I think we can officially um open the meeting at 7 and I'll go through the script that Jill gave me. Um so as a preliminary matter um this is Katie Moore, vice chair um just running the meeting for Jill who is out today. Um permit me to
confirm that all members and persons um anticipated on the agenda are present and can hear me. So I will go through who I can see first. Uh so Nathan, yes. All right. And Linda, yes. and Nikquille. Yes.
Peter, yes indeed. All right. And Nathaniel, yes. All right. Great. Um, so good morning. This is an open meeting of the finance committee conducted via Zoom. Um, speakers on the agenda will be participating remotely.
Um, and I, as the meeting manager, may allow for the public to provide comment. Um, if public comments will be received, uh, the board would like to hear public comments and if there is further action that is required by the finance committee, the meeting manager will add
the matter is appropriate to a forthcoming agenda. Depending on the comment, um, we may, if we are able to, within the confines of the opening meeting law, respond with information as opposed to needing to deliberate on the matter. Um, accordingly, please be aware
that other folks may be able to see you. So, please take care as not to screen share your computer. Um, anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording. Um, and I did post all docs on board docs um earlier today. So, you should be able to access that um as well
after the meeting if you need to reference anything. So, I will go ahead and jump into it. So, tonight we have Justin with us. Justin, thank you for joining. Um, and while you're you're here, I'll let you go first. Um I think the topics, if I have it right, that we
wanted um you to speak on, we do have a reserve fund transfer I saw um that we need to vote on tonight. Um and then I I believe also the it was article XX. I know they're um reumbered now and I'm going to pull up my new numbering of
them, but it's the easement at Parker and Elmwood. Believe we have not discussed that yet. Um, and then articles 16 through 20 all are about the reserve or sorry, not the reserve, the water and the the sewer um budget. So, I'm sure you can speak some to that. And
Nathan, I see your hand up. Uh, yeah, Katie, did you want to share um co-hosting with the rest of us? Oh, yes. Thank you. I will do that right now. I'll make you all co-hosts and Justin, if there's anything you want me to share, I can do that as
well. Yeah, it I'm uh I'm not sure what the control numbers are based off of when we put them up front. So, we can just go through each one individually if you don't mind. Yeah, let me pull them up. Let me first think you all co-hosts.
Yeah, they changed from department heads to think um yeah, today I was going through Jillian's, you know, R and T and I was like, "Wait, no, that's number seven." And then it was like a whole it was like two hours of like re numbering things. But all right, let me share my I
believe that's a word document which is Well, I'll go through. So maybe first do you want me to do the reserve fund transfer first? Yeah. Yeah, we can discuss that. So, I'll pull that
up. So, I believe this is it. Yes, that's it, Katie. So, it looks like just moving 100,000 um Yeah. from I'll speak to it and I'm I'm going to assume that Fincom isn't aware
of um a few months of deliberation by the select board, who is also the water and sewer commissioners for the town of Maynard. um related to um implementation of a new program under our water utility. Um it's a rebate program that
the board wants to offer uh customers who are affected by discoloration due to failing uh well sources that have been well documented for the past 40 years. Um that program has been designed and provided for feedback to the select
board from the Department of Public Works, Water and Sewer Department. And at our last um rate hearing, the board approved the rates that we'll discuss um tonight as well. Within that, they also approved uh the use of $100,000 from
reserve funds to implement the program in FY25. um not waiting for FY26. So, just so you know, this is a $100,000 transfer in FY25 to start the program within the next several weeks. So, would people apply for the rebate
program? Like, how how would the rebates be based off of? Yep, Katie. So, there's a PowerPoint presentation. Not sure if um that found its way to fin and I can always follow up and send the PowerPoint presentation um post this meeting as well for any further uh questions or
comments. Okay. But the the highlevel um process is there is a about roughly 10% of our customers in an isolated area within our distribution network that are um affected on a regular basis by discoloration. The rebate program would
offer an application approach um that is managed through the department of public works. Um those applicants must be within the affected area for higher consideration. Um we did open it up for further investigation outside of the
affected area that's been documented by our engineering, excuse me, our engineering consultants as well as our um our internal operators. Um, and that program is roughly a two-tier program. It offers, um, right now the price points
are $2,500 for what is referred to as a point of entry filtration system, which is pretty much your service line and it feeds your entire house. So, it would treat your entire house. Um, and then a pointof view system is $500 price point, which is something very similar to under
the sink um or a laundry process, things like that. Really just a targeted um infrastructure approach internal plumbing wise. So th that program has been accepted by the select board, but they may change um some of the
iterations to that. That that was the preliminary approach. We knew that the $100,000 was a price point target that wouldn't impact our ability within FY25 to respond to anything that would uh
require or have more advantageous approach to reserve fund. Um the $100,000 price mark was also targeted to provide roughly about 50 customers um with the potential for a point of entry. Within that conversation though, the
board also did um recently approve 9% across the board rates for water and sewer, which actually also includes a $100,000 operating line item for FY26. So, this is the initiation funding to get this program started before July 1st
and then July 1st will carry within the um within the budget that's approved at town. All right. Thank you. All right. Do any members have questions? Linda, Justin, two questions. Does this if if we set up this in in
this water um filtration rebate program, does it have to be spent in FY25 or is it sort of a one of those bank accounts line items that it will be held over to FY26 if if we're if we can't get it spent in FY25?
You are absolutely correct because it's a reserve fund transfer. It's not an article at town meeting. So, it is $100,000 $100,000 just to get the program started. Our anticipation by the time this gets approved and started, this $100,000 will
not be to completely expended. We'd be lucky if maybe 50 to 25% of it does, but we don't want to anticipate that a lot of residents who have been pushing for this program aren't already set and in place. We presented the rebate program
in its 99 percentile uh approach almost a month and a half ago. So those customers who have been advocates for this program are well aware and ready to pull the trigger. So we didn't want to anticipate that we would transfer a smaller amount and then have to say no
to a bunch of customers until July 1. Now what does this do for our water utility? Whatever doesn't get spent in FY25 hits our retained earnings. Okay? So, it's almost like we're just getting in front of it a little bit. Um, we're really just adding a program for about two months. Um, whatever is not spent
will hit back into our retained earnings. And as you'll see on a later control is we're going to revitalize both reserve accounts, water and sewer with this FY25 uh FY24's retained earnings. So,
thank you. And Nathan. Um, hey Justin. Uh, so could you could you explain to me I didn't quite catch what you meant about um so there's going to be a 9% uh increase to the water uh rate fund and it's going to it's going
to create a $100,000 operating budget. Um so that's going to be happening starting in July regardless of the vote at town meeting, but this vote is to like kind of like start the program a couple months early for the people who already need it. Yes and no. So there's
a lot of order operations. So the water and sewer commissioners approve uh future rates. We design our budget based off that rate revenue. So in essence, Nathan, if town meeting chooses not to vote on the two budgets that are in front of you um for water and sewer, we
would have to go back and change the rates. Typically, we have the revenue set in place so that when we have town meeting, we have the allocation of funds available. Meaning we can't set a budget without the revenue in place. almost like taxation prior to your general fund
budget setting. Um, within that 9%, the board did approve a $100,000 line item, which is specifically for the rate program, the rebate program, excuse me. And this $100,000 is just to bridge the gap in FY25 to FY26. As you know, town
meeting will approve um if they approve the budgets in for um May, those funds aren't available until July 1st. And um how how does the uh reimbursement work exactly? Like if I were in the affected area and I purchased a water filter a year ago or two years ago or or
whenever, would I be eligible for grandfather? Yeah, there's no grandfathering. It's only a program that's moving forward because there's no way for us to prove that the filtration system met our requirements. Um and there's no way to prove that the costing was uh appropriate to go through that
process. That was highly discussed by the board. Um but they have decided to move forward with a uh with a rebate program starting effective and only moving forward not grandfathering any uh previous uh installs. So the uh filtration so there there's
some number of towns folk who have are like waiting to install a water filtration system for this to go through and um the DPW is going to sign off on that is like the correct um type of fil filtration system. Yeah, it's a several
step system. So, there's an there's a pre-application, an application, um, and then there's a follow-through process that has to get permitted. Um, every single customer will go through this process. They'll be able to onboard their own plumbers. They will have to meet a national certified standard of
filtration, which still is a thousand plus options of filters that um, anybody any one of our customers can choose that best suits their needs. Um we will then verify that um through final invoicing um inspections and then that will be an
onbill credit. So we will not issue checks to anybody. Um we will only apply on bill credits as part of the rebate program. So if Nathan, if you went through this program and you hired um a pl a local plumber and you put in a $4,700 filter and you went through this
entire process, we would offer you $2,500 as a on bill credit. How sorry and how does the on bill credit work exactly? Um it's just an offset of revenue. So we are the billing agent for all water and sewer. So as you
know you get bills quarterly for water and sewer. So you would get an on bill credit. Don't think of this. So you have to understand when it comes to the water and sewer utility even though it's a public function don't think about how it operates in a similar manner to public.
