that that's what we're going to have to grapple with once we
get the whole budget. >> Yeah. >> Of saying, do we in fact this year have to do a proposition two and a half override? >> Right. >> So is the reason we're tight, and I don't want to steal future thunder, but >> because the school,
>> the school's a big driving factor. Um, health insurance is a big driving factor. Um, waste disposal is going to going to be a big factor. Um, collecting trash.
>> I'm also in I'm I'm also going through contract negotiations with three of the four unions. Um, >> so labor costs are going to be >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, the
not you know to me 20% increase on health insurance 8% increase on school budget whatever the increase ends up like those are big% >> on >> 17% possibly on trash those are big
chunks >> um contract negotiations were still ongoing uh I'm pumping the brakes as we go through this process to fully understand what we can afford in the first year. You know, I can I can adjust.
>> Yes, you can. >> That side of it, but um well, there you go. There's the >> That's why we're tight. >> Yes. >> That's that's that's why we're really tight, I would say. And also the fact
just the simple fact is that we have a lot as you know a lot of deferred maintenance that's coming due >> and it doesn't get cheaper. So yes, you can always say defer and stick within, you
know, try to stick within the existing taxation without asking for an override, but you just, you know, we we we know the next five years is millions and millions of dollars of capital. Um,
we're facing we're facing a challenge. >> Yeah. And I think that one of the other I mean I think the next two years are really tough is the problem. But I think one of the other factors is we had hoped that
CST would be moving forward at a faster pace to bring in >> a million dollar tax revenues. >> Yeah. Half a million dollars at least the tax. Yeah. >> For pay one. Okay. Um, and because of
the federal situation for research grants, you know, they they may not be moving as quickly as they originally intended to do. Um, so we don't have that, you know,
half million dollars to help offset. Yeah. and we can't we can't include that in our revenue estimates because I don't think we have a good feel right now of of what the
schedule is. Um, if we did, we could up the revenues and we may know more by town meeting. Um, because I think the building fees for the phase one were going to be about a half a million, you know, but
I don't know if their phase one is the same as it originally was either or changed. And um, >> so question again, it's more of a big picture question. I guess when I think about Tap and Invent Bennett, you're talking about bonding on those for 15
years. So you do those projects, they're about 4 million more. They're probably about six by the time you do both together. And then we're talking about a 15-year bond on that. So presumably in that 15 years, there's going to be another
Bennett Street and another Tapen and probably two or three more iterations. So that six is probably going to become 12. It's probably going to become 18. You know, it it's a little bit like the school business. We're always going to be building a school. It's just it
happens about every 25 years, give or take. So what other things are on this road big road rework list? >> This may be a question for Chuck, but he has a mic. Yeah, Chuck can speak to the
bigger, but yeah, so paving doesn't have as long of a lifespan, but all the underground utilities, >> that's the expensive stuff. >> That's the most expensive part. And that has a length, you know, 30 to 50 year
lifespan, that type of stuff. So, >> great. >> Is that the question you're asking, Lori? Is it a life question or an amount? My question is, you know, this spreadsheet we have that looks out to 34 is probably halfway through this by 30
we're going to have another Tapen Street on here >> and you know, Jersey Lane or or you know, Beach Street, something else and they're they're just going to I mean, it's just what happens. >> Yeah. But I just want to make sure we understand that as we look at these
numbers because I'm kind of focusing at the total debt service number down on that spreadsheet. And you know, by the time we get to 34, we're at about 5.9 million in debt service a year. And in rough numbers, that's about eight times
what we're paying now for debt service as a town. I mean, we're we're paying about $870,000 a year. So these are these are monumental jumps and I'm not sure this list is all inclusive is where I guess I'm going and I'm not trying to be
negative about that. I'm just saying from a budgeting point of view, we really want to understand what is all-incclusive because this number's going to get >> well and that's what we have to look at because like a million of the over a million of this is for a DPW garage, >> right?
>> One of the decisions is going to have to made at some point is is that a necessity, >> right? Exactly. >> Or not. And and I and I think that that's why this is kind of somewhat misleading because it isn't everything
that's approved. >> Chuck, do you have a sense of I'm I'm assuming the Tapen Streets about 4 million and Bennett, I think you said, was about 4 million. What other streets do you have that have all the
utilities to be redone in addition to the paving? >> Right. So, it's not that many um at least like you know anything can happen certainly and I haven't you know accounted for every contingency but um we've done this was done prior to me
even getting here I think you know with Greg and Carol uh you know a lot of the sewer work had been done that they could line and so like th those pipes are now good for you know another 50 years the the problem with Tapin and Bennett was
we went to line them like those were things we were just going to do in our kind of normal operating, but we couldn't. And so therefore, they became replacement projects. Um, and so like that that you know that drove that number up. And so that's what's driving that. After Bennett and Tapen, we
haven't found any or we haven't found any that really need that same level of um, you know, upkeep or you know, replacement. There's definitely, you guys know, you know, just as much as I do, there's there's a ton of water work to be done. I think we would, you know, bry to make that so that, you know,
we're biting off some number that everybody's comfortable with, like, you know, a million, a million, five, two million a year in to keep up with the water mane. But those are, you know, but that can be like I think those are the types of things I would look at and say, okay, this year for whatever reason, we
can only afford the million-dollar project, so we're just doing a million water main project. But then that, you know, the the next year knowing that we have a little bit bigger project and so we're gonna be looking at a $2 million project. The kind of way I would I would picture if I were you guys is like the kind of next big one on my list is Summer Street. If we were to go and do
all of Summer Street Water Main all at once, I would definitely be asking you for, you know, 8 to 10 million, but there's no reason, you know, that I can see right now that we need to do that all at once in one year. We could, but we don't need to. And so I'm going to break it up into palatable chunks
depending on, you know, what makes sense from an engineering standpoint and what makes sense in the field. And then we're gonna, you know, ask you to fund those construction projects accordingly. And, you know, that'll be, you know, iterative with me, you, Tony, Andrea, and you know, all of these other decisions that get made as they get made
and what, you know, what money comes in the door and what money goes out. So that that's how I look at the utility work going forward. Um and you know I I do think we you know the the more we defer the more we fall behind but you know I think it's manageable from that perspective.
