Hey, April. >> Hey, AJ. >> How's it going? >> Pretty good. >> Good. >> How are you doing? >> Doing well. scrambling these days, but doing well. >> Yeah,
know the feel. Here we go. Oh, good evening. >> Hi, Susie. Hi Ryan. >> Hello. How are you? >> Good. Thanks for joining us. >> Yeah, of course.
All right. I have a vague memory that George said he was not available tonight. Does that ring a bell to anybody or >> I hear bells. >> Suppress suppress that memory. No, I have bells all the time.
>> Yes. >> Well, >> oh no, I think his um I think he said see you to tonight. I >> actually he's just popping in now. >> Yeah, I emailed him. >> Great. >> Okay, I think we've got a full committee
tonight. So, I'm going to call the finance committee to order at 6:31. Um, just a quick review of the agenda. So, we're going to have a kind of brief discussion with
Ryan um about some sort of debt borrowing related topics. We're gonna um review the budget, the draft budget. Uh
and then we're going to review a series of articles which unfortunately I don't think are complete, but at least the the the ones that I was kind of aware of. Um and uh we should we should actually take
votes on those tonight. Um, so those are the sort of main things. I'm sure we have a couple other miscellaneous topics cover, but I think those are the main things we need to get done tonight. So, I'm going to start with Ryan because Ryan, I know you don't have um a ton of time, but I think there were a couple of
things that we were interested in chatting with you about. >> Okay. Um >> and those were one um kind of uh having giving the rest of the committee a chance to just hear from your
perspective a little bit about sort of ongoing discussions we've had about library borrowing and you know the the uh sort of uh guidance that we I shared with you
earlier about seeing if it was possible to extend the terms on that to 15 years as a as a a mechanism for lowering our annual uh uh interest expense
um and sort of covering the costs of the library over a kind of longer period of time. And I and I think for the benefit of the re the full committee I think there was some interest in just hearing directly from you about kind of your perspective your your recommendations
about that. So that was one thing. And then I think we also um wanted to uh sort of just I think you know I think we're sort of entering a period over the
next few years where we have some very sort of you know pretty significant big ticket um capital items like um the fire truck uh that I think is going to get um
potentially approved at this year's annual town meeting, but won't actually be the purchase probably won't be completed until FY28. Um, I think we're going to have a pretty significant um
uh uh uh project at the parking lot for the elementary school. Um, and the there's there's an engineering study that hopefully will get done in FY27, but that's going to lead to a big big
project um that potentially has a pretty significant dollar amount on it. Um and then you know we have a debt uh a regional school uh debt schedule that has some pretty
big jumps in terms of um what we're going to be responsible for um in in future fiscal year. So, I think there's just like a bunch of these sort of big items coming down the road and I think there was some interest in kind of
hearing at least your preliminary thoughts about like what how some of these how we might approach these um the borrowing for these things and I guess would we be bundling items together and what kinds of like
>> terms might be we maybe just kind of what early thoughts on what your strategy might be for that. So, um, >> okay. >> And then I think there was like a very specific question which I think you clarified for me via email about an item
on the FY27 debt schedule which had to do with this clean water trust um, uh, loan that we at one point in time we thought would was actually going to be potentially forgiven, but then I think we got some push back about eligibility
for that. So anyway, um might just might be helpful to just hear you your what your awareness about that is as well. So, uh I guess we can take those in in that order. Do you want to give a little bit of your thoughts on the on the library
um uh borrow? >> Um yeah, I just want to I just want to check something. >> That clean water trust loan is one we've had for a while now. That's that one on the death schedule isn't a new one. So, that's a permanent uh long-term debt
schedule that we'll have until it's paid off. There's no um forgiveness option or anything on that one. So, you'll see it for >> uh you'll see it for a few more years. I don't know exactly. I can get a copy of the original um it was before my time, but I can request a copy of the original debt schedule to see exactly when it
falls off. I don't know off the top of my head when you'll be done with it, but I can I can reach out to the uh the authority there and get a copy of it and let you know. >> Yeah. I mean, it'd be great to know. Yeah. just kind of what's what remains on that um uh what the balance is on
that and and and how how long uh yeah what are the terms on how long will we be >> paying and then I also just wanted to make sure I think I I did I think I did double check this but the this is the the principal payment on that um
um I didn't see an interest so I guess that's an interest free kind of loan that they offered us is Yes. >> We don't pay interest on that one. >> Okay. And I'm assuming that this is um
so so built into the uh the the debt uh schedule total that we have in our in our budget uh for FY27. Right. It's it's this was included in I guess this figure
here. is 391845. >> Yes, it is. That's correct. >> Got it. Okay. Um, sorry. I think Yeah. Okay. All right. Um, George, did you have a question about that? >> Yeah, but it's We have not put it in our budget yet. >> I think we did, right? >> Can you look Can you pull up the budget?
We can look at the debt service. >> Yeah. All right. uh because I thought it was included in >> well we don't that that 391 that you pointed to the we don't have the um broadband debt is in that number and we
didn't put that in our budget so we don't tie to that number. >> Okay. So let's >> but if you look in the principal section of the debt service >> Yeah. >> I don't think there's a 3860 in there. >> So
yeah, you got to go down. Yeah, there you go. >> I don't think we ever put it in. >> I think we were waiting to figure out what that was because that's new. We This would be the first year for that. And so because
>> you've been paying that since 2012. >> What is it then? >> Where in the budget is it? >> Because it's never been in the budget. >> It was a water pollution abatement. Uh let's see. >> Yeah. If you know the account, Ryan,
maybe we can look at the account, but I, you know, I'm look looking at the budget. I don't I don't see it. >> Uh, last year's number would have been 3854 if that helps us track it down. >> Well, I'll look. Yeah, let me look.
3854. 3854. I'm doing a search on that number. That's Snake Eyes. >> Unless it's bundled in with something else, George, is that's what I'm wondering. >> Right. >> Because then just search it wouldn't pull up. Uh, >> well, that may be. So but if it is we didn't bundle it this year I don't think
because if you take the total debt service um the principal number we have is 2 2001 122 on the budget >> 200122 y >> and you compare that to Ryan's debt
schedule. So what was I'm sorry 22120. Is that what I said? I'm going to do it right now. I'm going to try and reconcile it. 21202. >> Yeah. And so if I take all the principle
I'm looking at the expense report, the most recent one, and there's a in there's the um principal, there's the there let's see, what am I looking at? I'm looking at the interest on the PAS loan
>> was allocated um 7,330. So I'm wondering >> I think that must be something different. Um I think that was a second loan, right? Uh oh, wait. I don't know. >> And that interest is way too high and
there's no principle listed. >> My guess is that refers to this item. this other PAS loan that we took out. >> Yeah, this this expense sheet has some
is questionable here. >> Yeah, we can't even get the uh expense sheet to load on the website. So, >> yeah, the website's been slow lately. >> Yeah, there's something going on today with the website. I noticed that, too. Yeah. >> Oh, here we go. Let's see here.
Oh, we got to take out the 10,000 out of the 2122 for the for the uh septic. >> Yeah, it's on the expense report under principal WPAT septic. >> Oh, so that's this
>> page four of the expense report. >> And how much is it? >> Wait, wait. >> WPAT septic is something different. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's That's for the uh um septic system program.
>> It's a revolving fund, is it? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Also, it might be coming out of the wrong account on this. >> Yeah. I I just think it's it's not you, Ryan. It's us. We just never put it in the budget. >> But I don't I don't know what what he's
talking about. Something that came up in 2012. I don't I don't get it. So, I think we need a big picture of that. So, this is the loan that the town of Shootsbury got in June of 2012 from the Massachusetts Clean Water Trust for
water pollution abatement. We've paid a principal a um payment on it every year since FY 2013. >> Oh, so this is Okay. I Okay, so I I think I had confused I when I saw Clean Water Trust, I assumed it was one of
those PAS loans. So, this has nothing to do with PAS, I don't think. >> Correct. >> What water were we cleaning up? I don't I mean, there has to be an incident that precipitated this. This isn't This is
this related to the fire station. >> I honestly have I have no idea. I was um I had just graduated from high school the year prior. I did not did not work here. And um definitely have no history on you know, all I know is that we're
almost done. FY32 will be your last >> your last one on it. >> What was the the original amount? It's not >> uh total principle you're paying over the term here 76,797. >> All right, we got a real mystery here. Um
>> yeah, where is it in our budget? I wonder who might has some >> I think tonight we're just going to have to make a list of stuff that has to get figured out. We can't we can't do it on the fly. >> And this one is going to take some investigations. I have the town
meetings. I can look at them >> and and that's fine. I agree with that, Susie. I I think we need to understand it, but I also think we need to put it in the budget. I mean, based on what we've just heard, it we should create a line item and it should be in there. >> Yeah.
>> Unless somebody can tell us where it's been getting paid. If there's some other place has been getting paid from, I'm going to pull up last year's budget and see if it was in last year's budget. Maybe the line just got dropped. >> I I I don't think so. Right. Because I did we have any lines?
>> I mean, yeah. Why would we have dropped it? That I agree. I I don't think so either, but >> this the only thing I can I mean that's the only thing that makes sense. >> Yeah. >> Second here. Just want to check
something. >> 6146 329 >> Culver is here. Okay. >> Yeah. It wasn't in last year's budget. At least not under principal in debt service. H unless it's included in the PAS loan,
which we know is we know that's not true. >> And we're going to have to cross reference it to um Gail's accounts that she expenses out of. >> Yeah, I think Ryan or maybe Gail, somebody's got to let us know what account were they using for that. And
hopefully it's an account we've been budgeting. Yeah, because >> it's it is on my debt schedule for last year, so it it should be I don't know why it wouldn't have got budgeted. And again, it's not new, so that a line should exist for it.
>> Yeah, that's odd. >> Yeah, >> um Okay, so I guess the question is is who who's going to research this? Um >> uh is Haley Oops. Haley is here, just not on camera.
>> Okay. I'm wondering if Haley, if you might be able to um connect with with Gail >> uh and Ryan and see if we can and if you need to pull me in as well, although I
feel like I'm not sure how helpful I'm going to be because I'm this is a mystery to me. Um but if we can sort of Yeah, I think there are sort of two questions. One is what have we been doing like how has this been getting
>> and from which account and have how has it been funded in the past? That's one question. And then the second question is for FY27, is this something that needs to be budgeted for and added to our debt service
um section of our of our FY27 budget. >> Okay. And Ryan, what did you say the name was for that again? It's a um what did they call it? Water pollution abatement. I'm gonna I'm gonna email um I'm going
to email Gail Haley. So, I I'll include you on there. >> Okay. >> Um >> yeah, I I mean, you have to have been budging it every year. It's got to We can't There's because the money wouldn't exist for her to pay it. So, we got We'll nail down. >> But you >> nail that down. A few minutes ago, you
were something made you think that it was getting charged to that WP septic repair line. Is is there are you seeing something that >> Yeah, I saw that on our most recent um expense report. That's what I pulled
>> closing. That may be a mistake, but >> when we we used to carry that line at 25,000 and last year Gail said it doesn't even come close. >> And so you should just budget 10,000. The reality is it probably doesn't even
close to 10,000. So there was always room for it for this loan. >> Okay. >> Then it's related to the fire station >> there. I mean there is a water abatement trust like one that started in 2012. I mean that I mean does follow. I mean
kind of I mean makes sense. I mean for >> the timing in the name match up really well with that. >> And Ryan you said earlier it was it started what year was it? 2012 >> looks like FY2 2012 is when it was closed. So it would have been FY 2013
would have been your first payment. >> Got it. >> FY13. Yeah. >> And it's interest free. >> Yes. It's just principal payments. >> All right. I bet that's I bet that's fire station. >> Okay. All right. So,
all right. So, hopefully we'll get to the bottom of that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> That's fine. Okay. >> I didn't anticipate that taking uh this long, but uh uh we we'll we'll get to the bottom of that. So, did you want to
um give a little bit of your perspective on the library borrowing? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, definitely. So, um, for the library project itself, realistically, best case scenario, you would want to have that project paid for over the course of 10 years. The logic and
reasoning behind that is because of the dollar amount of the loan. It's it may seem a project over a million dollars may seem high, but in the grand scheme of municipal projects, it's just not a lot of money. So what happens is if you're trying to extend the life of that
loan by dragging it out 15 or 20 years, 20 years is borderline impossible. But dragging out 15 years, the people who are interested in that money uh as as far as whether it's a bank or a um basically like another financial entity
that's not really a bank that they go out and they bid on your loan that you have out there. They're not interested in such a long-term return of investment uh at a low interest rate. So, the odds of getting someone to even bid on it is really low. And then if you do get them to bid on it, they're going to be
bidding a really, really high rate. So, not only are you then paying interest for a longer period of time, more years, but you're going to be paying a higher rate of interest for more time over more years because it's the only way to make having their u their asset out for that
long of a period of time really attractive to them. the way the budget um that I sent over is set up currently, it does include a 10-year repayment structure on on the loan. Um I still stand by that. I think that is the best
possible option. We could potentially look at a 15 structure if the town is just adamant that they have no way of being able to afford it. Realistically, what we would do is we depending on the rate market, we would probably keep it in this product called a ban. We would
renew it on an annual basis for 10 years and then try to go out to bid for five years like locked in because you're not allowed to renew a ban after that 10th year. So you'd have to lock it in on a permanent loan for five years after that. Still not advised, but that would be
that would be the path forward if if that was the only option essentially. >> Right. >> So is the amount that we have in the budget the 10 year? >> Yeah. >> No. >> Okay. >> It's the 15. 15. >> So, so >> 15 we got principal at 15 years. So, so
this is, you know, this is basically sort of us, you know, as a fincom uh respectfully, you know, totally appreciating and understanding Ryan's perspective here. But I think I think
based on sort of our previous discussions thinking about the the trade-off here sort of higher um total interest expense over the life of the loan I think felt like it was a
price worth paying to reduce the annual um expense of um of the borrowing. So I think I so that's what's in the budget right now. We you know we can go back to the 10 years but I think based on some
of our earlier discussion it seemed like there was consensus around um around doing that. And while it's not Ryan's ultimate recommendation, it sounds like it's possible uh to do, whereas the 20-year term seemed like not a possible
um option for us. So, all right, let me go uh uh I think it was let's see Susie, George, and then Laura. >> Yeah. So, what is the cost of going band for using bands for 10 years and then
putting out the remaining loan for a 5-year loan? What are bands more or less advantageous? >> This depends on the market. At the moment, bands are more advantageous because of where the market is. because the long-term loan is locked in and the
bank doesn't have then it doesn't have a chance to kind of change direction whether the market is doing well or not. They tend to just be higher. So, right now with the way the rate market is, we're getting our borrowings at a lower cost. Um, you can see that we're estimating um 3.5% will come in for the renewal of
our current our current loan, which is which is a a good rate, honestly. >> Yeah. But you know a long term it could be it could be more this I mean no one knows exactly but you'll probably be looking probably closer to five six >> right. So Ryan am I right that g g g g g
g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g given this document your strategy was going to be to continue obtaining the one-year bands even if we weren't doing the 10-year um total borrowing, right? >> Yes. Yes and no. Like if you ask me right now, my plan would be yeah, we'll
do a renewal each year. But if two years down the road we have u we have a new president and they make some changes that impact the market to an extent where we see rates are climbing very quickly then I would be like you know we should probably lock this in for the next seven years and call it a day.
