One more lock and ins folks. How you doing tonight? This is the finance committee. It is Tuesday, April 23rd. >> Thank you. >> Working on our budget program for the season. It looks like um so first we need to open the meeting.
>> Correct. So I need a motion to open. >> Sharon Nolton. Motion to open. >> Darren Deo second. >> All those in favor? Join I. >> David I. >> Sherry Nolton I. >> Eluins I. >> Sharon Deay. Alita D Mari. >> Wonderful folks for coming in tonight.
Appreciate it. >> All right. So, up first we'll do the reserve fund transfers. Laura, would you like them all separate or can we do them in one batch? >> Let's do them. That's for >> Yeah, they're for different things. Yeah. >> Oh, they are. Okay.
>> So, first we have basically is um they're from a county to do with electricity. The first one is 7,500 for additional cost for street lighting. Has any discussion on any of these? This is all >> No, I looked at them. They're good. >> End of the year. So, I need a motion for
7,500 for electric street lighting. >> What are we transferring it on? >> Or um reserve reserve fund. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, it are there going to be any other transfer requests for electricity? >> Couple meetings left. So, it may or may
not happen. Okay. >> I was just curious if you if you know, should we expect more? >> There might be, but there may be money in other lines that could have offset it. These are the ones that >> needed it are tight.
>> Not that we weren't expecting this, but they're all kind of >> all right. >> Doesn't stay. It goes right back down to the original amount next year. It doesn't stay in those accounts. >> Okay. >> Any questions, Dave? No, just which one are we doing?
>> 7500 for the >> lighting first. >> That's up first. >> All right, I'll take a motion. >> Sharon Alton motion. Karen Deo second. >> Wonderful. All those in favor? Joe Dei. I >> David Matthew I. >> Sharon Alton I. >> Resilit. >> Karen Deo I. >> Alita I.
>> Thank you. The second one up is 9,000. And this is for fuel for the public safety code. >> Any questions, concerns? Now, >> I see none. I need a motion. >> Wait, I've got a question. >> Go ahead. >> Um, this being fuel.
>> Yeah. >> What are we budgeting going forward? Did we budget? >> So, like I said, >> was this like the 10% cut or was it in there because we know our expenses going to be >> fuel or your electricity or fuel?
>> No, we didn't. >> We didn't cut anything. Well, we didn't put anything more in there either. Some may have gotten a little bit more some of the lines. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Good. Yep. All right. >> Made
>> Sharon Nolton. Motion. Darren to Mayo. Second. >> Thank you. All those in favor? Joe D. I >> David. >> Sherry Nolton. I >> Darren De Mayo. I lead I last one is $27,840
for electricity for the public safety department. We don't make any shut the light up jokes or nothing. Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> We're good. Okay. Sharon Nolton makes a motion. Karen Mayo second. >> Sharon. Sorry.
>> Sorry. >> Karen Mayo. Alina. >> Wonderful. >> Thanks for that. So, I'm going to we're going to move the order around a little bit. We're um uh fortunate Rob Stevenson is back from Canada. They did not keep him.
>> Um and was that true last week when we lost you on the phone? It was because of the tariffs. >> Apparently, yeah. Apparently, my tariff ran out. >> Ran out. Okay. >> And uh No, it really I tried to log in. It says you can't join from Canada, right? >> I'm like, well, that's awful mean.
>> Yes. Right. >> So, we did have your paper. >> Yeah. Come on up. We had your paperwork last week. If you guys don't have it, >> um, >> you don't, that's okay, too. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Not the end of the world. >> Just give us the rundown. >> Yeah. I mean, it it's I just wanted to come. Thanks everybody for having me.
