Good evening. >> Hey everyone. >> Hi. There. All right. >> See orange. All right.
Is this everybody right? One, two, one, two. >> There it is. >> Yeah. [clears throat] Oh yes. There it is. I got a message. Well, I think I'll call the end comp to order at 6:31. I think Meredith will be
joining us because I want to call a message from her. So, uh, hope everybody's having a good summer. Um, let's see. Uh, let's do a couple things in order. I guess we can start. So,
here's kind of a quick >> rundown of the agenda tonight. We're going to review minutes uh from our last meeting. We're going to do a final set of endofear lineto line transfers.
Um, we're going to talk about the TAI and bond contract extension. Uh, I'm hoping we can take a little time to look at the long range planning tool and talk about next steps on that. Uh,
and then I'm sure there's some other updates that uh, folks might want to make sure we have a few minutes to discuss at the end. Am I missing anything? Okay. Uh let's look at minutes from
>> June 16. >> June 16th. Let's see. I had one and I know this which was I think Molly was absent but I don't think she's labeled as absent on that. Um, was it the 16th?
>> She's listed as absent. >> She is. I must have looked at the wrong >> Well, she is on the July one. >> Okay. >> No, June 16th. She's >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Laura. Laura, too. That's right. >> Yeah. Right. >> Okay. Got it. >> Right. And then Molly, you were not at the last one either, right?
>> Right. All right. >> Because Molly did correct me on that one. I want to make sure I got the right one. >> Yeah, I did. Okay. Entrance. All right. So, >> I did make changes on it since I sent it out. >> Okay.
>> In section two under the elementary school capital on number C, letter C. Um Susie corrected me on the on the dollar amount for the feasibility design analysis. It was really 150,000. >> Okay. So, so I corrected that and and I
went back and looked at the recording because just to be sure, um I also looked at the recording and realized that that 10 million wasn't mentioned. >> AJ, I think you mentioned 1 million. Yeah. >> But I think it's actually something different than that. So, I changed the
second sentence, the third sentence to say construction grants are also available for the conversion to heat pumps. And I just ended it there. >> Okay, got it. That way we don't have to worry about being accurate. >> Okay. Um, and don't let me forget, I got
an interesting update on this just as just right before the meeting, I got a email from Michael Deier that I want to update you guys on. Okay. Um, anybody have any other Well, did you make any other changes?
>> Uh, no, that's it for me. >> Okay. Anybody else have >> suggestions or >> All right. I will make a motion to approve the minutes from June 16th as amended. >> Second. >> Okay.
>> Coveris. >> Uh let's see. We got a new here. So, cashew eye, >> moer eye, >> I think I think we skipped Frank. >> You want me? >> Yes. Sorry. [laughter] >> Sorry. MC. Yes.
>> Uh, sorry. Do I abstain? >> Okay. >> Abstain. Right. >> Okay. Right. Uh, all right. So, the minutes are approved and then we have June for uh July 14th, right? Yes, >> George. Okay. Yeah. All right. And this
is the one where you've already made the correction about uh >> attendance. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Got it. I didn't see anything else for me. Does anybody have any >> um suggestions or >> edits? Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the
minutes from July 14th as amended. Second >> I cash I >> moer I >> Mossai. >> Great. All right.
So we are caught up on minutes. Great. Okay. And also uh >> Great. And then Laura, are you taking over as of this meeting or is that Yeah, next meeting. Okay, great. Awesome.
[laughter] >> And AJ, if I may, one thing. Um, >> yeah, please. >> It might be helpful to get in the habit of doing the AI on the minutes and sending the notes to Laura. I think it would be helpful. >> Yeah. Yeah. I can't recall. Does that uh
is that a default >> option here? Let's see. Yeah, it's the it's next to the uh shield with the the green shield. >> Yeah, >> I don't know if it happens automatically. I think it's remembering to send it to her when it's done. >> Okay. So, I think there are a couple of
things. One is there's transcription which is automatically um set, but I think you're talking about the AI uh companion is on. Yes. Okay. So, what you're suggesting, George, is that at
the end of the meeting that um that gets shared with um with Laura so she can kind of have that as Okay, that makes sense. >> And I mean, if Laura decides she doesn't mind, right, Laura, you can just let them know. Don't bother. But I think it's going to be helpful on on it will
be. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's a good idea. >> I think there some people >> I'm sorry. I I do the same thing for the buildings committee. There's like five forms. You should >> when you It takes about 15 minutes after the end of the meeting for it to >> do everything.
>> Okay. >> And then and then you could you could look at what form is best. You know, they have like five different forms and they give you the default one and see which one's best because some are >> okay. >> It's not as good. >> Okay. Got it. It looks like one of them,
if if I'm if I'm thinking of the what if I'm um seeing what you're describing, is a meeting summary that includes some kind of transcript. Uh but so maybe that's that's the one. Okay, sounds
good. So, I'll take a look at that after we wrap up and I'll send that to you, Laura, or I'll send you a link. I can't I don't know if it's a document that gets downloaded or if it's just a link. Okay, great. Um,
next up, why don't we do end of year transfers? I'm going to pull that document up. And we've got quite a few, >> but I think we can I think we can kind of just look at them together
and then kind of vote on them as a the group of of transfers. Let's see. Okay. Um Okay. So this is endofear transfers part
two. Okay. How's that for? >> Good. >> Font size. That work. Okay. >> Look at them all. >> Yeah. So we've got quite a few. I mean most of them are fairly small. >> Um you know I was trying to think of the ones that I was a little surprised by.
One was legal expense. I didn't >> I didn't I didn't that that wasn't on my sort of radar. Hey Lou, do do you have any um background or context that might be helpful for knowing what it was about the legal line
that sort of >> think >> things that we didn't anticipate needing additional legal guidance on and we had also utilized hippie law for some of the personnel board um sorry personnel like handbook related items. I see. Um
>> okay. [clears throat] And for some I mean I think these were all Yeah, I think that one was certainly a high ticket item. The independent audit also came in at a higher figure than we had initially >> projected. Um the electricity was due to
the the lag between when the library went live and when the solar panels kicked in. Um >> yeah, >> you know the the town administrator salary line that was because you didn't have a draft of my contract which would have told you that to budget in that increase,
>> right? >> Um there was some additional fire department calls and then subsequent trainings. >> Um and then I think everything else is fairly low there. A little extra in the veterans benefits than we had first planned. Um but the biggest factor was
the snow and ice, both the wages and the expenses. Um, >> got it. >> Um, could I follow up? >> Yeah, please. >> On the independent audit, I was very surprised by that. >> Yeah, >> because I thought we build that up each year and we roll over the balance so
that there's plenty. And I'm concerned if we did if we ran out last year, we're going to run out this year, too. >> Yeah. What's that? >> Yeah. So, I don't have I mean, I don't have the prior year comparisons in front of me. I could definitely dig into that
a little bit more. um and see how >> Yeah, I think you need to >> Yeah, I think you need to look into that one because we were building it up annually and rolling it over and I thought we had >> that was that was one that's like every
required every two years or three years. >> Every two years. >> Every two years. >> I think it's longer than two years. >> I think it was three years, but it might go to two years because we're bonding for the library. >> Oh, >> and it may have been an off year. may have been uh uh unexpected. Well, maybe
not unexpected, but came a year sooner because of the library. So, Haley, you >> that could that that potentially explain it, right, George? If if if if it's you if it's an amount that's usually acrewing over three years, but because
of the bonding issue, we had to do it a year early. Maybe that that might explain. >> I think that makes sense. I mean, I don't know that my memory is not so good, but uh that might be it. That would make sense. >> Yeah. >> The other thing I wanted to ask about was um and I was thinking the same thing. I was curious about the legal,
but the the other two that you didn't mention, Haley, are towards the bottom, the rubbish and the sanitary landfill were also >> fairly substantial. >> Yeah, I can check in with Merryill about that. >> Yeah, the rubbish there must be, right?
Because that's a contract. So, I wonder if there's like something in the contract that allows them to >> to to sort of bill us for sort of excess costs. Maybe fuel related. I don't know what it would be, but uh >> yeah, maybe it's a fuel class. That's a
good idea. It's interior landfill is probably related to volume. Maybe our volume was just higher. >> Yeah, >> I don't know. >> I think this also means that we can't solve these at this point. And so, um, one, we need a heads up when it's
happening. And then two, it needs to be figured out. And we could have a threshold at which point it has to be figured out. But, um, I mean, it's not like we didn't have a legal line in our budget. This is spending over that. And,
um, so we we when we come to this point, we need some explanations. It's um >> Yeah. and and we can't we don't have all the information to be able to figure it out from here. >> Yeah. So there is let's see there is an
explanation. >> Yeah. It doesn't cover all of those things. Gail doesn't have each of those. You know she has the ones for the biggest items. >> Yeah. >> Um you know or why we were over for building the heating >> electrical inspection. Um
>> we owed some people longevity. >> Yeah. But I can definitely get some answers for you um for those specific questions. The other >> the other related question I have Haley is >> Gail had
along with this document had sent um you know an expense report dated July 16th and I'm going to put that up right now was that like I would see these
um overages on reflected on that you know expense report but it doesn't really it doesn't seem to be the case. I'm not sure that it would because she would need she needs the select board and fin
to sign off on these before she can make the transfers. >> Right. But I guess >> we should see the deficits, >> right? So So here, like let's look at this the legal. So if I'm reading this correctly, it's showing a balance
15,000, not a deficit. So, but maybe that's because this expense report is not meant to track with this list of of >> it. It It
>> does. It's just I think it's a timing issue. I >> Yeah, it could be. I thought the same thing, AJ, and I went to the website >> and I found a file called FY26 >> July 31st, >> and I thought, "Oh, here's the real
one." I opened it. It was actually the first one for FY27. It's mislabeled. >> I see. >> So, the the >> So, the final >> I'm just gonna say the final one may not be have made it to us.