>> Thank you. Well, that's that sort of answers my some of your questions. Are are we going to have a couple more streets every year to to grapple with at four million per or something? And it sounds like maybe no >> at least at least not you know not as I
see it today. Um >> well the clarification is helpful because in my mind I was mixing it in with all the other sort of street projects that we'll have to do that include primarily water. So this one is more. It's water. It's sewer. It's, you
know, the paving. It's a lot more. >> Yeah. I mean, but Chuck, you must have a pretty long list of, you know, a street that needs storm water but doesn't need water or sewer. You know, a
street that just needs paving but doesn't need the others or, you know, there's >> Right. I guess I look at it as like >> well >> these larger capital projects that you're you're you're hitting the street, you're doing everything from soup to nuts. >> Yeah. >> But we >> right so we we definitely have a few a
few that we should try and work in and that's what we've been trying to do is you know like this year for instance we did the work over on Forest and Mill. We also did a fairly goodsized portion of Cobburn and Forest Lane because we could make the money go that far. And so that, you know, that's the paving that was not
water, sewer, drain. Um, we we always find drain, you know, drain's definitely one of those ones that we're just kind of assuming that we have to replace it when we go there. So that's kind of baked in. Uh, but you know, tapin's much bigger. Bennett will be much bigger, but the the other ones are kind of like, you
know, that we don't know every last basin and manhole that's going to need to be replaced, but we know that, you know, we can we can assume that there's something there. Um, so th those are how I look at those. And then, you know, there the w the water goes forever. We're never going to be done with the water. Um, and so, you know, we'll
definitely probably have to fix a few roads before we're ready to do the water man that's underneath it, but I'm trying to avoid that. I'm trying to get them all done at once. Um, so that's that's the plan. >> But the the streets go on. We we have a
backlog for no doubt. >> No, I think that's very helpful. And you know, annually, every year, you tackle that stuff in our normal sort of $3 million capital budget. And presumably that would just keep going on. What's different here is that these projects
are sort of tagged with a 15-year bond. And when they pop up, it this is overlaid on top of the normal $3 million a year you're working on. And that's just why we're trying to, I think, get a little forward look on what what those ones are. Um, you know, obviously we did
school a few years ago. Pine Street, Pleasant Street, Walker Road, big projects. Bennett, you know, Tapen are big. Question is kind of what do you foresee coming up going forward that's going to be added to those lists because we're
going to have to do it. It's just a matter of we don't want to be get four years out and go, okay, here's another seven million. We got to figure out how to sort. Well, I I think I hear summer is one of the ones that's >> that's fits in
>> and he can and he said can >> he can phase it phase it so that it can fit in that annual budget that we've been dealing with rather than being a bonded project. I think >> the question is what are the 15 bonded
>> projects as he said there's nothing >> right so I'm going to try and avoid all of those um but yeah we'll see if there's a something that pops up but um >> to say nothing
uh you know we don't know >> I I certainly understand that there's you know that there's harsh locked in science on on the sewer pipe that's gonna suddenly fail in a street that that we hadn't accounted for. >> Right. >> That's so Bennett and Tapen are the ones
we know about. Those are the only ones we concrete know about right now. And so that's the plan. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> But I but as you asked that question like my blood pressure goes up a little because I think of the you say the three million
that we're working on on an annual basis. Three million is probably not enough on an annual basis today. And the cost of all those annual projects are going up each year. And that three million is
shrinking >> because what's coming in under taxation uh you know the other stuff health and operational budget is growing. >> So it's this is where >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But that's, you know, that's
that's just true. I mean, >> that's, >> you know, we all in our houses have to defer projects because we can't afford them and and yeah, they cost more. >> Yeah. >> Five years later. That's >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean, >> that's your house though and your
decision, you know, but that is a boat. That's the boat that we've been in on this stuff. That's the conver That's absolutely the conversation exactly that, Tony, that we've had, >> which is why we upped the annual budget. We we get it. We get it. And we know that the three could change.
