Good evening. Um, call the >> April 27th FinCon meeting to order. >> We'd like to stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Sorry about that. >> That's okay. beat up by so tonight is our annual public hearing.
Um, see a few people out in the audience. I do not know if there's anybody out in Zoom who uh would want to be recognized during this time. I guess I would say uh raise
your hand if you do. And I'm told we can we can promote you to a speaking status. Um, but other than that, uh, Sandy, do we need to formally open this?
>> Please let me know. >> Anyone that's their hand is, is that a motion? >> Make a motion to open the public hearing. >> Second. >> Sorry. >> I have a motion and a second. Um, and
>> we are all in attendance here except for Steve Evans at the moment. So, I will take a uh yay if we're all in favor. >> I I >> I >> That's unanimous.
Um it's been a while since I've done this. I really don't uh really recall what what we actually do here. Um >> normally it's a roll call, I think. But, uh I think we're fine. But,
you know, it's another uh year of of challenge here at at the town of Norton to put this budget together. Um, I don't know if if Mark has any
highlights to the philosophy that we went through this year. Um, >> sure. Um just uh want to respond to something the committee had asked earlier for. So I did uh email back as
requested um my hires and all of them uh four out of the five of them actually reduced cost. The other one was costneutral. Um so we actually uh did really well. Um but we had a lot of constraints this year. We were going into headwinds with health insurance
coming up as high as it did with fixed and shared costs went up 5%. Um, everyone else went up 1%. Schools, police, fire. Um, so the the goal was to
reduce the the burden on all departments, have everyone, you know, pitch in uh do what we can for schools and have the town uh move forward strong. So, this is a year of restrained growth. It's not regression. It's slow growth to get us into a structural
stable position where if the winds of the economy come, and they do, we're not going to fall flat on our face because we're on a strong foundation. So, we're weaning off of one-time funds to create a structural even budget. This will get
us halfway there. next year. Our projections say we'll we'll almost be there. If if we can have some new growth, if we can have, you know, higher than expected permits, uh, local receipts, we'll be
full speed ahead in 2029. And I mean, that said, we're tightening our belts. Everyone's No one's getting everything they wanted. Um but this is a fair budget based on needs. We heard everyone out. Um multiple rounds of of
departments. Um ended up no one on town side ended up losing a position for a whole year. Uh there was one police officer where we're going to have to fund him halfway into the year, him or her I should say. Um
and we did the best we could for schools. We um uh took this back at the finance committee's request and um increased the budget from what was originally submitted to finance committee April 6th. We added money for
health insurance um because we're rolling out an opt- out program. We're changing we're adding an HSA option. We anticipate some revenue year one um more revenue year two hopefully. So that could make a big difference. Maybe in 12 months we'll be
full speed ahead and business as usual. Right now things are a little tight. Um we increased the ambulance reserve uh funding a little bit to restore the firefighter so we don't so we don't lose that position. Um, and we also gave uh 200,000 more to
the schools than than we originally suggested on April 6th at at this committee's urging um looking at, you know, forecasting with our projections and risk tolerance there. So, but we feel good about what's
in front of us. It's it's not ideal, but it's it's the best >> that we can put forward with the committee's input. I believe we made some adjustments to make this even more palatable and this will provide a strong foundation uh to achieve a multi-year
plan. Did I ramble enough? Did you you talked about projections? Did we see those going out a couple years?
So, what I we provided was the the one-time fund use for a couple years. Um, I did have my ad administration and finance specialist um give projections based on um AI, but they might have been
one or two% off just because AI is not perfect yet. And we will follow up with, you know, more sure projections. I just didn't want to give the committee something that could be off. So that's something we're continually addressing
and and going forward for sure will include five years of revenues and expense projections >> and can we get a commitment as to a date that? >> Um it's kind of my hot button. It was in
the five the prior administration that went unheard for years. >> Are you talking about like following up from this year's budget or for next year's budget submission a date? >> Um I would go with you know at what
point would this committee see some sort of projection out a couple of years. So, you know, the words are great, but picture tells a thousand, you know, thousand words there.
>> I mean, I I could commit to the the next budget. So, when we give you next year's budget, um I'm not sure what date that would be, whatever date the charter says, but next year's budget will have a five-year projection.
>> Okay, Brandon, write that down. Mr. Chair, >> Paul question to Mark. Mark, I thought last meeting when you took the hundred from ambulance, it was to take that 50 and add it to the other 50 for the police so they would have their full position for next year.
And then I thought that was the trade-off that we were going to go from 50/50 police fire to a 100 out of the ambulance for the fire. And then that other 50 was going to the chief to make his full position cuz the discussion was whether he could even hire now since it won't be open next year if he's got a candidate
that's, you know, on the hook that he could hire now and have fully trained and count, you know. >> So, >> right. I mean, we we had originally thought, you know, half a position would go to police and half would go to fire, but then fire, you know, found that
>> aimless reserve and then I guess we just just weighed the the schools ask and the the police ask because the schools need to start someone in September and the police won't lose a position permanently if we still fund it the second half of
the year. They'll still have the same number of FTEEs at the end of the year. That was the thought process. >> So potentially in October giving them back the other half year if it's available for the Jul. >> Right. So we're not looking to take the police officer away for the whole year
just 6 months. So I mean maybe even in concert with the with the chief we could put in something you know 3 months before and you know it takes time to put a civil service ad out get the list do interviews. So >> Mr. Chair >> Paula,
>> just referring back to our meeting on April 15th. So you did mention that a 100,000 would be going to the police department and 50,000 for the school. So now the schools are getting 200,000. So where did those additional funds come from?
So, the changes I made since April 6th are to add 150,000 health insurance, to add 100,000 ambulance reserve, to add 100,000 uh due to uh local aid uh
projections. So total ad 350,000 in revenues and that went to firefighter 80,000 police officer 45,000 and that's for
half school department 200,000. Okay. The other 25,000 um was retained in uh budget reserve for balance and flexibility.
So I mean if you didn't want the balance and flexibility in theory there's 25,000 there. >> That 25,000 would go to the reserve fund. Is that what you mean? Uh no, it's just um left over at the in the budget computation uh com similar to last year
where 21,000 was left for surplus deficit approximated. I mean we don't all these are projections, right? So we're just raising and appropriating what we think we will take in. None of them will be exact particularly because you know the Senate and the governor and
the joint committee still need to weigh in on it all. Mhm. >> Um so that 25,000 would give us a buffer if it's less than expected. Um last year's buffer was 21,000. Um
this year's buffer is currently 26,000. Um I mean >> thank you. >> Plus the 60 in free cash that's available too, right? >> Uh right. Whatever that free cash handout is roughly 60 and change.
Mr. Chair, >> Andy, >> uh Mark, I know we also talked about our last meeting the possibility of using stabilization or reserves. Um probably more likely stabilization at this point for uh for the snow and ice. Um and that would I think if we if we use 200 of
that for um from stabilization, we would free up the other 200,000 that the schools had requested to still have a million dollar shortfall. Right. They're still not still not balanced. Still have cuts, but not as catastrophic is is the understanding
that that I got from the superintendent. >> Um, so I I'm I don't think anyone's talking about catastrophic cuts. I mean, maybe a few positions here and there. Um, but I mean on town side anyways, we're talking about half a half a person
that we can not end up losing that um person. But uh I thought we had discussed um or someone had brought up I thought it was um using reserve to try to pay down snow
and ice but but I I don't think that's advisable because you you'll see I'm I do have one request for funds out of the reserve uh for electricity and it might not be the last one. >> Yeah, I was thinking more of the stabilization instead since it is emergency funding. It's a
onetime expense, sort of a >> unusual year for snow. Um, seems like an appropriate use for stabilization. >> I mean, we can >> I don't know if we can can we um maybe get some clarification from the superintendent about the the 400,000
that we talked about and what 200 versus 400 looks like. Just while she's walking up, I I'll say that stabilization isn't somewhere we should regularly take money from. We did last year and and we shouldn't take from savings to pay for
>> operations back though, right? We're not recommending well we're kind of saying you know there are funds there for extraordinary circumstances and
you know blizzards don't happen every year anymore. So, it's kind of out of the ordinary and that's where perhaps that money should have should come from
so as not to hurt other departments. >> We have free cash. We've always used free cash for snow and we have enough to afford this year's snow. But, >> but we we don't have enough for this entire budget. That's that's the that's
the overriding issue and and I had said a couple weeks ago, you know, when I asked Dr. O'Neal what what amount is needed given given how much the original
request was, what amount is needed not to impact studentfacing services? And I think that's pretty important. Um, thank you for having me. Um, I am I the only one that thinks Bill needs to knock on wood after that statement of
blizzards don't happen every year. It was a rough rough winter from my perspective, sir. Uh, six snow days is not um is not typical. Um, we had a lot of snow this year. Um, but I am crossing every finger that next winter's a little
bit better. Um, so thank you for the question tonight. Um I think that um the way that Bill just phrased that question I think is really important because he talked about what are the positions that are studentf facing. Um and so
as I said when I last presented and I apologize I was not at your last meeting. We had school committee that same night. Um even with the $400,000 ask we will be eliminating positions. And I think the important component of that and and it
really it a little bit of a is semantics and sometimes we can agree to disagree on the semantics because we we know at the end of the day that it's it's not necessarily impacting students as much as as it as it would. Um with the additional $400,000 I am still planning
to lay off to eliminate five positions. Those are three elementary classroom positions and then those are two specialized service providers. So that would still be um a reduction of five positions over our current staffing model for this current year. The
important thing for us to recognize is that two of those positions are going to be um eliminated through attrition. So, we have a staff member that's retiring. We have a staff member that is resigning. We would simply not be not backfilling
those roles and therefore um it's a loss of position, not necessarily a layoff letter to a particular individual. Um, I think the other important thing for us to consider is that I feel comfortable
about making those changes and those reductions um of those five staff members for a few different reasons. Um, number one is the fact that we are continuing to see a decline in enrollment at the elementary level. Our current kindergarten class is our
smallest class that we've had in a number of years. Um, and so those students are going up to first grade. we're not going to need as many first grade sections as we currently have because of of of this decline in enrollment. Um, also one of our specialized service providers was on
maternity leave this whole year. We had a really difficult time backfilling that position and so therefore that person's coming back. We're eliminating a different service provider and so therefore some of those things will kind of even out over time. So, I want to be
very clear that those five positions I feel comfortable doing that. Um, the request on the 400,000 was really to look specifically at um, Norton Middle School. And so, for those of us who have been here for a while, we know we have
made a lot of changes at Norton Middle School over the years. And so what this would require us to do, so the 200,000, we will gladly take the 200,000. Please don't do not misunderstand me at all.