We are an isolated utility. We can all we can set rebates uh programs off of billing. We can also set um credits based on u miscalculations of bills, things of that nature. Something that we do um quite often. And um I guess my last question is
what's the current balance of the water enterprise uh reserve fund? So this will be the first time we've actually uh withdrawn from this account. So right now we have we typically carry a half a million dollars. Um, if this is approved, we'd have
$400,000. That has to get us to July 1st. I will, you know, knock on wood, we have been highly successful with implementing this um reserve fund in each one of our utilities and we've never had to use it. Yeah. Yeah. I know. Yeah. I know you've been working really hard on like
establishing the water enterprise uh reserve fund. Um would this be setting the uh DPW back in terms of like any you know any like maintenance plans or just like anything involved with um uh new
wells or you know like the water uh plan for the next few years and that was highly discussed as well. So part of the conversation was to make sure that the board understood that this would be a new program not something that's going to reallocate funding from away from something more important. So with
reserve funds, they're excess funds. They're there for break glass in case of emergency, which the board thought was appropriate for this situation. Um, and then when we discussed the reasoning behind why the board wanted to move forward with 9% rates was to make sure
that they weren't reallocating $100,000 away from moving forward with our uh four-phase water improvement program. They actually added on. I provided two options. One was a seven AC 7% across the board that did not include $100,000 for rebate program and one was a 9%
across the board that did they chose the 9% across the board. Okay, thank you very much. Excellent. All right, any last questions? All right. And do we feel do we want to discuss this more um as a committee or
do we feel like we can take a vote on this? I'd be comfortable with a motion for a vote. Yeah, I'm happy voting too. Okay. But sorry, that would count as a motion to vote.
I will be clear. So, Nathaniel made a motion to um approve this. Recommend it. I'll second. All right. Great. We have a first by Nathaniel. Linda second. I will take a
roll call vote. Um Nathan, yes. All right. Nikquille, yes. Linda, yes. Peter, yes. Nathaniel, yes. And I am a yes as well.
So, it's all yours, Justin. Thank you. And then, so Katie, um, officially, I don't know if you'll be able to sign off on this. I I believe there is a line, but don't quote me on that. Yeah. Finom conducted. Yeah. So, we'll just need uh
official sign off or the minutes um sent to Greg Wilson and the select board just so that we can start to process out. I mean, that can wait till tomorrow, obviously. The next day is fine, too. Um, we'll start to move that program forward. We don't anticipate launching it for another several weeks anyways,
but just uh just for record keeping. All right. Okay, sounds good. I made a note of that. Thank you. And that's okay. Can I sign on that or does Jill need to? I mean, you're the acting chair tonight. I think that is um is allowed based on the
vote. So, and then the on the same tab, just so I don't have to switch screens, um I have I feel I have the final town warrant for the ATM. Um so, I can pull up I believe the ones that you were
going to speak on were 16 through 20 other than the um easement. So, I will Are these big enough for people to see? Do you mind just blowing it up for me a little bit? Yeah. Just want to make sure we have the right ones. Yeah, because there was two controls provided because
the board based Well, not on sewer, but on water there was two. So, we're just making sure that the water one that you receive. I'll look at the water. Um, and voting on should be a total revenue requirement of 3,280 99927. Okay, that's what you have. Okay.
Just want to make sure. I'm not even sure if the two controls made it to fin, but we provided two controls as discussed earlier where we provided an option for the board's consideration of a 7% across the board water and sewer rate increase or a 9% across the board. So, um the control that you see in front
of you represents a 9% rate increase um both water and sewer. Um and what you have in front of you is um a budget. So, we can we can discuss sewers right now. Um the sewer budget that is in front of you is um is a budget that actually
meets our operational needs only. When it comes to sewer, we're not advancing, excuse me, largecale capital improvements with this. We are actually adapting to our recently approved 7-year contract for our service and management
of our wastewater treatment facility. So, if you may recall last town meeting, we voted on the allowance of the board to execute a contract with Violia for seven years. Um, Violia has been managing our wastewater treatment plant for the past several years with um the
sunset of a previous seven-year contract into a new seven-year contract. There was a drastic increase um to the cost margins, and that was what we had to adjust for. Um and then not to mention if you're unfamiliar with these utilities, we are very very high
electric users. You know the this is a facility in a department that runs 247 pumps, motors, etc. So where is affected by the power purchase uh process across the commonwealth that you're all seeing as Eversource and national grid holders
as well. You hear a lot of conversations at the governor's level about 20 30% increases offsets. Well, every time electricity goes up in the Commonwealth, our budget gets drastically affected by that. Um, it's a large user. But the sewer budget that you see in front of
you, the two main drivers are the renegotiation of our wastewater treatment facility management contract and um power to execute our daily operation. Is there any questions? Linda, do you have a question? I do have
a question. Um, on the the 495,000 for capital, Justin, does that is that for capital improvements or is that going into some kind of capital fund? Yep. So, Linda, you you nailed it. So,
let's look at the the last three are actually capital, long-term debt, long-term interest. So, think of long-term debt principle, long-term interest as bonding for large capital, right? Wastewater treatment facilities. The dedicated capital line where it says
sewer capital that Linda is talking about, $495,000 is operational capital line item budgets. So, we have a line item for uh sewer collection system, $100,000. So that is how we repair pumps or we fix
pipes that are broken on a regular basis or we are proactive where we start to reline pipes in advance. Um that is what you would refer to as an operating capital line. Okay. Operating small and capital. Okay. So that that gets spent in the year. And then my next question
is on the indirect for retirement and shared employee cost. Does that come back to the town to help us with correct the cost of retirement and and health and health benefits? Okay. Yeah. So, Linda, all of our water and sewer staff
is 100% funded through the receipts of both water and sewer and then we backchart because they're also town employees. They're entitled to benefits, etc. Then we back pay through our revenue receipts to the town to offset those benefits. Great. Thank you.
You're welcome. All right. If there's no other questions, um I can move to article 17, which I know these are standard every year. A transfer from sewer retained earnings um of 200,000, which I feel was the same
number as last year that transferred as well. Yep. And I could kind of speak to that. I mean that this is an example. We have two return uh reserve funds, one in water, one in sewer. The water one tends to be a little heavier only because when we initially put it on board, we utilized the available stabilization
accounts to create these. And at the time, the stabilization account for water was half a million and the sewer was only $200,000. We are proactively looking to increase these um budget lines. Our target is actually roughly 5 to 10% of
the operating budget that we want for reserve fund. Um, but we weigh that against uh the needs of the operation. So with a 10% increase, it's very hard for us to add another 100,000 or $150,000 to that rate, driving it up to
12% just to increase our reserve fund. So it's a delicate balance we play, but we're comfortable right now with that with that funding bill. And then water we come to. So article 18 is the water enterprise fund budget um which will make
this see if you guys can see this. So it's a total of 3,280,992. Correct? Yes. So this this control um represents the 9% increase that the board has approved in water rates effective July 1st um for FY26. Um
within this um some of the drivers here as we previously discussed is the increase um of a $100,000 line item for well uh water inhome water filtration rebate program. Some of the other drivers as you heard me discuss in the sewer. The same thing happens in water
as power purchase uh increases are drastic drivers when it comes to our water as well. Um we produce and treat our own water and then distribute that. Um those are the main drivers within this. Um, one of the biggest advantages though that we discussed um, a little
earlier, Nathan, and I kind of want to circle it back so it it it kind of drives in. We're ending our phase one water capacity treatment plant program. And what that means is we've onboarded our new well source. It was referred to as well 4A and the treatment plant
upgrades associated with that, which was behind the Pho school. It's called the Green Meadow Treatment Plant. Um, you may hear in the future well 4A be described as a different number. Now D has reclassified it to call it well 8. So you may hear that, but it's all the
same. I know there's a number of uh Peter's been on been gone for a while, Katie, uh, Jillian in this situation where you've heard us talk about several years now building the funds for that and we are actually at 99.9% completion. uh punch list stuff very minor but that
project is ending within that within our water and sewer master plan. We are executing this fiscal year into our phase 2 financial building practice. So we target five to seven-year windows where we start to increase uh rates so
that we can offset the future bonding to move to our largecale improvements. Phase two is another new well source or two at what we refer to as one of our other treatment plants as Rockland Avenue. It's over by the soccer field. It's our largest treatment plant. It's
actually our newest treatment plant, but it is one that lost a well source several years ago and it actually only treats half of its design capacity. So, we're moving there to um to explore several new well sources there and improvements to incorporate those new
well sources. The average permitting it takes place um in a timeline of roughly five to seven years. So what we have is a projected bonding target at year five, six and seven. And we're starting to build in the funds now so that we can
control the rate at a steady increase versus a peak rate of 30 or 40% the year of bonding. We were highly successful in phase one with this approach and we hope to be highly successful in phase two. This puts together roughly about 300 to
$325,000 in a dedicated forecasting line that will build to close to a million dollar in five years. That should help offset the bonding cost so that when the time comes, you won't see uh you won't even notice the rate changes. We'll be
we'll start to move into phase three of the program at that point. So it's a controlling me um mechanism that we do with our finances and it's been highly successful for us. So we have not stopped the ball if that makes sense. We are still moving
forward. All right, sounds good. Any questions? All right, we'll keep moving. So we have a lot tonight. So, this again is a standard transfer from the water retain retained earnings of 500,000. Um, so that's been similar every year
too, Justin. Correct. Yep. And Linda, the only thing that you know that we can talk a little more detail with this one is we've just drawn down $100,000 essentially, right, to start this program, but we're actually utilizing FY24's retained earnings by the time
this is approved in July 20 um 25, we're going to have a half a million dollars back in that account. And then whatever we don't use, to Linda's earlier point, from now until July 1, let's just I'll use a rough numbers. we use 50K and 50K didn't get used. That's just going to
hit retained earnings and start that cycle over and over again and it's something that we do yearly. Yeah. And my question just is so retained earnings are just we're collecting a little bit more than we're expending somehow. Is that and then
that's how we get retained earnings and it builds up and then Yeah. Yeah. It's called it's in the general fund. We're operating in the black. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. it. The best way to describe it is if we have $5,000 for meters and we only spend
$3,799 in that fiscal year, that remainder goes over and it and it's and it's a cumulation of all of the line items. Sure. Thank you. Of course. And I believe there's one more. This is
a um every year we see this two transfer from water retained earnings for capital improvements and this is 180,000. Yep. So we have a very thorough and robust 5 10 15 100year CIP plan when it comes to
water and sewer. So when I say CIP, I mean capital improvement plan. Um, within that, the water and sewer utility actually manages all of its assets. That includes vehicles, uh, staff, our, uh, facilities, etc. Um, as part of a a
aggressive, um, short, medium, and long-term capital improvement plan. This is on target with our approach um to um year year-over-year um slowly replace the aging fleet that is um drastically
past its life expectancy. This is just a transfer from our water retained earnings in FY24 to offset the costing of purchasing and procuring two vehicles. Um this has also been a very successful approach. It it it is a holistic approach all around.