>> But um and I I wanted to just inject another thought because we had the initial discussion about the the reserves and you know how it's not bumping up as much this year. Um and we fought hard to kind of make that happen. And so and now
we're like, >> you know, >> because part of, you know, Tony, what's helped us make that, you know, three million or so work from year to year is we've had like a million in excess reserves from a year-to-year basis because we take in more money than we
planned for and stuff costs less than we thought it would, you know, >> and and and that kind of helped boil this machine a little bit and now we're not going to have that. Well, and I think the other thing was we didn't increase taxes
up to capacity during CO. So, we've had this excess levy capacity that we've been able to tap in. So, that the tax rates have still gone up. >> It just hasn't required an override. >> We haven't had to ask for permission. >> Right. And I think I think that's what
we have to take into consideration is the two and a the prop two and a half two and a half% is just a number and if it costs this town more than that to run the town
>> then I think you know we have to seriously consider is this a year we need an override? >> Yeah. >> Do we need more taxes to fund what we need to do? We don't want to do it every year, but um >> yeah,
>> you know, it may be that it's period periodically. We know we need it, but >> it's been a long time since we've done it. >> That school uh number that we got the 7.86 is that do we also kind of know or have a sense of the Essex Manchester?
Oh, that's the interesting part that the there's a dramatic shift in the appropriation between the two towns in what they presented this week. It used to be like Essex is like only like 8.07
and we're 7.86 whereas like last year they were eight something and we were four something. >> Oh, so it's even. There's and I don't know whether it's the the 2025 assessments that kicked in because every
they have >> they only do the assessments every other year. So in the formula for this year there's two years of the 2023 assessments and one year of the 2025. So I don't know if it's I haven't looked at the underlying number. I don't know
if the but I thought their assessments had gone up more rapidly than ours. So, I'm confused and that doesn't seem to be a huge shift in enrollments, but maybe there was. I mean, you know, maybe it was enough to do the shift. I I don't know. Yes, an
>> Since that's 75% enrollment and 25% equalized valuation, it's got to be enrollment. >> I don't know. I think, you know, it's something I'm going to look at because I it really surprised me. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um Yeah.
Thank you. It's a big number. Yeah. >> So, the towns are pretty >> pretty much on par this year as regarding the percentage increase. >> Okay. >> And and Essex is expecting more
enrollments because they're doing they have developments going on. >> They're like the 30 unit thing. >> Yeah. >> Not yet, I think. I don't know sounded like
>> so I also look at you know speaking of the school and the elementary school in Essex and that question is going to be a next year possibly fall maybe spring. Um,
you know that that I start to look at as we make some decisions for this year and defer to out years. I I think about, you know, the voter being presented repeatedly, multiple, you
know, times question to approve x millions of dollars for this project. And it's it it's going to be a lot and it's going to happen rapidly. And so I I think about that too when we're talking about
deferring things uh to the next year because I if you look at the the longer spreadsheet that you guys are all familiar with, you know, there's more there's more coming. >> Yeah. But I think that >> and the town's been supportive
>> and I think that we're in a I mean in in 2032 we got a huge chunk of debt service reduction in the schools >> and we might have new revenue coming on right around >> 30. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Um, so I think it's it's this year and next year that are particularly seem particularly tight and that's why it makes sense to defer some things if if we're going to look better in a couple of years. Um, we need to look at that a little
more closely probably, but um, >> you know, I just we we have to think about Well, the big big hits are building schools and we've built two schools relatively relatively recently. You can say the high school is
approaching its theoretical half life in 10 years, but once we get through Essex Elementary that the school building will be a while before we sign up for the next one, which is good. Yeah, I don't think we'll hit our our
>> they are a little close together and and and this one, but Right. You know, we'll get through it. >> Right. >> Public public safety DPW will be the the next big one after that. >> Right. >> Yeah. Right. And then capital maybe some
capital upgrades for the middle high school at some point. Some things are useful life could but that's just not normal stuff. >> But I think Tony your point is a really good one is that
this April town meeting um the elephant in the room will be Essex Elementary in the fall. And I I think it's highly unlikely you could squeak through an April meeting and not have a whole lot of questions about Essex Elementary.
It's going to go together. So, I think we need to think about how how that works. >> Yep. And and the they had a meeting last night. They're, you know, gave an update as to where they are with with that feasibility
process. um to have the vote in October, the decision has to be made by June or July >> in order to get the vote the ballot
question added to the November election ballot. The state needs to know by June or July. you need to know about the selected approach the the selected >> if you're going to vote on it and not >> so that and you know you have a town it
would probably be one night Manchester one night Essex vice versa and then the ballot question would follow that >> in order to have that ballot question included in the November >> state elections we have that has to be
submitted to the state in June or July. >> So, the specific ballot question has to be submitted and they're not going to so they won't be able to do that if if schematic design is not until October. >> So, we don't need to necessarily include it in the state
election ballot. >> I mean, that might not be reasonable. >> I I think that's their hope, but I don't know. That's just so we all are aware of, you know, a timeline, a sense of timeline. Yeah, I because I I had noted
that our they were targeting schematic design is October 26. I don't see that happen. >> I think just trying to get Manchester voters together in the middle of the summer to vote on something like this would be a really hard building. But
>> the schematic design needs to be done before we can appropriate the money, right? Because we don't know what the cost will be. >> Yeah, that schematic gets designed schematic gets done. gets priced that price becomes together with the design gets submitted to MSBA for the review
and approval that that estimate becomes the project cost and that's then the cost that gets carried in. >> So you're saying the schematics are not coming out till October 26th. Well, there's no way we can vote on it in the fall. >> No, not not for that.