Um, however, with the 400,000 would allow us to um maintain the level of programming that we have for special education at Norton Middle School. Um, for those of you who have had a student that goes to Norton, has gone to Norton Middle School, um, we have two teams.
And so a purple team and a white team. And so each team has a special educator that works with the students on that team that are on IEPs. Um and if we were to not receive that full amount, we would need to look at the program itself
in terms of um having only one special educator per grade level. and they would work probably with a paraprofessional across the teams in order to make sure that we're meeting the hours of service need for individual students. Um, and we would also look at our programming. So,
right now at the middle school or really at all of our schools, um, we have a number of specialized programs. We have a specialized program for students with language based learning disabilities. We have a specialized program for students with social emotional disabilities for students that are on the autism
spectrum. And then um finally for students that may um have lower cognitive abilities. And so those different programs are something that we offer really from kindergarten all the way through grade 12 plus. And so um the
funds would not be there. that we would have to do is we would have to look at those programs and we would look at the number of staff we have and the number of students and we would eliminate positions instead of having um fewer we would have fewer staff members working
with more students in order to meet um those needs. So I think I want to be clear that um you know I tried to answer Mr. Ratund's question as best I was able to at that time. Um, you know, since we last met, we do have some new
information. Um, as Mr. Gold mentioned, there are, you know, new, um, increases on the cherry sheet. So, chapter 70 is one of them. Um, the current House Ways and Means budget is proposing $160 per student over above the governor's
budget, which was $75 per student. That's an additional $85 per student. Um and so we know that that is not over till it's over and that won't be voted until um July, but it is promising to see that increase there as
well. So hopefully that answers your question without being too roundabout. Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Bonnie. >> Yeah. Uh Dr. O'Neal, one of the things that I often think about and I've mentioned it here a number of times that
I think Mr. was saying that it's not catastrophic the cuts um that you would need to make um which is five positions and you're able to do that through attrition is to remember that historically I've now been on this committee for 9 years um historically
there have been cuts made almost every year that I've been on this committee to be able to meet the budget needs or the budget constraints I should say. So, um, both of my kids had language in fourth grade, I believe, and I believe now it starts at 9th grade.
>> Correct. >> So, that is something that we cut 5 years ago, four years ago. >> Um, middle school world language was cut for FY25. So, it actually seems like a million years ago, but it really wasn't that long ago. >> That often happens to me.
>> Yes. Um, however, we have we made adjustments like year after year after year. So one year it was fourth and fifth grade was eliminated. One year it was sixth grade, one year it was seventh grade um until we finally had to kind of you know throw our hands up and say this is not going to work. So to me that is
catastrophic. That's my point is that these are uh death by a thousand paper cuts. These cuts are made every year. Um and it doesn't feel like five positions is a lot even if they're not people. Um, but to me that's something that those
kindergarteners you just mentioned, um, the fifth graders, the 10th graders, no matter which grade level you're talking about, um, at every grade that they move forward, they're missing out on things that kids 10 years ago had and those kids were missing out on things the kids
10 years before them had. So, that's my concern is that while it's not catastrophic in in so far as we're talking about one year, um it is to me catastrophic that we're talking about things that have been lost and numbers of positions that have been lost since I
even came on this committee 9 years ago. >> Mr. Um can I just clarify that so without the 400,000 in re and rearranging um the middle school special ed how many um positions would that would that lose
>> without the 400,000 >> correct >> um not counting the five that we're good and comfortable with I'd say it's probably another three okay >> ish and and And it's honestly, Sandy, I'm
not trying to not give you an answer on that. Um, but it's really challenging because we would need to really look specifically at the programs itself. We need to look at case load specifically. And it's a huge amount of, um, moving parts. And so, um,
it's going to take a lot kind of, you know, a lot of work for us to kind of figure out exactly what that's going to look like. And then we also know how, um, seniority works. and you know, we're not necessarily laying off the people that are the highest paid um in order to meet that number. And so therefore, it
would really I I would say probably three. >> Thank you. Of course, Mr. Chair, Dr. O'Neal, um would the class sizes increase for grades six, seven, and eight? And what would um what would you project that those class sizes would be
if we if you do not get the extra $400,000? >> No, they would not. So the general education classes at Norton Middle School would remain the same. So right now all of our students receive the same four core classes, math, science, social studies, ELA.
Yeah, that that's I got them all. Um and then they have a special subject every day. We have our ICE block every day. So those would remain the same. What would change would be the number of students that an a special educator would be responsible for on their case load. Um,
so instead of having um I'm the special educator for six purple, I would be the special educator for potentially both six purple and six white depending on the number of students that are on IEPs. Um, so as as many people know, we actually have a really small cohort
that's currently seventh graders. And so we've made some adjustments to um their programming over the years because we could. there weren't there's you know about 20 students fewer in that grade level than the others and we would just kind of move staff positions around. Um
so what would happen is we would kind of take that same model um for the other grade levels as well and then think about you know potentially you may be laying off a highly qualified teacher and then backfilling that with the power position just because you need the the
actual human body to be able to service that number of students. um but they wouldn't necessarily need a special educator um all day long and with a special educator overseeing the parent, it can work out that way. So that's what we would do.
>> Mr. Chair, Kevin, Dr. Neil, if you're the parent of a student with an IEP in middle school or you're a student in the middle school with the cuts, would they have a different quality outcome year-over-year with these adjustments?
I don't want to say that a student would have a different quality outcome. Um, full disclosure, I'm a parent. Um, I had a child on an IEP for many, many years that re that recently self- advocated and exited. I have another child that's on a 504. Um, and very different
students academically. They they could be not more they could not be more different as learners. Um, I think the challenge really and you know, it's it's interesting because I was having a conversation with a a fellow educator. when you lose staffing positions, the
work doesn't change. The the work increases for those that are left around you. Um we're not going to um not be able to educate students. We're going to give kids the best best that we can on a daily basis. Um the workload just increases for those that are left
behind. And and I do want to be clear too like it, you know, as as Bonnie shared earlier, we've we've cut a lot of people over the years. So when you look at a reduction in staff um for this current fiscal year, it it it's I mean Christine
and I kind of were like, "Yeah, we can make it work because we can and we have and we cut $3.4 million for FY24 and we're still making it work." Um so we I understand the financial constraints that the town is under. I understand that, you know, the pie is only so big.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I don't want Norton Police or Norton Fire or any other department in town to go without because the the schools had to have something. It it we've lived in a community for too long where it's been the schools versus everybody else. And that's not the way
that I like to do business. Um I I think that we're only successful as a community when we're all successful. Um, so whatever the finance committee decides that they're going to recommend at town meeting, we will we will go forward and we will make it work. Um,
but I I do I'm not doing my job if I am not telling you and advocating for the needs of students. >> Mr. Yeah, Zach, just so we're clear on the last few questions, when we talk about the 400,000, we're talking about
the difference between the 200,000 additional the town manager is recommending versus the 400,000 that you are requesting. >> So, a difference of 200,000. >> Yes. Okay. Just want to make that clear for anybody that might be watching. Yep.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Do we close? >> Mr. Chair, can I ask another budget question um of the town manager? Can you tell me why the unemployment was was um doubled? The recommendation for unemployment was 50,000 in the past and
this this um recommendation is 100,000. >> Um because we were nearing we're running really close at the time the budget was set. Um, we're still at risk of going over. Um, so we had
pinned it a little higher just in case. Um, I mean, could it end up being 50? Maybe. Um, I I I mean, 100 is conservative. Maybe
it'd be 75. Maybe it'll go over 100. Um that's why >> thank you >> Mr. Sure. >> Gavin, >> um what is uh Mark, what is our balance in
the stabilization account at the moment? >> So, we have two stabilization accounts. Uh general stabilization has 5.1 million and change. A capital improvement stabilization has 1.1 million and change. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> After tonight, um might be nothing. >> I don't know about that. Maybe >> Mr. Chair Zach when you say Mark uh capital improvements that's 1.1 before the recommendations.
>> Yes sir. >> So in theory it's the capital improvement is basically zero or close to it. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So it will be around zero by the end of the night most likely for for that account. >> If we were looking to take Sorry Mr.