So, where we typically see this 180,000 is because we've built in the financial buffer for the long-term improvements that we're going to bond in the future. Well, while we go year-over-year, we have this excess of retained earnings that were able to target very low
priority capital improvements without bonding. In the past, Maynard had a had a bad tendency to bond your um smaller capital items that then drive up principal and interest costs in the long term. we've been able to kind of compartmentalize that out and really
separate um and utilize non-bonding techniques for uh most of our smaller capital improvements um and really targeting our bonding capacity for the water treatment um capacity improvements that have uh long-term financial uh
benefits for the community for future growth etc. So, this is one of those examples that you see you you've probably seen year-over-year. It changes a little bit. It's based off of what our retained earnings are from that fiscal year prior. And we adapt that capital
improvement to make sure that we meet those goals. All right, great. And I think those are all the ones that we needed you to speak to that we still have to vote on tonight. Um, any last questions? Oh, there's article XXX which is something else which I'll pull up too, but it's
the easement at Parker and I'll pull that up but Oh, go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Are you comfortable with the golf course receipts? I think we voted on that. We did that one. Okay. Okay. Just want to make sure because usually that starts with me. So, I wasn't sure if you've already discussed it or if you
had questions. We did and we wrote our comment already, too. Perfect. Okay. Excellent. Didn't mean to interrupt. I just knew it was on my list as well. So I just want to make sure. No, thank you. All right. Is it everyone comfortable if I um exit and switch to the new article that we haven't seen yet? Yeah. Or
discussed, I should say. All right. So, let me stop my share and share a different share, which is I think this one. All right. So, this is to um
approve an easement um on Parker and Elmwood and it's for Ever Source, right? Yeah, it's forever source. So, this is just um you don't typically see this when it comes to utilities. Um typically the select board
have the full control to allow for um electric utilities to put poles in place, things of that nature. But this is an underground power source for the redevelopment of the Coolage School. So, this typically isn't me, but I'm aware of it, so I can assist you. Um, this
comes from the planning department, so that Oh, okay. Sorry about that. No, Katie, I'm here. I might as well help you. I know I'm intimate with the entire process. Anyways, um, so just so you know, the Koolage School was dispositioned several years ago. Um, a developer went through what's called
special permit through the planning board. Um within that the planning board has requirements that they like to see um electrical services go underground for largecale dense developments like this. Um this is one of those situations where when they went through special
permit Eversource had to change their infrastructure. So the previous approach was going to be on private property but basically um on Elwood Street and Parker Eversource is rerouting a lot of their grid. So they had to actually change
their approach to how they uh service this uh facility from electrical standpoint. And what's happening is they actually are requesting an easement through town property at this point which is the park. This will all be underground so you won't even know it's there. Um but technically um they have
to get a town meeting approval when it comes to easements of this caliber. Okay, that makes sense. So, I think that's it as far as what we needed you to chat to us about. Um, any last
questions for Justin before we give him release? No, I think that's it. Justin. All right. I have one question, Katie. Yeah. How is he terroris? I sent an email to the No, it's beautiful. It just it it
rained a lot the other day and it came in the driveway and there's a Anyway, but I did send a note. So, you'll you'll I'm sure that will get to you at some point. It's beautiful though. They do have to come back and pitch that. So, they failed. Yep. So, that will be fixed and addressed. Um, but my husband is out
there taking videos and Yep. I want the feedback. So, I also know Peter's up in that neighborhood as well. So, please let me know what you have in regards to Fletcher Allen Heights. I know that's a close-knit neighborhood. If there's any issues, please tell people to email us. We need to know before the contract is
released. I'll copy you on the one I sent. The rain has created this like little ditch from the road to our house with Matt and Brian in our house. It like it's it's coming a different way now. Something probably got disturbed a little bit, but um but but it it is a
big improvement already. So, Excellent. All right. Perfect. You all have a good night. All right. Thanks, Justin. Good night. Thanks, Justin. Thanks, Justin. All right. So, now I think our job is to vote and draft as many comments as we
can on things we haven't. So, I will pull up my new um little cheat sheet thing I did um which I believe is this. So, we got these are all different and I was getting very confused because now they're numbers and they're in order of
the town meeting. Um, and so all the ones that are highlighted green, we still need to vote on and draft a comment. Um, and you know, maybe we'll try to draft as many as we can tonight. maybe we'll take responsibility of assigning comments to people um and we
can send those to Jill, you know, after because these are we they're going to be um printed at the town meeting anyway. Um so I guess we'll go through. So the first one was um certified certified um free cash
appropriation for 2025 and we did get that. So let me um this was article 4. There's so many articles. Um sorry making you dizzy. Here it is.
So for So here's the um free cash and how they have it itemed out. Anything stand out to people that you have questions or concerns on? I have a question on the last one, the
solid waste. So, how is how is what's the big picture there? We're taking 92,000 here and then is it going to be part of an override or are we going to move money from something else? How are we going to pay for solid waste? I just I'm not I'm
not clear now what the big picture is on that one, but solid waste was number they have a um article that we I don't know if we've talked about that one yet. Hold on. Yeah, I think it was it was it was kind of a moving target as I remember.
Number 12. So that is believe we have to vote on that one tonight too. Is that going to be an override or how did they do that? Or change in rates? Sta stabilization. Wow. Stabilization. Yeah. Wow.
Okay. Wow. Okay. That's a big one. Thank you, Katie. Mhm. Back to the precache. It's a lot of paper to print for them. All right. Form. There we go. It's snow. Nice. I guess my other
question is the DP. No, the DPW is a different than the water. We just bought trucks with water. Okay. This is different trucks. Okay. And then the HVAC system at town hall. New police cruisers. Library stairwell.
How do we feel about voting on this? anything that we're not okay on it. Sorry. Um, do we know the current total amount of available free cash or it's in this range? Yeah, it's close to I'm not sure it's to the penny, but it's
pretty close. Yeah. Yeah, it's exactly that amount with certified bid do. So, we're spending all of it. Is that something that's planned to hit that amount? I'm sorry, I didn't understand the
question. Do we generally spend at all in previous years? Yes. Yes, that's typical. Yes, we do. Yeah. I mean, it looks like the 92,026 is what was just left there to round out and then I suppose the rest is handled elsewhere if it's necessary.