Um, I just wanted to come and just give everybody a breakdown because I know when um when we were looking at meetings that you guys had and I think some of the information that might have been presented from uh from the select board level didn't really necessarily have the amount of detail that we would have
liked to have at it so you guys could take a get a better understanding. And I think one of the things that chairman and I talked about was we're going to try to do a better job on the school side to help explain the budget a little better because there's I think a misconception of what we can what we can
reduce and what we can't reduce and how much we can use and how much we can't use and there was it's not as simple as has been sort of uh presented by certain people that that we could just go up the school can get a 2 3% increase and
they'll deal with it. Doesn't work that way. Um the state basically and that that graph that I gave you guys all the colors on it. The red is the minimum local contribution which is made up of the chapter 70 funds and then the minimum local contributions that the
state dictates to the towns that they have to pay. So that's the vast majority of of of our overall budget. We can't reduce that even if we wanted to. If we reduced it by $5, the state will go through and look at that and go, "Hey, you were
supposed to spend a hundred. You only spent 95. So next year you have to spend 105." They'll make you make it up. So we can't really go below that minimum local contribution or the the net school spending they call it. Above that, we've got transportation
and debt service that does not get counted to net school spending. Well, we have to get the kids to school and we have to pay the debt service. So that's the blue line. So the only thing that really is above
it is a small piece of the overall budget that we would consider and what we call discretionary that we send to the towns for their approval every year we have town meeting. Now out of there as has been sort of talked about the
state over the last number of years with this student opportunity act and everything has been trying to rightsize or correct old harmless type setups like the way we're set up right now is the state cannot give us less money every
year no matter what our student population is. So they give us a minimum increase. Last year I think it was hundred some dollars. It starts at 60. Sometimes they get it to 100. I think in this year's budget it's like 120. I don't know where it's at. But it's where
it ever comes out. That's all we get for a kid in a in in that increase. But then what they if you look even at what's been going on in the towns other than the year before where there was kind of it was flat with respect to a minimal local contribution increase that's been kind of going up almost a
half a million every year that they that they've been pushing through which is their way of sort of addressing and dealing with the whole harmless problem because if we were to look at the number of kids that we have and the amount of money that we get the delta in there was
when I started 5 years ago almost $4 million that we were technically if they look at their if they look at their mathematical calculation if they how they figure that stuff out. We're getting we were getting at that point $4 million more than we probably should
have. But because the numbers were up at when the point that they did it and then the population started going down, they don't reduce that number. So it's it's now the challenge is is that what rural schools are running into is bigger schools, bigger towns, they
can deal with they have the ability and and the luxury of having a an excess number of kids where they can it really works well from a from a overhead sort of dayto-day activities. When you're dealing with the small rural schools, we still have the same issues that all the
bigger districts have to deal with. we just have less less thing to deal with or less money to be able to do with it. They're able to take care of just economies of scale that rural districts don't. Which is why from the state side that and I don't know the name of the uh
the group that recommended that rural school aid be funded at like 60 million if we're they're at 12 now. I think they were at 12 last year. Nick Bodega put something through. I saw recently that they're trying to get it higher.
>> Yeah. >> That will obviously if they were able to get that passed that would get more money out to us which would reduce obviously the assessments to the towns, right? >> Because that extra money would be there to be able to offset some of the costs. So what we go through and I guess from a
budget side, we're see we're running into a couple things that we've been doing a better job at which actually ends up hurting us almost when it gets to budget season. When I first started, our E and D or our the revolving accounts that we have at the at the regional school district, we have E and
D, we have school choice, and we have circuit breaker where it you can kind of move some money around. It's like the town's free cash if I if I explain that right. As we've been doing a better job budgeting year over year over year, what
happens is the way that END and all those revolving accounts would get flush again is if you budget $100 in in a line item and they only use 50. Well, then $50 goes into that END account which allows us to offset the budget next year. >> Right. Same thing.