>> Okay. Yeah. I this is partly this is partly my mistake because I didn't I didn't actually do the crosswalk of these two documents until this afternoon and then noticed that. So maybe what I'll do is is I'll I'll shoot Gail a
message asking her if there's a final expense report for FY26 that we haven't seen yet and if if it's available just confirm that it should
with the the costs that we're seeing on the the on this um list of of endofear transfers. Uh, I can ask her about that >> and I personally am okay with with voting on these tonight, but I think that's a really helpful thing to have.
Also, if if I'm if I can just turn this conversation sideways just for a minute. When you look at the report that you just had on the screen, the unspent balance at the bottom is $635,000. After this transfer, it goes to $495.
And it seems to me like that's too high. It's unusual for us to get five $495,000 in a year at year end from unspent lines. >> Yeah, it's clearly not the final, right? Uh let's see. Um Okay. >> Well, and it's I don't think it's the
final before these transfers. It's probably two ago. Yeah. >> Right. Yeah, exactly. Um Okay. And [clears throat] in the independent audit, we had $10,000
um saved. So, you know, if if something was going to be different than what we had, we need to hear about it coming, I think. And we also need to understand if that is a change in like next year's uh
savings up for the audit. and and we had 20,000 in legal um >> uh allocated and so and that was following those years that were really high. So we need to know if there's a reason to be allocating more than 20,000
in legal and that's kind of all of those issues. We need to see it. We need to see why so we know what to do for the next funding cycle. >> Yeah. So the on in that expense report that Gail sent with this list,
>> the independent audit line is showing zero expended and a balance of $15,935. So this that would suggest that
the cost of the audit must be more like $20,000. Uh if I'm assuming that got spent and then it got over spent by an additional $4,000. So um I will ask Gail
about that as well. Um, okay. Let me pull back up this document. So, if it wasn't clear, let's see. Okay. Um, we are Gail is suggesting a
few different things here. One is we've got a um uh a total of 92,000 and change in um excess
spending. And she's proposing that we zero out the fincome reserve fund >> so [clears throat] that 47,000 and change gets applied to the snow and ice wages. And then there's an
additional, you know, roughly $54,000 in snow and ice expenses that get that get paid through either health insurance or highway wages. So, um I think that was a
question at one point earlier this year about whether we would like carry a balance over into FY27. And it sounds like her recommendation is that we're going to pay >> Yeah. We're going to just use transfers to to to [laughter]
>> fully pay our FY26 expense, right? >> Okay. Um, anybody see anything else? Yeah, please go ahead. >> For the snow and ice, wasn't there something about the state allocating more money for communities for that? >> They have, but it's not available yet.
And then there's also So, every state there's a formula. So there's a pot of money and like 80% of that money get goes to the municipalities and then you can apply for additional funding from that remaining 20%. So we have the
application and we do intend to apply but we don't have it in hand to be able to process out the um end of year transfers. >> So if we get an award it'll go into free cash. >> Um I'd have to check with Gail exactly
where it's going to go but I believe that we could apply it to some some of the path bills, but I would need to double check with her on that language. >> Yeah. Either way though, right, it's going to end up pret. >> Yeah. >> And we we don't have any sense of how
the formula what it how of the 80% how what that >> is going to yield for sheets. >> I believe it's based off of chapter 90, although I could I could Google it. That's all right. Yeah, just be All
right. Well, that'll be good. Um All right. Anything else stick out? >> I'm a little confused at why there's so much um so many highway wages
that were unspent that went against this list. H yeah, >> we had an employee that was out for many months, several months last year. Um he was on paternity and so we didn't have any other employees step in. So there
was that excess there. The excess in the clerk salary that's uh you know obviously we went most of that last year without a town clerk and um I think that was oh and police wages. So having >> Yeah, we know that >> you know
>> but in the highway wages um did was there a paternity leave um benefit? >> He was able to use his saved um PTO and then once that was exhausted he was on paid leave.
>> Okay. So the the last that that last expense report or at least the one dated July 16th is showing uh an ending balance for the highway wages line of 21,000
and change. So it was spent at about 82% of the um budgeted amount for that line. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So let's see. And she's how much is she using here? uh five
8 16 it looks like about 16,000 or so of that um is being used here. Uh okay, any other
questions? Anything else need to be followed up on here? Okay. Um, I meant to look this up, but Haley, I I have a one thing I was hoping we could double
check, which is that this is the real balance in the fincom reserve. >> It is. >> Um, it is. Okay, that double checked. Okay good. >> We're off by a dollar on our spreadsheet. >> Okay, great. Good. Okay. So, I think
what I'll do is make a motion to approve um these uh line-to-line transfers uh reflected in this document as ex as recommended by our accountant.
>> I have one question before we do that. Um, >> we had some um I it's probably in the minutes. We met some expenses that hadn't been anticipated and I'm trying to remember
um Yeah. So, where are those? Were these like the longevity >> section D um of boore and we had some unfunded budget lines for like the custodian
and the sigh highway super for longevity bud um >> yeah they're not there >> right >> and for longevity bonuses. So I see the highway superintendent, but that's not his. Well, his number is on the longevity.
>> It's 300. >> Yes. >> Longevity. >> Yeah, there was a longevity line. >> No, there was a mistake in the accounting of the highway superintendent Valerie. And so that is what's there
before you. These are not the longevity. >> Yeah. So Susie's point is valid. Why aren't they on here? Because we >> the custodian and the highway one need to get their longevity bonuses on this list right? >> Is that is it possible that that was
already taken care of in that first wave of >> lineto line transfers? >> I'll try to find >> Yeah, because we voted on July what whatever that was July 14 14
>> we voted to transfer 7,600 $35 from uh Fincom Reserve. >> Those were for the FY27. These are the ones for FY26, which we're looking at right here. >> There were two pieces
>> that weren't covered. And our notes say the FY26 unfunded budget lines will be covered by year-end transfers, but I don't see >> I see what you're saying. That's a good catch, Susie. Okay. I I see what you're saying. Right. So, there was two custodian I'm sorry. I know you just
said this, but So, it's the custodian for 500 and highway for 30 >> or 300. >> I mean 300. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. So, right. Those are FY26 unfunded budget lines. Okay. >> Um
>> and I don't think it came up until after >> Yeah. >> we So, they should be added to the bottom of this. >> Okay. Uh should we go ahead and and and and put them in now? Assuming that that's uh
that Gail just wasn't informed about that. >> Um we don't know. We don't know where to we don't know where to take them from. Right. Yeah. >> Right. I mean, so I'll see Gail
tomorrow. I can ask her. Um we could definitely send out another document. >> Yeah. to you. Um, and then I I'll have answers. >> Yeah. And then I'll have the questions about the the other two accounts for
you. All right. >> I mean the answer at that time. >> Yeah. Maybe what we can do is we can approve these transfers now as written and and prepared by Gail >> and then we can take a separate like
conditional vote to approve the other the final two [clears throat] transfers assuming um confirmation from from Gail about what the sources of those funds are. Well, that's I would you know what Susie just read was us approving doing that
and it's in the minutes of the meeting of the se of the 14th of July. So Haley, you might want to ask Gail if she needs to make them. Would those minutes >> be adequate uh support and based essentially PR approval. >> Yeah.
>> Except for this is well it's not closing document but it is a document that also the select board have to vote on. So I feel it should be attached here or written some way that it's conditional. We approve this plus another 800. >> Yeah.
>> These two identified cost >> right from a source to be determined by our accountant. >> I it it can probably wait two weeks and I wouldn't be surprised if Gail didn't find another one or two and we had
another one of these. Anyways, >> I I'm not sure we need to address it. And for all we know, Gail figured something out and that's why it's not on here. >> Well, >> uh, did she is she the person that for initially
um noticed that Haley or or did it came from personnel or >> the longevity? >> Yeah. For for the custodian and the superintendent super >> like is she aware? >> Is it possible she wasn't aware of that? >> It's possible. Um, you know, I think
there were there was a lot of confusion over longevity and who gets it and when. >> Um, >> so it's very likely she has caught other longevity misses. >> Um, >> at the end of the year, she sees every line. So, if those lines were over
spent, she would know it. >> They weren't identified in the FY26 budget. >> That's the problem. We didn't we didn't know about them until Haley did the table. Um, and she did that in the capacity of the personnel board making
these clear. So, I think one of the parts of this is we didn't say at the end of our vote. Um, Haley, you need to go back and talk to Gail because this is new information for her. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's what I'm wondering about is if she just isn't she's
[clears throat] not aware of it. Um, all right. So, let's do this. Uh, I think I' I've made a motion to approve these transfers as written in this document. Um, let's handle this one first. Uh, is there a second? >> Yes, second.