We've just been in this this kind of market position for a while now. >> Understood. Uh George >> um yeah um so the bands are renewable. So, one thing we haven't said, Ryan, and I know you're you're probably much very much aware of this, but
we've had very large average single taxpayer tax increase last year. 500 I forget exactly what it was, but it was over $500. We're facing the same thing this year. With the budget we have right now, we're estimating it could be anywhere from 550 to 600. And we found
out today that, you know, some of the snow removal costs may end up in the recap if we can't finance it this year. And so that would push it even higher. So we're really struggling to maintain the operating budget for the towns and
not overt tax the taxpayers to be redundant. Um, but that's really that's really what we're facing. So, we're just looking for any opportunity to save money. And we we recognize that, you know, it's important to keep your investors, your bond holders happy. And I can understand that this is an
attractive, but that's what's over that's what's on top of all these conversations we want to have with you. And we just want you to be aware. >> Yeah. and and and think about I know you're thinking in terms of our bond rating and you know how everybody's looking at it but we got to think also
we got to think about not only running the town but the taxpayers many were not happy last year and I can't imagine um it's going to be an easy year for them this year so that's where we're coming from just I wanted to kind of get the >> Oh no yeah and I and I I of course
appreciate that you know as a taxpayer living in Massachusetts my town is having very tough conversations as well so and I and I value it and appreciate it. It's just also, you know, my responsibility to try to ensure we make the best possible decision, you know,
longterm as well. And of course, costing a lot more long term isn't the wisest. Again, the 20 the 20-year the the real risk is just that you'd get a point where no one has an interest and now you have debt that no one bought and they're in you're in serious trouble. So, you know, you can eliminate ones that are
just totally unrealistic off the table. Like I mentioned to AJ, is 15 ideal? No. If the town is facing a really challenging year this year and they genuinely anticipate maybe two, three years from now they'll be in a better position, you could budget a principal
payment this year at a 15-year payown. But then maybe next year things are different and the year after that are different and you can double that principal and get us back on track. And maybe, you know, the final year like, you know, we can afford to make a greater principal payment and we can still have it paid in the 10 years. you know, if this year you think might be an
isolated incident, I I don't think you're unwise to try to budget the principal for a longer term of 15. My concern with it is that unexpected things just continuously pop up. So, you know, my well pump
yesterday, I had the shower on, all of a sudden shower stopped working. Well, the well pump died. Just, you know, no warning. There's thousands of dollars of unexpected expense there. And if I had, you know, have all of my other projects all stretched out right now, I'd be inundated with payments. So the, you
know, the fear of stretching it out even longer is that these other things always do pop up and before you know it, you're like piling debt on top of debt on top of debt and a big chunk of your budget is going just towards debt payments. So it's just important to keep a long-term, you know, picture in mind when you mentioned like your firetruck parking
lot of the school. I know there was an oil tank issue recently. >> So you just you never know, >> right? And so I would just want to follow up. Yeah. and and and those that debt service things are why we want to talk to you because we need you need to figure that out. Two points I just wanted clarification. So with a ban
every year we're going to be um refinancing if you will at the current interest rates. So if interest rates go up I just want to get this right for the minutes and if they go down you know great but if they go up that's the risk we're taking by not locking into a 10-year note. And then the other thing I
just heard you say and I just want to be very clear. We can pay we can change the life of the loan midway because we're with bands. We won't have that option in 10 years when we go to five. But in the 10 years prior, we can.
>> Yeah, exactly. If you do a permanent financing, you have a fixed principal interest payment each year. In this case with the ban, you have the flexibility in designing your budget what you make for principal payment. You have every right I I wouldn't do it but but you
know you have a right to just not make a principal payment year 1, year two, year three, year four. If you want to wait till year 10 to pay all of your principal down, you can. Like there's there's no law telling you you have to. So you have that you have that absolutely correct. >> That's great. Thank you. Okay, Jim.
Yeah, I guess I'm also uh concerned as Ryan uh uh brings up uh our concern concern about pushing our a problem out. We have a problem today and we're looking to push it out to 10 years or so from now. Um and that that's a concern
for me. I I guess one thing I'd like to understand, Ryan, is the overall cost. what we look at the 10-year versus 15-year. What's the overall cost difference we're looking at uh for the town? My concern is we're not we're not going to see cost pressures easing up
over the next few years. I I just don't see any signs of that. I think if anything, we're going to continue to see surprises and we as a finance committee going to have to continue to find ways to address these surprises. And I'm concerned about taking a making a
decision now that just pushes a problem down 10 years from now. >> So again, Ryan, I guess I just like to understand the overall implications for these these two options. >> Yeah, I would have to >> based on based on what you know right now today, you know, it's you know, some of these are somewhat a moving target.
Uh but based on what you know right now and the approach you're taking with these bands, >> yeah, I would have to I would have to actually take the time to do the math out to get a comparison. I think AJ had actually he had a template, too. I just don't know where he did a comparison as
to the cost difference. Um, and of course you're estimating rates because realistically >> no idea what a rate's going to look like. You know, if you're doing bands for 10 years and then you go out five years, you're estimating what the rates will be 15 years from now. Basically,
it's that's a tough game to play. Um, but you know, I like I said, AJ did do some quick math that I did agree with when he had sent it to me. Um, but otherwise, I could try to do I could recreate it myself. I just have to actually take the time to do it. >> Yeah, I have. >> So, so actually George did that. Um,
>> and I have it open. >> Do you have it open? No. >> Yeah, I do. Okay. >> So, so it and Ryan, I think Ryan brought up an important point today. These numbers um are not as conservative as they should be because I use the same
interest rate on all the loans. But the difference between um the interest paid extra interest paid over the 15 versus the 10 is about $103,000.
However, I would round that up because as Ryan pointed out, interest rates will fluctuate. Maybe we could get lower, maybe it'll go higher. So to be conservative, I'd say 110, maybe even 120. But you know right now the initial
indicator was about 100,000 >> over 15 years >> right >> and uh if I could also just to respond to Jim I think I would describe this slightly differently like it's I don't think this is just this is a solution
we've come up with to kick the can down the road or extend a problem into the future but there was a whole sort rationale that we discussed as a committee about a kind of a philosophical rationale which was about
having future taxpayers that are going to benefit from the library building which is a very different kind of asset than a truck that's a firet truck that's only going to exist for whatever the lifespan of that truck is. And so the
thought was that, you know, by um extending this to 15 years means that there will be residents that live in town in in years 10 through 15 that will share some of the burden of funding the
library borrowing along with residents that are here for the next 10 years. and those and those residents will, you know, will obviously be using and benefiting from the library just as as we are in, you know, in the next 10 years. So that that was part of the rationale. I know Ryan has a slightly
different image, somewhat different perspective because he's he's saying yes, but you know, there's going to be other, you know, we know, you know, other unknowns that are going to pop up, right, in between. >> Yeah, I guess I sense that, too. I have that same sense um that yeah, things are
going to pop up and >> right now right now I guess we're putting our bet on that things aren't going to pop up and that future generation is going to be fine. Um I think we should probably go more with what we know today and with the expectation that things will continue to
pop up just like they have today and in the past. So just >> and not pass on and not saddle a future generation with with uh with higher cost. >> Yeah. If I guess if you set this up
correctly, future generations should not then you should have your library paid off and then your future generations should be focused on maintaining it, paying for new roofs, windows, siding, repairs at that library. If you set up your debt correctly, you know, on a fair
schedule, you and and as a municipality, you focus on maintaining what you have, they'll end up being responsible for that next stage of its life essentially. And sorry, Jim, I didn't mean to cut you off. >> Yeah. I guess my you know there's a follow-up question just to help us understand all the variables here is for
this coming year budget year that we're working on now what's the difference uh that the impact >> 39 it'll be $39,19 that we would be adding to our tax levy. Yeah. >> By by reverting back to the 10-year plan. >> Yeah. It's about $43 on the tax on the
average tax bill. I I mean I obviously this is something that we should we should resolve tonight. I I I'll just speak for myself. I can't I can't contemplate
um adding that kind of a uh additional burden uh in FY27. So I I would not personally not support that. But obviously, you know, >> Yeah. Well, we've got that's 39,000. We just saw a message today that we're going to get hit with 98,000 for salt
and sand. >> So that's that's three times that. >> Um yeah, so you know, things happen and I guess we as a committee need to figure out ways to uh how are we going to how are we going to support this and fund it? >> Yeah. So one thing we have done on that
specific issue is that we did >> I think ur with some some urging on when we met with the highway uh superintendent is we did sort of push him to increase um his uh some of his expenses um I
believe including the the I'll pull it up but uh including the the snow and ice line because we have been seeing this pattern never quite as significant is this was a let's face it this was an unusual year but but we have seen over the last several years that some of
these lines have been getting over spent and so we I think through from our through our recommendations we you know the the budget has increased um Susie >> in interest of time is there any reason
we wouldn't go for bans for 10 years and then sort out the next part after that. Is there any disadvantage to that? >> Well, if you're well, because you want to plan your principal payments accordingly. So, you'd you'd
you have to plan now how you want to make each annual payment. Otherwise, come year 10, you wouldn't have it either you'd either not have it paid off or you'd have to make like a final payment, >> right? >> Or maybe I didn't understand your question. I'm sorry. >> That's what I understood you to say. We could do bands for 10 years and and
maybe it fluctuates a little bit because interest rates fluctuate, but it it sets out a principle that it'd be um one um 15th the bands would be for 115th of the of what we uh of the loan. And then when
we come to year five, we negotiate a loan for the rest of it. And because it's bands, we could pay off some more than 115th at a time. it. Am I missing something? >> I'm I'm gonna be just honest. I didn't follow it. I'm really sorry.