>> Yeah. So, as we've been cut, we've become more efficient in the budgeting side, the END amounts are getting lower and lower, and at a certain point, we're going to have to keep a certain amount of money in there. And that's one of the things that we're going to be looking at
this year is identifying what that sort of go-go level is. And then if once we've established that, it'll make it easier to say anything above it, we can move back into to offset the assessments. challenges. I think we're that delta is getting smaller and smaller. What we try
to avoid and what we certainly haven't and I think is many years even before I was on the school committee. If we were to ever run into a situation where END or one of those revolving accounts are are empty and there's things that need to get paid, we would have to come back to the towns for a special meeting to
request additional funds. I know there was a comment at at a couple meetings ago that says that we can't do that. Well, yeah, we can, right? And that's that's the process that we would need to follow because typically what happens is when we send the warrants to the towns, there are a number of items in the
governor's budget that are never figured out until later into the summer. If those things hit us negatively where there's less money coming in than what they thought, we've always been able to offset that with funds in the END or funds in school choice or just
tightening up from a budgetary perspective to make sure that works that we have not in my understanding years and years ever had to come back to towns for an additional for an additional request for funds. So what we've also done over the years
is at least I can tell you what we've done since I've been on is we've we keep constantly looking at this budget a little tighter, a little tighter, a little tighter. We are reacting to the reduction in
kids in the district, but it it's not as simple as, hey, we're down 30 kids, we could pull a teacher because they're not all in one class. It's all over the entire district. What that does allow us to do is sort of year over year, every two or three years, reook at the
different spots in the district to say, "Okay, are we right sized? Are we in the right spot? Do we have enough teachers for the number of kids that we've got?" We've gone through over the last 3 to four years adjustments in those class sizes and with the teachers. It started at the elementary school, then it went
to the middle school, and then the last two years, including this year, has been really adjustments at the at the junior high and the high school level. I already know that we're already looking at elementary school again next year to see where are we at. We're not anywhere
close where we can close school down because we don't have that kind of loss yet. If it continues, would we be there in the next, I don't know, seven, eight, maybe? Um, I think that would be a tough thing. I think that it's it's trying to
deal with what we've got with the kids we have in the district right now. Um, but we are looking at that. The other thing that we're actually in the middle of is we finished our unit A negotiations, but we have um what they call appendix B where it's clubs and all that stuff that's getting looked at. I
mean, we're we're looking to get some information to make sure, okay, what kind of participation do we have in the clubs? What kind is it worth continuing those? Because there is a cost for all of those. We're looking at coaches salaries. We're looking at all of that.
We've got got to make sure that from a a labor perspective that we're not in a spot where we're losing people or that we're that we're from a market adjustment perspective in a good spot. Um, so we're looking at all of those. We did have a conversation
um with administration that basically and I made a an announcement at the last school committee meeting week and a half ago that basically we're going to start looking at fiscal year 28 now and we want to make sure that everybody at the district side even though we weren't
able to basically go back to the drawing board from a time perspective to try to help for this year we pulled that extra 100,000 out of END to allow us to reduce the assessment ments by a larger amount. Um we've already got we know a um PA
system that's going to need to get replaced at the high school. We've got to try to figure out that that'll have to get paid for out of END or revolving one of the revolving accounts. We're going to be looking at the budget side up there to see where can we save to try to offset as much of that as we can. Um
but as we move forward, we're going to look at a number of things. Um Karen and I have talked about APs. We actually I just had a conversation today. We're looking at some of those because historically, um, the district has paid for all of the
AP exams that the kids have taken. Now, that's been a topic that I've actually brought up the last three or four years. Why do we do it? There's a number of kids that try that try not to study for them. They actually they've taken four or five classes and they may not study for all. Or you get some that are only taking one or two and they really don't