>> Yeah. not to be part of the state elections unless we did it as a separate ballot vote. >> Guess that's >> Yeah, but even if the schematics aren't coming out till October 26, >> then don't you need state approval? >> We need MSBA. I don't know if that
October is expected MSBA vote on or or review or that's when the documents are being >> I'll have to ask >> but I think there's still linkage between the Essex Elementary and our budget >> right?
>> Yeah. It's just it's just there. >> Yeah. and and they have uh so we have three of the four union negotiations this year. We have police next year and they have school next year.
So that would be a, you know, April 27 town meeting voting on FY28 impact >> that could come at the same time that
you're talking about those elementary school. >> Maybe voted down. So, the budget that we're working on for this coming budget season is using uh labor numbers we've been in
contract with for two years and this is the last year on. Is that right? Or are you negotiating for something that will impact the budget we're working on? So, we probably need to think about >> I don't know how we've done this in the past. We don't have placeholders. We just
>> No, no, no. They they >> No, I think that they >> No, I think that they know pretty well by the time we get to town meeting what it's going to be. >> Okay. >> We've had pretty our negotiations have tended to be
completed before the end of the contract. Right. >> Sometimes I mean the last one with police wasn't done the last time we did a salary. >> The new contract is effective July one. >> Yeah. So
>> we worry about that when we get to the operating report, >> right? >> Right now I have a place to >> put anything put you in a less advantageous negotiations, >> right? >> Exactly. >> Right. >> You know, yeah, that's the tough part.
Um, so yeah, that's it's it's I think we got a we have a number in there now. Uh hopefully I would, you know, negotiate a contract that stays within that number for year one.
>> Um I mean traditionally we have not had issues, >> right? >> We have not had issues with >> it's going well >> coming into having a budget where we can't cover the contract increases.
So whatever historically has been done >> right >> I know it's been a little more challenging when we go a couple years later then we have to retroactive >> but we've also had traditionally like 8% increases on health insurance
>> you know >> right >> it's a different >> environment now a different environment now >> you know parents are living that And that's part of the environment I'm speaking to. You know, it's a different
um but >> part, you know, part of the challenge that I'm faced with is that >> your typical cola negotiation numbers are being almost completely eaten up by
>> Well, that's what happened with social security this year. Social Security increased and Medicare increased to eat away the entire social security increase. So
healthc care is an issue. >> Don't know how that one gets solved. Okay. So we feel we've given the input we want to give on this capital budget at this point. Anybody have any other input they would
like to give? Not to say where >> um I mean are we are we really going to submit a budget that allocates $4 million for the senior centers? >> No, that's not on here. That's the first >> I thought it says borrowing on here.
>> Yeah, the right column. >> That should over be that should be one one column over. >> Yeah, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Sorry. And I have a question about the very first line. This is the question I believe if I understand it correctly is the software replacement
>> and I believe we're talking about deferring it. I thought this was pretty important. Can you help me with the sort of critical nature of this? I is that I had maybe the mistaken view that it was fairly critical but >> well I I am nervous about it because the
software we have is um it's being supported right now but it's not being improved. it's not being >> that's true. That's true. >> You know, it's like it's been bought by another company and the other company has their own software. >> So eventually I don't know when they're going to cease to support the our
software right now. Um so that's something I just wanted to like put on here and like you know it's not they haven't given us a date or anything so you defer it but I I just rather do it sooner than later. Have you asked? I mean I assume we've asked and they Yeah.
Every year I ask and they're like, "No, no, no." And I'm like, >> "Well, you know, when we first went to software, we asked them like, "Are you going to sell?" And they're like, "No, no, no." They sold the month we converted. >> Yeah. >> So,
>> I might be a little But you'll ask again before town meeting. Yeah. Yeah. >> But I just seems to me to be more important to get it done than refer that. >> Right. And then so another thing that came up frequently too is um we received
a grant through the code swordfam to change our domain or website address from manchester.mma. us to Manchester.gov I think is what we agreed on. And so that conversion actually is actually also taking place. So I figured we could
defer this maybe a year and then finish that website conversion also going to affect all of our email addresses, all of our loginins. Um, you know, it's a it's a huge it's at least six months transition. >> All of our safe places
>> and does that affect >> that's why she wants to get that done first. >> I just Okay. First is that's the word I >> want. >> It just seems to me deferred is not a good choice. I I I understand it's very tight. I got all this all the speech.
>> We're making tough decisions. I think it's a tough decision that has got to be rethought or thought further about because I think it's too high a risk to have it not supported. I mean we have no control of that. I >> it means it would mean not it would mean
having to make cuts in the operating budget or not supporting the school and asking the town for an override. >> Well, and I think I understand I'm I'm not being naive here. No, I >> must order the town. >> But I think Peter, she's saying that
there's going to be time to convert the >> the website that has to be done before they can even touch the software. >> And I thought it was just the opposite. I thought you wanted to do the software before you got to the Okay. Well, originally I wanted to do the software and then I found out after I sent this
to you guys that um the domain name is is actually going to be happening and I don't have to be able to do both at the same time. Mhm. >> So then, so you do the domain change and you have a FINCOM reserve if you have an
emergency and you have an a town meeting nine months through the fiscal year if you have an emergency in order to cover something like this. So I think that you have
>> I I'm not actually the dollars and cents. I think it's just the confusion of the fact if you suddenly have a software that's not being supported and may not be functional. That that's what I'm really functioning. I understand you've got all these backup pieces. I got it. >> I think it'll be functional. It just
>> it's supported right now. >> I understand it's important now. >> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the fact how can you function without it being supported? >> Yes. >> Yes, >> you can. Okay. that I missed. >> So, just just a general comment going maybe a little higher elevation here.