>> So, I I think I think you're I think you're correct, Susie. I mean, as Ryan said earlier, we we have the flexibility of making different size. I mean even though you know ideally we would be
planning our principal payments according to the schedule that we but there's nothing that requires us to do that. So we could we could adjust our principal payment um we you from from one year to the next. And um the only
issue we would have is that we there's this 10-year uh maximum um renewals on these on these one-year bands. >> Uh >> that's correct. >> Yeah. It's it's and it's just that you
have want you have to be responsible >> with budgeting it. It's just it's it's really really bad planning if you're not even >> on some type of schedule that you know as a municipality to have that debt paid off >> that you would want to go to annually
deciding what we're going to do this year kind of thing. >> And the schedule could be that this year's ban we would take it out for 15 um for 115th of the total because we're looking still towards a 15-year plan. But we could we could make it faster
than that. But if we if we take out a loan or if we pay the uhif 115th of the total and then do that for the next 10 years and maybe even do more some years, then we only have um five years left um
on the on the loan to do and we could just do something then. >> Yes. Yeah, you could. You're just going to be paying a lot more for it over the life of the loan. You're paying a lot more in interest. Well, >> I thought the bands were lower um
interest and um and yes, if we're going to 15 years, it could be it would be more, but we may because the bands are flexible, we might be able to pay it off faster, >> right? Well, you have you have the five additional years of interest completely
and then each year during those 10 years, your principal balance is higher. So you're paying more interest on top of the fact that you're just not paying it down as much. So instead of the next year you're renewing it for $120,000 less, you're renewing it for $60,000 less. So you already you just have a
higher loan, higher interest cost every single year for the 10 years. And then you get five additional years of interest too on top of it. >> Yeah, that's the $100,000 that we talked about over 15 years. >> Yeah. Uh, George.
Um, hold on one second. So, it's about $6,800 a year if if But on the other hand, um, well, I just want to I it's not generational. It's only five years. We keep talking generation. When I think
generation, it sounds like we're trying to put the burden on our kids, and that's not what we're trying to do. And a lot of us were paying for this library because we've been budgeting for it and putting money in the fund well before the library was built. And many of us were even contributing to the library. So for some of us, if we live here for
another 15 years, we've been putting into the library for 25 years is what it's going to be. Um so 5 years is not a big deal at the end. The flexibility is huge and that's what I wanted to say, but you all covered that already. So um
the flexibility is important because we are in extraordinary times right now and the state is going to have to address it and the way municipal government is financed is going to be changing in the next 3 to 5 years. We're all going bankrupt. So the flexibility for the first three or four years I think is
truly important. I also think that interest rates are still historically on the high side and it is possible in three or four years the 3.5% might look high to a lot of people. I'm not predicting anything. You can't I'm just saying we should not make the
assumption that interest rates are always going to be higher um in the long term. So, I'm going to vote that we go the 15. We start with the 10-year bands and just monitor it annually. >> Okay. Ch. >> Um >> Oh, I'd say we
>> I do want to be very clear that you don't need to vote on it. Um, I just need you to as a committee really tell me what you would prefer happen and then I'd make a decision. >> Right. I I all I meant was that we've we're as a committee we have to finalize our budget tonight.
>> Yeah. And I have to know because we had that issue a few years ago where I submitted something and the budget ended up different >> and the state was not happy with me. I just I want to make sure we're all on the same page. That's the most important part to I will send you uh as soon when we wrap up tonight, I'll send you a copy
of the the budget that we vote in this. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Uh Jim, >> yeah, I'd say we go with what we know and like George says, we we don't know whether interest rates will go up or down. We take a risk that they might go up. Uh but what we do know today is
we'll we'll be much we will have well over $100,000 saved to the town uh 10 years from now if we go with the 10-year. Uh that's one thing we do know for sure and in exchange for that we're saddled with a challenge a short-term this year challenge that we have to sort
out as a finance committee. Um so I guess that's the way I see it. >> 10 years from now we save the town $100,000. >> Just to be clear, Jim, it's not it's not it's not just a challenge for this year, right? I mean, it's we we would be what
what what we would be committing to is over the next 10 years paying an additional $39,000 in in principal payment. Um >> Yeah. And then and then five and then for five years there's there's no payments.
>> Correct. Exactly. Yeah. So the the the from years 11 through 15. Correct. >> Yeah. We'd also >> we'd also though I mean we could do the like we could start with the you know one/10enth I mean this time but we could if we're doing the bands we could still change it to do a longer term I mean
next time around I mean would be also an option >> right the bands >> yeah that's another option um is we we could right we could we could elect to do the larger principal payment this year and the next year choose to go smaller I'm not quite sure what the
scenario would be logic for doing that. But but that is an option. Yeah. >> I I guess I thought Ryan made a a comment about him making a decision. Ryan, what what decision are you making? >> The treasurer is in charge of the debt. The finance committee and the select
board doesn't have a say in the actual debt schedule. >> Okay. That's what I thought I heard you say. Yeah. >> Yeah. I ultimately I ultimately decide. I just that's not never in my life exercised it in any weird way because I don't like that. I think the most important thing we could do is work
together and collaborate and make sure that we're on the same page and what makes sense. Which is why >> when it was initially presented to me as like a philosophical mindset of we want the future to pay for it rather than you know the future and the present rather than just the present. I was like that just doesn't make sense from a financial
standpoint at all. There's I just don't agree with spending more money over long term. If you know in a case where the town has experienced a couple years now of serious jumps in the tax rate in excuse me the overall tax bill to the taxpayers and there is a substantial
concern about it happening again this year especially with the new information regarding the snow and ice. I understand looking at this year's principal payment using a 15-year assumption and revisiting that next year and seeing where we're at. I just think it's
important to remember and and kind of live in the mindset that I don't see cost like I don't think next year your health insurance is going to be less. I think it's going to be another huge hit and I think it's going to be a really tough conversation. So, I just don't want to set us up for I don't want to get in the practice of kicking every can
down the road and just hoping things get better because I just don't I don't think that is a a good fiscal outlook >> um for budgeting. But I I hear everyone tonight. I I really do. I think to be clear, I don't think I don't think there's in in our several different discussions we've had about this over a
few different meetings, I don't think there's ever been articulated a rationale that we would extend to 15 years because of a a short-term issue that we're dealing with this year that is
then going to resolve itself in some future. That that has not been the logic. The logic was really about and again I I describe it as a kind of philosophical difference about about who who >> about who should bear the responsibility
of paying for this borrowing for the for the library building. Is it >> I think it's also important how it was presented. >> Is it going to be residents that that live in town over the next 10 years or is it going to be residents that live in town over the next 15 years? Right.
>> Right. I wasn't involved in um like the overall I mean to get get a library built it's not a quick process. It's not an easy process. So you know one props to Marian for what she's accomplished. It really was a challenge and she did a great job. But I don't know how this was presented to your taxpayers. You know to
get them to vote at town meeting. How was it presented to them? This is something that we'll have paid for in 10 years and you're going to see it hit your tax bill. Was it presented that this will be a long-term thing? I think it's important to stay true to what was said to get the votes passed, you know, and I I can't speak to the history of
that, which is what makes it harder for me to make uh make a decision on a philosophical concept because I want to do right by whatever was said >> to get this project completed, you know, and I think that's important. I hope the finance committee has taken that into consideration with these dialogues. Uh,
that's really part of my motivation actually because I can tell you that what was presented to town was a 20-year loan >> and the taxpayers were told I believe it was 120 126 or 129. I think it was call
it $126 on your average tax bill in year one of the loan. And in fact, that information is still online. If you go to the library website and you go to the construction of the new library and you dig, you will find it. It's still there. I looked it up about six months ago and
then I was shocked to find out we couldn't go 20 years. You know, when you sent me the debt service schedule, Ryan, I I it knocked me out of my chair and you know, now I understand certainly, but that's what we presented. >> Okay, that's really helpful.
>> It was it was a cup of coffee, buying a cup of of Starbucks coffee a day. That was one of the analogies. >> That's Yes, that's a common one. Yeah. So I think I mean ultimately you know you're welcome to discuss and share with me uh what you just what you feel is best as a committee. I want I would like
us to be you know in agreement with one another. But I think I think it's fair that we change this principal payment to the 15th 115th this year and revisit this conversation next year and and just see what the you know what goes and we just stay on top of it each year and and
see what the direction looks like. I'm not opposed to that at all. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. I hope that helps. >> Certainly appreciate your your perspective, Ryan, for sure. Um, and thanks for for for >> Well, no, and thanks for uh thanks for all you do and including me. Um, it
means a lot and it I think it helps the taxpayers of Shootsbury feel confident in what's taking place. >> Um, okay. Do we uh I mean, I'm I'm a little cognizant of the time here. Do we want to talk to Ryan about sort of longer term stuff or should we should we
let him go for tonight and and come back to it? What what do you think Susie? >> Well, I definitely want to have a copy of the debt schedule and you know by looking at what we looked at tonight we we realize what we are need more clarification for ourselves in. So, um I
don't I didn't see that document. Did we end up getting it? >> So, we have an FY27 one. Yeah. Uh, I think, uh, let's see. I'll I'll share it again. Uh, >> well, we I'm just making sure that before Ryan goes, we have, um, the most
updated one. And have you sent this to us? Have I missed this? >> No, no, it came to me. Me and AJ had it and AJ put it in the budget. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I would like to have it. >> Yeah, I'll I'll forward it to everybody. Um, and uh,
>> so this has the 10-year payment structure on it, right? >> Right. So, yeah, I think we we would actually have to >> Right. You'd have to change that to 78191. >> I guess I can do that right now. Uh 78191. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um
so, yeah, I'll send this to everybody uh when we wrap up. Um Ryan, we don't have a document that that um that BL that has this run out for additional fiscal years beyond FY27, do we?
We don't I could probably figure out a way to make something like that. >> I think it might be helpful especially as we're sort of adding >> well especially if you think you've got a lot more projects coming along. Um it would be helpful to know when I mean let's you got your do >> you know you got your dump truck and
things like that cuz we could get an idea as to when some of these like I don't even remember when this backhoe first took place. I think it's fairly new. >> Yeah. >> Um >> so we could just you know you'd be able to see them falling off basically. Exactly. Exactly. And then and then it'd be a helpful planning document for when
we have new projects that we need to plan for that we could we could add. >> Yeah. Sounds like a fun project for me to help you with your >> with your future project. So yeah, I could definitely I could definitely work on that for sure. >> Okay. Appreciate it. >> Uh George,
>> yeah, I'm okay with with, you know, letting letting Ryan go right now. Um it's not the debt the long-term debt is not something we need to address today. We've addressed the the big one and that's the library. But um what Susie asked for what what AJ asked for is yeah looking at the debt service over the
next few years. The way I'm thinking about it, Ryan, is we if the firetruck passes in particular and if we also that's an $800,000 item. And if we also have to borrow for some of the greater, we're hoping we're going to get a grant and we can use chapter 90. But if we have to borrow for the
greater, how are we going to fit that debt service into our operating budget? Having said what we've talked about earlier with taxes going up so much every year, how are we going to try and mitigate or smooth out the impact of these? And that's what we want you that's what we're asking you for help with. One of the thoughts I just had,
I'm just throwing it out when you're thinking about options. If we're paying debt service on these things and they have small balances, you know, they're halfway through their loan. If we pay them off now, then the debt service that we're paying for them is gone. And now we can put in new debt service for the new ones. They might have longer lives.
a firet truck, maybe we go I don't know how long we can go on a loan, but a firetruck I hope it could be more than four years because that's a 15-year asset. You know what I mean? And so that's the kind of way we want to think. That's the kind of way I want to think. Anyways,
>> you can your select board can vote um drawing a blank on the length of >> of a term on the firetruck, but your select board can technically vote to extend the useful life of the term on a firetr. So, if you were borrowing it and
you're like, "This is very expensive and we need to be able to break that principle out a little longer," then you could vote to extend it to like, I think, say 15 years, for example. >> Wow. >> We probably wouldn't go that far, but >> but Well, no, you But again, this is a
You're not the only town that's really, >> you know, all these towns are struggling with these same things and they're getting creative and you're seeing people like Psychirds Vote to extend. You know, I've got one community that did vote their fire truck to 15 because >> that's what >> they just said taxpayers can't handle
that hit. But >> yeah, >> you know, it is a risk. They they they're really not meant to last that long. So ultimately, >> the best thing you could do is think, and this is my opinion, the best thing you can do is when you're thinking of these capital projects is you're like, think of 10 years. Like, you know,
that's the most you really want to be chunking out these principal payments. If you could set up your schedule so that you have a new police cruiser that takes you four years to pay off, five years to pay off, and then you know that you're going to need a new backhoe, and then you could kind of just fill that
into that place. So your budget necessarily doesn't change year to year. You know, essentially like, all right, our debt payment is a roughly 280,000 always because we just have things falling off and coming on, falling off, coming on. So then you don't see these massive uh spikes and dips for your
taxpayers really. I mean, it's not so much planning, you know, who cares? I can fill out a spreadsheet each year that's slightly different. But for your taxpayers to have the bills even go up and down, you're like, "Oh, it's great that it went down." But it's just so hard to budget your life that way. >> So realistically, you would try to plan this fire truck around your back hoe,
your dump truck, when you need a next new cruiser, etc. >> Excuse. >> And I do think we need some kind of um vision to present to town meeting when we talk about buying a firetruck. I can imagine some people are saying,
"Well, you just just started paying for the library." So, people do weigh um items against each other. So, we need enough of an idea of what the debt schedule role is. And um and truly a library is a very expensive item that's
on our roll now. But, um, I think we do need, um, not tonight, but some kind of way to present to the town what we know and, um, what we're guessing at and what it how that affects our debt schedule.