Yeah. I mean to the degree that we didn't want to spend it all um we likely would be putting it in one of the stabilization funds. So you know we are putting some into oped and in capital stabilization. So that's technically not
spent. Um otherwise yeah we spend it all usually. Uh if the usual practice is indeed to spend it all then I would feel comfortable as one member voting on this. Yeah I would as well. I'm definitely
comfortable. Me too. I'd like to just know how we end up with a snow and ice deficit of over half a million or almost half a million. I feel like that is one area in Massachusetts we should be better
projecting. But maybe is that like def like deficit doesn't necessarily mean bad planning. It just means that it comes from a you know we didn't Sorry. Yeah. Um, I can give a little history there and it's a little bit wrapped up in do
stuff too, but the in essence we deliberately budget the account lower than we expect. Um, snow and ice is the one account that do lets you run a deficit in and you
know spend money without it being appropriated provided that you don't reduce the amount from the prior year's budget. So our answer to this and it's common with many towns actually is that we never increase the snow and ice
budget and we always expect to have a fairly substant I think the snow and ice budget is around 2003 300,000 292 sticks in my mind. Um we always substantially underbudget
it and in other years this can be 7 $800,000 that we're taking for free cash. Um, and the reason we don't we don't want to jack it up because then we can't cut it and you know, chances are we never you anyway it that's the
convoluted reason why we deliberately have the amount in our annual operating budget lower than we know it should be. Um, interesting. I It's actually quite interesting. Okay.
Yeah, that makes me comfortable. Well, it is. Yeah. No, it is the quirks of state budgeting. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. No, that makes me comfortable. I'm good. All right. Someone want to make a motion to recommend?
I'll move to recommend. I'll second. Okay. And roll call vote. Um, Nikquille, yes. Linda, yes. Nathan, yes. Peter, yes. And Nathaniel, yes. All right. So,
I'm going to go back to our article answers. And so I'll say recommendation recommend. Do we how do you feel about draft comments on these? I feel I did a copy
paste on the water and sewer ones because I feel those are pretty typical every year. This one might be as well. Um do we want to assign these to Cintage Jill for um compilation or do we want to try to do it tonight
just to procedurally? So, is this a comment that is making it into like the final warn or are we putting this on like our our separate handout because I know that was separate handout. Okay, gotcha. Um, so it has to be written either way then. So, um Okay. Gotcha.
Well, maybe we finish voting on all of them first. Yeah, I'd propose that we do the voting on all of them, then see where we're at. And I would actually more favor assign them out and then we can come with them next week rather. It's kind of difficult
to draft it as a group. I agree. Okay, good. So then article six is the next one that we have to um vote on which is the town general budget. Um so I will stop this share and I will go
back to this So that was number six. Make that a little bigger. So $53,696 roughly most to education. Um this does
not we we are also going to vote on um the override for the school. So this is you know what they originally set for the schools. Um yeah any concerns or
questions? I had one one question. So when I was reading the schools override they were talking about the town had recommended 23.4 4 million and they we wouldn't do the o outyear override if they went up by 250,000. So
does this mean we're not going to do the FY27 override? That's because it looks like it's No, it's 23.7. Natasha, I'll let you take that one. Hi. Yes. So, um the conversation where we
landed, Linda, it sounded like I think I just want to make sure I understand what but yeah. So the multi- um year um was reduced just to the one FY26, okay, override only because they
increased the base amount for that. And the FY27 was only going to be looking um to allow us to not be leaning into that reserve funds as much. And so because we were able to make up for that
in an increase of our base amount, we we we um agreed that dropping that um multi-year was the was the best solution. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Thank you. Yeah.
Right. So So where did the um where did the extra uh funding in the budget come from? was savings due to insurance. So the uh select board and the town administrator have been in a parallel conversations
been negotiating with union um leadership um about different um insurance plan offerings. So, help, you know, which we've kind of all talked about a little bit at some level, but um higher um lower um higher premiums or or
what was that? Higher um savings accounts. They're going to do a couple of different things. Um but and it will be for all. So, it's not going to be just for new members. Um, and so that
savings, that 9% that we all were um, cringing about was reduced to about 2.9 I think it was the last projections that Greg was provided by the insurance. So because that projection for FY26 dropped
significantly um they gave that amount um that would be already be included in the 2 and a half. So it wouldn't have to be an override amount. It would be whatever is raised within the cap to the
school. And so essentially this amount re uh 23751 actually brings the school's allocation up to like um like 3.7 or something. I can't remember the last number but it was a more
um comfortable number to um to move forward. just need thou the override to ensure that we can also fund the contract for the parent professional um union because that's the other
aspect. Thank you Natasha. Y I have a question. Is the reserve fund the FINCOM reserve fund which we used to have 250 and now we'll get 225 is that the one that we start with
I believe yes it is okay so that's going down okay all right do we feel comfortable taking a vote on Ness. All right. I'm not hearing any nos. Um, would I make a motion, entertain a motion to recommend
I'd recommend it. Okay. Any seconds? We'll second. So, Nathaniel first, Linda second. Um, I'll do a roll call vote. So, Nikquille, yes.
Linda, yes. Nathan, yes. And Peter, yes. And Nathaniel, yes. I am a yes as well. So I will change that on my little
sheet. So this is article. So we will draft it at another time for now. Make that yellow to remind myself and then we can ungreen it. We voted and we
recommend. All right. And then the easement at Parker and Elmwood. Um I can bring that up again. Sounded pretty black and white to me. So that's to approve this for electrical work.
um by the old Koolage lot. My only question I maybe should have asked Justin was does the town get any financial consideration for granting an easement? Is there a value there? Does anybody know? I can somewhat speak to that. Yeah. And this is definitely I
have no idea about Maynard specifically, but a lot of times from a town's perspective, trying to get these kinds of things can can be difficult for what you said. So simply getting a yes is better than trying to ask for some sort of compensation. Okay. Especially
especially if it's deemed a necessity or for utility kind of like in this instance, I would assume that the yes is more important than compensation. But we could definitely get um confirmation of that. Thank you.
Sure. Just get the project moving. pull up the app. Um, I'd make a motion to or I do make a motion to recommend this article. All right, Peter first. I'll second.
Great. Take a roll call vote. Um, I know your answer, but Nikil, yes. Linda, you're muted. Yes. Nathan, yes. Peter, yes. And Nathaniel, yep. And I am a yes
as well. So, we will go. Sorry, bear with me. No color. We recommend and we we can assign these later on when we get a see what time it is we end. All right. So, the next one we need
to vote on the schools and that I have and sure Natasha can speak some to that if those have questions. believe it was about 600,000
612,000. So this would be an override. Yes. All right. Any specific questions to Nasha while we have her on here or concerns about this? So Natasha, with this amount um would that allow no cuts? Is this is this kind
of allowing for just stable funding? Um so there will be some cuts but the cuts will be um in maybe two positions where the
there's it's um person is not being laid off necessarily. It's just that a person might be retiring and we're not filling it right away. So through you know attrition in some way like that we might have a savings.
Um but there is some the the superintendent is looking just generally um as a healthy practice to reassess um at the high school. This there seems to be more opportunity looking at uh
class sizes um offerings. They we we talked at our last meeting about um you know having a standard amount you know if there's less than so many kids not offering you know particular you know maybe they need to cut a certain section
um because there's just not um a lot of appetite for particular class and if in those cases they might need to um that might result in you know like a a drop in a 0.5 FTE or something to that effect.
um if if the you know the participation isn't there but it will not be um I think to the original concern when we looked at 11 positions it's not going to be um um
programmatically you know impairing where you're increasing class sizes dramatically. Um we're still looking at class increasing potentially some class sizes but not to the extent and there might also be um an increase potentially
in bus fee but it again not to the I think just generally it's probably going to be healthy to look at um you know maybe it increases it hasn't increased in a while but you know incrementally going up maybe $25 or something so that people are not feeling like one year
$100 you know increase or something to that effect. Um so and we are obviously also hoping that who knows um until the state budget is finalized there could be something that comes through for transportation or education
um that that certainly helps as well. Thank you. I'll say Natasha, the school committee's worked so hard on this, right? With all the proposals you've had, and this is by far the most reasonable we've
seen. Yeah. Since you work, a really um collaborative process. And I just also want to just thank the finance committee as well. I I just think this this year has probably been the most um time dedicated to these conversations
and I think just for the community they I mean there's a lot of different needs happening in the town but um I think there's been a broader feeling of maybe collaboration and I think that ultimately it trickles down to just helping the residents getting the
information out um wherever we can. We actually are going to be having another public forum Wednesday for school specific um in in hybrid. So we'll be able to kind of talk about the most updated version of the information as well, but you know just to kind of get
it out there as much as possible. So I mean I wish things weren't going up. I know people are like no more I can't pay. I you know it's hard when you hear that and I don't know how to we could counter that. I mean expenses are just going up and um and so we just make a
decision as a town that we fund them or you know it's a education is a service or we look to see where we have to cut service you know but it should be a town decision and I believe this vote is after the
senior center vote as well think so I think this is supposed to happen on day one Um, and I forget the sequencing, but yes. Yes, it is. It's after. So, it's the which Yeah, I think that was a good strategy as well. Yeah.