care. >> It's it doesn't affect the grade. But one thing that we've run into is that because of class sizes, we've had to adjust um honors classes. We don't have as many honors classes as we did before. We have sort of regular CP classes or
college prep classes and AP classes because we just don't have the volume. So over the what I said Nick said over the last four five years we've had 21 FTEEs eliminated from the classrooms. So there's there there's
not we're leaner now than we were 5 years ago. >> Full-time equivalent. So that you could have two part- timers turn into an FTE, right? But I mean you're looking at 21 FTEES. If we look at the size of the um
staff at the district at the regional school district from 5 years ago to where we are now, we're down. Um and we've obviously got another six to eight positions here that we that we've looked at that we're going to be eliminating. Those are included in those 21 this this
year and there'll be more that look we're we're constantly looking at that. Um >> Rob, >> yes sir. >> So can I get to be for a second? >> Yeah. Um, everything you said makes perfect sense. >> Yeah. >> Um, and I appreciate it all the work you
guys do. Can I just grab this? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, >> so this is all the revenue side, right? This >> that's that's all the expenses. It's basically that's that's a breakdown of So, here's the assessment, the total assessment that has been that's been
provided to the town of Southwood of that assessment. I just wanted everybody to understand >> up until the red is net school spending. >> Then the blue is transportation and debt service that we have to do. >> Correct. >> So the only thing that's really at
question >> Yeah. >> is anything in the green. >> You did. Yeah. You >> that that would So but it even here in one of the sheets we've got is $2.5 million that we're looking at. If we were to shave an additional, it's only 1.5 there, but if we were to shave
another two and a half million off, that works out to 30 full-time teachers. We are not probably going to be in a position where if you eliminated 30 teachers, you're talking about a massive
>> massive 30 teachers, right? >> Here's my point. It it's still it's an increase. I I know there's fixed costs and energy costs are up and transportation etc. Right? So your
discretionary is small but still >> in over year over year the population is lower and the costs are higher. So >> I'm just playing devil's advocate. Anybody at at the town meeting would say
I still don't get it. Enrollment is down and all of the expenses are up and we're still maintaining the ideal class sizes and we want to make sure that every kid, you know, has a teacher and an assistant teacher and all of that hands-on. And
somebody would say, well, it it it still doesn't make sense. Everything you said is solid, but how was it that >> because the fixed cost increase significantly outweighs any sort of savings that you can do because inside even comparing last year to this year.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. So, >> but the so just looking at this from >> Yeah. >> you know 3 feet away the green block is higher. That's your non-discretion that's your discretionary uh that is that has increased more than
previous years. Right. Right. >> As a percentage of everything else. >> And it's 1.4 or 1.5 almost >> million. >> Yep. >> So, how is there not anything in that 1.4? And we're not saying 30 teacher layoffs, but how is there anything else?
>> Understood. So, here. So, this is a breakdown of what from a town perspective. Let's say some Well, fine. We're going to vote the budget down. Doesn't get passed. The only thing really at risk is the 1.4 million. >> Mhm. because the rest of it you have to
pay anyway. >> Rob said differently. What's the reason why the discretionary went up half a million when everything points? So what >> and that's the one sheet that I don't think Nick printed out. There's the wise that that the superintendent went over. Like when we look at last year to this
year, special ed costs have been going through the roof. >> So special eds in >> in district in district and kids that go out of district too, right? because if we have to send them out of district, we're on the hook for it. >> So that's why there's been a push over the last number of years. If we can
create a program to actually keep the kids in district, yes, it's an increase, but it's a heck of a lot less of an increase if we were to have to send them out of district. You've got the insurance costs went through the roof. You've got special ed, like I said, went
through the roof. You've got um some of the in district the out of district not out of district but the tuition costs at some of the at uh >> CEK >> CEK went up. All of those things continue to go up. No matter whether we've got less kids or not, there's all
of those costs that are up. There's labor costs that have went up. There's all of those costs went up higher than what the increase. So, if we looked at fixed costs that we couldn't control just from last year to this year, it was almost $2 million.