>> Uh, George, >> and and to the point uh, that you made about keeping debt service from fluctuating wildly year to year, we that's always been our philosophy. So what we've done, Ryan, is fund capital stabilization out of the operating
budget and we had a baseline of 113,000. I'm going to call it was 112 something 113,000. And when debt service was below 113,000 to the extent that it was below 113, we would put in um a transfer to the stabilization right in our operating
budget. When debt service hit 113 or went above it, that transfer stabilization went to zero. And that's how we kept debt service at essentially a flat level year-over-year. We are now at a point, as you know, the culvert, the backhoe, and the truck. And the fact that we missed the year principal
payments, we've fallen behind and now we we are are struggling and this fire truck is just a huge hit. So >> yeah, that makes sense because the firetruck I can confirm it. The statue is five years. I I just I wanted to be sure before I said that. So, it automatically has a 5-year max that you
can do for principal payments. The select board can vote to extend up to 15. It is high. I don't recommend it, but you know, just to quickly answer your question and help you kind of just prepare a little mentally that that's where you're at for those things. So, so Ryan, so so do I understand it correctly
that that there they're by statute each of these different types of capital items have an a lifespan that's defined by by statute. >> Yeah. So like your equipment which you know anything backhoe uh cruiser fire
truck all five years which >> you can understand then why a select board might extend a fire truck's going to cost you a lot more than a backhoe >> or a cruiser you know it just is. So you'd understand why maybe you'd want to go out a little longer and honestly they say that the useful life is 5 years.
Communities of this size hold on to their firet trucks for well past their useful lives. Uh Jim, uh you're muted, Jim. >> Yeah. Um I think this this confirms I
think a discussion we had a little bit in our last meeting with the with the uh capital planning team and that is the importance of a long-term plan, a long-term capital plan uh because that could help us manage some of these ups
and downs too. you know, the more we we know well out into the future what our needs are for firet trucks and backhoes and and police cars and whatnot, the better we can manage um the year to year the year to year the better we have
a a long-term vision. >> Yeah. >> April. >> Well, I'm also aware that we may have some expenses with a dam and I I don't know if there's any ballpark figure about what that's going to cost. That's not going to cost this year.
>> It is, isn't it? >> It will cost this year. >> Yes. >> We've got a war article, I think, uh, related to this. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> So, the So, back in December, the select board. >> Wait a minute. I'm wondering if Ryan can
go. >> Oh, yes. >> And And yes, we do need to talk about the dam quite a bit. >> Yeah. Yes. I think uh does anybody else have anything for Ryan before we let him go? >> All right. >> All right. If you AJ, if you don't mind,
just at the end of the meeting, send me your updated sheet just so I can make sure that we match and we're prepared. That would be >> I'm going to send you two documents. I'm going to send you the updated debt schedule, which has this lower principal payment for the library, and I'll send you our full approved budget.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much, everyone. Really appreciate all your >> Take care. >> Take care. Yeah. So, did uh do we want to talk about the dam now or should we start going through
uh should we look at the budget? Anybody have any uh All right. So, let let's do this. Let me um let me pull up the budget. Uh there have been a couple of small changes I wanted to make everybody
highlight for everybody. Um, okay. Or maybe the only one since our last look at this is we we updated the library expense line by a very small
increment uh based on guidance from Molly about the threshold needed to uh maintain our certification. So that has been incorporated in this. Do you I don't
even remember my >> It was $146. >> Okay. $146. Um and uh I think that might be the only the only item that's changed because Yeah, because I think we we already
talked about the the elementary transportation uh change. Uh Susie, >> um I got the email from Haley about Furcog and I think that the confusion is
>> Furcog has two lines in our budget that I know of. One is number 226 and the other is the building inspector. Um because our building inspector um services come from Furcog and what this
uh line 226 equals is everything whereas >> the the building inspector supposed to be parcelled out of that number. That explains why they had such a huge increase. There was no other way. Uh >> yeah because because even the on Haley's
email the two the 2026 number didn't match what I was seeing in the >> Right. and and and I I feel like I um looked at the numbers. I think it would be good for Haley to go over them really carefully on the furcog sheet because
the the sheet they sent doesn't in it includes last year's total >> um and it includes um this year's numbers for FY27. Um, but I I did a lot of arithmetic and
I feel it it's it just needs to be very carefully done. So, for one thing, there was an increase in the building inspector of 2% cuz she was guessing, but um we we can use the sheet they gave us to
give an accurate number for the building inspector and the residual amount is what goes in line 226. >> Are you do you happen to have that document open? I can pull it up, but if you have it, >> handy. >> Yeah, I have it. >> I should have emailed it to everyone. >> Yeah, you did. Uh,
>> you can probably open it up, AJ. So, basically, we're going to have two different numbers on the building inspector line and the Furcog than we have in the budget right now. >> Yeah, exactly. I'd like us to get that resolved right now. >> Yeah, we can put we can make those changes today. >> Well, that's what one of the things
though in this one. It says the paper they sent us says at the top that the increase for for um building inspector was zero and yet their number is higher than what we had in our FY26
building inspector line. Um, the math adds up, but I don't know. Um, it makes me not be clear what numbers we really used last year. But, but I did figure out that the problem is
>> Yeah. >> All of it's showing up on 226, but it really has to be split between the two places. >> That's great. That's good news. >> Yeah, that that's going to save us what? $4,000. So, um Okay. So, so there is a specific
they they disagregated the amount for the building inspector in that. >> Yeah. So, oh, so what what I do see is they have the building inspector at $7,56. That's what they say FY27 should be.
>> 7,56. >> $7,000. Yeah.$7,56. >> I see. Um, and um, it looks to me, I mean, I did a a lot of numbers and now I'm looking getting
confused, but it looks to me that on our other line, on our furcog line, it should be 17,026. So, all right, let me let me put those numbers in now. Um, so
all right, sorry to make you say this again. So, building inspector 7,000. >> Yeah. 56. 7056. >> Okay. >> But that No. See, and see, look at what happened. Look at that jump is way too high. That doesn't make any sense. So,
that that's why I don't like their sheet because they didn't have last year's numbers there. And so I feel like this all has to go back and somebody and Haley needs to sit down with them and really figure it out because in fact
they're saying um the increase overall is 3,8 uh 3,888 which is a 8.4% increase, not 54, but this one just showed up that high. So something screwed up and and that needs to go back
to them and they need to figure it out. So, so FCCIP, that's the building inspector. >> Yep. >> Okay. Uh, >> so I might not have these numbers right. That's just what's on this sheet, but
there's no comparison, so I can't tell. >> We don't have the >> And on line 226 is the other line. And I think without the building inspector number, line 226 should be
17,072. >> Yeah, it's at the 9% increase. I mean, that's a big jump, >> Susie. So, I'm just looking at um that. So, they have a this is the FY26 version of that. Yeah,
I I saw that sheet afterwards and I thought, "Oh, for God's sakes, this is this is too late for us to be wrangling these numbers." But somebody's got to wrangle them. >> So So this um so this number is correct. The the the
four $4,738 was the budget for building inspector for FY26. No, >> right. >> So, why would it go to 7,56 and such a big jump, but the overall number only jumps 8.4? So, something is
>> Well, it probably has something to do with the fact that we now get plumbing services from the fur cog where last year we didn't, but during during the last year we had that person resign and we've had to pick up that service. Right.
>> Oh, I see. All right. So I think for for that's some plumbing inspections. >> Yes. Now we get plumbing and building inspections through the >> perogs, >> right?
>> Um I mean I think it seems like at least for now the the the best thing for us to do is to plug in these numbers as appears in that FY27 Furco spreadsheet. Don't you agree?
>> So then on line 226, we want to go to um it should be the balance taking out that building inspector from the balance is um that we would owe for COG is 17,026. >> Okay. Okay.
All right. So it wasn't quite $4,000 and save, but we saved a little bit. Uh >> well, we're going to use it up. >> Well, yeah, exactly. All right. Uh okay. >> So, that's um so so that so we do have a
couple more changes. Are there Susie, did you have any other items that you think might need to be double checked or changed or >> um not in not in this sheet. My other um my other question was is is there any
monies that are um showing up on page 11 and 12 of our expense sheet that could be applied towards the dam, but I didn't get an answer back, so I don't know. >> Susie, didn't you have a $540 item that
we needed to add back? According to Kate, a cat. >> Let me let me >> Oh, yes. I've done that. Sorry. Um >> Oh, it's in here. >> Yeah, you remind you just reminded me. Okay. So, that is this water quality line. So, >> Oh, yeah. Right. Right. Right.
>> All right. So, >> so water quality for 540. I just want to put that in the minutes. >> Yeah. So, so that was $4,000, which is what the library testing and reporting is. So, but we had
we had not budgeted for anything else on this line other than the $4,000 needed for the library. The Katherine Hilton was quite upset to see that there was nothing else in here. So, um she >> And you put it on line 78.
>> I put it on line 172. Water quality. Is that not the right place? >> Um line 78. Will you bring that one up? >> Yeah. So that's water resources. >> That is the committee and that is their
line and that's where it should be. We we thought that committee was inactive and it was not. >> Okay. Got it. >> But can we change that because she said that that had to do with like LWAC. >> Yeah. >> And if we change the name, I think it'll make more sense going forward.
>> All right. Let me first just make sure I make that change. All right. So, this is going to go to line 78 is going to go to 600. >> Yep. >> I'm going to get rid of this note. Okay. And then
>> 172. >> 172 is going back. >> Yeah. >> 4,000. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Why is this? Oh, yeah. Isn't okay. Um, and sorry, Haley, you were saying we should rename
>> Yeah. Um, so I'm looking at Cat's email. She actually says that it's a thousand dollars a year and that, um, she said that what they, what would be best, this is Cat. I'm talking as Cat now. Um, I think is that the budget line be restored to the 1000 and renamed Lake
Wyola Advisory Committee so everyone knows what's what. >> All right. So, I'm just gonna pull I'm gonna expand the >> not sure where she got the thousand dollars because we have back um for a
while 600 and I looked to see if it was always expended and I can't remember the answer to that. >> So, let's >> um she said that they've been well, I don't know. I'm only reading the email. So, she says they don't always spend it, but when they need it, they need it. And that they've been receiving $1,000 a
year. >> Okay. I I think she's either mistaken or it's a different line alto together which I I that's what made me think that maybe she was talking about um line 172 because that
>> has had a budget of you know somewhere in the range of $1,000. But if you look at the expended amounts, it's like actual spent FY221 is $95, $264, $114,
$25. It doesn't seem like in the last five years they've spent anywhere near $1,000, >> right? And the $1,000 doesn't it certainly doesn't correspond to anything that's been budgeted for line
78. >> That's been 600. >> But that also that there's no spending actually happening in this line, >> right? So that's why I don't know that must be the inactive committee. >> It's not.
So Susan, you're pretty confident that what she's talking about refers to line 78 and not >> that I am but um >> is that would that would mean that they have not spent any money. >> The other the other thing that confused
me was looking at our expense report. So how we understand the budget and how the accountant does >> it's listed a little differently. So I was trying to figure it out from there but now I can't. It's just been a lot. >> Um,
>> the water resources committee was very active. They ended up putting in the test wells for water quantity the along the ridge. That's what that and they have not met for a number of years, >> right? >> So perhaps that should be changed to
LWAC if they're if they have money that if they have a project. Well, this would be my recommendation since Cat is reaching out also as the treasurer of OWAC. I would say that we take the account
the water the line not 78 the other line and I would add the $1,000 to that because people were kind of upset that they weren't consulted with this. And I think to to you know make nice and to go forward we should just add the $1,000
back. if they don't spend it all, it just goes back into the general fund at the end of the year anyway and then we just add that on top of the 4,000 for the library or you do a separate line for the library. But I think that we
should just keep that and then next year we can flag it so that we know, okay, let's talk to ELWAC about what their actual water quality testing needs are. I don't think we should combine the two because we're dealing with a new expense for the library. So I think the we can
call water quality library for line 172. And then maybe we'll just go ahead and make line 78 lwack a th00and. So we're we're short 400 there. George. >> Um,
before I ask my question, what did we just do? What's in the budget just for the minutes? What should I write? >> Well, we haven't figured out what we're doing yet right now. >> Okay. But when you sent us the budget today, you said that you increased the library expense by a small amount to meet state funding and and what did you
have done? What you put? >> I had I had added $600 to line 172 water quality. >> Okay. Thank you. I I that that was what I had said earlier today, but that may have been um >> That's fine. That's what I wanted to get in the notes. Okay. Um
>> so I I I Yeah. >> No, no, that's fine. >> Okay. So I I mean I I got to say I'm a little I'm also a little frustrated, Haley, because I I I feel like >> um I I feel like we're getting >> sort of reprimanded from, you know,
>> for and and I think there's a lot that's not clear here. I don't I can't I can't understand where >> it's not clear to me where in our budget we have budgeted previously budgeted them at $1,000 a year. It's probably
172, but even that's not totally clear. And then I mean it's it's when you look at the actual dollars expended, it's it's it's never been anywhere near that amount. So, I don't think it was an unreasonable
move for us. >> No, I don't think so either. My I guess my point was just to keep it status quo and then when we have the benefit of more time so that people don't feel like something was changed without, you know, talking to them, then we can do it because even like I said, if they don't
spend it, it just goes back as free cash, right? >> But I agree. I mean, because then I think there if we have more time to talk to them, it's like look at what you're actually spending versus what we're >> Yeah. >> putting aside. >> Okay. Susie. >> Um I just think that we could call line
78 um wasn't what was the number god? Um we can call it lwack and we can we could make it 600 and then if we need to do a transfer from the fincom we can.