Sure. Uh if we were looking to take 200,000 from stabilization, it would be from the other one though, right? The one with 5 million. >> Okay. So, >> yeah. >> Which I would strongly urge not to kick the can down the street because that's
what we've been doing every year for the past, >> I don't know, 5, 10, 20 years. Mr. Chair, >> followup. >> Mark, you are suggesting that um the
revenues and the local receipts and new growth will be starting to happen next year. So hopefully this may be the last year we'll have to dip into that potentially based on what you were saying our projections could be over the next few years.
I'm trying to be optimistic and um I do believe it's going to straighten out if we stay the course. If we use one-time funds, which sounds like is being proposed on recurring expenses, it could take longer. Um yes, we hope new growth
happens. We're going to invest in some sewer lines and, you know, try to get some more businesses to move in. Realistically, we're looking at two to four years for for that to hit. Two years, three years, four years. That's when we expect the bump.
>> Um not next year. >> So that's kind of projecting new growth. Uh >> what is >> if if and more likely if we get to a deal with the unions next year, then we could significantly reduce some some
health care costs. that in my mind doesn't doesn't justify creating a potential downstream problem for a one-time benefit. >> Mr. Chair, what what about the
miscellaneous account where it appears we've got a $371,000 step up, which feels like a slush fund. Not sure what all is in that.
It's in the operating budget today. >> That's money for insurance and salary increase, I believe. >> That feels mushy. >> Yeah. No, no. Like >> on the last page, >> I can tell tell you if every penny of
that went to salary increases on the town side, it it would be lucky to get half of what the school got for raises. Mr. Chair, >> Sandy. >> Um, so Mark, just to to be clear, like last year we were at what 2.2 million in free cash and stabilization combined
that we spent and this year we're at 1.6. Is that are those numbers correct? >> Um, 2.2. We're at 1 point that sounds roughly correct. There was a capital there was this 500,000 draw last
year. There was another 200,000 that was put in the fall in supplements >> where we're trying not to do supplements barring true emergencies, >> right? And I think if we don't do supplements, we're still in better shape than last year. We're still, you know, >> the 1.6, I mean, I appreciate it's less,
but so is 1.8, right? So, it seems a little bit like arbitrary to say we're going to lessen it and and to come up with 1.6. six versus 1.8. Um, again, both are less than 2.2, right? Still going in the right direction.
>> Bar barely like like we got we got to we got to get down so we're not using one-time funds for recurring expenses or we're just burying our head in the sand and pretending there's not a problem. >> Mr. Chair, then why the 1.6 mark? Why not just go down to 800,000? Like
>> because then it would be catastrophic service impacts. Let's see. >> You will pro, Mr. Chair Bonnie, >> you'll probably not find 10 people who agree more with that statement. Mark, we um in the 9 years that I've been
sitting here, I do believe kicking the can down the road is something that we've said a number of times. We've implored this town to listen to us when it comes to um how much how big the pie is, I guess you would say. Um to reference what Dr. O'Neal said. And um
we were have been told resoundly that we have to do what we have to do with what we have. And so you know we're not aren't always in agreement, the 10 11 of us, but um ultimately we come up with a a decision about what we
recommend based on the fact that this is all we have to work with, >> right? and and you know given that Prop 2 and a half this is this is what we have and I can't in good faith recommend we spend more money than we're bringing in which which we're doing by 1.6 6
million and I'm not comfortable with I I want to move in the right direction and it sounds like we're discussing moving back to where we are like one step forward to >> if this is why lottery winners end up being broke because they they follow the
same habits that they followed before. See, I I don't I don't think we're advocating for that. But, you know, if you if I I can be very, you know, corny here,
but the kid you don't educate is the person that the chief is going to arrest in 15 years. So, you know, at some point
you you do have to support all of it and and you know, yeah, two 200,000 is is going in the wrong direction, >> but I I I I don't I don't see the logic for
for just saying no, we we need to be we we need to have this this this budget which appears to be only cutting one department seriously and the others are are you know no one got what they
wanted but one is really getting hurt where the others are getting marginally hurt that that one department is getting double the percent increase of any other department and is getting an over a half million increase. No other department's
getting even a $50,000 increase. >> Mr. Chair, >> you have to look at at how many employees >> I was just going to say >> before you start doing that game >> and the mandated >> Yeah, it
100,000 over the mandated costs. So before we go much further, how long do we keep the public hearing open? >> We do have to open it up to questions from anyone from the public as well.
>> Is there anybody on the Zoom that we know of? >> Bassam, anyone on Zoom? >> I am. besides maybe Steve and I'm not even sure
he's there. >> Anybody from the audience? Come on. Say something. Mr. Chair Brandon, I'd like to make a motion to close the uh public hearing. >> Second.
Uh any further discussion? Hearing none. Uh, all those in favor? >> I I >> I opposed abstain. One second. Mr. Chair, Steve Evans just texted. He's been trying to get on
>> again. So, before we close it. Oh, I I guess he's part of a committee, so we we can uh close it, I guess. But he's would like to speak, I believe. >> He appeared. >> There he goes. >> He's in. Steve, are you now uh fully connected?
>> He's not. >> Oh, >> now we can same problems connecting >> could be All right. So, um,
>> can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Hey, Steve, can you hear us? >> Nope. Oh, >> I'm taking that as a no. >> Zach. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Everything. >> Absolutely.
>> We close it. He voted. >> We voted. So we're we're officially closed. >> Okay. He's part of the committee anyway. So >> did people close the public? >> Yeah, we voted to close it. So that part is closed. So now we
get to the fun part of >> the agenda. So I'm not sure we're we're done with the the discussion of the school. >> Mr. Can I just can I just um speak to something the town manager just said? >> Yep.
>> Um I mean you're talking about the the schools with 400,000 would be a 2% increase. There are certainly other departments that are getting more than that. And I don't think it's really again to you know it's not really a fair comparison to say the schools monetarily what their bottom line is. They're
they're the biggest budget. So percentage- wise it's not a big increase. Um, and again, there are there are departments that are getting I can certainly go through the list, but we can all see them on on your sheet, too. There are departments getting more than 2%. Um, and so, um, you know, it does,
to to Bill's point, feel like they're the ones that are getting hit the hardest. >> When does the state finalize theirs? It's It's usually after the fiscal year has started usually, frankly.
>> That's not going to work then. >> Okay, >> Mr. Chair. Zach. So, I understand it the chapter 70 money that you're talking about the state that comes to the schools directly or it goes to the town and it winds up
in the town general fund. >> Recap. So, it goes to the it's part of the cherry sheet. On the front of the cherry sheet, it says chapter 70 is one of the uh categories. There's also other school categories. So, well, chapter 70
increased 160. Another one there's charter something, you know, decreased 150 and these there's increases on the front, decreases on the back. The net comes to the town. >> To the town, not to the schools directly.
>> Correct. Okay. Well, I'm thinking we'll get back to this discussion at some point. Um, so how how do you want to proceed, Mark? >> Uh, so, um, up to the committee. We have
a some warrant articles still left to vote on and then we have the vote on the general fund budget, the water budget and the sewer budget which are three articles. So I mean
maybe we go in article number might make sense and when the budgets come up hit it then unless you want to hit the budget first or last. >> Mr. Zach, >> I would say if the schools are here, I always try to respect people in the
audience. Uh we should probably tackle the budgets. >> There is the roof. I'm not sure if if you want to hear more on that or if we've heard enough. >> I've heard enough. I don't know about anybody else. >> Heard it several times.
>> So, Mr. Chair >> Paul. >> So, getting back to the um the chapter 70 money which wouldn't get approved till after we've already into the next fiscal year that will come back as free cash indirectly for the fall town meeting which doesn't do the schools any
good. So, um I'm inclined to think that if we were to take 200 grand out of stabilization for the snow and ice removal, it's a one-time cost. It's not really going backwards as far as the uh um ongoing expenses. I mean, it's it's
semantics, Mark, I know, but um and then the money comes back hopefully with the increase to chapter 70 funds and uh uh after the fiscal year starts and we can either reappoint it to uh the stabilization to fall town meeting to reimburse it kind of like we did last
year, Mr. Chair. I mean, that would be my thought. That way, the other the schools could potentially be made more whole. So >> by the same think and potentially with a 45 for I'll >> just
just Mr. Chair we've always used free cash to pay for snow and ice and we can afford to do that again. We budgeted 250 it was 380 so it's within the margin of error. >> Say that again. We budgeted 80. Um, in
the free cash plan, we we set aside 250 in anticipation of this year's snow. The final amount was 380, 130 over what we planned, but we only budgeted 80 because that's the minimum amount we have to budget. So, we can overspend if if necessary,
>> right? I I mean I I I guess in the spirit of working together, I mean maybe we could take 50 out of unemployment and leave 25 out of the surplus reserve. I mean it
beats borrowing money from tomorrow to pay for today. So that would free up 75 if the committee's inclined. That gets us to what? 275 of the 400 like meet me somewhere. >> Mr. Chair, I think the the 400 is
meeting somewhere, right? It was a it was one and almost one and a half million. They were short and so for me the 400 I don't I don't think they can just do this part way is my understanding. Right. It's it's the they either have to reorganize the entire middle school
special ed department um and what that looks like. They they can't really do that part way, >> right? G given the you know the notifications they have to give to their staff and whatnot, you know, they need to know
>> now. So, I'm um you know, the the extra 70 or whatever 75, you know, that's great, but it it still doesn't get us to where
I think we need to be. Yeah, Mr. Chair. Um I think that taking 1.6 million from free cash as opposed to 2.2 two like last year is weaning and then taking 200,000 from stabilization
as opposed to 500,000 like last year is also weaning and I thought that was our plan for this year is to try to wean not completely you know cold turkey um and then next year hopefully we're
looking at less but we can't you know go down to nothing again I think going down to 200,000 from 500,000 and a stabilization is reasonable. >> And again, broke broken record bill
here. Projections which I talked about in September would all make this so much easier to see what we think the future is going to be.