So, yeah. And then the thing with which is helpful here is that um so the election is the 27th, which will be like a week later, the ballot. Um,
so this you it's contingent on the ballot passing. So if the ballot passes, we don't have to come back and re and allocate it because it's the way it's worded. We'll allow that allocation. It's to happen. Um otherwise we'd have
to have another town meeting to come back and allocate the funds after they were approved or wait till the fall. Uh, and so, uh, Natasha, can you speak to what it would look like for the school budget if this weren't to pass? I know, um, that Superintendent Hos was
talking about like 11 positions being cut at the, uh, town uh, hall forum. Um, what what would it look like at this point? Um so if if this doesn't the increase in
that 263 I think it was that added to the base um certainly helped but it does still put in jeopardy um it might be that fewer positions are cut but it's still put in jeopardy the MEESA contract for
the pair of professionals so we may have to um go back and um reenter negotiations because clearly if if we don't can't fund it um you know we can't fund it. So that would, you know, need
to be reassessed. Um, and the the cuts would be would be more. Again, I don't think it'll be that same level of um but it would probably hit a bit more um programmatic wise um
because then we'd have to look to see what the state ends up you know allocating at the end of you know for the budget um to see is it possible you know the priority is is very much so for
the the pair professional contract. Um, so you know, if that means we might have to, you know, cut an extra position or something just to ensure that we can at least fund that, then that would it would come down to really getting those final numbers to see because it is
pretty close for what we were able to to look at. Um, and also it might need mean to again look at how much we're relying on our reserve funds. you know, if this does pass, um, this, I think, only requires
about a 100,000. So, really a low number, um, that will allow those numbers to either kind of recoup a bit, um, so that we can be more responsive if something shifts in, you know, the next year or so. Yeah, that was actually going to be my
next next question of uh what this would mean if this passes like what it means for the reserve funds that have been drawn down in the last last couple years. It means that we can not yeah we wouldn't so that that 300,000 that we were you know had kind of penciled in
which was really kind of at the high end of our comfort level we can you know step back from that. Um that's what that you know that number that increasing that base allowed us to do it because it's adding to that operational um
amount that we could work on and um and so I think that again with a little bit there's not like a going to be a one answer. So like that plus maybe slightly increasing bus fees because that will give some breathing room um you know as well that we're not relying on the
reserve because that's where the robust it's it's very heavily subsidized by the school choice and operating budget. Um and then you know monitoring people who are retiring in the next couple years as well. Um so that will be
savings for each position that is on that high end of the for for teachers in particular the high end of the hiring this the steps people who are capped out and you know being able to hire
somewhere in a more beginning step in a lower scale. But that is going to be more of like a a 2 to threeyear um realization over time. Um, have there been many conversations
about what the next couple of years will look like? Um, should this pass? Like I know that uh some of the teacher contracts are like like 3% annual like salary increase and the school budget only goes up like two and a half%. Uh, so we
Yeah, I think that's that's absolutely those are the the conversations we're having. So, um I think that's the negotiation piece that the teachers hopefully, you know, are seeing. I mean, there's really not a pocket of money that's coming. So, I
mean, the teacher contract in particular, um, you know, it might be I mean, they generally come in at like five or six, you know, percent as their opening number and we were never like
that. Um so um I think it would be the next one could potentially be a little bit more contentious because we are seeing now a pattern of revenue growth that is is not hitting 3%. on a routine basis. And so that that does make an
argument for how do you commit to a 3% plus, you know, beyond for another contract, you know, so you just kind of have to see how the growth is happening and maybe how expenses are going down.
Um, but we'll see. But yeah, those are all thoughts that everyone is having is how do we how do we you know and the teachers should be aware that this is you know this eventually comes to them as well.
Thank you. And just for awareness because I know we're recorded but um the school committee has has generally taken a position that administrator increases um usually align with teachers as well. So, you know, we we generally wouldn't
see like administrators getting, you know, like four or 5% and teachers getting. So, you know, when when teachers had their contract at 1.75, that's, you know, for for 3 years, that's what administrators were getting as well. So, um, and I think that was I
think that was a good precedent to set. Um, you know, like, hey, it goes around the hardship. We spread the hardship around. All right. Do we feel comfortable voting on this? So, everyone kind of know where they stand.
Can I make a motion? Oh, go ahead. Yeah, I believe you can. Okay. Okay. I'll make a motion to recommend um article 10 for um the mayor public schools. I will second.
Take it. All right. I first Nathan seconded. Um and roll roll call vote. Nikil yes. Linda yes. Nathan yes. Peter
yes. Nathaniel, yes. And I am a yes. So, thank you, FinCom. Thank you so much. Thank you for all your work, Natasha, too. Um, thank you, Peter. I feel like I I don't know. We win you over somehow. I know that was a very
slow yes that you came to, but I'll take it. Um it's not such a slow yes and I would wasn't going to say anything but um I expect for you know your next
public hearing for Fincom's public hearing on the articles and for town meeting I mean I know a lot of the background and am comfortable recommending test. I didn't think the explanation to
Nathan's or Nathaniel's question about what happens if this doesn't pass was super compelling. So, I would just I think that could be a little bit more compelling and a little bit clearer. Um, so I'm just going to throw that out
there. Nope, I appreciate it. I know Brian had I'll be honest, Brian had some numbers he had updated at I just didn't have it handy. um but that he shared with us what um when we're looking at the different overrides, but I'll I'll make sure that that is more concise and to the
point. All right. So, the next one we have to vote on is article 12, which was the um solid waste and recycling that we briefly um brought up, but they're looking to fund it through the general stabilization fund of $478,000 roughly.
I'll pull up the comment. So, this offsets the revenue from sale stickers and combined with the free cash that they appropriated as well. I know it's a big number. Um, how much is in the general
stabilization fund currently? Oh, I do not. Peter, look at the warrant. It says 2.5 million. Okay. All right. Yeah. 2.578. Thank you. And and last year, I believe it's still around 2.1 million. Yeah. And last year was 1.8 and we got 500,000
from MSBA. That's how it went up so much. And our financial policy is it should be 10% of our operating budget. So, we are way below our own policy and this is going to make us What's that?
That sounds really high. I don't think that's the policy. I I I was just reading it, but you can you could check it 10%. That's what how I understood the policy because I was just checking these numbers about how it went up to 2.5 million from last year and my
understanding is because we got 500k from MSBA was what it only add a little bit every year. The 500k from MSBA is because we had done a withdrawal from the general stabilization. Yeah. for the Green
Meadow study, right? And then we put it back. Then we put it back. Yeah. Yeah. Or something. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, uh I think I think Linda's right there. The financial policy manual, town of Maynard. Um it says that the the town shall phase up to and then
maintain a general stabilization fund of not less than 10% of the prior year's operating budget. Yeah. So we should be around four to five million close to and I just don't see I I know what they had to do to balance the budget but
taking all the trash out of this and free cash I don't know. I I I have troubles with this one. Anyway, it's it's an eyepopping amount to it is an eyepopping amount and it's moving it it's going to move it directly onto it's another thing
you know when we doing we just talked about Natasha's override another override 9% on water and now this is saying next year you're going to pay for trash too it's adding a lot of costs with
no you know and I know everything goes up but anyway yeah I mean I think I think we should be paying for the trash now, you know, not paying for it out of a out of a reserve fund. Um, yeah. Like I don't Yeah.
And Nathan, I think your projections show we kind of knew this was coming, you know. Um but so is this then if assuming that what you were saying is correct that this is almost a workaround to try to not or not
not sorry not to try to not pay for it now but because we aren't paying for it now we have to pay for it in some way so we're doing this I I did not have a chance to read these in much detail so I'm just trying to understand based off of uh my understanding is we're paying
we're trash was normally in the operating budget that this year the select board is recommending they take it out of general stabilization and in FY27 we'll have this new enterprise fund like the so you'll get a separate trash bill like a water bill. So basically
what was being paid for out of your trash this year, I mean sorry, out of your tax bill this year, we're kind of buying we're kind of buying a year by digging into our savings and the next year you'll probably get a trash bill on
top of your tax bill. And that is what was presented. That's my understanding. But that bill would be what was presented before. It's a as you use it type of bill. Correct. I don't think they've I don't think it's been decided, but that is what it sounded
like. Yeah. I don't know if it's a is it pay as you throw or some carts some subscription card service or whatever. What happens if this article doesn't get passed? Is it just like they use whatever they can with the revenue from
stickers and then the rest is like tax or how does that work exactly? Would they have to do an override? I I don't I don't know the answer to that either. Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, the likely answer is they would have to double trash stickers from $4 to
$8. Yeah, that's what they should be doing. Like I mean like a financial policy manual like the withdrawals for operating expenses, which is what this is, will not occur except under one of the following circumstances. If the governor uh reduces budget line items
for local aid by 10% or more, if um state budget appropriations is re by 15% or if a catastrophic act occurs which requires the use of one-time revenues, this is like subsidizing um like like a tax subsidy. It's I don't think this is an appropriate use of this
fund. Was this reviewed by town council? I mean, I feel like an appropriate use of a fund. Is it a gray area or straight up? No, I don't think it's it's not like illegal. It's just against our
um it's it's against what our our financial policy manual says. Um just to be clear, the financial policy manual is something that was drafted by
an outside party. this study from I think UMass management. There may have been somebody else involved. Um and I mean we haven't adopted it. It was
kind of put in place as a good idea by the town administrator, but is not really something that we've voted on ever or you know, certainly I don't think the select board
has ever adopted it. The finance committee certainly has not ever adopted it and the town administrator did deliberately didn't put it up for adoption by one of these boards. Um it's a very conservative, you
know, in the ideal world kind of financial manual. Not to say it doesn't have good ideas. I think 10% is a fairly high number, frankly. Um and I don't think there's, you know, I'd be curious what do recommends. Um,
and anyway, yeah, I just want to add that context for what those financial policies are. Um, that Yeah, I that's what I want to say about those. Not something we've ever actually discussed and said yes, it
should be 10% or no, it should be 8% or it should be 5%. Um, Peter, just um note that. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. No, that's that was all I had to say. Just going off your last comment. So, uh, I pulled up the
the DLS website here and it looks like their recommendation uh, and I'll quote, "A community's target balance for a general stabilization fund varies by budget experience and other available reserves. A recommended goal is typically in the 5 to 7% uh, of the
current operating budget range." Right. That that is more the number I would have had at mine and not 10%. I mean which is you know you're right we are I think we are well let's see we are not
using the stabilization fund to fund ongoing operating budget. we are using as a one-time thing in the to plug a hole in the operating budget um as we transition to a new system.