>> Okay. So uh I think we've got two options. I think we can. Yeah, we can do that. We can change this to the the name of this line 78 to LWAC funded at $600 funded at $1,000.
Well, I guess it um or we can um add $1,000 to line 172. The only thing Susie is if that's if that's where they've been if that's how we've been budgeting them is from line 172 in the past which again
is not 100% clear to me but maybe >> um then I think we should probably keep do at least for this year we should probably continue to do that um so and then and then get this resolved and you
know potentially add a line or so um That that would be my inclination, George. >> Um, we need to add the debt service for 3,860 to this budget, right?
>> Well, I think you mean for the clean water trust. >> Yes. >> I think we want to do some more research on that because I don't think we know >> right >> for sure what's that. Yeah. >> All right. >> Um, >> so are we finalizing our budget tonight? >> We're trying to. >> That's what we're Yeah, we're hoping to
do. Yeah. >> Well, we got to get an answer to that question then, right? >> Yeah. I mean, I think I think reality is is that we can we can finalize vote tonight and if it turns out we've got to add something, you know, we we can do
that given the the time frame. We could even do it before we meet with the select. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um Okay. So, I think what I'm going to suggest is that we I I think I think we can we can change
line 172 to uh to $5,000. Um, okay. >> Somebody's got to keep in their memory that that is two different >> Yeah. >> groups. And we don't have a good memory, I'll tell you.
>> No, we don't. >> No. Could that be added some way? Yeah. Can we add a note? Yeah. >> Includes uh water testing and reporting for library
>> whack. How's that? >> And then go back and take the 600 out of line 78. >> Yes. All right. And I forget what we said. is uh um committee
inactive. That's it. Right. >> Okay. >> And looking at line 169, fire uh water mitigation. I wonder if that's where this mystery number is >> the 380 whatever 3800. It looks like
that's where it is that because that's three. >> Yeah, >> I think that's where that line goes. So Haley, when you're when you're um following up with with Gail and potentially Ryan about this clean water trust thing, can I guess that it might
help be helpful to reference this line as potentially what they've been building it towards. >> Which line number again? 169 >> 169 fire station. >> Okay. Uh all right. Uh Tom Seaffort, I see your
hand up. Did you have a quick question for us? >> Thank you, AJ. Yeah, really quick. And um it might be inconsequential, excuse me, >> but um I was at the last ELWACK meeting. I sit on their committee as the planning board rep. And the specific expense that
did come up um is a uh a tool for the damkeeper, a measuring device for the water level. And I it prompted me to wonder is there an expense line for something like damkeeper expenses? Um and only because technically the
expense that's currently on the table is not about water quality as much as a a measuring device for the water level. >> Got it. It looks like >> Thanks. >> isn't Thanks Tom for that clarification. It looks like there isn't. There's a there's a couple of salary lines but not
a damn expenses line. So, um, yeah. Uh, okay. Let me just go back to hiding these. Okay. Are there any other um
items that we think we need to tweak, discuss, revise tonight? Well, we we talked about uh there was a lot of stuff flying at the end of the last meeting. Another one was about meeting the elementary school
transportation rise. >> Um I don't know if you've gotten >> I gave some thought to this and did a little calculating and so >> um so just to uh refresh everybody's memory. So, we are
right now we are planning on applying 169 roughly $169,000 of cash reserves for four budget items. Um, I was thinking out loud at our last
meeting about potentially suggesting that we apply another $15,000 of cash reserves to help ease the increase uh, which is I think around 30 something,000.
>> 36. >> Yeah. So, we have a $36,000 increase in our elementary transportation expense. It's just due to the contract. um details. That's a 44% increase over FY26.
If we were to do that, um that would >> 68. >> Uh that that would save the average single family tax bill on $17. It goes
from, at least as it's being calculated in this spreadsheet, from $55 that's $536 to um 518. So, I'm I mean I'm not um I'm not I'm
I'm I'm somewhat ambivalent about it, but I'm I I would be open to to doing that. Um just for for essentially the same reason what what we did with health insurance last year um to help kind of ease in the
transition of what is a pretty sharp increase. Uh, Susie, >> and this is specifically part of the rural aid argument. >> We are a small town. We just had a a hit on our transportation
um for our school and it's a big hit. And so I think I think it would be good to try to ease it in um and to continue to point out these kind of numbers to our legislators. Any
other thoughts about doing that? Um, does anybody have >> a strong feeling about it? >> I think it's a good idea. >> It bring us to 183 in cash reserves, right? Spending.
>> All right. So, uh, I don't hear any objections. So, um, elementary transportation Uh, oh, I can't just do that. All right. Uh, I'm not going to worry about that
right now. Okay. So, that would be $15,000. Yeah. So, that would bring the total cash reserves applied to $184,000. All right. Um, >> did you um adjust the uh
>> So, I've I think I've got >> excess levy capacity. >> Yeah, I think I think I've got to do a few adjustments now, right? Because we've done a bunch of things. Um, >> yeah. 19433. So, uh, I think what I think the quickest way for me to do this is
to, uh, where'd it go? Excess levy capacity here. Zero that out. Then I get the number. So, it's 1007. Okay, >> George, >> please.
>> What's that? >> Drum roll, please. >> Yeah. Can Can you think of anything else I need to do just to kind of uh make sure everything's >> Did your numbers move? your line numbers.
>> Uh, no, that's one thing. Okay, so revenue, >> you just copy. Yeah, just copy. >> Uh, so I think >> Oh, how come there's not a number there? Oh, you know why there's not a number there? >> Click on click on cell F. Click below
the 41. >> Mhm. >> In the blank space. >> It's evaluating to cell I can't read that. Uh, >> I think if if you put his I think if you put put a penny in the column P, just a
penny in I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Um, it must be in the 26 column under 345 to the left of 1250. >> Uhhuh. >> 125. It's column N. Put in one cent and I bet you you'll get a number >> right here.
>> Yeah. Put in one cent because it evaluates to see if there's a value. And if there is, it puts in a number. So there you go. >> Okay. >> So now your numbers are fine. >> All right. What if I just put in zero? Yeah. >> Uh uh. Yep. Yeah. And do the same thing down on row 60
>> where there should be a row 60. >> Okay. >> Um and copy the formula down. Yeah, you need to copy the formula down, AJ. Yep. >> Okay. >> There you go. >> Great. >> Kind of worked. Didn't really. No, this is >> something's going on there.
>> Yeah, >> I can fix that later. I If you send it to me, I can just fix it or you can look at it and probably figure it out. Anyways, >> yeah. All right. So, all right. So, I I understand, George, that this is not going to be totally
accurate right now. this average single family tax bill calculation for the issue that we to for the reason we talked about but at least according to this it basically puts us in line with what we were doing what we ended up doing last year
um which isn't great because that was that was a hard year for people but I don't know we can do anything else um yeah >> um well no we can recommend cuts in budgets >> or we can apply more free cash And that's about it. I mean, we do also
have to think about how are we going to keep the snow expense from hitting next year's recap because if the snow expense is not covered this year, right, she said the final thing they'd have to do to the extent we don't cover it is they're going to put it in the tax rate, which means excess living capacity
>> is what they would have to use. And so that also has potential at $98,000, it has potential to add a hundred something just over $100 to the average tax bill. >> All right. So, can I speak to this? So, I I was thinking about this and I I do
think that Tell me if you all agree that this year it's fair to call this an extraordinary year in terms of the snow and ice removal expenses that we've had to incur. That this is not this has not been a typical year, right? Um, we have
over spent that line several times in in recent years, but never to the degree that we have this year. I don't think it's going to be as I don't think there's any reason to think that it's going to be as significant next year as it was this
year. So, I would be in favor of a warrant article that um that applied. Well, can we do that? Actually, is that even technically possible? Can we have a warrant article that applied cash
reserves to cover some of the deficit for FY26? Is that >> something we can do at town meeting? >> I think we can. Why not? I mean, >> it's going to be before the year is over.
>> I I didn't Wasn't that in that Wasn't the options in that email you forwarded to us? >> Yeah. I because I there was some >> I think I think she said we could >> Yeah, >> my Yeah, memory. >> Yeah, let me let me pull it up. Uh
>> yeah, it says you may want to discuss covering summer all of the snow and ice deficit with free cash at the annual town meeting. >> Okay. Yeah. >> And I think we have evidence we can look at some of the past years where there was a balance that was covered. And the
other piece she's saying is that like we do in May, I think or maybe yeah, I think it's in May is do line-to-line transfers, right? Of >> course, town meetings on May 9th. So, we
won't really know um what monies will be left over to be able to move, but she suggested there'll be at least payroll uh town clerk um health and town assessor lines and also I would say the
police chief. So, there are some monies that can be moved. It means we'll end up with less free cash. But um >> and we have 50 we have $52,000 of reserves also. Right. That could be >> Right. >> Right. Well, we we might have to cover
the the um deductible on the oil tank. >> The oil tank. Yeah. >> Um >> so that's $10,000. So we may have let could we do we think we could safely assume that we'll have 35 to $40,000 of
finan reserves available to cover part of this snow and ice deficit >> probably. So what's what's confusing to me is the sequence. So we have town meeting show up on May 9th. Would we
would we go ahead and have a warrant article that says take that um cover that deficit out of cash reserves and then if the cash reserves um then at the end of the year cash
reserves wouldn't be needed for that and they wouldn't hit the tax recap. they would have been dealt with and then we get whatever free cash back we do at the end of the >> that's you know that if I may to question
>> can we write a warrant article with a limit um uh transfer free cash at the end of the year to cover the unspent amount of snow removal
for no more than 98 85 and then whatever it ends up being at the end of the year after we transfer everything we can that amount comes out of free cash. In other words, you know, if your assumption 35 is right and we got other lines, we might be able to cover a good chunk of
it. And but this way >> Yeah. that that gives us flexibility. Yeah. We don't have to actually know what the the precise dollar amount is. Yeah. Well, I think we could do that or we could even do George just to slightly
modify that. We could assume that at a minimum we're going to be applying $35,000 worth of reserves to that deficit. So, we could say 985 minus
we could say up to $63,500. Sure. >> Right. Which is Yeah, between that and the line item transfers, I think we're safe. >> Yeah. Uh, Susie, >> no, that that's it. Sorry. >> Yeah. April, did you have something?
>> Uh, no. Actually, I just was thinking this could be left on the for the fall town meeting as well, so we would have more of a sense of, you know, the won't the recap have occurred by by then, though? Uh if we do it in September,
we'll be okay, but we would have to do it sooner. >> We want to time it before the uh tax recap. >> Yes. Just like we did last year. >> That's right. >> Well, our new bylaw says that we have to have it in October, but that doesn't mean we couldn't do like the first,
you know, week of October to leave time for the recap. >> Well, and we make sure we co coordinate with the assessor's office not to set the tax cap. I mean, we don't have >> we have deadlines with the state, but as long as the assessors know what's going on, I think they'll be fine.
>> So, Haley, can can you think of any reason why it would be imperative for us to do this uh now at annual town meeting versus special town meeting? >> Um, I would probably have to think about
that a little bit more. off the top of my head. I mean, spacing, right? If you want to try to paint a really good picture for the voter about, you know, what our circumstances are, maybe you favor waiting because we we know we're going to have a lot to cover
already at annual town meeting. Um, but I Georgia, I think if I heard your question right, you know, we could definitely add language that says, you know, not to exceed a certain dollar amount or, you know, however we want to
cap certain transfers >> and we could word it to say pay the remaining balance. >> Yeah. >> Not to exceed. Okay, that's >> I think my instinct is to say that
there maybe however however small a possibility it is um and it may not be small it's possible that we will be able to cover this through a combination of um line-to-line transfers and fin
reserves. So if we don't if it's not necessary for us to spend time on this at annual town meeting, >> right? >> Um versus special town meeting, then I would say what why why would we choose to do that voluntarily? Yeah.