Not that it it's gonna pan out that way, but at least to see it. So, you know, this this hey, we do a budget in a in a in a one-year bubble
has never made sense to me ever. And I've been on this committee way longer than I want to admit. And >> that's very true. And I've been saying the same thing for anybody who's been on
this committee with me. Projections, >> you can't do it in a vacuum. You can't do it in a bubble. So I would understand way better if you know taking an extra
100,000 extra 200,000 when I see a projection that's just going negative for the next 5 years you know I'd be thinking something different but you're telling me it's going to get better so I have to I have to you know take
>> not if we keep borrowing money from savings >> but I I need to take the dice and and roll it going, okay, it's going to get better. So, this one time event should not be repeated again next year. I I
but it's happened for the last 20 YEARS BECAUSE WE DON'T SEE A FREAKING PROJECTION CHEAPERS. >> The projection is we'll be good in two years unless we borrow from free cash orb savings. Then it's going to take more. It's going to take two and a half. It's going to take three years to dig us
ourselves. >> Mr. Chairman, >> Zack, >> are we ready to move on and have some motions? >> Yeah. >> Okay. I make a motion that we move $288,268.15
from a stabilization account to pay for snow and ice. >> Second. >> There'll be two more motions following. on discussion. Mr. Chair, >> y >> I I I thought we had discussed two 200. Why would the motion be for more than
that? >> There'll be two motions to follow. One I can only talk about one motion at a time, >> right? So why should people vote for this motion if the understanding was >> that's their choice? >> That's their choice. >> Is that a rule? Sorry. >> Um
>> voting an extra 80,000 for no reason. I I I gosh I I didn't think this evening was going to go to the to midnight, but it it looks like it may. Um just like I'm berating Mark
to my right here about projections. If you're telling me there are two more, you know, motions coming, I'd like to see the big picture before I vote on the first one. Okay. My my first of all, the the snow and ice was a one time let's
start with the snow and ice was a one-time uh occurrence and that's why we have an emergency fund to coveret one-time emergencies. So, let's take that off the table by funding that from the emergency fund. Secondly, on that, we've already filed with the state to
get some money back from that under the state of emergency. So when and if it comes back in the fall, we can replace some of that or all that money back. My second motion is is going to be uh just like we did, excuse me, should have
brought some water like last year is funding everybody now is to give the $200,000 to the schools and I was going to make a motion to give 45,000 to the police department so we can be done so we don't have to deal
with any of that in the fall. Now, do we want to split heels about the other 40? Whatever's left, we can, but I'm just trying to make it as easy as possible and as clean as possible. If that's a good enough explanation for you. Was that three or two?
>> That was it. Okay. >> One for the school. >> That was three. The police. >> No, no. I I >> I heard two or like motions. >> Two motions after. >> Yeah. >> Not three, >> but okay. I think I got the picture.
>> So there's a motion on the second on the floor. On the floor. >> So there's a motion and a second on the floor to do 288,000 and some odd change >> 15 288 2685
>> from stabiliz article 11 basically on the on the warrant. I have a motion. And I have a second. Any further discussion? >> Mr. Chair Mark,
>> I to borrow admittedly more than to to tap from the piggy bank more than we're going to spend just doesn't make sense. Especially when I've I've identified 75,000 we could take money from. So if we took
>> 45 I mean the 75 to restore the path of police officer and I mean the most we would need to take from stabilization if you're taking anything is 170 and that would still achieve the goal that we restore half the police officer
and give the full 400,000 to the school with 170. Don't cap the piggy bank for a dollar more than you have to. The piggy bank will be restored in the just like last year. The piggy bank will be restored. Alls I'm trying to do is make it as clean as possible. If you want to uh you know chop it up and take it from
here, there, and everywhere, we can do that, too. Um but, you know, that's your choice. But that's my motion at the moment. I'm just trying to make it as clean as possible and we will clean this up at the fall town meeting. >> You could you could you could work with him and do the 170 from stabilization
for the partial snow and ice and then that would allow that to be coming for free cash. And again, a little more accounting, but it it serves his purpose of not taking a penny more, Zach. And >> did you want me to change my motion? >> Does anybody have that math? >> Would be 170, right? According to the
town manager, >> uh 170 would be the 245US 75 170. >> I think you have to withdraw. >> Okay, I will. Do I have to withdraw it or change my motion? Uh >> amend it.
>> Amend it. Okay, I'll amend my motion to $170,000 from stabilization to snow and ice act 11. >> Second unless you have to I don't know if you have to. There was a change. >> I have a mo motion and a second on the
floor. >> Any further discussion, >> Mr. Chair? >> Brandon? Not to beat a dead horse, but how I just want to write it down. How are we getting the 170? >> Yeah.
>> I just want to make sure everyone on the committee fully understands. >> So 45,000 is for a half a police officer. >> Yep. >> 200 is for the schools.
>> So that's 245 that we we were trying to find. What we have is 75 50 from unemployment. So unemployment goes down 100 to 50 and
then 25 from budget surplus >> free cash. You mean >> no budget surplus. You're saying there's free cash. >> So that's 75. So that the 245 minus 75 is 170.
>> Does that make sense? Yeah, >> that's compromise. >> There's a motion in the second of the floor. >> So, and and we'll get this back in the fall. >> With any luck, >> we have a motion and a second.
>> I think that before I go further, did we lose Steve again? left. >> Okay. So, okay. Uh any further discussion
hearing? None. All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Abstain. That's unanimous. >> Number two. Motion two would be, I believe, Mr. Chair, $50,000 from Well,
although we didn't vote on this budget yet, so it wouldn't be a motion to move it from >> We haven't voted on any of the >> You're going to I mean, you could move the budget with the following amendments. Yes. You know,
>> let's get to that shape, Paige. All right. >> So, the two amendments would be unemployment 100 to 50 and uh use 25 of what did we call it? budget surplus >> towards
the hang >> schools, right? >> Schools would be >> So, yeah, there's three there's three changes in the budget, right? There's >> schools unemployment, increase schools, increase police. >> Where's the schools? You see it? >> Right. >> But we also have to say where the money
is coming from, too. All the >> Right. Right. I'm just looking at the change. We would have to increase the use of free cash 200,000 for schools. So that then so there's like four amendments.
I mean you can make those as as one motion. So so I guess just talking out loud. So the motion would be to approve the budget with the following amendments. uh 100 to 100 unemploy or 100 to 50 unemployment.
Uh 25 using uh what's it called? Budget surplus. >> Uh 200 free cash to schools. >> Where are the current sources listed for um the budget? Are they in here
somewhere? >> They're not in the handout. I apologize. I I have them in my hand. >> Okay. So just that >> I can we can run and bring copies back. >> He didn't know there wasn't an updated one. >> He didn't know. >> Okay, let's do that. >> The last page to 50.
>> And so the third amendment would be to to use 200 free cash as a funding source. So to add 200. So we're adding 320. Oh, we're also adding
170. We already made that motion. >> Yes. Well, that was the article >> to the snow and ice. >> That's art. Yeah, that's separate article. >> And we had planned to pay, I'm just thinking this through. We had planned to pay the snow and ice out of free cash. So, we would spend less free cash on
snow and ice and then the 200 would go to the schools. >> Yep. And then we would have to add 45 to the police. Yep. So we're adding 45 to the police, 200 to the schools
>> and taking away 350 from the unemployment >> and taking away the unemployment and taking the budget surplus. >> Yes. the four. So if you want to say like as as presented unless you want to say all that.
>> Um so the the free cash amount is now going to be >> 1.8. Well, I thought we only are taking 170. >> Um, >> right. >> All right. We're going to have to have a
left and a right ledger here. >> Make it clean to begin with. >> So, we just took 170. >> The bottom line, right? >> We're going to take >> Yeah, but we only need 170. >> Well, we still need 200 to go to snow and ice. >> Get it together.
Now I'm confused. Didn't >> So I think I think going back to article 11, we need to also probably amend that article because the the motion only had 170 funding it. We need to fund the other 128 26815
>> free cash >> from free cash. >> Yes. >> Article 11. That sounds right. So instead of >> I tried to make this clean from the beginning, but it's
>> it's getting >> and then to make sure. >> Okay, >> we're getting in 200. >> The bottom line, but I just want to make sure. >> Yep. What?
>> Actually, that's I don't think that's right because it's not >> that's 170 right back at stabilization. >> Article 11 is going to be reduced by 170. >> So the free cash in 11. >> Sounds right.
Well, just basically we did last year the 500 up front and then we put it right back. Well, if the schools get that additional money per student, >> right? >> Almost cover the stabilization replenishment in the fall. So, it makes the school more whole now. >> It sounds like we're agreed on what to
do, just how to do it. So, article 11 has to reduce by 170. >> Uh, just passing this down. >> Yeah. So, it's going to be 118 26815. >> Great. >> Correct.