You're running a $22 million business with 70 employees. Software is important and I hear the argument about schools and whatever, but when software doesn't work and your organization goes down, it stops, believe me. So I would be careful
about being too pennywise and pound foolish particularly on financial software because without it you've got a problem that a kind of a theoretical >> that's why I brought it up now. >> That's why it is critical. Yeah, it's
critical be reliable and available. >> Right. >> I understand we have all these emergency backups but but it's not if you can work it without support. That's the the critical item here. >> I think we need to keep it in mind >> and as we go through the whole budget
>> y >> and see what the picture looks like. >> Um if it appears as if like we're going to need an override then we pull might pull something like this back in. >> Concern I have is the you know we might be able to buy time
now but the conversion process takes a lot of time too. >> Oh yeah. So >> I have no idea what that entails. >> I just I thank you. I agree. >> Yeah. >> I think it needs to be kept on in the conversation because you asked did we all we all comfortable with where we are
and that's what I am not comfortable with. >> No, Mr. >> Yes. >> Okay. Anything else on this? I'm also I'm also operating under the
assumption that our commitment to our you know annual appropriations towards OPM is uh in concrete you know >> pretty firmly. >> Yeah. So that that's another
>> I mean I >> you can play with that but question >> the so what the OPED schedule has I think is 360 for this year and about 150 for the year after that and then we're fully funded and then we can start which is
why we've got this two-year period too because then we can start we would still pay the normal cost which is about 150 but then we have about 400,000 000 of retirey premiums that would pay out of OPED. So, we've got a swing of about
600,000 when we stop making the OPED payments and start paying premiums out of it. So, that's a big number. >> Um, >> that's bigger than I thought actually. So, >> and and next year we'll be partway there
because we'll be putting in 150 rather than the 360. So this is probably >> 360 for FY27 and 150 for FY28, >> right? >> That's what I meant by this year. This year. Yeah. Yeah. Um so that's why the fiscal year we're working on is
particularly difficult. >> Um and we've been we haven't missed >> a payment on OPED and we purposely picked a more aggressive schedule than was required. >> Yeah. Also looking down to all the death service and other things going on that
that money is very valuable in the coming years, >> right? >> I think getting OPED solved and off the books is going to help, you know, borrowing too. >> Yes, I think >> and our auditors should love that. >> They do love it already. >> I think we hear that we really care
about making that payment. >> So that's why I'm operating under that assumption. And you know that you know you have that $600,000 swing in two years. you got potentially CST coming on board, you know, >> it's kind of just like hold on.
>> Exactly. Right. >> Get through it. Um, so, >> right. >> But that if we were I just wanted to ask that question again to make sure >> it's a good question to ask >> in the right direction. >> Yeah. It's also possible that if we come
to the point where we need an override, you could do an override for that oped payment. >> Yes. >> Because I think people very much understand it as a discrete item. >> Yeah. >> If you did that, would you do it for the whole amount like the 360 and plus the
150? >> You could just be done with it. >> Yeah. >> It's an interesting thought. I don't know. You know, >> glad I asked a question. >> Yeah, I'm glad the question too.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Where do we go from here? >> Anything else? Do you have any other updates for us, Andrea, that we need to be aware of for that's going on in this fiscal year? Any red flags >> other than me? >> Um, can I jump in here after that? I
have you both on the agenda. So, yes, >> you know, it's uh I'm I'm still getting used to the process that you guys are comfortable with. Uh it's different than what I'm used to, but that's okay. Um,
you know, I especially it's a it's especially, you know, given the tightness of the year, >> understanding the operating budget is really going to have a large factor on how we really iron out some of this capital. >> Exactly. Right. >> Um, and we're still going through that
process. Uh, our hope for Monday is to bring information to you with kind of like a higher level picture. I don't know if we're going to have the budget book per se on Monday, but I think we can we'll have, >> you know, we have the data that we can
provide you guys. It's just may not be in that final looking form of a budget book. Um, so I think a lot of like some of the delay uh where you're used to having that budget book or used to having some
of these things more ironed out at this point is due to me being new and just kind of getting used to the process. I've I've it's been ingrained in me from my previous town that I don't speak to the
finance committee until I have the blessing of the select board. >> Um just we do it a little bit different. You know, it's fin comes first and then select board and fin meet together and you know, so I'm just kind of getting
used to that. So, so do you expect we'll have a final quote unquote budget book by our first meeting in January? >> Yeah. Okay. >> I would say I think I think we're going to catch back up to your normal speed.
>> Okay. uh at that point >> then then I think that >> you know our first meeting in January will then be a little different >> because we really will be looking at the budget for the first time then >> which is fine. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Which is which is fine.