>> I think we need to just have Haley run it by the accountant, too. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Haley, is that something you could Yeah. When you talk >> I can ask you. >> Okay, great. Um, all right. So, then
that's one less thing for us to sort out uh tonight. Uh, okay. Anything else on the budget? >> Yeah. Can we apply a little more cash? >> So, I guess the question is what what
line item would we be applying it to? Well, I saw that the school is getting a making a big estimate on the amount of um circuit breaker they're going to get next year. >> And so their increase next year, based on what
I read in the email today, may not be that great of an increase. And so I'm thinking maybe we can apply a little to the school this year knowing that next year we won't have a large increase there and we're not really hurting ourselves. >> How much how much are we applying now to
the I'm going to look >> we're applying 113 114,000 to uh the temp costs and they're saying they think they'll get 130 next year and 130 and
>> and spend 227, >> right? Well, they're already spending 227 this year and they think they're going to spend 227 next year, but they're getting that 130. So, maybe we can go up 17,000 there. >> Yeah, that's true.
>> If we want to stick to 50%. I honestly I that tax impact I I just think it's going to be close to $600 when all said and done. And I just want to and and I we do need to remind everybody that the library building, we all knew it was coming and it's going to
affect us this year. I I don't have the number top my head, but that's probably close to $150 on the tax rate. So I mean we can certainly remind people of that and maybe a 550 increase is really a 400 increase on regular operating budget and there's this one time well for 150. I
just >> I'm nervous about this number. Last year people were shell shocked and I think they're going to be shell shocked this year and >> I'm not going to be at annual town meeting this year. So I'm just tell you right now um but you know what kind of a message are we going to send at that
meeting? How are we going to frame this for everyone? >> Yeah. Well, and our framing is going to begin with our report. And I think we will need a narrative too in our report. We're not just going to lay it out in the only in the format. >> I've said it in the past. I think when
we do that in your report, a paragraph at the beginning is really important. >> Yeah. >> And in fact, the work that you and Laura have been doing, I'm sure there's a lot there that we could start with. >> Yeah. >> And just one last thing and then I'll stop talking. I I will start the annual report this week. AJ, as soon as you get
this set, if you could send it to me, I'll start putting it together, so maybe we can review it in the next week or two. >> Okay. Yeah, sure. That'd be great. All right. So, there's a I think I heard a proposal there to increase this amount to $120,000.
Is that what I heard, George? Yeah. >> To 130. >> Oh, 130. Yeah, that's right. 130,000. Um, anybody have a strong feeling about that one way or the other?
Um, >> and the only thing I would add, AJ, is after we do these things, maybe we should jump over to the capital. >> That's actually just you read my mind. That's what I >> Okay. Yeah. Good. >> Yeah. Let's do it 130. I I go for 130. 227.
17,000. Um, okay. So, this is what um this is what our cash reserves look like if we do this. Uh, you guys see this? Okay.
>> Yes. >> So, I've added this $15,000 for school transportation. >> Yeah. >> And uh change this to 130,000. So, our free cash
at uh assuming everything here passes is $710,825 which is eight 8.4% 4% of the operating budget. And obviously this assumes no
no funds get returned to uh >> AJ just before you go forward. Um >> yeah, >> you added row 28. Could you just click on the 333 and make sure it's picking up that new row you added in? Sometimes they don't get picked up. We just got to be careful. >> Yeah. Yeah, it includes it's 2. >> You did that already. All right, good.
Yeah, I just >> 28. Yeah, >> perfect. because sometimes that's a trap that we fall into. >> Yeah. >> Um 700,000 is pretty good and if we get, you know, 100 to 200,000 in free cash, we've gotten more in past years, we'll
be all right. >> Could we could we make a line a subtotal line so that the operating expenses are subtotal and then the whole cash reused? >> Yes. because I I think it it's a little
bit scary um to see it all in one place when really we've our and we're trying to pay attention to >> Oh, I see. Yeah. >> changing out our operating ease our operating spending back into the operating budget.
So, we got to kind of know what number we're working on there, >> right? Subtotal >> operating cash for operating >> cash reserves for operating. All right.
Have to make sure that's day 28. Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. >> I can see that math now. >> Yeah. >> Oh, boy. Yeah. Well, you know, this is an extraordinary, you know, you heard John Tricky say, if things continue the way
they are, we're going to need a partner. And I think if things continue the way they are in funding education in the state of Massachusetts for the next two to three years, we're going to have to do whatever we can. It's just the all the old rules are getting thrown out. So, I'm I'm not
afraid to I I of course we're always conservative about how we use cash, but I think we have to think differently right now. We just got to use crutches to get through to the new financing world, whatever that has to be. And I think that people will feel 8.4%
4% cash reserves um in our free in our free cash is is respectable. Um but we also have got to go on to the dam now. >> Yeah. >> Well, one thing I want to talk about where we have the schedule open. We
don't have to talk about it right now, AJ, but I did want to revisit the um the dam. Well, we're talking about dam. Okay, never mind. Because I'm not sure capital stabilization is the way to go. But let's let's just move. >> Okay. Well, um All right. So,
so I think I didn't hear any objection. So, I've I've made the change to boost our um uh cash reserves applied to the school budget to 130,000.
Um so, >> and the 15 for school transportation. >> 15,000 for school transportation. Yeah. So, do you want to talk about dam repair? So, there's a warrant article
draft that I drafted that would apply 83,845 of capital stabilization funds to pay that cost. George, do you want to share your thought? Yeah, I what I wanted to say was I I think we should use
stabilization, not capital stabilization for two reasons. Um capital stabilization is really for capital items. And yeah, the dam is a capital item, but it's really repair more than a capital item. And also, um it's going to require two-thirds vote. And if this is an emergency and it's something we
really have to do, I think we need to lower the bar >> um to get it to pass. So if we went to stabilization, we could get alls we'd need is a minority a majority vote. And also stabilization is for stabilizing the budget. It's not necessarily for any
specific type of item like a capital stabilization is. So for those two reasons, I think we should go to stabilization. I do understand that the stabilization account has a smaller balance and so we're digging deeper into that. But I'm concerned about the two-thirds vote. I I mean, I can't
imagine that, you know, the audience, the crowd, when they hear when the residents hear what's going on, they wouldn't approve it, but >> Mhm. >> What happens if they don't? >> Yeah. Uh, understood. Yeah. I I I don't have a strong feeling about that either way.
Does anybody else have a concern about me moving this over to stabilization as the the source for that funding? >> That sounds right. >> Yeah. Okay. All right, Susie.
>> And um I had looked over the budget and suggested that there are funds on page 10 and 12 of the expense report that I want to know for sure not available to go towards this project. And the other
piece is right now the state prides itself in getting money to towns for um bridges, culverts, roads, and I believe dams are in there. So, what I'm hoping is that the future for this dam is that
there is state funding and that that all sort of lots of effort is put into um getting those amounts, getting some grants. So, you had a specific set of lines that you thought or at least you were curious
about. Could could they potentially be >> Yeah. So, they're on page 10 and 12. Let me get to them. Um Yeah. Yeah. Where's page 10? >> This is from the latest expense report. >> Yeah. Yep.
And I sent this note to Haley because I don't I'm not fully I don't know all the what these words are about, but they need to maybe looked into. Um there >> I think those funds were
>> I think those funds were initially set up for the project that was going to happen before we discovered the sinkh hall. And then then I know part of the discussion was that some of those funds could go towards the um repairs. So
where am I? Page must be page what is this? 12. Page 12. There was um 35,000 for the dam consultant permitting
and there was uh there's a balance of 5,000 in the uh Wyola dam project. And there is one other was there one other maybe I saw it on the other page.
Um, yeah, there's there's Lake Wyola draw down permitting. There was 8,000 allocate 8,000 something allocated and there's 5, uh, 251 left. There's damn consultant
for permitting. That was a $35,000 allocation and all of that is still on the book unspent. And um and then the dam Wyola dam project still
has um 5,600 left on the books. So all of that is relevant, but maybe there's a reason they can't be used, but I feel like we have to sort of check into everything that's out there. Um,
>> so I wonder if we could if what we could do is we could word the if we could use the not to >> Yeah. exceed >> exceed language. Uh, so to see if the town will vote to transfer from stabilization
an amount >> not to exceed $83,845 for dam repairs >> taken in. And then that's just going to require a majority vote. Okay.
>> Okay. Um, so where would folks like me to start? I just pulled up Sus's email and the expense reports. >> Yeah. So, I guess um I guess I I don't think this has to be resolved tonight, but if
there's I I think the the the question is could there be some research done to determine if any of those um unspent balances could be applied to the
current dam repair expense that we have for FY26. So, I will I'll check with Gail, but the amount that's in there, that 49,000 and change that the ending balance that corresponds to what we were awarded in
the initial grant plus the matching contributions that the town and the Lake Wyola association did. So, we got that first grant that was originally supposed to be for the studying of the dam and some repair
work, but because we had the emergency, all of those monies had to be repurposed into permitting and only permitting and design um work done by GZA. So, that's been accomplished. We're getting bills
from them now. We're moving into the the actual construction phase of the project and that is where we'll incur the 83,000 and change. Um I can I can certainly say I'm working with GZA um to apply for
funding. If we were awarded that funding that could take some of the burden off of taxpayers when we get to town meeting, but there it's a grant so there's no guarantees. Um so but that's an option that we're we're heavily looking at. We we're already working on the application
right now. It's due this Friday or this coming Friday. Um we're going to keep looking at grant opportunities. It'll be a little bit easier to time those and time that with the CPA funds because once we're done with these emergency repairs, we'll be able to better work
with the state on additional uh engineering tests and additional, you know, environmental permitting that will need to happen. But at least then you should be able to plan for it and start tracking that. But we we are on the hook for the 83,000. We cannot use CPA
because it's happened in this year. The select board back in December um declared a state of emergency. So the deficit spend on the project once the construction starts happening which we anticipate will be end of March, early April. So should be starting fairly
soon. Now, I can always check in with the uh construction company and what else is it going to say? Um, but yeah, I mean that's where we're at. Those funds look like the ones that, you
know, we already have pretty earmarked for uh GCA. >> Okay. Um, so I think when we get to warrant articles, you'll see that I adjusted the language for that to give us some
flexibility if they if it turns out we um, you know, we either have a grant uh, opportunity or we have a line-to-line transfer opportunity. Uh, okay. So maybe this would be a good
time to open up the warrant articles. >> Yeah. >> Uh just making a quick change to the budget one to match the work that we just did tonight. Um so bear with me for
a sec. Okay. What is that? Okay. Um, okay. So, first one, uh, obviously these are going to get renumbered when they get added to the draft, the full draft
that Brennan's going to be working on, but, uh, first article here is the, um, regional school budget. And I just pulled this straight, actually, the regional school committee is meeting tonight to vote the budget, to approve the budget. So um
this is the exact language that uh they have in their vote. Um so this is the total budget for the regional school and these are the assessment amounts. Now, one thing they So, this is going to take
some explanation at town meeting. They their language is referencing the assessment amounts prior to their applying END funds. This
is so this is like absurdly complicated. But so you'll recall that the the way the region put the budget together this year is they they did the budget and then they have adjustments they make to
that budget at the bottom of the budget document that apply those END excess END amounts that they um were carrying in FY26 and are obligated to
pay back to to the town member towns. Um, so this is how they're doing it is they're but for the purpose of the warrant article and the official budget they it seems important to them that they actually um calculate the base
amounts as the numbers the assessment amounts prior to them. >> But I don't think >> I don't think those are the base amounts. I think those are after the END because that's what we have in our budget. >> Is that right? >> Yes. Yes, it's possible AJ that the
38845 229 is before the END. >> Oh, that's what it is. Okay. Yeah. I don't know. I'm speculating that >> because I'm I'm glad I'm really glad you Okay, that made sense to you. Okay, good. Yes. So, that that's what they've done. The
total budget is pre e andd uh funds applied. Um and so okay so this does match the the number break. >> So the point is to everybody in town that if you add up the four assessments
Yeah. you're not going to get 38845. >> Yeah. And they're not going to do that. So we're all set. >> Yeah. And we are. And in fact, even then they wouldn't because >> there are other revenue sources. Exactly. Beyond the the assessments. Yeah, >> that's right. >> Okay, good. All right. So, when I saw
that because I noticed that they had added this language as follows for the base. And so, in my mind, I just assumed that that was what they were trying to do there. But, okay. Got it. >> That is interesting language because by us all voting for that ma basically sets the base to these numbers. No.