Linda's exactly right. I mean, your taxes paid for this $600,000 last year and in addition to doing a $600,000 override, we also, you know, essentially got an extra $600,000 in the operating budget by cutting this out of the
operating budget. Um, and we're doing 200,000. Well, the 200,000 for the senior center is totally new. Um, so yeah, this is something, you know, residents used to get for their taxes that now we're going to charge
them extra for. Um, but it's not that we're setting up a system where we're we have an ongoing plan to tap reserve funds to pay for operating expenses. We're doing it as a one-time thing as we transition to
a new system. Um, which select board is leaning on that. But it last year it was an operating expense and we cut that operating expense budget. And if if we're paying
for it out of a stabilization fund this year, that's not transition. That's just one more year of an operating budget that we're we're not calling part of the operating budget, isn't it? I I would argue yes if we were planning to continue the
subsidy. I think the select board and you know they haven't been entirely clear and I'm not sure they know yet. They may reduce the subsidy somewhat or they may eliminate the subsidy in
FY27. So your statement is true as far as it goes. My statement is implying that in FY27 we won't do this and that's why I'm saying it's a one-time thing. Okay. I mean that I I hear what you're
saying, but if we if we don't have a clear signal from them that about what's happening in FY27, then how how do we know this isn't doesn't just become like an operating line? Um, I mean, I've seen some of the discussions at the select board and this
was raised as a question at I don't know if it was the library or maybe it was even budget subcommittee. Um, but yeah, I mean it's it's clear to me as the select board has implied, this
is not an ongoing plan for how we're going to cover trash. I mean, clearly we can't afford it. It's only like four more years of trash and then we've killed the uh stabilization fund. Um, yeah, I so it's clearly an
unsustainable thing. So that's why I think it can't continue and I'm fairly confident that it won't. Um, but you're right. I mean, you're right about FY26. We are definitely taking something that used to be paid out of taxation and we can't
afford to pay for it anymore. So, we're paying for it out of stabilization, which is not ideal. Um, but I guess I can live with it because I think it's a one-year thing. I also think there's a whole other set
of issues with raising cash trash trash sticker prices so much. Yeah, I do too. Um, you know, there's issues around I illegal dumping, people starting to, you know, be financially motivated to doing
stupid stuff with trash. Um, and so I think there's a good reason not to have a huge increase in the stickers. Um, though I would agree over time trash should pay for itself, but we can do
better. We're asking people to vote on overrides that will increase taxes, you know, all at the same time. Natasha. Yeah. Yeah, we are. Yeah, I was just wondering um if because I I I think depending on how much folks
have heard from the select board because this has been a very also evolving conversation. I wonder if Fincom's just recommendation comments would be able to articulate that recommendation is contingent on um this being a one-time,
you know, as Peter has mentioned, but their their comments don't say that. But I do recall also hearing that same conversation that this is that transition period. Um and that the next step would be working to fund the enterprise fund.
Right? It does say that at the end in their comments to make the need to prepare, right? I think they were just very creative as much as possible. How do we fewer increases to the you know stickers is another increase that would happen
now versus this this has already kind of been paid and also to to Peter to your point I remember Greg when we had those it was I think it was Collier's um had done that the financial policy There was a grant years a couple years ago and I
think it was around that 5% number. I recall Greg kind of hovering around as maybe his litmus test for um balance which was closer to what the state guidance
was. All right. Thank you, Natasha. All right. All right, it sounds like we have enough information perhaps to take a vote. Does anyone want to make a motion one way or the other? I'll make a motion uh to approve.
And I will second motion to approve. All right, we'll take a roll call vote. Nikil, sorry. Oh, sorry. Just to be a stickler for the recording. Recommend. It's a motion to recommend. Recommend. Thank you. Sorry about that. Um, I'll make a motion to recommend then
and K you can second. And I will second the recommendation. All right. And roll call vote. Nikio. Yes. Linda, no. Nathan, no. Peter, yes. Nathaniel,
yes. So that's one, two. Oh, and I'm a yes. So four 42. Yep. So we will have to be mindful when we're drafting this comment and who wants to
take this. Um I would motion for someone to take it. Nathan, feel free to say no, but I was very much on the fence and very close to just straight up abstaining from that vote. I would want to do a little bit more research myself
if I had more time, which I don't believe I really do, but um you seem pretty interested. And I think in this instance, I'd like to have one of the strong nos write it. If the committee
feels otherwise, feel free to speak up, I guess. Or I guess if Nathan doesn't want to, feel free to speak up. Uh yeah, I
Oh, go ahead. Go ahead, Nathan. Uh I was just gonna say like I um Yeah, I'm I'm happy to write a comment. I'm not sure I could make a strong case for uh for recommending it. Um yeah, but I can Yeah, I can I can uh
I can I can write it. Unless Peter, you're about to say something. Uh, no. I was going to say essentially the same thing that I I mean I appreciate your thoughts, Nathaniel. I
think it's awkward and somewhat unfair to put the onus on the two no votes to then write to yes recommendation. um if they you know if I would maybe do as a friendly kind of amendment that
perhaps one of them could be nominated to write a two to three sentence addition to our comment explaining why they think it's a bad idea and certainly with a 4 to2 vote I
think our comments can reflect that you know there was two different modes of thinking in the incom and some people were against it and you know that here's their case or their case in a couple of sentences. Um as opposed to making them write the
recommendation they don't agree with. I guess that's kind of what the my intent was. So that that summarizes something better. Peter, thank you. Sure. I would I I would be happy to write a couple sentences um to put into
the comment. So maybe Katie, we can just note that for when we get down to assigning uh writing recommendations that you'll address some thoughts for whoever is writing it to include in
right or will you do it? Maybe I didn't follow that. You weren't you weren't the thoughts to include. Yes. Okay. Okay. Come back to that. Okay. Thank
you. And then all of these are kind of and we might be able to go through them fast. Um so these are all the sewer um and water budget and transfers. Um so I guess we'll go through them one by one. So, first one is article 16. This is the
sewer enterprise budget fund. Um, I did update these numbers. So, it was 4,225,000. Um, do you want me to pull up the Let me stop my share. I don't know if we can I'll just leave them pulled up for this whole thing. So, we'll go
through all of them. Um, here we go. So, this is number 16. Did I pass it? No. A citizen's petition. Here we go. And Justin already spoke on on
these. Um, we feel comfortable taking a vote. Yeah. I would just hope in our comments we could just reflect that Justin said that select board agreed to a 9% increase in rates. So hopefully
we'll maybe it's maybe it's said there by the sponsor comments too. Actually a higher it's 10.73. Oh it's 10.73. Oh okay. Okay. Yeah because it's just it's going to add up for people right.
And you might have put that in your comments, Kitty. I think I might have seen that. Did you? Yeah. I I just copied like we we every year we noted the increase. Yeah. So I just copied and pasted and changed the numbers. Yeah. Um
they're pretty standard over every year. I would move to recommend. I'll second. So, Linda first, Nathan second. Um, roll call vote. Nquille, yes. All right. And Linda, yes. Nathan,
yes. Peter, yes. Nathaniel, yes. Okay. So, while we have them all up here, I'm just going to move through them all and then I can go back to our sheet. So the next one is the transfer from those
um u sewer retained earnings of 200,000. This was the same one last year. Uh I move to recommend article 17. Second. Right. So Peter first, Nathaniel second.
Roll call. Um to recommend um roll call. Nil. Yes, Linda. Yes, Nathan. Yes, Peter. Yes, Nathaniel. Yes, and I am a
yes. So, we will put that as recommends. Article 18 is same thing but for the water. So, this was a 9.5% increase. Um, I'll make a a motion to recommend. I'll second.