>> That's always our kickoff meeting and so we just may have to spend a little might have to have a little longer meeting. No, I think we're going to move through it very efficiently. >> We might be able to send you stuff >> before then. >> It won't be in a high budget format. That's all.
>> Yeah. Like the PowerPoint I did maybe. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. We'll adjust. >> I'm I'm I'm adjusting as well.
>> It's also, you know, kind of like finance theory, too. It's it's you the approach that the takes is different, >> right? >> Um, >> so, you know, I I I'm trying I want to make sure that I put something in front of you that
>> you you are all comfortable with, the select board's comfortable with, that the town's going to be comfortable with. >> You know, I don't want to come in and drastically change how we approach the finances. >> Um, it's it's an interesting way to do it. It's just, you know,
>> well, yeah, I think that Yeah, I think we set the schedule at that first meeting in January and so we can figure I've got to I'm still waiting to hear when the um finance committee report has to go to print.
Um I'll sent it to Debbie, but Debbie said that Tiffany does that. So, I'll do a followup with Tiffany. >> So, I was going to put together kind of like a reverse I was going to put together a calendar of key dates, you know, chronological
and reverse. >> You really want to build backwards from that date. >> Well, we just I want to know >> your meetings you can fill in there, but like the key >> I want to know how many meetings I have
>> to get through the budget >> before we have to do have to have things finalized. Mhm. >> Good. >> Um because it's always tight at the end >> and I'm also doing that for planning board purposes as well. I'm trying to
get the planning board to set their goal of having a written recommendation included in the book. >> I wouldn't hold up the book for that. >> I No, that's what I'm saying. I'm trying to make I'm trying to get them
earlier. You know, to me, I think if a resident can see that recommendation in the book two weeks leading up to town meeting, it's a much better process for them to be, you know,
to know where the we're ready. Yeah. >> The more information they have take something to town meeting. >> The book go the book's got to go when the book's got to go. If the planning board's in, it's in. I'm trying to get >> No, I agree that I think People want stuff in writing. And I think that we've
had town meetings where there've been a lot of pieces of paper handed out with at town meeting with all different numbers and >> yeah, >> people don't have them and you know there's the green one and the blue one and the yellow one and the orange one.
Um yeah, I'd rather have it all done in advance in the book. >> When things are in this book and you go to town meeting floor, voting and discussion goes very nicely. Yes. when you're amending and adding and handing out pieces of paper, it's a it's a total
flip of the coin. >> I've been there. Completely agree. So, I'm trying to >> y >> get that schedule out for the planning board as well. >> Yeah. >> So, what's wor well for us in the past, I mean, you're basically looking at a quarter, which is 13 weeks, and a couple
more weeks in there. So, I mean, we're typically like a 15week schedule and we hit the big items like DPW, police, fire, public safety, harbor, master, town government, library, school is always a wild card. You know, we're
we're waiting around for their final budget. We try to get them in to talk. By the time you put all that together, it's usually just one or two extra weeks and then it's a scramble of editing. But but the whole my point is the whole thing does begin like in the first week
in January. And if the first week in January slips to the second or third week in January, >> it's a pile up at the end and it will be it'll be really tough. Yeah. >> So, >> and I think it's late this year again. >> Yeah. >> I think it's
Yeah, it's the the 8th. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Is our first meeting. So that's Okay. >> And I'm unfortunately gonna miss that, but >> maybe I can tie one.
>> No, >> um, >> so we may we may be able to get you that budget book in advance of the meeting. Um, and of course your kickoff meeting and we can I'll we'll chat about you
know would you typically have a department at that first meeting. >> Okay. >> I I think that the the first meeting I think this time we're going to we'll spend a little more time going through
the budget. Um, but we identify areas of concern, perhaps areas where we think we're going to need more information and then we set the schedule for when we're going to meet with the v do each
the various departments. >> Um, that's kind of the purpose of so the first the first department head meeting would be on the 15th. whoever. And you're going to need to give us input as to
which ones you're most comfortable with for us to go first on. >> Yeah. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. >> You know, because you may have some that you still need to work on and those we should just do because we really like to vote on the budget at that meeting if
we can so that we're >> through it. >> Yeah. I don't uh I don't get excited about readressing things six weeks later when all of a sudden sudden somebody has a completely different opinion. And I would say also if the capital it
can be kind of nailed down for that department that's great. If if we get to usually we deal with capital like at the end of March and if >> if I do it earlier >> this list we've been given or whatever list we're working with is all red and
we're like starting a new in March. That's then we're going back. That's hard. It's very hard. >> Okay. was talking to Tony about it is um the legal line is running really high and I
think I mentioned that the last quarter so I just wanted to mention that again I'll bring that up again when I do the second quarter report for next >> yeah I did hear that we we actually had a ZBA case and the town
town council actually had to go to court >> which is like about the first time that I can remember >> um >> you went anticipate more of those in this coming year or is this are we in sort of in an anomaly situation right now? >> This was an old case.