>> Yeah. Right. Um, >> I mean it's fine. >> Yeah, >> they gave us the wording. >> All right. So, just for the the new members, um, what we're going to have to do is just take a vote on whether to we
whether we as a finance committee are recommending approval of each of these wine articles. So, uh, I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of fincom article one as written here. Second.
>> All right. Any questions or any discussion about this? >> Okay. >> Cashew I >> Moer I >> Moss Ito I >> Stein I
>> Oh I don't think we have Jim right. He >> Jim left. Yeah. >> He left at 7:30. >> Yeah. >> So basically when we say we're voting you to recommend this, we're voting to recommend to the voters to approve it. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Mhm.
>> All right. So then article two here is our budget article. I would love it if maybe George you could just check check my math here. Um uh that I did this correctly. I'm pulling this number from
the budget that uh at with the adjustments that we made tonight. And then I'm just subtracting from that amount the $200,000 that we applied of free cash reserves that we're
applying and the $10,000 from the septic betterment fund to get >> Yeah. I mean those three are supposed to add up together and they do and they do add up to 8338475. I assume that's what's on the bottom of your budget spreadsheet. >> Yeah. Except there's just this annoying
thing where the total operating expenses and the total revenue are off by >> a dollar, >> $1. But that's a penny. >> Not anything I need to worry about, right? >> It's rounding. Happens all the time. >> Go with the higher number. >> Yeah. All right. Uh and in fact, that is
the higher number. Yeah. Okay. So, uh any questions about this? All right. I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of fincom article 2 as written. >> Second. >> Second that. >> Okay. George
>> I >> cashi >> moer I >> moss eye >> I >> so 6. Okay. Uh and then I think this is just a kind of formal formality to see if the town
will vote to set the salary compensation for all elected officials of the town as provided by uh to be made effective July 1 as contained in the budget or taken. So I assume there's no questions about this.
All right. So I'll make a motion to approve so sorry recommend approval of Bencom article 3 as written. Second over I >> cash Moer I >> moss I
>> do I >> and I saw this as the spon this is the sponsor we had for this article last year say the same to uh same for this year okaycom article four another formality to see if the town will vote to authorize treasur to enter into
compensating balance agreements ments during fiscal year 27. Uh any questions? All right. I'll make a motion to recommend approval of fincom article 4 as written. >> Second.
>> Okay. George I >> cashew I >> Moer I >> Moss I >> I >> that's next up is fin article 5 to see if the town will vote to allow the select board
to apply for accept and expend state federal and other grants which do not require a town appropriation. I'm gonna make a motion to uh approve uh to recommend approval of article five >> and second
>> I cash I >> moer I >> MSI >> I >> and Stein I >> all right uh think article six to see if the town
will approve the appointment pursuant to MGL chapter 268 8A section 21A of Katherine Hilton as a board of health administrative consultant while also serving as an elected official on the board of health. >> That we do we vote on that one? It's not
financial. >> We have for years. >> I don't know why we do but we do. >> The fin has to Okay. >> Yeah. Uh so I'm going to recommend approval of article six is written. >> Second. George >> I
>> cashew I >> Roer I >> I'm not looking at I'm not looking at screen cat Hilton 2 what's what's the position again >> as a board of health administrative consultant while also serving as an elected official >> okay board of health admin consultant
okay thank you >> all I think we were up to seven Laura is next soy do I sky I >> all right to see if the town will approve the appointment pursuant to MGL
chapter 268A section 21A of Walter Tibbitz as a cemetery groundskeeper while also serving as an elected official on the cemetery commission. I'm assuming he still has these roles, but somebody will correct me if I'm wrong. >> Uh, all right. I'm going to recommend
approval of article seven as written. >> Second. >> I cash I >> M I >> All right. So then we have this article that has these spending limits for the
various revolving funds. >> I don't actually know where these come from. So, these were the amounts that were listed in last year's article. >> Is there any reason to think any of these amounts have changed? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. All right. So, I'm going to
recommend approval of article 8 as written. >> Second. >> I >> Oh, sorry. Uh, cashew. >> Moer, >> Masai,
>> do I >> All right. And then, All right. Then we get our to our capital items. So, to see if the town will vote to transfer the sum of $64,318 from free cash for a new tractor for the
highway department. So, do these need to be changed to an amount not to exceed? Is that how we >> No, we don't usually do that. >> Okay. Got it. All right. >> And if it comes in lower, Yeah. you know, that'll happen. They'll just spend what they need.
>> Yeah. Okay. Uh, so I'm going to recommend uh Sorry. I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of article 9. >> A second. I >> cashew I >> Moer I
>> Moss I >> So I >> All right. Article 10 to see if the town will vote to transfer the sum of $10,630 for free cash for a new sprayer for the highway department.
Uh I'll make a motion to approve article 10 as written. Second >> I What was that amount? 10,000 >> $10,630. >> You think I'd know. All right. Thank you. >> Cash you.
>> Our eye. >> Moss. >> I. Article 11 to see if the town will vote to transfer from free cash $15,000 $15,800 for an engineering assessment for the ele the Sheesberry Elementary School parking lot renovation project or
take any other action. And you guys should tell me if if I should change the wording of this. >> Looks good. >> All right. I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of article 11. >> Second. Cashew I
>> Moer Ray >> Moss I do I >> I see if the town will vote to transfer the sum of $6,000 from free cash for two new snowblowers for the Sheets
Elementary School. I'll make a motion to recommend approval of article 12. >> Second I >> cashew Ier. Mai, >> wait. >> Si,
>> that was two snowblowers. $600,000,000. >> Oh, yeah. Right. Of course. >> Such a deal. >> To see if the town will vote to transfer the sum of $15,000 from free cash for necessary Okay, so this is You may want
to revise the wording here. for necessary mechanical repairs to the partitioning system in the >> sorry >> how about needed mechanical >> for needed >> mechanical repairs to the partitioning
system in the multi-purpose room/ cafeteria at Sheetsbury Elementary School >> for the what again >> partitioning sorry for needed mechanical repairs to the partitioning system in
the multi-purpose room/cafeteria at Sheetsbury Elementary School. >> Thank you. >> I think that um the discussion that Frank gave us or I'm can't remember whether I heard it at the school or heard it at the Fincom.
>> Uhu. >> Um they were talking about a push wall. Um so I don't know if that will include material of the wall. >> It might be a push curtain. And if it's a push curtain, they won't need the mechanicals and it'll be a heck of a lot
cheaper. >> Yeah. And and will they replace the curtain because the way you push it includes the curtain. So, I'm just thinking it says m mechanical repairs, >> right? >> I I'm thinking we might need to make it a little bit more uh >> what if it's just uh
>> repairs? >> Repairs. >> Yeah. >> Or needed repairs, >> right? But Sus's point, it might also be a replacement of the curtain, >> right? And >> I suppose does repairs cover that? >> Maybe we should say repairs slashreplace. >> Yeah,
>> repair. >> Yeah, >> because we don't know what it's going to be yet. >> Yeah, that gives us flexibility. >> And is there a better word than partitioning system? What did you call it? Push wall. Is it >> um >> maybe just call it partition.
>> Okay. >> Yes. to the partition in the multi-purpose for needed repair. Look at >> all the slashes. >> I know. To the So, can I just call it the multi-purpose room? >> Yeah. >> Everybody knows what it is, right?
>> Multi-purpose gym. >> They have like cafe. >> They were calling it cafet cafety or the cafeteria. I wouldn't know what the multi-purpose room was. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I think that's a good point. Maybe we just said gym cafeteria.
>> Gym slash cafeteria. >> We like those. Can't slash the budget will just slash the description. >> Okay. Uh >> I think the piece though in capital planning we talked about like the
screens in the I mean I think the curtains in the front, not just the partition piece. Like I don't know how that got presented last week. >> Yeah. I think that piece seemed um that they thought they could come in and they might have money left over for
something, but I'm not sure we can how that would be worded in a article. >> Yeah. I mean, it also might be just I mean, you know, having one company come in and do both. I mean, kind of. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, is this a good
>> Maybe we should take out the word partition then because they might replace the curtain on the stage. That's what you're referring to, right, Laura? >> Yeah. >> So, >> what if it's just needed repairs to the >> uh >> gym cafeteria room and then we'll just
obviously have an explanation >> except it's not that might imply like floor >> floor. Yeah. >> Yeah. Uh needed partitioning slashcurtains.
uh for needed repairs and >> or you could just say for curtains. Uh go of course then it's not the fancy ones up on the windows but >> uh pre-cast for needed repairs and
potential replacement something like that. >> Yeah. Oh, that's good. Replacement of >> repairs and materials. >> Yeah. Yeah. Needed repairs and materials
>> in the gym cafeteria room. >> Yeah. >> Is that fine? >> That's beautiful. >> Well, no, because it still doesn't distinguish from floors, right? Repairs. There's no cur there's no um
>> for the for the partitioning >> right um >> for capital planning I put replacement of the mechanism for the stage and center dividing curtains of the cafeterium. >> Okay. So uh for needed so just sorry can you say that one more time?
>> Uh replacement of the mechanism for stage and center dividing curtains in the cafeterium. Go way too fast. Sorry, I'm a little bit slower. Replacement of the mechanism >> for the stage and center dividing curtains.
>> Yes, it Okay, that's so much better. Okay, >> that does sound great. >> Or replacement of the mechanism for the stage and center dividing curtains. Okay. Is that good? >> Did we put elementary school in there anywhere?
>> Yep. At Sheetsbury. >> Yeah. Okay. I'm going to recommend Sorry. Make a motion to recommend approval of article 13. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. George, >> I cash I moer. I
>> Moss. So do I. >> I. >> Okay. Article 14 to see if the town will vote to transfer from free cash $5,700 for a new clicker system to be used by the town moderator at future annual town
meetings or take any action. Is that good? >> No. >> I have a silly question. >> Yeah. >> Does that include the special town meetings? >> Yes. any any town meeting. >> Annual. Okay. >> So, take out annual. >> Yeah, that's a good idea.
>> Town meetings. Okay, good catch. All right. Uh, so I'll make a motion to recommend approval of article 14 is written. >> Second. >> I cash I >> motion nay. >> Moss I
>> do I >> and Steini. >> All right. So that's 51. Okay. All right. Uh article 15 to see if the town will vote to transfer from free cash $15,725
for data digitization services or take any other action. Uh I'll make a motion to recommend approval of article 15. >> Second >> George I >> cashew I
>> moer I bas >> and sky. >> All right. So, this is the one we just changed to see if the town will vote to transfer from stabilization an amount not to exceed $83,845
for dam repairs or take any other action. >> Okay. Any >> is there any question about this being in this FY27? >> I was wondering that too. warrant and not
for FY26. >> What if we said for dam repairs occurring in FY26? >> Yeah. >> Could you for the damn repair um per the
dam safety order issued? And I can get you the date >> per the damn safety order issued. Let me um just pull that up real quick. I think it was I think it was December 3rd Ben
>> to see if the town will vote to transfer from stabilization an amount not to exceed $83,845 for dam repairs occurring in FY26 per the dam safety order issued on
>> That's the date. That's the right date. >> All right. issued on 1235. >> Does that sound good? Okay. I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of article 16. >> No second. >> I cash I
>> I >> All right. Article 17 to see if the town will vote to borrow $800,000 for a firet truck. Take any other action. Little tip. >> I'll second that.
>> All right. Uh, sorry. I don't think I made a motion. I'm going to make a motion. >> Recommend approval of article 17 as read. >> All right. So, George, you're seconding. >> Yeah, I second. Yeah. >> All right. So, just to be clear, even though we don't think these funds are
going to get expended in FY27, we need to approve this so that the sale can actually like occur. >> Yeah. >> The purchase can occur, excuse me. >> Right. So that the fire chief can uh proceed. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh and this requires a
twothirds vote. >> Yeah. For for borrowing. >> Borrowing, right? Okay. All right. So, I'm gonna recommend um Wait, did I already do that? No. Yeah, we already did that. Okay, George seconded. Uh, so we'll start the voting. George,
>> any discussion? All right. Arvinis, >> Cashew. I >> Moer I >> Moss I. >> So, I >> All right. So, this I got from Leslie, two articles that the board of
assessors have uh right >> introduced. So, shall the town of Shootsbury revise a town meeting vote approved on May 5th, 2001, adopting clause 54
of section five of chapter 59 of the general laws to establish a minimum value of $6,500 on personal property subject to taxation. >> Okay. I don't know if anybody from the board of assessors
wants to share. Well, this is something this has been in operation >> uh for the last three years I believe >> where it's a meansetested um process that people who are over 65 can >> No, that's not what this
>> Oh, that's that's the next one. >> That's >> you're on to you're looking at 19, not 18. >> I am. >> Okay. >> This is this one here which sets a floor I guess for the assessed value of personal property. I think it was >> Oh, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
>> I do remember that conversation. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I I was jumping to article 19. Yes. >> I don't I don't understand what this is for. >> But how did the >> Go ahead. >> Well, so currently, if you have personal property and it amounts to less than
$1,500, we don't tax it. And that's really more a practicality policy because it's just the amount of effort that's involved for the assessors and the collectors to collect it. It just isn't worth that amount of money. The standard, the state allows you to
exempt personal property valued at up to $10,000 as a minimum. So, anybody who has personal property below $10,000 doesn't get taxed in some towns. We're raising we're recommending raising the limit to 6,500.