>> That's for you. >> I tried to make this clean from the beginning. >> Mr. Chair, pass it. It was never going to be clean. Brandon >> Mark. Yeah. >> Could we simply say uh I'm writing to provide context for the proposed
transfer of $118,268.15 from free cash and $170,000 from stabilization for article 11. >> U that would be appropriate. We have to withdraw our motion on the budget because we can only have one motion at a time. Then then someone could make that
motion. Yeah. >> You lost me. Oh, what is this? >> We want to take care of article 11 first, >> which we did, I thought. >> Yeah, but we have >> Okay, completely. >> Is that where the other >> 18's coming from?
>> 18 is coming from is free cash or is it coming from >> free cash originally? The whole amount >> cash. >> Looks like >> the whole 288 was free cash. Now we're going to take the other 200 from the schools. We're just That's where we're finagling from different areas. Okay. All right, Sandy.
This is our >> I like finagling >> finagling, right? This is the total, >> right? And then 118. But that had some that had some change, too, though. >> Great. There. >> The whole thing's free from cash
originally. So, just Yep. Yep. >> But it was um >> Pete Pete had the extra Pete had the extra >> 2165, I think. 2885 >> 26815 Yes.
>> 268 26815 >> 288 2685 >> Right. And what I was proposing is just subtract the one. We can't though because there's another motion on >> I think you have to >> we got to redo Zach's motion again.
>> I I trying to sort out the uh >> 245. Okay. So I I I got it balanced out here. >> Why do we have to review the motion? >> If I I second, he withdraws us first. Brandon can make the one that has both
of them covered for 170. Right. >> Right. You >> Zach, I'm going to withdraw my second. Can you withdraw your first and Brandon will make a different motion for that? >> I withdraw my motion. But we've already voted on the >> We already voted on the uh
>> motion to reconsider it. >> That's what I would say. Reconsider. >> Motion to reconsider article 11. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to reconsider article 11. Any further
discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? >> I. >> That's unanimous. Mr. Chair, >> Brandon, >> I would like to make a motion uh article
11 to transfer $118,000 $118,268.15 from free cash and $170,000 from stabilization. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Any further
discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor I >> I opposed abstain. That's unanimous for the regular budget. We need to add the 50 back and then an additional
>> that was $118,268. >> Why do I have >> 50? Yes, sir. Can you read from stabilization for the police? But we want >> 270 from stabilization. So you go to the
police page. >> All right. So now >> can you add 45,000 to the 758? >> So we're going to use >> should be up here on personal services. >> I mean we can just do probably.
So, we're gonna end up using >> We didn't take it. We have to make a motion less free cash because we're using stabilization. >> Hey, Steve. >> We don't have another package. >> How you doing? >> 473's here.
>> So, we use a pack. >> What's your final figure in that one, Paul? You already have a >> I have 478. >> All right. So, >> Mr. chair >> instead of Bonnie. >> Steve's here. >> I know. >> Okay. Just want to make that known at 8:09. >> So that's what he looks like.
>> Let me pretend I'm on >> plus 45 on the police. >> 200. I think it's actually >> 4,78,460. >> We should do the number. >> Do the schools to add another two to that, right? >> Yeah. So that's that would that's an easy one. So that would be >> retained earnings
>> 3787, isn't it? That's that's freaking >> Mr. Chair. >> But we have to add the 50th to the police budget and 200 budget. >> Oh jeez. >> 45
to the school, 45 PD. Yep. >> 245 on that side. You take 170 >> 25 and 50 on that side motion to put the two buckets here and take it from those three buckets. >> So free cash I
>> I don't think we need to make a motion for that cuz that's automatically going to fall back into free cash. >> Oh sir has to go. >> Yep. >> So approve the budget. >> Okay. >> Oh no you're right. Anything else coming up?
>> It's just coming. It's just going to fall. I'm going to get it out. >> Yeah, I've got >> before we get to the fun of moving that >> feed up some of that 16 budget with the following amendments. >> You're the >> Yeah, >> that's your funding source.
>> I your go back saying >> budget as is. >> So then I'll re email after I make those changes. Mm- >> But we're not reading each budget and each >> No,
>> you can say as is shown in the >> those two changes of those two. >> If you want to read them, read them. >> I don't want to, but >> but that's what's done, >> you know, to just >> this is always done by department, you know, by each department. Yeah, >> but I mean it can be quick if we
>> muscle through >> because the problem is if they >> if a handout gets changed then >> 16 is still >> it's still made that >> so I I would just stay
>> go with each department and just >> okay >> uh like How do we want to proceed here? >> Just reading them. >> No, you have to go budget by budget. >> Okay.
>> So, I would just read the totals for each budget. >> The only ones that'll change, >> right? >> Just the bottom line. >> Yeah. So, the one we plac in the school, >> right? So today, >> so we're going to when when you make the
motion, just add 200 to the the school, add 45 to the PD, but you also have to add to the revenue side, too. >> Uhhuh. >> Revenue side. >> Zach, so what's the plan? Are we going department by department or the entire
budget with with amendments? Kick ass >> department by department with the amendments as we get them. I'll leave that to the vice chair. >> It's your time to shine, Brandon. >> Time to shine. >> Go for it, buddy. We all had to do it. >> Well, thank why. Thank you.
>> Mr. Chair >> Brandon, >> I would like to make a motion to vote on article 8 for $82,250 for the select board, $446,250
to the town manager budget, $2,320 of finance committee, $165,000 to the reserve fund. $34,59. Town accountant
$399,953 for the assessors, $321,510 for the treasurer/collector, $80,000 for legal services, $528,000
for 52842 for data processing, $35,000 for tax title foreclosure, $195,145 for the town clerk, $47,600
for elections, $174,400 for the conservation commission, $164,949 for the Planning Board, $4,277
for Uh what is that? Regional planning and economic development. $300 for the zoning board of appeals. $184,000 for the mun municipal voting
maintenance. $2,400 for the town report. $52,550 for postage for old apartments. $4,000. Excuse me.
>> This is the one that got increased by >> 45,000 4,788. >> So, uh I would like Do I have to say I want to make all >> Keep going. You're on a roll.
>> 4 million. I would like to uh 4,788,460 to the police department. 5,495,422 to the fire department. >> Did you Sorry, did we add we added the 45 for police? Yep. >> Yes. Sorry.
$219,50 to emergency medical services, $9,200 to emergency planning, $273,923 to the inspection department, $6,976
sealer weight, $650,000 for the communication center, $125,944 $4 to animal control, $2,000 to the tree warden,
$37,872,686 to the school department, 1,733,26 to the Southeastern Regional uh vocational budget, $137,757 to the uh regional agricultural school
1,281,283 to the highway department. Holy cow. Um 80 $80,000 for snow removal, $50,000 for street lighting,
$8,400 to sanitary landfill, $187,84 to the board of health, $4,000 for the public health nurse, $314,251 to the Council on Aging, $240,00
321 to the veterans agent, $632,689 to the library, $69,755 to recreation, zero to the historical commission,
$1,500 to the Memorial and Veterans Day, $0 to the historical >> DI I district commission. Thank you. 3,615,855 to maturing debt. 2,270,259
to interest, $16,360,346 to employee benefits, $100,000 to >> Yep. 50 >> 50 >> 50 >> 50 on unemployment.
>> Thank you. 50,000 to unemployment. >> 1,610 Excuse me. 1,610,730 to miscellaneous. >> And we took $25,00 total. >> We need to total it. >> Yeah, we total. We need to do a new
total >> with a grand total of >> you got to add the other uh >> 170. >> No, no. 200. No, you got to add >> you go up 245. Take out 50. >> 1431. >> 282.
>> 245. That's 195 when I went before. >> That went down 50. >> What did I say? >> 170. Close enough. 245 - 50. >> Close. If I got it work, >> this 81 >> 81 >> 086 22
>> 245 - 50. Yeah. 95, >> right? 45US. >> It should be. >> So, we're adding 195. >> You got the number there. >> Plus, plus minus 50, right? 81281
>> I think 282 >> is what I got. >> I have 81431 282. >> So it's the number there. Plus 170. >> No, plus 195. >> I I have 81 281 282
>> 282. Yeah, that's what I have. >> That's what I have. 81 281282. >> So that's the total >> with all of the departments for a grand total of 81,281,282. >> Second that.
Have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hear none. All in favor? I >> I >> abstain. Opposed. That's unanimous.
>> That was fun. >> Mr. Chair Zack, can we move on to the roof project so these folks can uh go about their business? >> Yeah. I thought you didn't want to hear
anymore. Well, we we have to vote. >> Okay, Brandon. >> I'm more than happy to answer any questions that the committee may have about the roof. >> 11 million. >> As you know, it passed at the ballot on
um I believe it was the 11th. So, thank you very much uh to the Norton community for supporting it there. Um, I plan to give a brief presentation um at town meeting on the 18th. And we'll also have our designer there with me as well to answer specific questions about the bid
process and how that will go as well as um the way the um bid process will work when it comes to alternates such as metal roof versus asphalt shingles um and the other items that can be done as well. So um they will be there to answer all questions about construction.
>> Mr. Chair >> random. >> He waved you. Waved himself. >> I would like to make a motion to vote on article one, the Norton Middle School roof funding for 11,443,631.
>> Second. Any further discussion hearing? None. A motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed abstain.