Now, if we didn't do any sort of adjustments, that discretionary would have been 2 million bucks. So, we're trying what we can to lower that down, but it's not as simple as onetoone sort of, hey, the numbers go down, therefore the cost should go down. It doesn't work
that way because the fixed costs, the percentage that they're going up are morphing. It's just dwarfing everything. It's it's there's really the only way to adjust it, right? You're not going to get
level from one year to another. If you do, you're going to have to it's going to be Armageddon. Like, you're going to have to make massive cuts to be able to make that number work. And we've got a lot of tides kind of rolling against us. You've got increased mineral and local
contributions that the towns are getting hit with that we don't have a choice with. They don't even offset the incre like the the the fixed cost increases. We've got very little increase coming from chapter 70 funds like very little that don't do it. You've got all of this
extra cost that get hit. And if we're down 20 kids, >> but if you're down 20 kids, what I'm hearing, sorry to interrupt you, but what I'm hearing is if we're down 20 kids, there's other factors that are that aren't straight 20. It's a multiplier. So all of those other costs might for every one that's going, there
might be a multiplier that's 1.5 or 1.7, something similar to that. That's >> See, the problem is if you're if you lose 20 kids, you lose 20 kids in a district. So if you're lucky, even if it was equally distributed,
you're losing one to two per grade, it's not enough to do anything. Like you can't you can't necessarily go, oh, we're down two kids, get rid of teacher >> because you might have one kid lost, but another kid going to CEK, which is
>> right. Well, that that you could have two and then that I'm talking about those costs are >> it's it's a very difficult setup. What's the saving and teacher ratio now? >> Oh, see. Okay. So, I'm not the expert on everything. There are going to be some things I can help you with, some things
I don't. I do not know that answer. >> How about the cost per student? >> That I don't know. >> Here's my question. >> Those are good questions. >> Minimum contribution. I know I'm not from Massachusetts. In Connecticut, >> we have what's called the minimum budget requirement. >> Okay. >> Same kind of thing. >> Okay.
>> There are exceptions to that calculation. One is a significant decrease in student population over time. They recognize if you got 20% less kids, >> yeah,
>> you shouldn't have to continue to escalate that minimum requirement. You have to apply for those things. You have to get and it's not that you got to make it up the following year. >> Well, okay. So, that's where the difference is between the state of Massachusetts, state of Connecticut. State of Massachusetts has what
something what they called hold harmless. So districts in declining populations are held harmless from having less money given to them. The challenge is is that you're not just
dealing with lower student population. If you're in an urban area and you've got an excess number of kids and they go down a little bit and you want to adjust the thing down, you can probably you can get closer to that one to one. When you're dealing in a rural area, there are
certain things, maintenance, finance, accounts, like all of those. You've got certain fixed costs that you have to have whether you have a district of 500 or a district of 10,000. and the bigger districts that have the sort of
economies of scale can make that work better. Now, on top of that, they're also getting huge money from this student opportunity act that we get nothing from. Now, what what the state is running into is there's now a vast
majority of of districts that are in this hold harmless setup and there's more and more in the bigger rural areas that are going to so I think you're going to find that there's going to be a lot more there's going to be a bigger push to try to readjust that because now they're starting to get where they're
not getting their increases in revenue like they normally do. And it's it's again we are not when you look at the amount of money that's being asked above net school spending when you look
at the state perspective. we as a whole are usually on the the lower end if not the lowest end of the scale that from a district perspective we're not asking for this huge 150% above minimum local contribution like
there's a ton of districts that are way up around that area we are 2 three years ago at 3% I think we're at five now but what I think you're going to find is as the minimum local contributions are shifting and the min and and that student opportunity act is adjusting
that number is going to have to go up just because there's more costs. >> I think it would be helpful if we understood the cost per the average cost per student. >> Yeah. >> And then the average cost per student when all of these other things occur.