Um it's kind of the standard that a lot of towns around us are using. Belure town uses that which is where our new assessor comes from and he recommended it. >> Does personal property include cars? >> No, that's excise. So personal property in the town of
Shootsbury, it's a utility companies and anybody who has a second residence in uh an estate, the property in their home can be subject to personal property. So Lake Wyola, there's a number of t homes that are paying personal property taxes,
not on their homes because they're paying real estate property tax on that, but on some of the contents on their and it's generally not real large. Pardon me. >> These are like secondary dwellings on >> Yes, that's right. >> That's exactly what it is. I'm sorry. I should have mentioned that.
>> And also businesses with equipment. >> Some business and businesses too. Yes. So like a landscaper >> um if they have tractors, they can um if their tractor doesn't amount to $6,500, they don't have to pay a property tax on
that. But if it exceeds it, it does. Right now it's 1,500. And just so everyone knows, this is not lost revenue. What happens is it's less property tax. It's less personal property to be taxed. The tax rate will still get set to meet
the tax levy. It's just shifting some of what those personal property taxpayers were paying to the residential property taxpayers. And it we we came up with it adds about $4 to the average single family tax bill. So from our point of view, there was between $300 to $500
worth of savings by doing this >> mailing. Yeah. And the just so everybody knows, the assessor made the point that if we spend less time processing those, we're going to spend more time out on the road looking at properties, finding things that should be taxed like new
sheds, garages, and swimming pools. So to in his mind, this pays for itself in the long run. >> Would it be possible to kind of clarify that we're moving from 1500 to the 6,500? because I mean it kind of sounds
a little bit like the 6,500 is >> yeah we're not establishing it we're raising it >> but like I don't know I mean like just like to revise like just kind of general like I'm I don't know just >> No, I think you're right. I think we the town meeting vote
>> I mean I think this is going to this is going to be presented at annual town meeting and there will be >> okay >> I mean the the the somebody from the board of assessors is going to need to give an explanation. But maybe it'll make the explanation
shorter if it says up from 16002 >> then then people are done with it >> andor change establish >> since we're not establishing it we're >> to raise >> the minimum
>> value of 6,500 is on personal property >> well of no minimum value of personal property from 1,600 to raise the minimum value of 1,500 to 6,500. >> Yeah. >> Raising from is it sorry 1,500? You said
>> 15. It's 1,500. >> $1,500 to $6,500. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> To raise the minimum value from $1,500 to $6,500 on personal property subject to taxation.
um to raise the minimum value of $1,500 >> on property subject to taxation. Two, I'd put the 26,500 at the end of the sentence. >> Yeah. Or I'd take the minimum value in the and the other one at the end, >> right? >> To raise the minimum value from >> No,
>> to >> either way. Yeah. Right. Either way would be fine. >> That's good. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. So I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of article 18. Second
>> ice. >> Cashew I >> lo I >> moss eye. >> So I >> and I >> All right. April, you want to tell us about >> this is something we established in and
uh uh three years ago allowing people who are over 65 who uh qualify for the circuit breaker for Massachusetts income tax uh to apply for a reduction in their
property tax. Uh the um Yeah, that's it. >> Yeah. the the amount of the reduction is is established on an annual basis by the uh board of the of select the by the select board. I I can't remember what
the minimum is but the maximum is up to 200%. Right now it's 50%. >> So we're not actually changing anything. We're just simply updating property taxes. >> We have to we have to re revote it every I believe it's every three years.
>> Got it. Yeah. last one. Okay. So, >> and this this adds probably maybe one or two pennies per uh tax bill. >> I Yeah, on the tax rate. The tax bill, it's about $7.
>> Oh my god. >> Yeah, you're way off. >> Yeah. No, you're right. It's an It's like a penny on the tax bill. On the tax rate. >> It's very >> Yes. >> All right. >> It's been very helpful to people. Does it say somewhere that this is an um a
vote that has to be taken every three years? I mean, >> section reauthorized. >> Reauthorized. >> Like AJ said, we can set it on the floor. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> All right. And then this is just the actual text of the >> the language that was
>> Yes. >> back in 2022. All right. So I'm going to make a motion to recommend approval of article 19. >> I will second that. >> All right. >> I guess you I
>> time. >> Fortunately, I don't have I didn't realize until this morning. I'd forgotten that we usually have to vote on the MLP budget articles even though they >> we don't control it.
>> Yeah, we don't control it. But I don't have their current budget. I I emailed Gail Huntress and Jim this morning, but I think she's on me. She's >> And it would be article 19, right? I mean, um 20.
>> Oh, yeah. Uh all right. So, I don't think we can vote on this tonight um because we don't have the actual numbers, but >> we'll just have to do that maybe at the beginning of >> meeting with the select board. >> Meeting with the select board, but >> yeah.
uh just uh and then the other only other thing is is I haven't I haven't gotten any information about CPC uh articles and I know there's something right Haley there's >> there should be something um I can check
with Matteo tomorrow where that stands >> uh >> AJ why are you doing all those warn articles >> um does I mean who does who does I mean why wouldn't the CPA committee be >> no they do those but I think usually
what I like last year what I did was I somebody had sent I can't even remember who it was had sent those to me and since they needed to be voted on by the fincom I just >> cut it but I just I didn't I haven't received them yet >> but even the fincom ones I mean when I
was you know I've been on the fincom for a long time I didn't realize that the fincom chairs were the ones doing it I I think if you ask I think Becca used to do it. >> Yeah, I was going to say because when I chaired I didn't do them. >> Yeah, I think >> I don't think Jim did either.
>> I did them last year so I just assumed that I needed to do them this year. But uh >> Well, I appreciate you're doing it, AJ. I appreciate all you do. Actually, >> I like the way the language is simplified. Somehow I got very um lot of words written, numbers written out that weren't necessary, and it makes it
harder to read it. >> So, I I like it this simple version. >> You got to keep it concise. you. I agree. >> All right. So, I don't think there's anything else for us to vote on tonight. Um, but I think basically, so let me
just make sure make sure we're all clear on what we're doing next. Um, we are meeting with the select board a week from tonight. I believe the meeting is scheduled for five, but Haley, maybe you can let us know when they're going to
want to us to join that meeting. >> Yeah, I can see that because they'll have some other business to do first. >> You'll need to post it though and you'll need a time. >> Yeah. >> And that has to be done early enough. >> And I think what I'll do is is I'll post for maybe
30 minutes before we meet with the select board. then we can log on. We can talk about the uh we can vote on the MLP articles and the CPC articles and then
we'll just segue into the the select board. Is that >> well would we want to be in person as much as possible? >> Yeah, that's a good point actually. So um >> and don't we just pick a time and ask the select board to work around our schedule? Well, the thing is if we meet
in person, we can't meet with the select board because they're going to be conducting business. >> But can we find can can we use that upstairs room that we used to use for FinCom meetings way back when? >> Yeah, the little one. Yeah, >> does he have to reserve it?
>> Um I don't think anyone's going to be in there. >> This is usually we met in the land use clerk room. >> Well, yeah. So, >> I mean, right now it's only the select board that's scheduled to meet. And if
anyone wanted to meet by Tuesday, they got to post tomorrow. Yeah. >> So, I'd say your odds are pretty good. >> When he posts, he's going to pick the location. And that means he reserves it by default. >> Yeah. >> What is that? What is that room called besides post?
>> It's not really a name for it. You could just say land use clerk office. >> Used to call it the conference room. >> Yeah, that was it. Right. There's a conference room and there's the room. There's the council for aging room and there's the select board room. >> Um I I think I would prefer to meet in
person because it gets a little wonky when we're with the select board and they're in person and we're on screen. So >> we could actually meet in the um um senior lounge. We'd be right next door. >> Oh yeah, we can do that.
>> Yeah, we'll just have to keep the door closed. Yeah, >> we are. >> They can knock and let us. >> Yes, that's true. All right. >> All right. So, why don't we set a time that works for us and then we can have the select board slate us according to that. We'll just need I think I'll plan
on us needing 30 minutes before we meet with them. Uh, do we want to say 5:30? >> Yeah, >> sure. >> That works. >> Okay. So, Haley, can would it be okay if if if we just ask the select board for
us to join them at six o'clock? >> Yeah. Okay. >> I'm sure they'd be fine with that. >> Okay. I'm going to post for 5:30 and the senior lounge will be the location. Okay.
All right. Anything else for us to cover before we adjourn? >> Minutes. the >> the other the other I feel like we need to have a running list of stuff we're going to deal with a um once we get
through this warrant part which is um things that we're wanting to let town the town know things like the um salary adjustment that process this is coming up um >> well I was thinking of delivering that
just as the personnel board as our report. >> Okay. It's just it's not in the budget. Um and well, at least tell everybody who was thinking they were going to get adjusted ahead of time and then maybe we can just put it out the p but it should
be a personal message so it's not left out. It's not ignored. So, so I think if I understand it correctly, what we're what what the personnel board is going to be saying is that what we're we're
um revising the calculations and those will be applied in FY28. Is that is that the >> Yeah. Well, you don't want it worded so that you're guaranteeing that you're going to give an increase. I thought we were going to do it in the September um
in the fall town meeting >> if it's needed. >> If it's needed, but okay. >> I just don't want to promise people something. That's all. Yeah, >> the the personnel board is going to meet with all of the town employees after town meeting and then we're going to
have a subcommittee from that the board meet with each individual employee just going over job description and actual hours that people are working >> because those numbers have are variable. >> Yeah. >> You know, people are many people are
working far beyond what they're being paid for. We want to get that straight. >> Yeah. And the assessor's office you definitely need to look at. >> Oh god. Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Um. All right. Anything else?
>> Minutes. Like I said, we got three minutes. >> I want Oh, yeah. I want to make clear um get cleared up with Haley. As I understood it, the MIA is going to cover everything beyond the
10,000 that we pay. Is that right? Is that how >> what they've what they have told me is that we have the 10K deductible and that's all that they've said is that we that's what our policy has in it. And you know, I'm in pretty much constant
comment, constant contact with um both licensed site professionals speaking to them today. We've decided to do some proactive testing on neighboring wells that are but the school. So that's all the information that I can
give. So, at some future FINCOM meeting, we're going to have to do a fincom transfer of $10,000 for to to pay that deductible. Correct. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Because I don't I don't know how it works in terms of like if it's up to like a certain day that they pay until you know if it incorporates like this layer of testing but not this layer of testing. But I their report should be
coming in pretty soon. So that'll give me a better idea. And I wasn't in the office the last two days. So I need to check in with them again. >> That'll put FinCom reserve to 42. >> Mhm. Yeah. >> Well, and it sounds like it's not it's
not totally cleared up yet, so we don't know. Um and any more expenses that we need to be knowing, >> right? But if it's under insurance, they should be covering all of it. Well, she she was just saying she didn't know if they cover all the days of testing or
only certain days up to a certain number of days. >> I only know that we get the deductible. Yeah. And I just don't I'm not comfortable making >> I don't want to say something if I'm not totally sure. I know we have the deductible. So, I would imagine that that covers things, but just until I can
verify 100% that's what I'll leave it at. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, well, I know it's we've got a bunch of minutes that have accumulated, but it is kind of late, so I'm thinking
>> I'm okay waiting. It's just we got more next time. >> Yeah, I know. It's bad, but we'll we've we've we've had we got a lot of work done tonight, so >> maybe we can get some of them done while we're waiting for the select board. >> Yeah, exactly. >> That'll be first. >> Yeah.
>> All right. Just remember, I sent out three of them so far, so you all better have them accessible to you. >> All right, we got it. >> All you do, Jo. All right. Um, so then I'll make a motion to adjurnn our meeting. >> I'll second that. >> Okay,
>> I cash you I >> Moer I. >> Los I do I >> and Stein I. >> Okay, great. Thanks everybody. I'm going to send you the budget and the warrant articles that we just chatted about.
>> And will you send us the debt schedule? >> Uh, I think I did earlier. You should have it in your inbox. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And then I'll I'll CC um Ryan as well if I remember to do that. >> And I'll post for next Tuesday
5:30 in the senior lounge. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Good night everybody. >> Good night. Thanks, Captain. >> Bye. >> See you. Yeah. Good job, AJ. >> All right.