>> That's unanimous. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you also for the last vote. in order. >> All right. >> Did Did we vote on where the money was going to come from for the budget >> for
>> budget? The source >> the sources. Yeah. >> Right. So, it'll automatically come out of the the 25 surplus. The only thing we need to do is um >> amend the >> stabilization. What's that? >> Amend the >> free cash. No, no, it's stabilization.
We already voted that, >> right? That was our So, we should be all set. >> The free cash changed. >> Free cash didn't change the 16. >> Free cash doesn't change, right? >> And stabilization 170. So, that's all taken care of, then lock, right? >> 170.
>> You just lost your little 25,000 buffer >> 118 for snow as he wanted to. >> That should be all set the money. >> So, we're just moving the same amount of >> Yeah, we're good on the revenues. >> Well, don't we we usually read off where the sources are though? >> We do. We're using stabilization >> and that's going to be on the article
that list on the article. >> I mean that'll be on the article next week. >> We make the motion. >> So the 195 >> unless you want it part of the budget motion here, >> 170 here. Yeah. >> Yeah, we do. It gets broken down at town
meeting. Sandy, you're saying >> budget, >> what's raised inappropriate, what's state or or you know, uh, like water and sewer, that kind of stuff. >> I got it. >> Yeah, you like whatever's in the article itself, right? That that we usually go
through. >> Just one moment while it loads. Unless you want to pull it up. It's uh, so this basically this sheet here, Sandy, >> uh, Tom meeting >> usually >> and then, >> right, but we don't we don't like not the whole thing. just the where the >> we don't
>> specifically for the budget. >> Yeah. I >> mean on the article itself, you're going to have to say where all the money comes from to to cover that 81 million >> ambulance receipts expun. >> Yeah, >> we had that somewhere, didn't we already? It's not the vote, but we had
that listed somewhere. I thought >> this is these are the sources. >> All right. Yeah. the motion to tell me. >> Yeah. So, those are the funds transfers and then the rest of it is from >> here it is
>> that's going to >> so we can vote on that at next meeting but >> this isn't right. >> So, I have all the numbers but >> so that should be accurate then >> the 81 is going to change clean it up and vote for it next week. next week.
>> Next week. >> That should >> just Why don't we just clean it up and vote for it next week >> by 195 more? So that becomes that um should be the right amount Mark as it is with the 170 from stabilization >> and the 170 is paying for snow and ice.
>> Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm fine. I'm fine waiting until next week if you want to do that. Clean it up cleaner, I think. >> Right. >> We'll screw something up. >> He's wonderful. That's a trade. >> Just voted this up. >> Yeah.
>> So that goes to that. That goes to that. >> Everything ties. >> So that >> Yeah. stabilization. >> So >> Mark, you are going up 170 on pre-cash this coming year. >> 170 coming out of stabilization for last year from instead of free cash the
coming years. >> So you're going to go up from 16 to 1770 on free cash. So are you using more? >> No, you're using cuz you you're taking it from snow and ice that you want to use it for for this year. >> So we were going to use it for snow and
ice. So now we're going to use it for the budget. >> That's right. So you got to add 170 more into the budget for next year. >> 12 using >> same same net balance. >> Yeah, you're right. You add 170 back in. >> So how much free cash are we using?
>> Cuz that's for this capacity >> whatever the difference is between 81. So this would be >> the 190 195 >> because we tapped stabilization >> be 170 >> it would be another another 170. So it should be >> it should be 17
>> 1770 1 million >> 770,000 for free cash mark. >> Yeah 1770 from free cash >> right >> sure >> using stabilization and free cash. So stabilization is supposed to be one or
the other. >> The snow and ice >> that's pay off a current bill to the rules right next week. >> We went to we didn't go to Harry. >> Right. We're not using that for this budget. >> 170 for stabilization isn't for this year's budget office deficit.
>> Yes. I def this year's budget. >> Awesome. >> Mr. Chair, there should be 17. >> Let's do it next week. Yeah. 77 >> next week. >> Zach, >> can we just clean it up and vote for it next week and move on with the agenda?
>> Yeah, let's let's do that. >> Yep. >> Too tight. >> Exhausting. >> Um, so we did that. I don't want that. >> So if I don't I don't want to take the reigns. If if we're going in order, we'd be on article five. Is that what the
chair wants to do? Article five is article five. I'm actually asking to do that next week because that's with a KP law. Um, so there there's two that are with KP law. I mean, if you want, I can
brief you on it, but I think the committee might be feel better if they have the red line version in front of you. So, I'd respectfully request to do article 5 and article 26. Those are the only two that will be on next week.
>> Works remain. >> Okay. >> May 4th at 7 o'clock next week. >> I said it. Um so the next one would be article six the water enterprise budget >> right here
>> which we have in the handout >> 5 point >> almost 5.7 >> I don't think so is >> oh I found it's like >> what page in the packet it's
>> seven You got >> page seven. Page seven. >> Where is that in the package? >> Page seven. >> Page seven. >> Page seven.
>> Yep. Page page seven. >> Page seven went up one. >> There we go. >> All right. Let me see. >> So, so you'll notice the difference in this in prior years um is net surplus.
So we are budgeting uh for the whole year round. We expect to to give 420,000 back out of water, 571 back and that would go to uh retain the respective
retained earnings. Um this one is article 7 for sewer. So this would be 3.2 2 million I I >> B287 me make a motion. >> Mr. Chair >> Brandon,
>> I'd like to make a motion to vote on article six water enterprise budget and the amount of uh for personnel services 1,395,477. >> That that's water you're reading. Is
that the one? Yep. We're on. Okay, perfect. Uh, indirect expenses in the amount of $681,847. Other charges and expenditures 1,448,000. Even debt service 1,751,574.
Net surplus $420,473 for a total of 5,697,371. >> Second motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> Mr. Chair, >> can you quick explanation on what the
increase in the personnel services is? Um, so if I'm reading this, it's going from 1.293 to 1.395. >> I thought part of that was the new DPW director. >> It did >> funding part of that.
>> I believe what he what he did was create a a water foreman and a sewer foreman. So that's the way he sees effectively managing the crews. So, we're adding a management layer on top of what we have today in addition to
those folks that have been there previous. Um, so out of the uh roughly half a million dollars that uh Pete discovered, um yes, he's putting 80 towards a position to help better
deliver um snow removal and to make sure our water's clean and to provide for the the services for wastewater. Yes. position of >> one in water, one in sewer if I understand it.
>> And so what's the dollar amount that gets attached to those? You said a DPW person. >> Um heck was that? I'll have to look that up. I apologize.
I don't have it in front of me. you're looking about 310,000 increase on the uh the budgets together. Um so there was I recall there were various uh increases. I think one line was for software.
Um there there were a few lines that the director explained when when he came in. I'll do my best to >> Yeah. >> piece it together. 300 something. The personal service is a low marker up
300 and something thousand between the two water and sewer >> last year. >> Part of that DPW salary plus the two new positions. Is that what the three is? >> This comes out of highway and >> um that's what I'm looking >> Yeah, cuz that's just personal.
>> That's what I'm saying. So it's 300. So it's three positions for plus the DPW director, >> right? >> Cuz that was only funded for part of this year. >> Correct. the software that Mark was calling that would be separate come out of the which is down here right yeah which is another
big pump >> which was another $100,000 there ever presented this department was it one I missed >> yeah Wednesday >> I think is
January >> I'm not sure >> that's why because of the changes. >> So water we're in >> between two of them. >> It's almost water services. Yeah.
>> So part of that's for the deep >> and again most of the does come out. So that's why Mark, I think you only had a half year's salary for the DPW director for this current year. So, there'd be a >> for that in next years plus the two new
forman positions. >> Yeah, his his salary split between water, sewer, and highway. >> So, 94,000 is Is his salary out of water? >> So this is a combination of raises and
adding one foreman. Mr. Zach uh refresh my memory. The salary breakdown for the DPW director is what percentage is coming from each budget? Do I don't remember.
>> I believe it's 15% highway and then the other 85% is split up among water and sewer. Not exactly sure the percentages. One I think it's 55% water, 45% sewer. So, of the remaining
>> I I know that sounds confusing. >> So, I I can answer >> Mr. Chair. >> Uh for highway, it's 14%. So, it's $23,100 for um >> water. For water,
it's $94,49.78. >> Mhm. >> And for sewer, it's $47,849.91. That's a salary breakdown, >> right? And the total would be 165 that I know.
And then that with raises, >> right? So with with raises and plus the foreman. >> That was the April 15th uh handout. >> Yep. That's that's what I read it from.
Yep. >> And Steve, you might not have those cuz you weren't at the meeting in person, so I don't know if you have those handouts. Could >> be in his >> They should have been electronic, too. Okay. Yeah. I have a mirror if you want to see this. >> You were in the mailbox, too.
>> Any other Who said mailbox? >> Kevin. >> Sorry. >> He's at the kids table. >> So, did I have a motion and a second? >> We did.
>> Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. >> Six. Yep. All those in favor >> I >> I >> opposed. >> No. >> Abstain.