>> Okay. All right. Any other discussion about this? All right. George >> I. >> Cashew. I >> McI. >> Moer I. >> Moss. I >> Okay. And then I think what I will do
just in case it saves us, you know, some time and and helps I don't know when the select board needs to review this list. I'm going to suggest and I'll make a motion to um
uh provide conditional approval of two additional FY26 line-to-line transfers. $500 for the custodian's longevity bonus and $300 for the highway superintendent's longevity
bonus to come from a source recommended by the accountant. Second. >> Okay. Any other discussion about that? >> I cash I
>> I >> MOS I >> Okay. Um and H out that you need something like that's not sufficient from for us for those last two just let us know. We can do it in the next meeting. >> It should be good. The select board
meets tomorrow, so I can have them sign, scan it, and get it to all of you. >> Great. >> And talk to Gail. >> Okay. So, that's line-to-line transfers. All right. Um >> Haley, can you walk us through the um
tie and bond contract issue? Yeah. And just especially well I think Frank you might have some of this background but just in case maybe you could sort of give us a little bit of background on what they've been doing and yeah you know um
>> um >> what what the >> the long story is when when they were doing all the library work we discovered that there was peass at the old fire station and you know trickled down and moved through the ground. So we we've
essentially reached the end of our current contract of services with Tai Bond. And so initially they had um I had said yes, you know, we'd like to continue. Could you give us a proposal? And what they had submitted was about $100,000 a year for the next three
years. So I said, you know, that's a that's too big a price tag. We're going to have to go out to procure that. um could you just so that we don't lose any you know state dead marks and any reporting deadlines can can you just give us like 6 months so that we can
continue doing the service and that'll give us ample time to put together a bid and um go through that whole process. So what you see in this proposal is for there's 14 double filtered poet systems
and then it's also budgeted I think for about 30 or so homes that have the single vessel poet. Um, >> yeah, 30. >> And I I could not go into the scientific specifics of that, but um, what I can tell you is that this proposal clocks in
at just about $63,000 and would get us through the end of December. Um, it would cover um the the reports that have to be submitted every six months. um and that there would be a status report that the Thai bond would
submit and some additional site assessments. Um there are some things that this does not cover which doesn't deviate too significantly from what we're currently doing but like if somebody needs bottled water because
they they are water tested um and they don't have the poet system we would be responsible for that. uh you know we already pay for laboratory analytic services um through PACE and um you know public notification letters. Brennan is
very diligent about doing that and getting that back and um you know poet installations and the like. So it's still a substantial cost. Yeah, >> it was not something that was um on the town's radar when we were in budget season. It came in very very much at the
end um of last fiscal year and so and it's a significant expense. It's not as much as they quoted us for the full year of service. Um and we are required to do the reporting and the testing and the monitoring. Um so it's something
that we have to think about and ultimately plan for procurement where we can hopefully get something a little bit more competitive than what they've given us. So, sorry, Haley. Are you saying that it was going to cost us $100,000 for a year and now it's costing us $63,000 for half
a year? >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> Yes, they quoted us >> even more. [clears throat] >> Makes sense. >> And that's not the only cost. >> No, it's not the only cost. Um, I mean I
can definitely, you know, I wanted to just bring it to your attention and I can go back and say if there are terms that we we want to include or exclude um to continue the conversation, but I before I did anything, I just wanted to bring it to you and the select board
first. So just so I'm clear, Haley, this scope here is essentially the kind of minimal level of compliance work that we are obligated
to perform, right? It's testing of existing houses that have already been identified as having excessive >> um PAS >> contamination levels. It's not
installation of any additional new poets. Does it include testing the additional sort of surrounding area outside of the currently identified? >> Yes. >> Zone of Yeah. So that's
>> the way that they would do it is if something new was identified, then if you go back to page one, they would do a 500 foot radius around that point and they would test. >> I see. So it wouldn't just be what's happening now. They would, you know, continue to
test and see what the because sometimes it shifts and one home may register as having it, you know, for one testing cycle and then not for the next because that's just the way that the groundwater moves. >> Okay. And I know there's a few hands up, but if I just could ask one more
question. I'm curious about whether this so this doesn't break down those costs by you know any kind of like specific units. So like is there a cost per test
or per home or something like that? Um, I wonder if they would be I mean obviously they they arrived at this figure of $62,700 somehow, but we don't see the underlying math. It might be I think it's reasonable for us to ask for that. And I
would be curious if the cost, I don't know what the terminology is, but if the cost per test or per home or uh it's probably per test is more or less consistent with what we've been paying them over the last couple
years or if there's been any significant change in that cost. Those does those sound like reasonable questions for us to ask them? you know, >> there's lots. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh Susie,
>> so first of all, um I don't know how this compares to the services offered in the last contract. I don't know if they had these things called um we're including five additional
private well locations per sampling round. I don't know if it's in if that was what they were doing before. Um I don't know if any um thing happens within the 500 foot radius if that will
be an additional cost or is that caveat there meant to cover some of it. Um the previous um contract for most of it was quarterly testing. Um,
I believe, well, I know it's gone to only semianual testing. Um, and like Molly, I don't understand why half a year is more than half of what they were proposing in the longer range three-year contract,
but I don't know if that three-year contract was really taking into consideration that it's now semiannually, not quarterly. So I don't know um if there has been a process of comparing what we were getting before and for that cost and what we're getting
in this proposal and like you said if we had a a a per cost per household um we would know a little bit more about it but there is the difference between a household that has double poets and a household that has single. Um,
[clears throat] so I think I think if maybe Haley's gotten some of these answers, how does this compare to the last one? Why is it more than half of their proposal for the next three years? And and then we'll have to talk about
the funding. I would understand this to be we have some funding in FY27. Um, and we we have talked about how we need to look at look at the funding stream, make it an operating cost, blah blah
blah. But, um, I would I would I would think that there's some already matched up funding in our FY27 budget for this. >> So, I can answer some of those questions. Um, so the first the 2022
proposal is more localized. um there are fewer fewer poet systems that were part of that testing. So this is it's a greater expanse. It's definitely more um of the testing. It also covers more of the state reporting
which has changed a lot from when when we first signed this contract with them several years ago. It's more comprehensive now. There's more steps involved in what's required to go to the state. And as far as um you know the the laboratory fees have
always been built to the town. Some of the other standout pieces of this um for the services not included you know is again the B so there's more cost the town in the sense of the bottled water and the public notification letters and the poet
install cost. Um but this essentially the scope has increased so the I mean I guess at its most core level scopees increased so the price has increased. in terms of testing um and the number >> uh George.
>> Oh yeah, two points. Um first of all, the contract is not a fixed price contract. It it states not to exceed and then it goes on to say that it's based on um I don't have in front of me anymore, hours plus um an hourly plus expense basis. So they're just giving
their high estimate of what it could be and sticking to that number. >> But it would be interesting I I agree with you AJ to see the components of it. How many hours are they estimating and what kind of rate do they think they'd bill us at? And then the other question the bigger question is yeah Susie was
saying we might have some of this budget in FY27. [clears throat] We have we need to look into that. We need to really understand what our annual costs are going to be going forward. And obviously this is an amendment. It's only good for six months. It's really that contract that gets signed for the new year that's
going to give us better information for that. Um, but right, we've been using loans to get us through. We have a fund. What's the status of the fund? What's the balance of the fund? How long is that going to last? And h how are we going to work this expense? Because it seems it's it's an ongoing expense and
there is no outside funding for it at this point. So, you know, that's something I hope we can uh follow up on. >> I mean, it sounds like we have our answer at least, you know, that we've been to a question we've been
asking about, which is what is our our sort of ongoing expense. And maybe this is the answer. It's $100,000 a year, assuming this problem stays relatively contained. Maybe maybe that's
not a maybe that's not the right assumption to make. I don't know. But um >> well I would just just one thing about that but also all the fees for fee fast because there's the lab fee >> and then there's there's test there's some other fees that are referenced in here that they don't cover and so right >> we need you know what do we need to fund
in that line >> right uh Frank >> yeah I just wanted to ask about the um the testing I thought we were at a finite stage that we've had so many houses and we test there.
Um, and they they've all they don't go farther out because they haven't been tested. They they test negative. Is that true? >> So, the process of testing Oh, excuse me. The process of testing is that each each semi annually they test all of them
and if anybody shows up that wasn't being detected before then they have to um look farther and also because PAS is not a stable thing there can be no detects on um some of those 30 houses
and then they detect it and it becomes um one that has to be followed up on the 500 foot range. Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, I guess there's So, Haley, I think you've got a couple
things um questions to follow up on. Um let's just assume a scenario where we decide this um this extension needs to get funded. um what is our
process? So, so what are we proposing to do here? So, part of it is one step would be to see if there's existing balance in our um PAS loan
um balance, right? Uh that could cover some or or all of this. So, that would be one question. Um who who would have the answer to that? Is that is that is that something that Ryan could track for us or is it in our general expense
report? Uh anybody know this? >> Ryan would be my first go too. >> Yeah. >> You might also have insights about what we have to do. >> Okay. >> For like a yearong contract. >> Yeah. All right. So, let me make a note.