They're, you know, the their school choice. So, I'm going to use simple math because that's how my brain has to work. >> The average cost per student is a hundred bucks. But if they go to CEK for example, now it's 125. So we've got a 25% in increase. If it's special ed,
that goes up to 150. That's so for every two for every student that we lose if we have two in. You know what I'm saying? Like that that's a way for us to try to understand. This is part of the reason why I also wanted to come tonight to get some feedback from you guys where it's like
look, we can't adjust the warrant articles that we've sent for town meeting for this year, but we've already given a directive to the administration and all the school and the and the individual schools that we'd
really like them this year to be extremely frugal on everything. any sort of savings that we can look at and we're going to be looking at everything to say, okay, do we need this? Do we not need this? Do we even if if we can do that now, all that's going to do is save
us money in the lines, which allows more money to go in END, which allows us to offset for next year. So, it's it's not going to go to waste. Like, it's not and I don't want anybody to think cuz I know there was a comment that was made a couple weeks ago that, oh, if we're not doing maintenance, then that maintenance
line goes somewhere else. It doesn't. I if stuff that doesn't get used gets put in END so that we can offset the the the assessments to the towns the following year and it also allows us to deal with whoopsies or unknowns that we just weren't expecting that that we get hit
with. What I'd like to do is if there are specific questions that you guys would like answered like those, put them in an email, send them to me so that what we can do and what I'd like to start doing is having more routine conversations throughout the year so
that it's not this rushed sort of what's going on and where can we save some money. I I want everybody to have a better understanding of of what's over there and how we're dealing with stuff so that it makes it a little bit easier when we get to this crunch time to go, okay, I've got a better understanding
because if you are looking for that, I think that's a great idea because you can get information where it's at, where it's on. The last thing I want you guys to feel like you've got to do is go, okay, let's look at this line by line. The challenge is is that the regional school district's not set up that way.
And we can do everything we want to from a Southwick perspective, but you've got to remember the way a regional school agreement is set up is that if two of the three towns vote the operational budget through, it's through. Now, what you've got on your side is
that out of the seven members of our school committee, five of them are from South. And the other thing you've got to and it it's tough because you don't see it in here. I have take great pride in trying to get this
down as low as I can and look and address things that are that are getting that the town of Southwick is being burned on. So, the two big things that we've adjusted and I know from a select board perspective, they weren't necessarily happy with me with this with with one of them.
>> If you notice, we're in the dungeon. >> No, I know. But but number one, >> when I identified the discrepancy and the I don't know what you want to call it, the the outofd district tuition issue >> Mhm. >> I addressed it right away. And that's
saving us literally $30 and some thousand a year that it's not going to show up here. >> Right. >> If I didn't do what we did two years ago, this would be through the roof and there'd be nothing we can do about it cuz it's just set up that way. That went
on for 10 years. Yeah. I mean, there's a million dollars that the town lost. Adding that second SRO into the school budget is the right thing to do for the taxpayers of Southwick because now that's in here. So, it looks
worse than it is, but you've got to make sure that on the town side they pull that cost out. I don't know if they've done it or not because the expenses are going to be here for most of it. When we originally started talking about that second SRO, there was an agreement that
we wanted to try to make that we thought was going to be fair. It didn't end up turning out to be fair. So, the only fair thing to do is for the town to invoice the district for the time on premise for the two SRO's so that the town of Southwick is actually paying what's appropriate.
That's in there and has been fixed. But what it does is it artificially increases the school district budget because it's now not on the town. So that's got to just be taken into account when it's done that. It's okay, but there's extra cost here, but it's cheaper for us to do it this way because
before we were paying the full freight and we shouldn't have been. So I one and then I'll get off my my soap box, but I appreciate the frugality, but I would put more weight on understanding the data points because I'm I'm putting more weight on understanding where the
numbers are coming from rather than everybody tight in your purse. understood. So, but but I appreciate both sides of the coin, but I would I would just for my opinion, I would probably have fewer questions or fewer kind of what's going on in this >> kind of, you know, this massive bucket
of dollars if I understood the data metrics that go into all of these components. And you guys have provided us with breakdowns before, but certainly not to the level of questions. And I so I appreciate you coming in here saying we're going to do a better job of that because that's what I think. I think we
need to understand the data behind the numbers so that we're not having this conversation that when it comes we're like, "Oh, yeah, that." >> Well, yeah. And I think I think being transparent makes sense. >> I think being more transparent with that is only going to help you guys from a from a finance perspective. And look, there's nothing there that we're hiding.