All right. And roll call vote to recommend article 18. Nikquille. Yes. Linda. Yes. Peter. Yes. Nathan. Yes. And Nathaniel. Yes.
All right. And Katie, you're a yes. Yeah, I'm a yes. Sorry. Thank you. And then I think there's just two more. So this is the transfer um of 500,000 from the water retained earnings, which again was the same as
last year. I move to recommend uh the transfer and sorry Katie you got to slide the article up a little so you get the number of article 19. I'll second who who seconded. Oh you. Oh
okay I did. Okay. I thought I heard someone else. So Peter first. Um Linda second for recommending article 19. Roll call vote. Nquille. Yes. And Linda. Yes. Peter,
yes. Nathan, yes. Nathaniel, yes. And I am a yes. And then the last one from this is the transfer um for capital improvements from the water retained earnings. Believe this was the same number as as
last year as well. Um this is for two trucks. Um it sounds like So, I'll make a motion to recommend article 20. I will second. All right. And roll call vote. Nikil,
yes. Linda, yes. Peter, yes. Nathan, yes. Nathaniel, yes. and I am a yes. All right. So, let's go to
this. So, I will update all of these. So, just take me a second. So, we need a draft. So, we'll assign these, but whoever we assign these to, I mean, I could probably do these. I just kind
of copy pasted um what we said in the previous years. Um, I did not know this number. I didn't look up. Anyway, I have to fix some of the numbers, but um, draft did this
one. Color draft. We'll do this one. I'll go back and put recommends before I send it to Jill. Um, draft and then we approve to this one.
We're over halfway. No color and draft. All right. So, the next ones we need to vote on. We did good. All of these. We've done article 39, citizens petition of
the um senior resident um real real estate tax relief. And this is the one that um Dick Downey sent out a note that he's going to um let the um town um members know that
only state legis legislature can authorize. So this is not something that legally we can move or pass. Um he said it could come down to like if if we still wanted to if the town still wanted to carry it and make a motion that our
recommendation could just be that we're not making a recommendation because only the state can authorize it. Um so I don't know that we even take a vote on this. I'm not sure the um I would want to ask for maybe potentially a little
discussion to because from reading his email he also said that if it changes in the meeting we would be put on the spot to come up with a vote andor opinion and I don't know if we would want to be
in that position without having right you know two minutes of discussion or something. I mean, I know my opinion pretty clearly on this one, but um I'd like to just open that floor, I think, for Yeah, I I think to be on the safe side,
just in case it does get amended to be in its correct form, which I think is the the phrasing that Dick Downey used, we probably would want to write uh we might as well, you know, have something handy just in case that does happen. So, yeah, I would say I agree with Nathaniel
there. Um, I'm not sure I'm remembering the Dick Downey comment, but I think it would be very hard for this to be amended into any form that
uh would pass muster with town council. So, one, I would throw that out and then for us to speculate endlessly about what the form might take and then what we might do. Um, I would argue it is a
perfect valid perfectly valid response for us to say at town meeting, you know, essentially we're saying no because we haven't had time to consider this and we think or I personally in this case uh
think any, you know, dramatic change like this to real estate taxes needs to be vetted more thoroughly and to do this on the spur of the moment is just bad policy on its case. So, um I personally don't feel the need to
go any further than that trying to think about hypothetically what this might be. I mean, there's there's no way to even, you know, Dick Downey had some note in his thing that oh, can we give a number as to what this would cost? No, because there's no clue as to how they would implement this. And I mean it would be
a, you know, fivemon process trying to figure out the ins and outs of exactly how this would be implemented before you could ever put a number to it. I mean, it's just so I feel no need to waste our
time on this. And does could we take his recommendation because he says he would accept a response such as the fincom makes no recommendation as it's not legal permissible and for general knowledge the loss of revenue is unknown you know something like that.
Yeah I I don't I personally don't feel the need to put anything about the loss of revenue I'm perfectly comfortable saying we recommend no because it's you know it's not legally Yeah. Yeah. Well, there's a difference
no recommendation and a no recommendation. And I should be clear, I agree with Peter, that I would, you know, if we would be forced to pick something, I would be happy to accept a no based upon the fact we've had zero time to properly review whatever theoretical change has happened that
made it even remotely um council approved. So, as long as no one on the board cares otherwise, since I brought this up, I'd be happy to just say that's that's acceptable to me. So, we don't need to write anything
on this or um have anything printed in the town warrant for this or do we? I can. It would go in the handout anyway though, right? So, um, regardless of whether we vote no or
if we vote no recommendation, um, I think it would be useful to point towards some of the abatements and like um, exemptions that the town offers um, just as like a service to people who are reading about this article because they
are really invested in this issue. You know, just because it's not legally permissible doesn't mean that there isn't um, a need and desire for something like this in town. and using this as an opportunity to point people in the right towards the right resources they might not know about would be a valuable use of that space.
Do you want to write the comment for it? I was waiting just put his hand up. Yeah. Okay. I guess I did it was so good. All right. Nathan right comment and then do we even take a vocal on no recommend?
So if we're not making a recommendation because it's not a legal binding thing to make or do do we take a vote on that? Feel like we've done it before. It wasn't Peter. You mentioned we tie it on purpose because you can't not vote I
guess but we can't vote on a non-legally approved. My recollection is Yeah. I mean I I think it's clearer to vote and so Um, yeah. I mean, all right. I'll make a motion that we make no recommendation.
I'll second that motion. So, Peter first with making a no recommendation on article 39. Nikil second. Um, roll call vote. Nikil, yes. Linda, yes. Peter,
yes. Nathan, yes. Nathaniel, yes. And I am a yes as well. And Nathan will write the comment. Thanks, Nathan. Um, and we're almost Is that it? That's it. So, we voted on all of them. Uh, so now, what time is
it? It's not even 9 o'clock. Wait. So, let's assign. How come you're so much faster than Jill? Well, we're not writing the comments. That's why I'm not I'm not typing comments. She's so good at that. So, I'm going to assign them instead. Um, so
let's go to So, um, certified free cash appropriation for fiscal year 2025. Um, we have to draft that. Who would like to draft that? This is, isn't this one kind of a normal one every year? Yeah. Last year it was. Um, yes.
Uh la last year it was just kind of like outlined what the numbers were and it kind of restated what some of the the lines we were funding were. Yeah. I mean I think it I mean there may be some comments to make about individual lines except I
mean I'll take this one if you want if nobody else wants it. Uh, but I'm not going I'm going to deliberately not repeat what's already in the sponsored comments. Yeah. So, it may wind up very brief. Fine. Just because I'm not looking to add words and
uh but if somebody else wants it, that's fine. But I'm happy to take this one. Um Katie, I'm very sorry to to I guess jump order, but I might as well say it now. I guess I would be happy to to volunteer to um write the recommendation for article 12, the solid waste and
recycling just because I mean I know last time um my minutes were like excessively detailed whatever and I I generally take you know decent notes so I feel like I have a a decent understanding of everything that would that was said. So uh yeah, I would be happy to to do this one. Great. So I'm
going to say that Nathan will draft some thoughts to send you. That sounds uh great. All right. So, we have Peter. All right. Town general budget. Um, does the does the chair usually do
like the big but that one? Well, I guess it doesn't matter. We don't say who writes the comments, but I feel that's a bigger one, right? Maybe I'll skip that one. I'll see appetite for the others. Um, so the ement of Parker and Elmwood.
I can do one. Um, which is this one is article seven. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you, Linda. I'll do all the water and sewage ones since I kind of started those um the schools. Anyone feel strongly about this
one? I'm going to come back to it. Think think if you feel pulled towards it. Um we have article 12 already done. Um I just I'll do all of these. So I'll do the sewage and water ones. I
just have to change some numbers in there. I already started on that. Um, zoning zoning. I think the only other one is 39. And you're going to write the comment for Nathan. So, let's go back to the two. The overall town budget. Should
I have Jill? Should should Jill do that one? What do you guys think? I mean, I I would be happy to do that one as well. Just looking at last year's um Warren article, it seems pretty routine. We just like said the total amount. You know, we said, oh, all the boards have participated and worked hard in this and
you know, that sort of thing. So that sounds fine. All right. So I will give you article six. Oh, can I just say and I mean this one we may want to then talk about at next week's meeting and probably the school override one just to
make sure the comments reflect stuff. But you know particularly on the operating budget um Nathan's comments about taking out the trash. I think it's important that we highlight stuff like this. um you know even if we're you know
ultimately voting to do it but that you know in terms of transparency um you know we're the one institution that should be calling out stuff like that. Um so and and the and also that
yeah that we're also having two overrides like yeah the next two articles are overrides. Yeah. to keep the schools and the seniors center. Yeah. Can you actually do the general operating?