All right. So >> it also helps to ask Gail. >> Yeah. >> Where these are being tracked in the expense report. >> Okay. So let's take one scenario. Let's assume that there's insufficient
funds in our um loan uh balance to cover this cost. Are we are we going to a special town meeting and um uh to
um procure funds for this or I mean is there uh I assume that's what we'd have to do right >> that would be yeah we'd have to do special town meeting which um in our bylaw would be some Saturday in October
and I think we would also need to decide IDE, you know, once the contract extension is up in December, you know, how do we maintain this that service until the start of the new fiscal year? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I'm looking at the uh expense report and
under hot um I have to under the hot uh is it under the highway? No, it's in in between. Uh it's on page let me see what page. >> What's the line number? I I'm getting
there. I'm on page 12. Um >> Oh. Oh. >> And it's and it's a So I'm on page 12. I near the bottom of the page and it's called PAS contamination and it started the year with
198,000. >> Took out some money and it says we have 95,897. And that's what we were talking about when we were looking at FY27 that we that money is listed on the
expense report. So yes, we can make a a plan B, but >> right >> um it's really understanding how it's showing up in our um in our expense report and you know talking to Ryan can help too, but um >> yeah,
>> unless we're wrong and and this has a line number, you know, it's a long number. Um, >> yeah, I don't need it. Never mind. >> Did you, if you happen to go to the expense report, you can see it on page 12 near the very bottom. >> Yep. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. I think the only thing with that is just making sure that, you know, like I said, I think the full first year that they quoted was like 106,000. So, even if we have that much in that account now, it might not get us through for a one-year contract. And so, I just want to try to make sure that we plan for
that. Mhm. >> And and h and Haley just I mean one of your earlier points was that >> this is a cost that's large enough to to
require us to put this out to bid. Is that >> did I understand that correctly? Yeah. Yeah. >> And do we know are there are there you know numerous >> uh firms that do this engineering firms that do this kind of testing? Do we do
we know uh >> there's there's several different firms. I had talked to some other TAs. Um and there's a couple towns that use I >> would have to look at my email to for the vendor name, but there they had also recommended a different provider. >> Um I mean the the bid process is great
and that it could be more competitive. I mean, maybe some of the things that aren't being covered now could be covered. >> Um, >> you know, I just like to have that like worst case scenario plan, but my hope is that through procurement, we would actually get something that's maybe a little bit less than we were first
quoted and has more value. >> Yeah. >> GZA ga is another one. >> They probably >> Yeah. Well, I think that other thing that is troublesome is that we did not
understand that >> the contract would be well, they're saying it's only a half a year. Um, but our fiscal year and this
contract thing doesn't seem to jive, but we were looking at having enough for an FY27 and we were only off by maybe 5,000. So, um, so I
I guess what we I don't know what we didn't know. I don't understand why, you know, we wouldn't just go for the 100,000 which we seem pretty prepared for. Um, it's clear that the contractires,
>> but why would we go for a half year instead of a whole year which we believe we are set up to fund? >> That was because then that would allow us to have time to go through procurement. you know, I didn't I don't know when I saw those figures and I, you
know, was thinking about it and having talked to other TAs, I mean, I didn't I wanted to see what else was out there. Um, you know, we we work with Tai and Bond and they've been really good to us, but I think that, you know, to me, we owe it to ourselves to just see what
other options there might be if we went through that process. And we can even start on the state approved vendor list and try to get something similar. But my goal was how do we how do we maintain the testing that we need to do in the short term and have time to go through procurement because it can be a lengthy
process. >> So because the contract expires is why it has to come open to a bid. Is that right? >> Period. Just period. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Got it. Okay. All right. Um
All right. Makes sense. All right. So, so we've got got a few in terms of follow-ups here. We've got some questions for Ty and Bond. We've got some questions for Ryan and Gail, potentially Gail about um source of
funds. We have a decision to make once we have those answers about whether to um request additional appropriate additional funds
uh at a special town meeting for this purpose to car because obviously this contract only covers us for one one round of testing. Um and then Haley, I guess, right? There's no reason why, and maybe you already have.
There's no reason why why we can't start the um procurement process for the back half of the year and maybe even build that as like a longer term contract that carries into FY28,
right? Is that Yeah. >> No, we can start that soon. >> Okay, great. All right. Any other questions? >> I think the other thing about the 95,000 that's sitting in that line is like Kaylee said, there are other expenses
that are probably paid out of that, some of the lab testing and blah blah blah. So, it could be insufficient for the year and we'll wrestle with that when we get a clearer picture. But I still am struck by the idea this is a half year. They've already completed the spring um
testing and it's a high number. 62 is high and and it really is high when you think about they were doing four testings in the past and it's true they're doing more homes, but it also stabilized a little bit in the past. It
wasn't it didn't continue to the original was you like bam bam bam. It was expanding. So, I feel like there's not a clear apples to apples here. And I don't know, we also have the problem that Tyen Bond lost the person that was doing it, Jeffrey Arps. And so, whoever
is in on it now, whether they're looking at the past contract and understanding what the pieces were and making a good projection. And like you said, um, AJ, if we got a cost per home, we could compare it kind of more simply to the last one. But we it's kind of not clear
enough to me. And I I feel like this number is high. And like um George said, this is not to exceed, but I'm not sure that there's a clear understanding of how this contract is different than the last. >> Okay, George.
>> Yeah. And we've been grappling with how to fund this for years, and it would really great if we could put this all wrap this all up together. I think we're at that point. But my question is, we're not the only municipality dealing with this. This is a problem nationwide. And
has there been any talk, I don't know if anybody's heard about potential funding from some other outside source, >> right? >> There is a state there is a state effort right now to talk about it, but I don't know what kind of yield it will be um in
terms of local funding. Is there a is there any kind of a movement a grassroots movement through the state from the municipalities or the MMA? >> No, but I think there certainly could be it could be a good way to start maybe
with the small town administrators since some of our fellow um towns are doing the same thing and then work our way up the ladder. >> So there is a piece of legislation that has PAS in it. I don't know if you know which one that is, but it's it's in the mix, but I you know, I don't know how
how long it would take for it to show up, >> but that I mean Joe Cifford has talked a lot about it and so I think she is the sponsor or co-sponsor of this particular legislation. >> Susie, did this come up in the meeting
at the uh MWR? >> No. No, they don't deal with the problem end of it. Well, I know it's I know it's you know Aaron has has tied the two together at times. >> Yeah. >> Talking about how great would it be how easily we towns could solve the pfest
problem if they could put a straw in the quavin. >> Yeah. Right. Well, the other the other long shot is that um Worcester Polytech has a new huge grant to look at something they have that would take PAS
out of the soil. So, if we can stick with science, we might get there. Um, that'd be great. But [clears throat] the fact that that's even funded is because PAS is a gigantic problem. >> Just one thing about that when when when Sam was here who works for Ty Bond to
take a sample from my well, he mentioned years ago one of the options is pave over the field where the problem is so that water doesn't leech into the soil and move the PAS from where it is. Just >> throwing that out there.
>> Right. But we also have [clears throat] places in town that have tested positive without being connected to the fire station. >> This is true. Um I was just doing some reading while we were talking. So there there is this
emerging contaminants in small or disadvantaged communities grant, but I think this may apply to municipalities that provide >> central water, >> a public water supply. Yeah. Not like
private wells. Does anybody know anything about this EC SDC? >> That's allegedly why we got turned down from the final uh clean water trust. Yeah. >> Because our problem is a private well >> Yeah. >> sort of problem. I see.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Interesting. Okay. Uh let's see. All right. Is there I don't think there's any other any sort of action that we need to take at this point right
now. Right. We've got a bunch of follow-up research to do and then um we will revisit this at our next meeting. Anything else on PAS the tiger bond contract? Okay. All right.
All right. Hi, Meredith. >> Hi. I wanted to apologize. I thought I had put the meeting in my calendar, but it's set up for tomorrow and it wouldn't have done me much good then, but I I remembered before the end of the meeting, so here I am. >> Yes. All right. Good to see you. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. We got We got to get
used to Monday now. Uh we've been talking Tuesday for a long time, but anyway. Um, all right. So, just to just to let you know what we've done so far. We approved minutes. We approved a whole bunch of endofear transfers which we
think are the sort of final round of of transfers related to our FY26 budget. and we just discussed um the big sort of complicated issue of our um PAS testing and mitigation work.
Um so if you're interested in that, we can we can follow up uh after the meeting more. >> All right. Uh next up, let's see. Um, can we George, can we talk about the uh
long range planning tool? >> Yep. >> Um, would you uh let's see as we're talking about does it make sense for me to share it or do you want to share it on your end? >> I'd rather share it because if I'm running through it, I can open and expand things and
>> Right. Yeah. No, that's good. I'm gonna >> I'm used to working with it. >> Yeah. >> I mean, if you wanted to, I wouldn't argue but >> No, no, not at all. >> Makes more sense. Uh, I'm going to make you co-host so you can share. >> Okay. Okay. Everybody see this?
>> Yep. Yeah. >> So, this >> Can can I as you're before you start, George, can I make a couple suggestions? one would be to just give like the briefest of sort of backgrounds on what this tool is for um Frank and and
Meredith's benefit and then for the rest of us that have seen an earlier version of this, could you let us know kind of what >> the key updates are to this from the last time we saw it. Okay, thanks. Yeah. So, um, so I distributed this to
everyone after our last meeting and since then I've made a couple small changes, a couple changes to it. But the high level what this is is um I don't have my large screen. I've got
my PC, so the screen's not great. I'm going to um >> Can we take the frame the pictures off the thing so we see more? our pe our people list >> and also what I can do is I got to
unfreeze the pane but I'm having trouble getting to so so it I can move around. So what this really is I'm going to skip the first section and the this what we really are looking at and especially if you look at column K is we're looking at the current
approved budget for the current fiscal year. That's what this is in in gray. And our total budget for the year is 8 million3. And then what this spread and it's and it's broken down that 8 million3 is
broken down by the the large classifications. And I do want to apologize to Meredith and Frank. I was hoping to meet before today to go over the budget. I've I've injured myself and I'm not mobile. I'm pretty much stuck at home and so getting town hall would have
been a challenge. So, I will definitely get to it. Um, probably not for two weeks, but I'll definitely reach out to you anyways because I was hoping >> we could also Zoom if that was easier. >> I'm sorry. >> Sorry. I was just saying we we could also Zoom if that was easier. In person is nice, but you know.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. I'd have to set that up. I'd have to think about that. Okay. I appreciate that, Meredith. Um, so anyways, so as I said, this is the total budget for the current fiscal year. And then um it's broken out by the major categories in our budget and you can see
them all here and you can see their dollar amounts and then it shows for each one the increase from the prior year for that particular line. So well let me let me back up. Up in this section we have our assumptions for
increases. >> Well the so [snorts] I'm sorry I'm a little discombobulated. FY 27 actual budget and then what we do with this document is we extrapolate from the current year to future years using
growth factors, inflation factors if you will for various categories and then all other. So here's your categories for instance um well I have to I have to expand this. So I'm
going to expand this. Now what you can see is general government was one of the sections and what you were looking at earlier was just this one line for general government and then this percentage is the increase year-to-year.