So that's 10. Yes. One. No. >> This one. >> Mr. Chair. Brandon, >> I would like to make a motion article 7 for the sewer enterprise budget and
the amounts of uh for personnel services $614,312 for indirect expenses $215,889. Other charges and expenditures 1,495,111. Debt service $390,44. Net surplus $571,291
for a grand total of $3,287, uh7. >> Second. Have a motion and a second. Any further discussion, >> Mr. Chair? >> Zack. >> Well, let's talk about the albatross in the room. A 50% increase in personnel
services. 5050. >> It's not 50. >> We must not be on the same page. What? What page are you on? 400 to 600. >> Page seven, right? >> It's what? >> Yeah. 400,000 to 600,000. That's not 50%
>> 54 54.1. I've been corrected. >> Okay. Do you have yourself >> out of sewer? Yeah, >> sewer. >> So I you want me to I guess just to add clarification out of that 200,000 94 was
for the DPW salary. Mr. Chair, wasn't it 47 on sewer, 94 on water? >> Yes, >> correct. It's 47 for sewer. So, that would that would account for 50 of the two. So, where's the other 150? The foreman roll.
>> I I see 94 in a foreman roll. >> That was water though, right? Article six. We're on article 7. >> No. So, the 94,000 is for sewer. >> Oh, it's the other way. Now that 94,000 is is
>> a new the former >> a new position. >> No forward. >> Yeah. >> Just 94,000 is for the DPW director. >> That's what Yeah. >> Out of sewage. >> That's water.
>> No, if if you go to sewer, the 94 is for the foreman. >> I'm sorry. Yep. I know. >> Yep. Yep. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yep. >> For water
>> it's 94,000 and for sewer it's 47,000. >> Correct. >> For the DPW director. >> Correct. >> So I just wanted to clarify that. >> Yes. And then Yeah. >> 94,000 vacant. >> Right. That's for the vacant position. New
>> position. >> There is a vacant position. That is budgeted for >> the 94. Yeah. >> At 94. Exactly. >> So it's 140ish. >> It's been vacant for years.
>> So it's 140 right there. >> Created position. Is it >> the rest? They're >> saying it's vacant. What do they mean vacant position? Then why wasn't it budgeted till now? 306 313 39 600. >> We can do the been unfilled for that long.
>> So there's 60,000 in overtime. >> Three years. >> You don't need it. Clearly you three years without it. >> Is that something normally Did those figures change from the same that was on that two weeks ago?
Are the figs the same as two weeks ago? >> Yeah. So there's no changes. Just more glaring when it spelt out that way. Either way. >> Yeah. So there there is like double the overtime in this budget
than there was the previous year as is the same in water. Is that the over overtime doubled pretty much? >> I thought that >> was that for the snow is that the help
of the snowing that they don't do now >> because it's on the DPW bill. I thought he said something about that. >> Could be. I I don't >> that was part of it. totally remember that >> use the >> talking about buying a new plow and that so that way they could >> but I thought that that was part of what he said that they're going to be
utilizing all those mountain snow and ice removal and stuff >> and that was part of capital right we wanted the plow for the truck for the water >> because they bought a new truck for the >> right they bought a truck previously without a plow for the water department he's buying the plow now they're all
going to be plow so it'll be But you're right. So, are we waiting on this one? Moving forward with this one? >> What do you want to do?
Mhm. >> Yes. >> Tonight, >> Zach, when he was here last meeting in the other room, wasn't there a discussion where he had a a water department truck that was bought or sewer truck that didn't have a plow setup because they couldn't afford it at the time and they bought that now
because all the sewer and water department employees are actually going to be plowing streets now and that's probably why they increased the overtime. >> They've always done that. As long as I lived in town, >> sewer and water plowing. as long as I lived in town >> because I know he bought another plow
>> that was part of his capital. >> Correct. There is a there is a plow added as part of capital. >> Yeah, that was >> that's capital >> that was out of capital. Y >> yeah. So I guess just doing some numbers right
the delta between 26 and 27 for sewer was $215,841 the DPW director portion of the salary is $47,849.91 and the vacant position with a salary of $94,5652
comes to $142,41543. You deduct that from the delta between the two years and the difference is $73,425. Just to put it in perspective, >> what does the over time go up? >> Which is >> And how long's the vacant position been
vacant? >> For years. >> So, I'm just trying to explain, right? We're looking at it. was saying over 200,000 but just I guess putting some meaning behind it. So given that perspective the 73 looks
similar to the difference between 25 and 26 >> speaking to the mic or we can't hear you. Oh, >> I I was just going to say that that I mean that looks similar to the delta that 73 to the delta between 25 and 26, but but not 24 and 25,
which I was not here for that. So, I don't know. I don't remember even what was happening the year I was here and why, you know. So, I guess it seems not that wild looking back one year, but looking back two years, it is still large.
Also in the 2027 request has the um net surplus projected in there for each of those two which is a million dollars between the two accounts. >> Right? So we're adding a million dollars of revenue, >> right?
But that tips the scale as far as making it look like it's a big increase, but you're actually projecting the surplus. >> Exactly. >> So, did did we have a motion >> in a second? >> And a second. >> We've never had this. >> So, >> that's the money.
>> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of the sewer enterprise uh fund budget of $3,287,07. Uh all those in favor
>> I >> opposed. No >> opposed. No. >> How many was that? >> Three. >> Three opposed. >> Who is the third? >> Kevin. >> Kevin. >> Three musketeers down here. Three musketeers at the end.
>> Kevin, Steve, Zack. >> Kevin, Steven, and Zack. >> The leading three. >> All right. We did that. We did that. We did that. >> Okay. So, article nine.
>> Article nine. you get there. >> So, we're asking a vote of no action on nine. We We have no funds to put in the capital improvements appropriation.
>> So, do I make a motion no action? >> Mr. Chair, >> I would like to make a motion of no action for article 9 capital improvements appropriation. Second. >> Have a motion and a second for no
action. Article 9. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Uh, all those in favor? >> I >> opposed abstain. That's unanimous. We already covered article 11.
>> And then we voted on 11, right? That the snow and ice. >> We got to vote on 10. The capital plan. >> We already voted on it. >> That was done. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we already did that. >> So action gives you 12 and 13, right? >> No action.
>> No action. I have to do we just notice both >> 11 and 12 is no action. >> I just do them together. >> All right. >> Just say article 12 what it is. Article 13 what it is no action was tonight. Right.
>> Mr. Chair >> Brandon, >> I'd like to make a motion uh for article 12, budget supplements and transfers for the water enterprise and article 13, budget supplements and transfers for the sew sewer enterprise of no action.
>> Second. Have a motion and a second for both article 12 and article 13. Any further discussion hearing? None. All those in favor >> I >> opposed
abstain. That's unanimous. >> Then we have uh compensated article 15 240. Article 15 is page 17. 17. >> Thank you.
This is so much easier. Um so this uh Mr. Chair is transferring 240,000 from free cash to pay for um future employees retirement. We're informed that two firefighters intend to
resign uh next year and this is to replenish the fund for people that resign this year. And this will bring the balance to uh roughly $1 million, which is actuarially probably 33% of
what we'd have to spend, but that's a sufficient amount going forward. 15. Yeah. >> Mr. Chair >> Brandon, >> I would like to make a motion to vote on
article 15 to fund the compensated absences trust fund in the amount of $240,000 from free cash to the uh compensated absences trust fund.
>> Second. 40. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed abstain.
That's unanimous. Mr. Chair Mark. Um, so if we could uh vote no action on number 27 as well. It's the the last one. Maybe we even >> left it off, but we're withdrawing the the sidewalk
>> um the the law to have people shovel their sidewalks. >> We'd ask for no action on number 27. >> Mr. Chair Brandon, I'd like to make a motion on article 27, the adoption of the bylaw for sidewalk maintenance. Is
no action. Second. Have a motion and a second for article 27. Uh, any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Abstain.
One abstain. Uh, so that's 10 in favor, one abstain. And then going back to number three in new business. I I believe that's the last one we haven't acted on yet. >> Don't know how that
>> how I missed that one. >> This is essentially a transfer because we built this building and the Council on Aging and didn't allocate sufficient electricity and propane. Page eight.
>> Uh, page eight. Page eight. Yes. Um, so this building is heated primarily by propane as is the police station. Uh, COA is heated primarily by electricity. >> Interesting.
So, so this would bring uh negative accounts positive which is uh a good thing and we will budget better next year for electricity and propane. >> Total you you can see the accounts that that went negative on page 10.
>> The electricity account is uh roughly 13,000 in the negative. That's for this building and the police station. and the propane is um 28,546 uh over spent and we still have a few
months left in the year and April's bills that this doesn't include. So the request should be sufficient to end the year with both these counts in the positive. We would ask for propane uh 35,000,
electricity 15,000 in the municipal building account on page 10. And then page 11, we'd ask for uh 5,000 for electricity as it's a little too close for comfort. Um, there's only 2,661
left and that will probably go over. But with 5,000 that should provide a sufficient cushion without requiring an endofear transfer. >> I'm going to hold you to that.
>> Brandon, it's all you. >> Mr. Chair, I would like to make a motion to vote on uh the reserve fund transfer request for municipal buildings, utilities, and
senior center for a total of $55,000. Um $15,000 going to electricity for the municipal buildings, $35,000 going to propane to the municipal buildings, and $5,000 for electricity going to the
Council on Aging uh and Community Center. >> Second. Have a motion and a second. Any further discussion, Zach? Mark, I would re-review this. I mean,
I'll vote to support it, but all these new buildings are all on heat pumps. I think the only propane you have is cooking in the senior center, but all this is all heat pumps. I'm not sure what the propane is for. Oh, maybe someone's I don't know. We're paying it. So, yeah.