I'll take the school override. Oh, thank you. And then I'll I'll chat with Natasha and see if I can come up with a little bit better case. Happy for comments. Sorry. Was that for me, Natasha, or No,
I was just saying Peter was Peter was um gonna take the school one. I'm like happy to provide whatever you need. Thank you, Peter. Thank you, Peter. So, our um I technical question. I guess
our next I know this is on routine agenda but just knowing when we'll have time to talk about these comments. Um our next meeting is the 12th which is our public hearing. Can we talk about them at that or do we need to do an ad
hoc meeting on the 5th? I would suggest doing a meeting on the 5th um if other folks are amendable. I see. Um, we certainly can
remember we'll have meetings on the 12th and the following Monday for town meeting. Um, I mean, I hope it's different. I expect our public hearing to take as long as it takes Jillian to read through
the you know I don't know what is what are we up to 40 articles or something and that unfortunately there at least as in past years has not been robust discussion that takes a lot of time so there would
be time after the public hearing to further discuss the comments I was about to say the arrow on the other side of caution here and do exactly what Peter's saying where we do the 12th, not do the fifth and then if we run out of time on
the 12th we do like 14th or 15th. When do we have to have our comments to the town to print up? That's a question. I mean it's really it's photocopying a page. I Yeah, if we give them to them by Thursday, they
should be able to do it. I'm not okay, you know. I don't I mean it's not We could all you know copy 10 at home and bring them along um and hand them out that way um if we have to. But well if we each do 10 that would be 60. Yeah.
You know whatever the number we'll have time. We'll have time regardless. Yeah. Um I just there isn't the deadline of it getting printed. It's just you know copied.
So it sounds like the majority would just prefer to meet on the 12th with the understanding that we wouldn't go late and we would have a second meeting to, you know, help out Nikil's early schedule the following mornings and further in the week. I Well, there
wouldn't be Nathaniel, the town meeting is the following week. So the 12th would be it as far as No, no, right. I'm saying during the week of the 12th. Oh. Oh, got it. Yes. Right. Right. That was my suggestion was that we we because otherwise I'd
completely go on the fifth. I'm saying do both. If it's short like um Peter was saying, then we're good and we can have our discussion afterwards. If it's long and um detailed, then you know instead of having our discussion that we want to
have on these specific two uh two articles, then we have something on the 13th, 14th or 15th, probably 13 or 14th. now. Um, instead of staying super late on the 12th, I also have to get up early. Nicul, I fully understand.
Much appreciated. Thank you, Nathaniel. I'm I'm a part of a BNI group who meets every Tuesday morning at 7 a.m. in Boxboro. It's such an early morning Tuesdays, but yes. So, I I agree. I guess we can move on. Oh, go ahead,
Peter. Can I just ask a separate question on town meeting triggered by something Natasha said I think where she said you know the budget and the overrides would be I think you said night one it and I'm sorry if I missed an
email or something but are we already planning the town meeting is two nights long is that um D sent out something that maybe like two or three weeks ago that it's available, the school's
available the 20th. Um, and I think it was because there's what is it 40 something articles? 40 45 articles. Yeah. So, I think he was genuinely making sure everyone the way
he sent it, I think it was like you're on notice and the school's available. So, if we need to if we're, you know, I think his rule of thumb is if it's not done by 11, right? Um, unless it's like one article or two left,
he'll I'm guessing he'll call it for the night and then reconvene. Yeah. Okay. Yep. So people should know that and be thinking and actually I didn't realize it was up to 45 but town meeting
is likely the 19th and the 20th then just so people know. Uh sorry Katie. Thank you. No, that was a good question. I didn't I didn't catch that. So and we can't really review draft recommendations ahead of the meeting amongst all of
ourselves, right? even yeah you can you can schedule like your quorum like notice you can schedule like 30 minutes ahead of time or something I know that's sometimes what has been happen if you guys have like a last minute recommendation that you're going to provide during the meeting I'm just wondering is but even as we draft we
can't like we can just email it to Jillian or you Katie right we can't email it around yeah okay yeah we can't we can't email it around but I mean Katie in discussing it with
Jill. I mean, Jill could, you know, once we collect all these things, put out a document that's the draft completed. Yeah. Comments. We can't discuss them, but we could all review them prior to
the May 12th meeting. Right. That would be great. So, we're more efficient. Yeah. I'll make a note to Jill about that. Yeah. So just with the idea of that and with expectations and people's schedules and
I'm just throwing this out so feel free to weigh in if people feel differently but that can we kind of say that we're all going to get our recommendations into Jill by May
5th and that would give her time to compile them. So, a week from today that we have to submit them to the chair and then she can compile them in a couple, you know, she'll have a few days and then hopefully by Thursday or Friday she
could send out a completed document in advance of Monday. Yeah, that sounds good to me. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'll say May 5th by May 5th. If it's before, even better. So, we will plan to meet on the 12th. I
mean, I'll I'll get to the routine agenda. I guess that's that's next. Well, in planning for um our public hearing. So, there's nothing we need to do other than have our comments ready um as much as we can, but nothing else to plan.
Correct. We're just reading through. We voted on everything. We have our recommend or not recommend and it's the 12th. So I think that's it. Um so other routine agenda. Oh gohead. The only piece that we the
only piece that we haven't really done that much of that, you know, members could decide is, you know, any kind of publicity, you know, members might want to do about our public hearing to the degree that we're trying to, you know,
educate voters ahead of town meeting. you know, if people are particularly active on some, you know, on Facebook or some other social media and want to post, hey, don't forget the fincom, you know, learn about the upcoming override. That'll get a turnout. Um, you know, or
something, you know, learn about the upcoming town meeting and, you know, ask questions, um, that, you know, might get more people to our meeting, um, which might be useful. So
yeah, that is a good thought there. It's usually crickets on those hearings. So all right, I'm going to pull up um I know I have them up here somewhere. The next thing is um Linda sent minutes that we need to
vote on. I believe these were Oh, there was another one because you sent the 14th, too. These are for the seventh. I don't see the others posted, but I can send it. We can do it the next time. I'll send it
again. I I don't think they were posted. Oh, okay. Just the seventh was I think so. Yeah. Let me look in. Sorry. I look I'm looking in board docs. I don't see them.
I I mean I know I sent them. So well I'll just send them for the 12th. Okay. Yep. So the 14th I think it was the 14th. The 14th and then and then for tonight the 28th. Yeah. So all right. So can everyone see? Is
this my word document? Everyone see that? Yep. So, everyone is present. And then we had a transfer on there from the 31st. Very thorough, Linda. I would make a motion to approve the
minutes for April 7th. I'll second. All right. Great. And a roll call vote. Nquille, yes. Linda, yes. Peter, yes. Nathan, yes. And Nathaniel, yes.
And I'm a yes as well. And Linda, do you want to send those to the town clerk? Yep, I will do that. Great. And sorry about the 14th. That was my I saw them. I just didn't drag them over. So that's okay. They're done. We'll do the 14th, right? At least you
don't have to type them up. So 14th at next meeting. And any um updates from chairs and members? I know there's a uh a budget subcommittee meeting tomorrow. Is it tomorrow? Yes. Um and we did post
the agenda for that on board docs. Um if anyone wants to take a look at that. Um any has anyone had any meetings since our last meeting to talk about any um updates that you're a leazison for? Um I have two very brief updates from the economic development committee. I think
that this first one is probably old news at this point um because we had a gap in our meetings and then um I don't think I brought it up the last one because we deferred it until this time. But anyway um apparently a winning bid of $2 million for the art space building has been awarded to Marchi Development in
Conquered. Their intent is to build out 38 two bed, two bath units while preserving the frontfacing facade, green space on Summer Street and the cup. Other assets such as a senior center and a community space are also being considered. The town is currently negotiating a purchase and sale with the
developer, but I think that's probably old news at this point. And then the second thing is um I guess the business district or whatnot is exploring a public art project. The present proposal is to include five small clock tower statues that will be painted by area
artists. Lisa Dunn, a business analyst by trade, has estimated the project to cost approximately $15,000 uh of public art. Um the district team is also still discussing whether the clock tower will be a final project and whether the intent will be to fund the
whole project at once or to seek funding to erect one of these statuettes, I guess, at a time. Um and they want to make it a permanent installation. And that is a more recent update from the uh economic development committee's uh meeting this month. So there you have it, I guess.
Awesome. Interesting. Thank you. I'm just imagining these little clock towers all over. Um, any other updates? All right, I think that brings us to the end. Future meetings. Um we landed on get Jill your comments by May
5th or before um is preferred and then we will plan our next meeting on the 12th which will be our public hearing and then annual town meeting on the 19th. Um does that sound like a wrap? We'll make a motion to adjourn the
meeting at 9:06 p.m. I will second that. Oh, go ahead, Nathan. It's you. It's all you. All right, I'll take a roll call vote. Nquille, yes. First, Nathan second to um adjourn our meeting. Sorry. Oh, yes.
Double yes. Um, Linda, yes. Peter, yes. Nathan, yes. Nathaniel, yes. And I am a yes. So, we will see each other on the 12.
Night. Good night. All right. Mater.