Here's the full detail of it which I collapse for ease. But what I want to show you is we have a category called salary cola. Here's our estimate of what the colas might be in the future. Given inflation these days, we might even be a
little low. And then any line that is called is designated salary cola is increasing by that percentage. >> Sure. >> And then the next one is salary contracted. Anything that's salary contracted is increasing by the percentage that we decided as a
committee to use for that. So these percentages here drive the increases at the budget line level. But what we're going to look at today is I'm going to collapse this and I'm going to collapse that. We're just going to look at it at the higher level just by the different
departments and we can open up any given department what like deck service which is I'm going to talk about to see more detail. But the purpose of this schedule is to take the current year, try and calculate going out what our budget
increases will be again based on these assumptions. Any line that didn't have a category designation is using this 3% per year. And so we can make various versions of this. >> Yeah. so that we can get various
budgets depending on our assumptions. Maybe our salary assumption is too high or too low. We can do another one of these, change that and see what the budget would be in that instance. But right
now, we got current year and then we're calculating what future budgets will be again based on those percentages. The only thing that's different um from those assumptions would be we added a line here that's not in our
budget. Um and the recommendation was made I believe was AJ that we have a contingency amount for unexpected expenses like maybe the PAS and it's based on 1% of the previous year's budget. So each of these numbers is
based on if you look at the formula on the previous year and then that's also one of the increases in the budget from year to year and that's a big increase in the first year because you know we don't have anything there but now we threw in a contingency it's level going
forward relatively level but it was not there and that's one of the reasons why we see a big increase here and so one thing I was going to mention earlier is for each of these departments you can see oh I did mention it the percentage age increase yeartoear and you can see general
government personal property fire department el uh emergency there I don't know why oh that should be buried huh anyways um you can see they're all pretty much in the 3% range even a little lower until you
get even even education is reasonable until you get to debt service >> so I'll get back to debt service in a minute because AJ did ask me to talk about what's different, but just to understand how this works. That really flags to us what one of the big drivers
is for what looks like over a half a million dollar increase year-toear. And we'll talk about that. So, that's the expenses. A big part of what we're trying to do is get a we're not trying to estimate what budgets will look like in the future.
We're just trying to get guidance, a sense, an instinct for how things are going to go. So that we these are made to be played with. They're also not made for making definitive decisions. They're really
more to help guide us and to think about some of the long range issues if that sounded right. If anybody's got other ideas, I'm okay. Anyways, so total total operating expenses and then in the next section we're going to try and figure out what will our tax levy be? How much
will we need to raise from the taxpayers from the property taxes? And so what we have here is our various revenue sources at the highest level. Again, there's detail under it, but I collapse it just so we
can see at the highest level. The first one is state aid. We all know mostly that's education. It's also un uncommitted. I forget what it is. It's lottery money. The UGGA. Those are the two biggest items. And then this one is
excise taxes and pilot payment l taxes are in this one. So, and again, Meredith and and Frank, I'll cover these things more directly, but here's what we were planning or expecting that would be the revenue in FY27. That's what we build
the budget on. We also have this 10,000. It's just a wash. We also have an expense that washes with it. Again, we'll that's the same amount, so it's not really relevant. And then we had how much we used in cash. And you all remember that these are the items that we had warrant articles for. And so what
I do is I subtract those revenue items. Actually, I add them together. They amount to 1799. And I subtract that here. Let me show you the formula. I subtract those other revenues from what
we think the budget is to come up with how much we need to raise from property taxes. >> Right. >> And that 1799 603 includes whatever cash reserves we've
proposing to uh apply to the budget. Right? That's one of the non tax living revenue sources. And and that's the reason why this number is actually higher than this number is because right now we're assuming none >> which you know I think it's not correct. I think >> one of the things you might do with this
is say okay we knew we'd be stepping down from year to year >> this and actually I think this is a good plug for the long range plan because if you look at the long range plan without getting too nitty-gritty about it you can see we have a big jump yeartoear but then it seems to level off a little. the
increases seem to be a little more reasonable, more to the level that we've been accustomed to prior to two years ago. >> So, this tells me maybe we should consider using a little cash to step down or step up from here to here without having this big jump between
these two. >> So, just kind of a way to think about using long range plan. So, and George, it it looked like, and if you could just confirm this, that for some of our larger
revenue sources like chapter 70, you base those year-to-year increases by calculating an average increase over this previous five-year period, right? Yeah. So, >> you can see it right there.
>> Yep. Okay. And again, you know, if we hear about legislative changes or anything else, we could always amend these and make changes to them. The same thing is true with the local aid. If the pilot money, there's two pilot issues
out there right now, the quabid and pilot in general. And right, new information may come along in the next who knows how many months, and we can certainly address those as well. >> Yeah. Okay. um and those other sort of smaller
um cherry sheet revenue sources that where you're essentially assuming that they stay flat for this entire fiveyear period. Is that more or less consistent with what we've seen in the past as well? like where those have
not changed in over the last much over the last five years or >> they do fluctuate. There's no question. But the fluctuations are just impossible to um predict. >> Okay. Yeah. Got it. So some might go up, some might go down. >> And they're not material, right? And
they're not material relative to >> chapter 70 in >> but the stateowned land is going to be one of the wild cards, right? >> Yes. So let me show you that. Yes. I was going to go to that. >> It's right there. Right. Just AJ's point, I really only mess around with the ones that are are, you know,
basically the lion share of the total number. >> Yeah. >> So, if we go to local aid, which I had expanded, this is the line we're talking about. >> So, yeah, that 50,000 that we just that we we know that this 3465 is short by
50,000 because the governor's budget >> is giving it 50,000 to all the towns in Quabbit. If that's signed into a long-term bill and if it's 50 or anything else, then of course, yes, Susie, we would >> But on your other on on the other
section you just showed us, there's one called stateowned land and it was listed as 31,000. Um, >> it's not the same thing. I don't know what this is, but it's not pilot money. >> Okay. >> Yeah, this is definitely not pilot. Yeah, this has come up before. This is definitely not pilot money.
>> I don't know what it is. It's weird. Right. >> But this this is the one that really matters, right? This is money from Teos and Ammeris for Atkins. Those two don't amount to 40,000 and that maybe 50 and the rest of it, the 300 comes from the state for Quabinland and state parks
including the lake. >> Got it. >> On a side light, um, somebody asked me how often the pilot is renegotiated with Ammerst. Do you know the answer? >> Um, >> Mr. Assessor. Yeah. Uh, it's on a
regular basis. >> I think annually we talk about it with them. Uh, I Yeah, I can't give you the exact I wish April was here. She might remember. >> Can't give you the exact details how that's figured. Um, but it's $30,000. So, even if it went up 10%. I mean, I
think it did go up, >> but it goes up small amounts. >> Okay. >> I next time I'm with the assessors, I'll ask that question. >> Okay. So anyway, so so far you can see we try to calculate potential budget amounts for future years. We do the same thing
with revenue from the state and locally. And then we can calculate what we anticipate needing to raise from taxpayers. And there's a whole lot under here which I'm not really going to show you right now, but we do c
>> well >> one let me let me talk to you about the things we're trying to accomplish once we know the budget and we know what the revenue from the taxpayers are going to be. Now we can calculate what we think
the tax bills will be. And we do have AJ here a factor based on historical increases historical increases in the value of all the property that gets taxed in town is been increasing by 6.8%. That might be a little high.
>> Ah really >> it might be a little high. Um and also the annual increases in the average value of property has been 3.7%. I think we should use a factor that's the same on both of these. Um but we
that's something we can talk about. It would be a small thing but this gives us a relative idea and using these two factors plus the tax levy we can calculate the tax rate and based on what we think the average. So
>> the assessed value you divide the revenue you needed into it divide by times a th00and and you get a tax rate of 1734. we apply it to the average single family. We think that in the current year based on the budget we passed at annual town meeting in in May
or June, whatever. May um that our average taxpayer will pay $7,248. I can tell you right now that number is high. I think it's going to be $100 less roughly because of the 50,000 from the state and we are getting more chapter
seven money. But um and then in this year we're figuring our total assessed value is increasing again by 6.8%. We're figuring 3.7 increase here. So this tax levy divided into the value of
the properties means we have to tax every $1,000 at $18 and that will yield us our tax levy. And when you take that $18 and you multiply it times the average single family, the average single taxpayer in our town will be
paying $7,830 in fiscal 28 if this estimate was a reasonable estimate. >> Right? >> And then down at the bottom is a summary of the key factors that areffected affected. So the
first one is the increase in the budget from year to year. That's the number that we presented on our budget to the voters when we voted the FY27 budget. This is what we think that number would be in our annual town meeting for FY28
if this was the budget that actually happened. And you can see the budget increase percentage. And then the other thing is the tax levy increase. And you can see last year we this year for current fiscal year we told the voters we anticipate a budget
uh tax levy increase the amount that all the taxpayers are going to have to pick up. Additionally over the prior year $427,000 again I think that number is high. Um but for FY28 we're thinking it's going
to be this much more than it currently is and then each year following. And again, you can see the these are the levels that have been more typical of what our annual increases were prior to the fiscal crisises we've been seeing.