Hope hopefully it's going to the right company. I I'm I'm not a HVAC guy, but I will get with the HBAC guy. Any further discussion? So, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I
>> I >> opposed. Abstain. That's unanimous. Chair, that's all we had. >> Wow. So what is left for next week? >> Article five and article 26,
>> right? So the two laws, a personnel bylaw and a general bylaw for the DPW director. >> That was more or less housekeeping, >> right? Cleaning up language essentially.
>> Okay. minutes? No. Maybe. >> Oh, we have lots of minutes. >> Where do we want to start? >> Motion to adjurnn. No. >> The minutes next week. >> No. I want to get rid of these minutes.
>> Mhm. >> Um, >> which 15. So, >> well, the insulin's back in. >> Is that my phone? >> Mhm.
>> Put in my >> So, we had minutes from 15 >> or last meeting >> March 2nd. Well,
>> it's going back pretty far. It >> is going back pretty far. >> Today's packet has April 15th. >> Is it last week's? >> So, let's look at last week. >> Well, >> let's do painful.
Um, >> this >> we had stuff from >> 2024. >> Did everybody read that? That was from the 13th, the meeting on April 13th, that packet. >> Yes.
>> Well, no, they I had several. So, >> big 900 day, everything was >> So, if you go to the April 13th, >> that was a March 23rd. >> Yep. April
13th had minutes from May 1st, 2024. >> It's just typos. >> May 1st is on page 17 of that packet, right? >> Yes. >> Page numbers.
New edition. That's the new edition. >> We like the page numbers. Thank you. Page 17. Is that not on the committee? Then >> I'll make a motion second just for discussion. Um, for the >> what's that?
>> May 1 minutes. Bonnie was not present. I watched and checked. So, I have that strike out on the one that uh Bill will sign if approved. >> Jeez, I don't think I ever missed a meeting. >> Oh, that's good that he missed it. That
was a joint meeting there. No. >> Okay. Dave and Kevin, that was a three or four hour meeting that we all missed. >> Yeah, me too. >> There checked for me.
>> Oh, Bonnie wasn't there either. >> Yeah, cuz there's >> there's no record of my votes. So, it said at the top that I was there. So, Christy checked for me and I was not there. Every time there was a vote, I was apparently silent. I just don't see that
that happened ever. >> No way. >> No way. >> I'll take a motion if people have reviewed them. >> Should I do it? Did anyone hear me? >> I wasn't here, so I'm not going to
>> Doesn't matter cuz >> Mr. Chair >> Paula. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the Norton Finance Committee meeting minutes from May 1, 2024 as amended with Bonnie Yuzukovich absent.
Yzakvich. Thank you. Yukovich. Yes. Kevich. >> Close enough. >> I don't know how to say that. I didn't learn it tonight either. >> Is there a second? >> Oh, nice. No second. >> Second. >> There we go.
>> Thank you. So, I have a motion in the second >> uh for the minutes of May 1st, 2024 as amended. Any further discussion? Hearing none.
All those in favor? >> I opposed. Abstain. >> Yes. I >> Wait a second. How am I? One, two, one, two, three, four, five.
>> Still passes. >> Five. >> Five abstained. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Six. Yes. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Um, next would be July 10th.
>> Sorry. Could I get how many how many room for that one? >> Five. Five abstained. >> Five. Okay. >> You need to own >> Do you need to know who they were? >> No, everyone's present, I guess. So, I'm just wondering if um are all older minutes. Does everyone have the same
stance if they if it's older like they're going to abstain? Just cuz like our assistant clerk is working hard on this. So, I don't know. Just just a just a question for me. >> Consider I would >> Well, in my this is just my opinion, Mr. there that if um it doesn't affect the
quorum then I will just abstain but if it does affect the quorum then I can trust my team the committee members so I only do so when necessary >> I'm not sure how many it needs to be approved
>> is it just the majority >> just yeah >> so then next up would be July 10th Make a motion we approve the minutes of July 10th. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. All those in
favor? >> I >> opposed. Abstain. >> One, two, just two. >> All right. I like that. Uh let's see here the next in this
packet >> 23rd >> March 23rd of 2026. Make a motion we approve them. >> Second >> um >> I had a note on this one.
>> What was the spelling? I remember >> Kevin's last name >> on page 36 in the bottom. There's only so many second duds. Um I think one ed has to come out
and then >> hate it when the typewriter stutters. >> Yeah, I know. >> Kevin's name is wrong too, right Kevin? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Don't know what to spray are. >> Um, >> Mr. Chair,
>> I guess the only other >> note I had here and I'm not really understanding my note is under old business and I write, "Don't we need more detail?" But whatever.
Who was that? >> Me. Um, just this is March 23rd, 2026, correct? >> Yes. >> Um, just did you note that Kevin's last name is missing the J at the end. >> We've got EJ.
>> Thank you, Peter. >> That is correct. >> You move on to the next round. >> Going to make it phonetic or something. >> Uh, let's see here. It's not pronounced. >> Okay. >> Polish.
>> So, I'd take a motion um for these minutes as amended. >> As amended. I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second to accept the uh meeting minutes of
March 23rd, 2026 as amended. Um, all those in favor? >> I >> I >> abstain, one abstension. So that's 10 approved, one abstain.
Uh, the next would be uh March 30th, 2026. Starts on page 40. I guess if you're gonna put me in there in in two ways,
I'd prefer Bill to William, but >> other than that, I had no changes. >> That was a >> motion to accept the March 30th minutes.
>> Second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I >> I >> abstain >> me and Sandy. >> Two says nine approve to abstain.
Uh April 6th, 2026. Motion to approve. >> Wow. >> Second. Have a motion and a second for April 6th. Any further discussion?
All those in favor? >> I >> abstain. That's unanimous. >> That's that packet. page 19
>> who does or does not have >> it was at the end of the today's packet I think right for the 16th >> uh which which one are we >> 15th packet >> April 7 from the April 15th packet we have minutes
>> April 13th April 15th April one >> the draft one >> any reason why it was called draft Oh, >> I've been a joint meeting. That's why, right? Well, that was capital improvement. We don't approve. >> Oh, why is it assigned besides that? >> I think they just didn't give us some
information. >> Oh, okay. Forget >> trying to figure out draft. Okay. >> Drafted. Drafty. >> Those aren't our minutes. >> So, this one here is our 50 packet. >> I think 19
>> 19. I have minutes that or a packet of minutes that started on July 7th, 2024. >> Oh, we did those. >> We did those. Did we do those? We >> did those tonight already. >> No, no, no. We did that at a previous meeting. >> Yes. >> Yeah, we did. >> I forget which meeting.
>> Ones that were one is from the package page 19 package. So, just April 15th. >> Does this mean we're actually going to be caught up?
>> We can be so lucky. >> So, April 15th. >> Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Motion to accept April 15th. >> Second. I have a motion and a second to accept the minutes of April 15th.
All in favor? >> I >> I >> abstain. One opposed. None. So that's 101. >> Is that it? >> That's it for tonight,
>> Mr. Chair. Brandon. Wade. >> Wait. >> Didn't you have a write up? >> We gonna adjourn because I got one. >> That's for the next meeting. >> I thought that was for this week. >> Well, no, cuz you couldn't write it up until we voted on everything, the budget.
>> Well, I guess that's true. >> All right. >> Please, >> Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, >> Gavin. >> Two two quick things. Um the first on the abstension thing cuz I've asked this question a few times and I get a different answer. If you abstain, are
you taken out of the quorum count? Cuz that's what I thought it was before I joined this committee and then I was told differently since joining this committee. >> You mean out of the quorum? >> I think parliamentarian. >> If we have uh you know say you have 11
people here, we have quorum to start the meeting. You vote on something, 10 of them abstain, one votes yes. Does that still pass? >> No, because you need a majority. >> Six still might be a majority of those voting. >> Okay, so maybe that example was too
extreme. You have six people, so you can start the meeting because you have quorum. One of them abstains. Can those five still approve something without so to the so the question the concern earlier was just that we were
>> we were close to the majority it's the majority it's not the quorum okay thank you and then >> majority >> my second thing is super quick um in preparing for the roof discussion which was quick um I was reading a bunch of permanent building committee stuff and I noticed that on
their web page Sandy is listed as our liaison, but Paul I think was listed in the permanent building committee minutes as the liaison. So I was wondering one who is our liaison with the permanent building committee and two can we make sure it's correct on the permanent building committee web page.
>> I'm also still listed as the chair on our website our town website. >> You can have it back. >> No, thank you. >> All in favor? >> Just a small like clerical thing. Is it actually Paul right now? So, so I so I went to a meeting and Zach showed up
with me and that was the only time we've been invited. So, I don't know if that's the only time they've met or not. >> Okay. >> Okay. But, uh, >> I was surprised cuz we hadn't voted on it. So, >> nope. >> So, maybe we don't really have a leas. Um, >> we we we did voted on
but you were only invited once. >> I think because Zach was voted that same meeting to be the capital improvements guy still. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, I guess we just need to update that on the web page when you get a chance. >> Small thing. Thank you. >> So, who does that? >> I was it.
>> Our IT director probably >> nobody I know, right? >> All right, >> Mr. Chair. >> To who? Who's the leazison? >> To Paul Schliker. >> Okay, great. >> Congratulations. >> Chair, >> let me know. >> No, no, no. Sandy wants the chair back.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> I would like to make a motion to adjurnn. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those abstaining.
>> Opposed? >> In favor? >> I >> guess that's unanimous. Thank you. Oh >> people.