>> Yeah. >> And it it was um questioning the town's interpretation of the bylaw and so it was felt important that >> the normally it's the um defendant
attorney who who does everything but in this case the town needed to be represented. >> Yep. But on the overall legal costs, it's if you look at the bills coming in, are they all kind of like unique to this
year or do you think this is a trend going forward and we're going to be seeing this >> 27 28 29 type deal? >> I feel like this is unique. Um definitely start. I don't know how long it's going to last. Um >> right. So some of these projects and
things cases that are going on could end you know next month or could be in a year >> and we could also get >> new things like if we happen to have another 40B project >> right >> you're now talking
for that >> because you can't have we have an outstanding No, >> no, >> nope. >> It's not told while it's in court. >> Okay. >> Because HAC overruled us.
So, we've had, you know, that that 40B, we've had the Culbert, we've had um health, we've had board, we've had >> Didn't you have a police
personnel issue? >> Yep. Yep. Uh we're going through contract negotiations. I do think that it there may there may be some communication outward to department heads or committee chairs
saying, you know, as far as like uh a quick ask or email to council. We might need to like tighten that up because we're right we're we're really >> I I not the driving factor. you know, but I think we do need to
>> I'll make this comment that I've made before and been ignored that the individual boards have no clue of the legal expenses that are being attributed to their
boards and I think that is extremely important. we could share that >> to have to have that um broken down because I think that there are times
that it's cheaper to contact town council in advance of a case rather than having the case be appealed and go to the courts. And I think that's but I agree. I think there's opportunities for
um I think some boards are using town council more than others. >> Y >> one thing that might be helpful and Ann probably remembers this from fincom years of old but there was originally a spreadsheet that just kind of listed
without a lot of pertinent information what were the current legal challenges that the town was dealing with. And I remember it so vividly because when I got on this committee, it was crazy. There were like 13 or 14 things and they
were they were big eaters of cash. And I remember this committee said, "Whoa, let's prioritize." And I think it was kind of like an outside group a little bit, but it was, I think, very helpful saying, "Let's try to figure out how we get this one off the counter." This one
off the counter. And I think you're right, Sarah, that sometimes these things are there lots of little things that eat away here, but you know, maybe having a list of of which ones have been on a long time and and you know, kind of a little just reflection of
>> certainly once >> we end this quickly or we let this one run a little longer. What do you do? >> Once they're in the courts, it's all a public record, >> right? >> So there's no reason why the actual cases can't be listed if if they're >> gone to court. It's different if stuff
is being negotiated behind scenes, but >> I think it's helpful just to sort of say, okay, we're currently in this year. What's the what's the current expenditure that's going on in this one, this one, this one, this one? >> If it's easy to do. >> Yeah, that
>> do you have any updates for us on the facility planning committee or the school building committee? Um, not too much since we last talked probably. You know, we're, you know, I guess the the we did have a a meeting with u
the uh the consultant on the DPW design and public safety design options have been sort of vetoed into the the thinking there just to have a sense of it and uh that was helpful. Um and
um you know I think the Pleasant Street site is still kind of being talked about as as an option though. Um and and there's also discussion about you know whether you know to try to do it all together versus you know DPW and then
public safety separately. Um, >> did I read the ones >> did I read sort of listening to the last night's presentation? A lot more discussion of putting the two schools together. It seemed to be more discussion of that than I recall from the first meeting.
>> Oh, you're so I'm talking about facilities planning from the school thing for now, >> but I'll get to that in a >> Oh, I'm sorry. You're talking about the operating budget. >> No, no, no. I'm talking about facilities planning committee, which is uh the town >> I'm sorry. I was talking about the schools,
>> town building projects. Um, not school. Um, but anyway, so that's that's ongoing. Um, and we talked a little bit tonight about, you know, hey, when can when do we want to afford to do this? So uh and then the school um to your point
uh Peter is um so we whatever options we indicate to the MSBA that we're going to study you know to the state those are the things that the architect has to study. >> So Apple Street was a was a potential site
>> that was listed and so we had to go through that but we've kind of dismissed that. it's got a lot of uh additional costs that uh that would that would hit it and um and uh but otherwise the actual uh so the school site and the
option of possibly you know doing something that co-mingles with the memorial project um given that the the headcount at Essex is relatively small it's like 250 kids. >> Yeah. And uh but I think it's the
memorial project kind of shapes up as being not a great option. You know, it kind of >> the tennis courts go away to, you know, accommodate uh parking, you know, which that that's a that's a trip wire all on its own. >> Um and it and it just and it requires an
addition, you know, so then you're doing project in two locations, you know. So if you're looking for an opportunity to spend more money, you know, that's a great idea. uh it's not super efficient. So, but otherwise they're they're going down a good track and I think uh
I think the current phase which is GDP preliminary design program that's where they do the demographics that's where they you know they understand the school program and they forecast the size of the school that's required. Um so all that stuff gets submitted to the state
to the MSBA uh this month and then once they review it we go into the next phase the second of the three phases in feasibility study which is >> and that phase is where you actually pick a design. That's where we hone in
uh that's where we truly begin to you know more thoroughly evaluate the architectural options you know for the different uh things that and that will include memorial still and uh but at the end of that phase that's when we'll recommend a particular design that we'll
study in schematic design that will lead us up to October >> and I thought Pam said maybe that was a February time frame does that seem right >> for the PS >> for picking picking the option.