And you can see again in FY28, we got a real problem. So, so far the budget increase, what it percentages, the revenue increase for tax levy, and then the XX levy capacity, which
half of you know what it is. Um, and >> it was explained to me and Frank. >> Oh, okay. Well, that's good. Yeah. So, Susie, you covered that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, I'll cover it again. Reinforced learning is really important. >> Sure. >> Um, but basically, we have been very
fortunate in that we have not been taxing at the limit that the state allows us to tax to. And that is excess capacity that we have to raise taxes. But we haven't been doing it. We all have been benefiting from it because our
taxes are a little lower. But if we were to bring this budget to the town the way it is and we weren't using cash and the estimates we had for revenues are what they are, we would be asking the voters to pay to use. Well, we would be using $453,000
of that capacity. And that would bring us very close to the limit that the state allows us to tax without an override without asking the voters for a twothirds vote or a ballot question. So excess
levy capacity for for uh Frank and um >> Meredith's benefit is something that we really do watch closely because it has a direct impact on the increase on the tax bills. So these are metrics that I isolated from above. The other one is
debt exclusion. Um because the library kicked in, we had a big increase in our debt exclusion override. And debt exclusion is important in the way it's handled in revenue. Susie may have covered that with you. I will also. But that's something we we're keeping track of. And then of course the cash we use
um is always important. So I isolated that. And then the increase in the tax bill, that's basically these two numbers together and the percentage that increase is. So that's what we're doing with this schedule. I can add more if anybody feels like there's something missing, but these are really the
metrics that we mostly talk about when we're analyzing the budget at a high level. So George on that question. So I I view this bottom section that you've got highlighted here as kind of like a a dashboard for the whole tool, you know,
and so >> yeah. So I think there are a couple that I would like assuming this is eventually something like I could see us sharing this a snapshot of this dashboard to
other folks. Um, I think there are a couple things that should probably be on here. One is just the total operating budget. So, not just the increase um, but the actual total um, budget.
>> Yeah. Uh and then we see how much excess levy capacity we're either using or generating in each year, but actually seeing what the balance of the excess levy capacity is. Um I guess at the
conclusion of each of those fiscal years would be useful I think as well. >> Yep. So that in that year where we use $453,000 according to this model, what does that actually leave us >> at the end of the year? Yeah. With I
think that would be a useful >> uh >> well especially in like the way you're saying we might just present this and not everything else. Yeah, that's those are important things. >> Yeah. >> And in that case, I would probably add the tax levy, too. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's probably a good
idea. Um the only other one that occurs to me would be the the total um projected uh non- tax revenue but not the non- tax
revenue actually the the non- tax revenue excluding cash reserve. So like the the state aid basically. So like the total of state aid and local receipts is I think a useful
useful number. Um yeah or maybe it's just the state aid that's >> I can do both. I can I can do both. >> Okay. >> I mean if we decide it's too much information we can always >> Right. I mean I think and the reason I suggest that is because kind of one of
the themes that you know has kind of come up in the last couple of years is just this idea of how much of the burden of funding the budget is being absorbed by you know the tax levy.
And so like being able to show people that, you know, state aid is really not increasing, expected to increase in each of these years. Yeah. >> Right. What I might do is um make another section because if you look at the heading on that section,
>> it's year changes. So I put key balances. >> Yeah. >> And put it ahead of this. >> So have balances and it'll be these guys here. Yeah, that makes sense. >> And then I'll have um And then I'll have
yeartoyear changes. >> Okay. >> Throw these in here. So I'm not >> Yeah, >> I have a can do. Let me just >> Sorry. Go ahead. >> Yeah. So this is a process of learning how to interpret which is quite quite
challenging. So when I look at Well, he's moving everything around. So I >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. [laughter] Um, so when I look at there's a lower budget increase projected for FY
28, but there's a bigger increase to the levy. And that's because there's no cash reserves put into that picture. Is that right? >> If we put cash reserves in, the increase um to the tax levy will not be 739.
It'll be something lower. and we did last year. >> Yeah, >> I can show everybody that because I actually worked on that. Um I I actually took a look at that and I can show you something I was going to say for all of you um for everybody. Um the total
budget increase from FY27 by each of those departments is 545. But oh, I don't know where I put it. There it is. Is 545. But if you look at the revenue increase at 739 and the
difference is roughly the 205 >> loss cash flow. So that is so I did that reconciliation. So you were 100% correct. So, so when we talk about this being a tool and I'm trying to understand why when the budget total
budget increase is less in the second in the in 28 but higher in the impact on taxes, it's because we get to choose line um 449. we get to [clears throat] think about that and that is actually how we have been working to bring the
tax increases um lower because we did not want to impact it um we didn't want the dollar value to impact so much so um that's one of the places to to or reorganize >> yeah and it certainly and again like I
said earlier this tool certainly shows that this probably something we should be thinking about for FY28 if this all turns out to where we're headed down. Yeah. >> And the other thing that we don't have um specifically
is the capital impact, right? >> Well, I created a spreadsheet to do that, but it may not be the time. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. >> I think what >> what would be helpful George though I think is is have you confirm that what
you have done in this tool is you've actually instead of just applying an inflation factor to our debt service category you actually plugged in >> the the our obligations that we got from
from Ryan. Is that that correct? >> That is correct. Yeah. That's why I highlighted that particular one in yellow because I wanted to talk about that when we're ready. I think >> there's still some questions about the summary I did. I think we should talk about first, but then I'll come back to this. >> Okay. Okay. Got it. >> Um
>> I see Laura. >> Yeah. Uh Susie, did you have anything else before I go to Laura? >> Well, the other thing is that I am a person that really can't read online. I I I need to have bigger picture than moving and scrolling. So, I wondered if
this is printable. >> Um, yeah, if I made I I I would make a PDF version of it. >> Okay. >> And you want me to email at some point a PDF version of this? So, here's what I would suggest, George, is that all of
this stuff, the summary stuff at the bottom, so the key balances and the year-to-year changes, I like the idea of all of that ending up as like a dashboard that's a separate sheet that
can then be um printed fairly, you know, cleanly as its own like >> put a heading on it. >> Yep. That's I can do. Yeah. What I'll do is I'll just insert some rows here and I'll make it a I'll put a heading on it. >> Yeah. You know, and um
>> I'll give it a label. Sure. >> And I'll make this whole thing printable. >> Yeah. I think that would be great. >> You got it. May maybe this way too with notes. >> Yep. You got it. Just going to highlight just to remind myself. I just I mean one
suggestion for the key balances might be to add reserves balance also just kind of so we can keep track of how much of that we're uh >> putting where >> yeah and that means we're that so Lauri
you just gave us extra work because what that means is we're going to have to really do the same kind of thing of course which Susie suggested and I know others have in other meetings. >> Yeah, >> you got it. But that is a whole another the cash reserves. This is really operating
budget and revenue. It >> we use cash reserves to plug sometimes and create revenue but it's not really driving um cash reserves and so I but I do have a spreadsheet on that and maybe next
meeting AJ or if we have time I can give a warm up on it. >> Yeah, I I think we should do that at our next meeting. Yeah. Okay, I'll have that ready and I I sent it to you AJ. So you might want >> Yeah. >> You know, if you have any questions or anything about it, let me know. >> So that was a looking yeartoyear on our
cash balances. Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah. So basically what it is I'll make >> Yeah. You don't have to go into I just wanted to make sure I understood the noun in that sense. >> Yeah. So what it is is I take the beginning cash balances or the ending cash balances of FY26 or or 25 and we have right we have the spreadsheet where
we do our capex stuff on it. >> Yeah. And so it's that for the first year and then I do the same thing going out in future years. I take the ending balances after we do those things, put them at the beginning balances. I'll tie it to the capital plans long-term thing eventually. And then we'll drop those
capital purchases in there and we'll see the reserves going down and then we have to make assumptions about how much reserves do we generate at the end of each budget year, you know, things like that. But that and that itself would be a project just like this, >> right? Yeah. Thank you.
But it's a capital budget. It's pretty standard thing. So, it wasn't really that hard for me to make it. Okay. So, AJ was asking about that service. So, you know, the things that need to be done in the future at this point, we could evaluate
and you all have this spreadsheet. You could open this up and evaluate these percentages and decide, are they reasonable or not? They seem pretty reasonable to me um for this purpose. That's one thing we definitely need to change. Another thing we need to change uh evaluate is some of the revenue
assumptions like we talked about using an average for the state aid. I guess that's pretty good. If we hear something new, we can change that. Um and then we talked about I was talking about these valuations. What's really the right numbers to use? I think 6.8's
too high because we had a blip and we know property values are high right now. Um, I just can't imagine they could continue an increase at that rate. But >> yeah, >> so I think this is something we need to talk about as well. And then the debt and then there's back to the the budget
and the debt service piece I'm going to expand. And to answer AJ's question and everybody else's, I'm sure is this is what was provided to us by Ryan. And I tied this back to the schedule he sent us. And then I made an assumption about
the firetruck which may not be true. I'm going to just freeze this this line here because I don't want to lose the heading. I know it confuses people. It can be confusing. Let me put it that way. So in FY I'm not sure that the first
debt service payment for the fire truck is in 2008 28 and I'm using an assumption of 10 years. So, I basically took the price and divided it by 10 and then I calculated interest at 4%. So, maybe we can look more closely at
this or ask Ryan what he thinks is more likely to happen with the firetruck. And then we have to think about things for the future. Um, you know, are what are we going to what kind of debt service might we have in the future? We know that we want a grant for the greater. I don't know if
everybody heard that, but we did get $250,000 for the greater. Woohoo. And um I sent an email to David Grineier and asked him it how he was going to fund the variance between that 250 and the
300 something it's going to cost. He never got back to me. So I'll have to follow up with him um because that might have to be funded by debt. Hopefully he can fund it with his chapter 90. So those are things we have to think about. What are our long-term capital needs and will we be borrowing for anything else
in the future? Right now, assuming that our first if the firetruck is received in FY28, assuming we have debt service in FY in FY27, if the firetruck shows up, our first debt service would be in
FY28. I don't know if there'd be two or one. I think we pay semiannually, so it might only be 40. It may not happen until next year. So, this is something we probably want to answer, especially in light of this increase here because the big portion of this increase is this
number and that number and it goes down to 15% when I take those out. And also for everybody's benefit, looks like we have a half year of loan interest in FY27 and it goes to a full year's complement. And
so, that is also another thing that contributes to this increase. There was some kind of talk in the flow of last year about maybe paying off some of these loans out of cash reserves to get them out of the
picture. And I don't know um like I don't know how many years the PAS loan is out there for. It doesn't seem like it. We've already been paying on it, right? It's it's not that's not the first payment. I don't think
>> so. I don't know if if that is a strategy that we would be thinking. >> Well, it was one I was there was one that I had raised and I think it's a conversation with Ryan. If you look at the dump truck and the high and the backhoe,
we funded them for the the principal portion of those for the current year, right? 86,000. So 86 next year and 86 the year after that amounts to the numbers down here 1725.