Like there there's you guys can have whatever data that we need. I think it and I think if we establish what kind of metrics you're looking for, that'll make it a lot easier for Nick to be able to pull that information and then just send out like regular monthly updates. Even where are we at? Here's where we're at.
I mean, once they've got that generated, that would be a simple report to be able to put together and then send out and then that way it's not just, okay, let's go to the budget roundt meeting in November and we kind of get the first look as to what's going on. you should be able to get data and
information all all throughout the year that it makes this time of year a little bit less crazy because then like you said you've got an understanding of where the data points are what's in our control what's not in our control what does this look like I mean what we're
basically going to be we've asked everybody to put everything together I want a a a breakdown what do we absolutely need >> and and what can we from a organizational
reook. Are there opportunities for us to be able to get leaner and meaner without having significant impact for the outcomes for the kids? And I always think that there's opportunities for that and we've been able to do that. And the nice thing is, at least on on the
the opposite side of it, when we've done this every year, the last three, four years when I've been there, I don't think that that process was ever done before where the the cuts that were being made, I'm just not having our committee
stamp them all no matter what. There's a conversation there like, what is this going to do? What have you done to adjust for it? Is there going to be a significant impact? Yes or no? If there's going to be savings and there's going to be a way to make it work where it's not a a big issue, then fine, let's do it. But if we're going to make a cut
and it's going to have a significant issue, then okay, wait a minute. Let's wait. Let's do this the right way. And that's what we've done over the last four or five years and it's worked well. What I'm worried about is just from a straight mathematical perspective.
Now, does this mean we're over two and a half by 200,000 or we're under by 200? Okay. So the challenge that I see and that I'm worried about and this is one of the main reasons I want to start
everybody understanding this early is that even if we do a fantastic job being lean and mean and doing things the right way, there's still going to be these costs that we're not going to be able to control that it's going to be there. Even if we're able to reorganize and make some additional enhancements from a
staffing perspective to make it more to make it work, there may be nothing that we can do. If the minimum local contribution goes up another $500,000 and the fixed costs go up $750, I I don't know what we do. Like you may run we may run into from a town
perspective a 2 and a.5% override no matter what. And and it may not I I don't know how we do it. Like, but if we're going to get there, the best thing from my perspective is if everybody's got as much ammo and as much information as they can so they understand it.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> 100%. >> So, >> I'm sure we're going to be there. >> That was it. I mean, I know I'm not bringing up anybody, >> you know, I'm going to have a couple comments. That's fine. >> Um, the cost per student, I went looking for that information this past weekend
um on the on the state and all you can find is back to um 2024. They don't even have 2025 information on there. >> Doesn't surp us us or the state does >> the state because I wanted I wanted to see where our cost per student across
every district in the state. Um because the schools posted something explaining net school spending and said that we were like one of the lowest 236 out of 258. >> Yeah. And I was put back by that making
it sound like the town is cheap funding our schools. >> No look at it that way. But >> no, but well that's how I did because I didn't think it was fair to post something like that without looking at the cost per student. And back in 2024, we were like right in the middle. So I'm
going to assume that we're probably still right in the middle of what >> of what we spent on a cost per student >> throughout the whole state. we were just just over $20,000 per student. So I looked at everybody who you know was above that and below that. >> So I I just thought that was
>> at two different metrics >> and and and I think there you can look at them different ways and I think the the point that they were trying to show was that I think there's a general concern that there's you know what the costs go up the pudles go down we're
we're we're we're spending way over what we should. the the comment about net school spending over compared to the rest of the districts in the state >> to show that we're being we're being good stewards of the money that we're
using and that we're only 3 to four or 5% over that net school spending amount where even if you've got you could find districts that are same cost per pupil they are like 140% over their net school spending but we're able to do it at 105