>> Uh well, so PSR ends in May 26. >> So yeah, >> at least that's what I noted. I might be off on that, but >> um yeah, in fact, that that sounds a little late to me almost because then that that only leaves like five months for scrap
design. Small school, but it's a little tight. >> Anyway, so that's all there is. It's pitch. M >> um leazison on updates. I can say I did meet with the fire chief and we did talk about
capital items and you know maybe some of these items are tight slightly overstated based on you know some things he may and we also talked a little bit about the safer grant staffing and >> deputy chief, you know. So he's trying to
he's he's he's he's trying to think outside the box and come up with the most coste effective solutions for the town is what I'd say. >> Well, we've not met with the DBW since Dean's report last meeting, so there's
nothing new there. >> And does anybody want to be a liaison with the police department? I'm happy to take that on. >> Okay. I'm concerned because Todd is retiring in June. So, I kind of
see this as a transition year to some extent. >> Okay. >> I just think it's important that >> we can try to meet with him. Um I'm going to miss our next meeting, but presumably the next I can email you my update.
That's my >> Okay. >> Speaking of missing meetings, I will be away between about the 20th of January and the 10th of February and I believe
we may have a meeting scheduled during that time >> and the meetings will be every Thursday as I recall. Yes, I will be away the first Thursday also. >> Um, okay. Wait a minute. Let me get my calendar up. My calendar is in a
different location on my phone than it used to be due to user error and I can't get it back to where it was. >> Um, >> yeah. And the meeting I will miss will be the 29th of January. >> Okay. Um, Peter, what meeting are you missing?
>> The first one. >> January 2nd. 7th. >> Seventh. Is it eth? >> And you're missing that? >> I'm I'm missing that, too. Okay. >> Okay. Okay.
Um, November minutes. Be able to look at that. >> Do I have a motion to approve? >> You do. Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> Okay.
>> Can I um Is it possible? We've normally had um they have been sent to us as a word doc and these were online. Can we get them sent to us? >> I'm having a lot of problems
because what's coming through my email from the town now is always PDFs. Yeah. Right. >> It's not Word documents, >> right? >> And I'm too cheap to pay for PDF editing
on my laptop. So, I can't I can't even download them to my laptop. I have to print to a PDF and then load that PDF to my laptop. >> It would be both. >> One say maybe I should pay for the Adobe software, but so something's changed.
setting that might just be a setting that it's that it's when you it's was happening on my computer and um and when you click on attachment that comes up as a word document as an attachment >> goes to PDF. >> Click on it and it's popping up in a PDF
form. >> Yeah. Right. >> So you just got to it's a default >> program that you're opening attachments with and it's >> my setup needs to be changed to Microsoft. Yeah. >> Y >> my setup. Okay. Yeah, >> because Adobe's trying to get you to pay
for their their editable version. >> How do you change this >> at a broader level? I've over the years save these save these in a form. You know how to do it? >> And I will tell you, Debbie, >> I saved her bacon years ago because she
said, you know, I don't have incon minutes from like 200, you know, like >> right >> 18 to 21. And I said, well, let me send them all to you. when I marched in with a zip disc and when they were in word
format, they were really nice to be able to search. >> Oh, okay. >> And I will tell you when we were like trying to figure out like firet truck or bond or something, you could type it in and >> I don't know, this may be way beyond
where everybody wants to go, but but when minutes were in Word Yeah. >> and we could dump them in a folder every year, it was great. in my humble opinion. >> I imagine Gail's sending you a word version and you're just
>> No, we're getting a PDF. >> You're getting a PDF. >> Getting a PDF. And then I don't know about all of you, but I had to I got something where I >> I think it's coming out of SharePoint. >> Yeah. Out of SharePoint. >> I think the minutes are being done in SharePoint now where they didn't used to
be. And I think that's the difference. >> All right. We'll look at it. >> Yeah, >> thank you for raising that. I I have no idea. >> Um, next meetings. >> So, we have a meeting Monday night,
December 15th, joint with a select board, >> and it's at 6:30. >> Okay. >> 6:30, >> not 7. >> It was posted today at 6:30. So >> is that that is that when our business starts or that's when
>> the only item on the agenda is the budget. >> Yeah, there's not a lot on the agenda for Monday. So >> unless he's changing it tomorrow. um building in >> I mean I received both the select board
and the final agendas were posted today and they both only had the budget on it had no other >> also the uh the agenda a little bit later with some other stuff after the discussion of the budget for the Either way you guys are the first thing on our
agenda Okay. Cuz usually we're at 7, >> but that's okay. That's okay. >> 6:30 is fine. 6:30 is fine. >> We can cope with 6:30. >> It doesn't have to be our meeting doesn't have to be posted till tomorrow. >> Tomorrow, right? So, we could put our
consent agenda >> first. >> First. >> Well, no, we'll leave it at 6. We'll show up at 6:30. >> Yeah, just show up. >> We can leave earlier that way. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Thank you. And then we have the
Thursday, January 8th meeting as a budget kickoff review and to establish the schedule >> and essentially every Thursday thereafter. >> Correct. And what I'm going to do again like I did last year is request that we
be in room five with 1623 studios. >> Yeah. >> Okay. There's more room and the recordings are better. Um since we have people coming in to and talk to us.
>> Okay. >> Anything else? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Let's go push that red button, please. Thank you.