If we took 1725 of cash and we paid off those loans at the beginning of fiscal 28, then we would be freeing up $86,000 in debt service in our operating budget
for two years. and that might allow us to pick up this 80. So that's that's one way of looking at it. It would also save us the interest on those two things which amounts to $13,000. >> And is there a restriction against
paying off some loans early >> these days? There's most loans don't have provisions like that. Maybe bonds do, but I don't think >> Oh, okay. That's the difference. Loans and bonds. Sorry. >> Well, these I don't know how these are financed. So that's >> that's a question for Ryan, I think.
Right. >> Exactly. >> And I don't know if it's a good idea or not. I don't know if we have enough cash reserves or not. I mean, I'm hearing a lot of positive things about cash reserves in the form of of rule aid uh that came to us that we won't even need for FY26 because
>> it goes to the school. >> It goes to school. Rule a is a bad example. Um funding for the um snow and ice that's going to come to us. We certainly look like we're going to get some money from unspent lines. So we, you know, it it the sooner we know about
C free cash, the better off, the better we positioned we are to make a decision like this. We do know that our stabilization funds are getting pretty darn low. >> Yeah, we do. And I also would say if we use free cash, just something to think about. If we use free cash and we got
rid of these and it turns out this loan doesn't start until FY29, we could put in the operating budget an amount to fund capital stabilization because we just created the capacity to do that. >> Yeah. >> So another thing to think about and that's why I think you know
brainstorming with Bri Ryan I think is not a bad idea. All right. So, George, can we um can we just quickly recap like what I I think this is very close to being a
usable tool that individual FinCon members can have access to, can model different scenarios. I mean, I think that's I think that that's in my mind that that's one of the most valuable
um ways we you know for us to use this is to model different scenarios like um you know an optimistic model, a stress test model like what were to happen if you know we have
um another you know health insurance spike or another um regional school assessment spike along the lines of what we saw not this year but you know last year. Um and it you know like and [clears throat] then
you know that that would enable us to sort of look at kind of a range of possible outcomes and and help us think about well okay if you know if these assumptions bear out like this this is this is potentially how we might need to
respond. So, so I think that's um you know I think we're getting close to to that. But I do think that one of the reasons why some of these outlier years look relatively positive
in this tool is because of some of those assumptions in the top part of the document. And so it seems like one of the things that we need to do is uh all of us independently review the these assumptions right here
and maybe we can have a discussion at our next meeting about like getting some consensus around what we think of as the best like the appropriate kind of baseline assumptions to make about
these. I still feel like the the the maybe the education assumptions are are too too low, but like you know that I want us to have like a a discussion about this and kind of a little bit of a negotiation.
>> Yeah. That you know education is actually not low when you're talking base operating, but when you take the fluctuations of out district placements >> Yeah. >> It's such a hard thing to predict, >> right? Because without the special ed SCES's increase was very low
>> was was pretty pretty more more like two two two% right >> 2.39 or something >> less than two and a half >> right but is that yeah I guess the question then is and this is part of what we're
trying to deal with with this idea of a stabilization account but anyway I guess the point being that I think all finan members need to like now that you've got like an overview of this. I think you need to review this tool and bring to
our next meeting. Any thoughts you have about some of the assumptions that are built into this that you want to either advocate for a different approach or diff a different assumption or ask clarifying questions
about why we're assuming that and not this. Yeah. But to bring those kinds of questions to our next meeting. >> Does that make sense? One factor I was looking for is the trash. Um, >> and in fact, the trash has had a contract that increased at about 4%
every year. And now we're headed to a new contract. And last, I'm just going to complain about this one more time. The last time we had a trash contract that came in, it was up, it was an increase of 60,000 and we just ate it in
the budget. And as we've gone along, um, that may be a bigger number. and just just packing it into the operating costs may not work. So I know that there was a notes section on this and George mentioned the trash contract. Um
>> yeah, >> so it's it's >> where it is under here in public works >> and we don't have OP on here. Um even though we're intending to start putting it in the operating exp >> um you know I forget what assumption I made with OPE here. O op is a revenue source you mean or
>> no I'm sorry I said the wrong word again. PAS all those acronyms. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. >> Yeah. PAS. Right. It's not in here. Right. Okay. Yeah. That's a big one. And again like I I this could be it right here. Our contingency.
>> Right. Right. Speed out our contingency. [laughter] >> Right. >> So much for that. >> Right. >> Turns out we do need it. Yeah. AJ, I agree with you. I think this is the first thing people should think about. But I did go to the state website and I looked at their long range forecast models. They have templates and all
kinds of stuff, but it's a lot more it's really sophisticated stuff. I think larger towns with finance departments and they can dedicate a lot more time to this can use those templates. They I I mean they made sense. They look good, but it was a lot of stuff, but they didn't have current thinking on
inflation rates for these various categories. Do >> do any of us and maybe Haley have a contact at the DLS that you know somebody that we [clears throat] know that we might be
able to share these assumptions with and get their feedback on whe whether they think this is consistent with how they recommend towns model these um these increases.
Yeah, I could send an email. >> Okay. >> I know there was that that that person that was doing those interviews, right, with different maybe that >> I'll start there. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And the other thing we talked about is sending this off to Becky to look at and
Ryan. Um Ryan's view wouldn't really cover some of this, although he was in the select board in orange long enough to know maybe and he also has a bazillion jobs. But um Somebody else looking at it like that might be helpful.
>> Yeah, that's great. This is exciting though. I mean, I really feel like this is going to be very useful to us. >> I think it gives us a good sense of where we're headed right now. I mean, I think it does need to be tweaked. I think the other tweak, AJ, the second
thing I would ask is how do we figure out what type of debt service we might have in these future years? >> We can see things dropping out. I can't imagine that something isn't going to drop in. >> Yeah. So, I guess that my thought was
that isn't that part of what capital planning is working on right now. So, >> yeah, maybe a while. >> It's going slow as molasses. >> Okay, got it. Because I think >> and we can't even get ourselves a date that we can all meet for the next two weeks. So,
>> and we got to work with department heads, which is also not necessarily the most effective. I mean, Haley, do you feel like you might be able to put together a preliminary list of some of the things your capital items that
you're hearing about in these some of these future years FY30 and beyond that? Yeah, >> I think so. If George, if you send me what you have, I'll look at it because there's a couple things that like I know aren't on there like the salt shed at
the highway department, >> right? That would be something. >> It's funny you say that. When you look at the Warren articles that we approved at annual town meeting this year, half of those things weren't on there. Digitization >> and some things never will be. Those are
one shot deals. Um Haley, um I really don't have anything done in terms of what we're updating, but what I sent today for the um the um what do you call that? the records request. >> I I think I c I CCed you on that, right?
>> Oh, I didn't get that. >> Oh, you didn't? >> Oh, I better check that because I sent I replied to Calvin and I replied all did Calvin saved. >> Well, I'll check and make sure. >> Okay. And I can just check with him tomorrow then.
>> Well, I'll send it to you again. Um I'm putting it right here now. >> Um I'll send it to you again, Haley. Um and that'll have it. that'll have the old stuff. The dollar amounts might not be right, but it'll give you a sense of some of the larger items that are coming along. And you know, in case in case you
weren't aware, Ryan will tell us we can't borrow for a police car because items at 60 70,000 really anything under 100,000 this that's hard to find somebody to lend you that money for municipal
governments. So it think in terms of bigger items, that's all. And then the other thing I think you know that we might want to talk about or think about is yeah are these averages
for growth right and I guess we really can't do anything with the state aid until we have a better idea and the local aid and the pilot until we have a better idea. Right. >> Right. >> So AJ I don't know what you think about those things. So, those are the other ones I'd say. And I think once we did
that, once we get these pieces, I think we have a long range plan that gives us a good idea of where we're headed. >> Yep. >> In terms of >> can the assessor give us um their view on um
the assumptions that uh around uh yeah, >> property value. >> Sure, why not? I'll um I'll ask I um >> I'll send it along to um the assessor's department. I will ask them. >> Okay. >> We're not meeting again till September, but I can certainly do that.
>> Okay, sounds good. All right. So, >> in terms of running a spreadsheet, you just click on these boxes that are in the far left and it opens up more of the information. >> Yeah, this is I've got this set up with what they're called. They're called groups. And so I when I'm presenting something like this to a group of
people, I have detail and really we're we're looking at the summary level, but if a question comes up, you want to see the detail for you for any of you and all of you, you can just hit these pluses for any particular line for >> these will open up all of them for the
whole thing. And if you if you're doing that and you're scrolling through it and you want to look at it this way, you certainly can. And then when you want to just look at at the high level, just hit the one and it collapses the whole thing. >> Nice. >> Nice. >> And that also for here, if you look,
I've got prior year information in here. >> Uh you can't see it. Why can't we see it? >> But there's this is So yeah, there it is. So you can see I got We don't really want to look at that data, but it's there if questions came up and I can use
it for trend analysis. >> That's great. So that's also there. >> All right. So everybody should plan on spending some time with this. Um bring bring any questions, any suggestions to our next meeting. I think we're probably
yeah like you know a meeting away from having a working tool. So this is this is awesome. >> And I'll send this to everybody like last time. You can all feel free to do whatever you want with it. Your your copy. >> All right. Sounds good. Um, all right. We've got 10 minutes
left. Um, I wanted to leave a few minutes for any updates that you all have. Um, I have one uh or a question, which is I got uh an email from Brennan about the annual report, the like the
Shootsbury annual report. Um, does anybody remember what we usually do? Do we just like attach our our annual report and that's got the summary letter? this time. So that and that and then they >> put the budget in. Sometimes I've seen
past rec uh without the budget. So he needs to know that he >> he has the budget, too. >> I thought I said it to him, but I can check. He usually I mean he he may have it and he just what I what I what I saw was a a a general reminder that went to everybody about Yeah.
>> Um the August 31st deadline. So he he might he might have a plan. But >> the only thing I would say to to qualify what Susie said is sometimes I change the heading. I think I changed the very top to say as presented at annual town meeting >> June or May 10th or whatever date it
was. >> Okay. >> Um [clears throat] >> would you would you mind sending him a version of that of the annual report with that header on it? Uh >> I don't mind. No, not at all. Um, the only thing I will say is if we have a special town meeting and we adjust the
budget, >> it won't be the final. >> We're not going to do that this time. >> Well, so we think >> it takes a whole lot of work. >> Yeah, >> we're only we're only a month into the year. So far so good, >> right?
>> So, you want me to send it to him now? >> Uh, yeah, sure. I I He said the deadline was August 31st. I just Yeah, >> sometime. Okay, great. Thanks. Um, okay. Does anybody else have any updates
um or questions? They needed to uh they wanted to run by the committee before we wrap up tonight. We're doing pretty good on our twohour cap here. So, >> and you're going to tell us about um you're going to tell us about uh the heat pumps grant. >> Oh, yes. Okay. Uh thank you for
reminding me. All right. So, I had sent um Michael an email asking if there was any news on our technical assistance grant. Uh and here is
his response. Um okay, most of which I think did make sense to me. I might little bit I was confused about, but uh you guys see this? Okay. >> All right. So, no no no no word yet on
see if I can >> Yeah. >> All right. Uh, no word yet on the technical assistance grant about a month ago. Haley and I had a meeting with DOR about it. They wanted the town to complete a comprehensive building
assessment, which is a deeper analysis by an engineering firm paid for by National Grid. We agree to that but made the strenuous point that a CBA was not a requirement for eligibility for the technical assistance grant. We suggest that they make a condition of approval
of the grant. We got the CBA approved on an expedited basis. The site visit was last week at SCES and we will have the final report by mid August. So despite this extra hoop, I continue to assume we will hear from DO er in early fall. It
is worth noting that this was I thought was interesting uh noting that the CBA was really helpful, the best of the three site visits we've had with experts. I think there is a growing consensus among the ad hoc team from ECAC buildings and ESCOM that the best
technical approach to meet the school's needs will be airsource heat pumps rather than ground source. These will be much cheaper to install, which means that when we apply for the $1 million implementation grant, we will have money to spare to do canopies because I assume
the solar canopies >> uh at the school to cover the cost of electrical usage by the heat pumps >> and the various other upgrades to the other municipal buildings. Another benefit of the air source heat pumps is that we can install them more quickly since we are fighting the clock in
regards to the oil tank. We are very aware that we want to minimize costs. We throw down the drain maintaining that failing system. The CBA consultant is aware of our urgency which should help and how she writes it up. Timeline as follows. We're trying to get our procurement process set up now so that
when we get word from DOE, we'll be ready to go out to bid when we get approved. Uh he still remains optimistic. If we [clears throat] can get a vendor to do the assessment work, can design documents as the deliverables from the TA grant, we will then be
positioned to apply for the implementation grant, municipalities can apply February and August of each year. It will be a stretch to be ready by February, but it's worth being hopeful. If not, we should apply in August 2027.
All right, so that's the update. So, it does sound like a pretty substantive one. um still optimistic about the TA grant. Uh it does occur to me as I'm reading this that Caitlyn said, >> yeah, >> that this um uh God, what is it? What is
the the school construction uh grant >> MSBA? Yeah, MSBA also has I think uh you know their funding process that uh could that that uh uh
heat heat pump system could be eligible expense for that. So >> sometimes take a long time to get. >> Yeah. Right. >> They have a limited pool. >> They Yeah. Well, MSBA definitely was addressing this particular one as opposed to delaying the roof. So, it's
supposed to be on a different track, but I um could you send me this email so I can go? Yeah, thank you. >> I'm going to send it to everybody. Okay. >> All right. Uh any questions about this or or any um other kinds of updates?
I was at the CA uh Katherine's meeting uh with the the assessment and it was the most like Michael said it was the most positive thing. Um ground source is still going to have to use [clears throat] >> uh some uh petroleum base backup
her system that we should close into the air will not. So we could meet the >> I see >> state demand. >> State demands you have to have some type of backup. >> I see. What would the backup be for air for air? >> No, not air. Air air airsource doesn't have a backup. It'll be the solar and
all that. It's just the if we do ground if we do ground source heat pumps, you have to have a backup with very low temperatures. [clears throat] We'd also have to increase uh you put heat in, you take heat out.
So, we'd have to increase air conditioning in the summer. >> That's a real benefit to to to air. But I always thought it was the other way around. I thought because I have um mine's air source, right? >> And I get to a certain temperature and I have to start burning propane. When the
temperature gets down to the teens, I got to start using propane to keep my house comfortable. >> Yeah. >> And I thought the benefit of the ground source was the temperature 100 feet, 800 feet, whatever it is down never changes, >> right? >> It it never changes. But what happens is
the area you take it out of change goes down. So those of you taking a lot of energy out of there, you dep what we were told is you deplete that area heat source. So that's why you air condition it and put the heat back in in the s in
the summer. You put the heat back down and you do zero. So that's where the balance is. So >> it'll be nice to see when we probably get all the bells and whistles and you see all the um proposals. But it was this was very positive because we got answers
that wasn't u national grids view you know because they they want us to stay certain project going forward >> but we will have to do the parking lot. >> Yeah >> that was going to be what the ground
source took care of was the parking lot >> that's good point >> there's all sorts of trades going on here. >> Yeah that's a good point. Yeah. >> And that's where they could also put the solar um panels there. That was another if we get it in the grant, we could do all that and put the uh
>> parking lot uh solar panels in. >> But ground source is a lot more expensive because of the drilling and there's a shortage of drillers because a lot of institutions are putting ground source in. And there's also been a lot of complaints. I think you've all been aware Mount Hoyoke and UMass the noise
involved in sinking those those drilling those holes is really loud and a lot of people are complaining. >> Huh. >> Right. >> All right. Um, any other updates? We've got I I do have a hard stop tonight. Sorry guys at 8:30. Um,
>> any other updates? I would just say, you know, it's been it's been three months and the new assessor is working out great. >> Great. >> He's got big plans. He's very energetic, enthusiastic. He's catching us up on things that we haven't been able to do because we haven't had a full a regular
assessor. And so that's going really well. Um and then capital planning is working on their long range capital plan. It's currently it's not unaccurate in terms of the things that are laid out on it.
Although, as a Haley pointed out earlier, there are things missing. Um, but the value, the dollar values need to be updated. There's been tremendous inflation since it's really been completed. So, we're working on that. It's just a slow grind because we have to coordinate with managers and the
summertime is quiet, but we want to get that done before we get to the next cycle, the next capital budget cycle. So that's what's going on with capital planning. >> So AJ, if you have to leave, I see that Mary Lou has a question. You could leave and we could answer her question and then adjourn.
>> Okay. Um well, uh Mary Lou, I'm going to call on you now. Maybe if it's a quick thing, I might be able to hang off for a minute, but I I might have to to leave. >> Thank you. Can you >> Did you have a question or comment? Yeah, >> I can hear you. It is a little bit low, but if you could speak up a little bit.
>> Okay, I'll I'll talk loud. I have a quick question. >> I was looking at that budget paper stuff that you were showing on your computer. Is that >> accessible to the public? And if yes, where? Or is it just a draft that you
all are deciding on? >> Well, what it is is it's it's a planning tool and it's very much a draft right now. It's a new This is a new tool that the finance committee has um
>> committed to to developing. The purpose of it will be to model um of of different scenarios so that we can see potential sort of budget implications of of different you know
kinds of decisions and and different factors over a fiveyear period. So, in other words, as a public person, I can't look at it right now. >> Well, it's Yeah, it's not ready to be distributed now because it's a draft.
So, when it is when it's complete um you know, we haven't discussed it, but I would imagine that it'll be um uh you know, a document that uh that we'll share just like we do with our other
budget documents on on the website. Um, but yeah. >> Yeah, >> you're welcome. Okay. Uh, anything else folks needed to discuss? All right. So, I'm going to make a motion to adjourn the finance committee. Oh, everybody saw
I posted I think at least the next several meetings. Um, so the only thing that's going to be a little strange, right, is because there's a meeting on August 31st, I think it was, or something like that. Yes. So that'll, you know, so so that'll so
September won't exactly be the first and third uh uh Monday of the month, but because we're going to actually have three meetings in August, but anyway, you guys get the idea. So hopefully that this schedule is working out for folks. >> Well, I think that makes sense because I think is Labor Day.
>> Yeah. The following Monday. Yeah. So we went ahead and we do it anyways. >> Yeah. Exactly. All right. Very good. Okay. So I make a motion to adjurnn our meeting. >> Second. >> Second. >> I cashew I
>> I do. >> All right. All right. [clears throat] Thanks everybody. >> Appreciate it. That was productive. Okay. See you later. Take care. Bye. Bye.