or 106 fix. So, it's it's and I don't want anybody to think that there's that there's like this total like nobody's worried about or nobody's watching the store with it. And I know that's not coming from you, but it's but if you
don't without any information like that, it's certainly not uh out of the possibility that people could hear snippets here and there and go, "Well, wait a minute. costs keep going up and the the pupil numbers keep going down without any sort of extra info on top of that, you can get a misunderstanding of
what's going on. But I think those two things that you're looking at, there's two different there's two different factors in there, >> right? Well, it's when I read it, it was like, okay, the town's cheap, we should be paying more. That's how I read it. And then I said, okay, the cost per pupil, we're right we're right in the
middle of the pack. >> Y >> um >> that still doesn't work with with rural school districts, though, right? because the cost per pupil comparing a rural school district student I was looking at the district that we were right in the middle who was over us who was under us. I I was looking for some of the smaller
districts and then I also was talking to several people in different communities from Chabe to Westfield to Long Meadow about class sizes because >> I I know it's ideal for the students,
ideal for the teachers to have class sizes of 16 and 18. But that's not what's going on around us. They're like, you know, 22 23. And I don't think we have 1618 anymore. I think we're higher than that. >> Okay. >> That's that's not what was presented to
us. >> Okay. Well, then let me first now what Jen said 10 years ago and what what's going on now? >> There was 23 kids, you know, per class. >> Okay. >> Back then and there was six classes and it dropped down to five. So by you
saying that okay there's 20 kids sprinkled here or there but over the years sprinkled here and there they're adding up to a classroom >> understood and as I said if you look at the last where where the reductions and the adjustments have been we have less
classes at the middle school the the elementary school the middle school and the high school than we did six or seven years ago. You just can't make a if you lose 30 kids or 20 kids you can't just okay that means the teacher's gone. It doesn't work that well. It doesn't work
that easy. But over time, that allows you to readjust class sizes and it allows you to readjust numbers of teachers if it's appropriate at certain as they go through the system. Like we're seeing graduation classes that are lower now than there were six years ago.
Well, that reduction had to start at the elementary school, right? And then they work their way up. Well, if you follow the adjustments that we've made in the class sizes and in the numbers of teachers by grade, that's exactly how that's been done. The elementary school
get adjusted first, then the middle school got adjusted, the the the upper middle school or junior high and the high school, and now we're back down to where we're going to be relooking at the elementary school again. So, there that's happening. It's just it the
economies of scale doesn't let doesn't allow us to do it as if we were like a school district of like 5,000. Then if you if you lose a bunch of you might be able to make those adjustments quicker. >> Does it make sense? No, >> it does. But I'm I'm just very concerned
about the class sizes being 16 and 18. >> So let me let me do this, okay? Because I I don't think they're that low. Let me find out, but I'm not gonna guess. Let me find out. And what I'll do is I'll reach back out to you guys and let you know where they're at. >> I'm adding it to the list of
>> And I mean, I may not be able to get these to us before town meeting, right? I mean, this is >> But to your point, we want a future stage like I'll call it dashboard or something, but we can start compiling some metrics and >> it'll be easier when we do this year-over-year. If you've got a if you've got a dashboard of metrics that
you guys want to look at, it's going to be easier to compare, contrast, here, where we're going, how are we adjusting, I think that's great. I I think that's a great idea. More info for you guys, the easier it will be. And we're looking to do this up at
Granville, up at Talin. I want to have like public meetings where people can come in and ask questions and sort of we can walk everybody through because I think one of the things is going to be okay. Well, if we get what I'm worried about is if we get to an option of two and a
half and what is it says Hadley? >> Yep. >> They didn't pass it. >> So, alone there's going to be >> there's going to there's going to be more there's going to be more. >> Yeah. But I think if and as a taxpayer if we make that decision I just want to
make sure everybody understand what it means and I don't think we've we've certainly it's not I don't think we have not done a a good job at this point explaining what that kind of adjustment would would look like. It would be
significant. I mean I know South Hadley's talking about sports going away and all these things. I mean there's so you start impacting things by that kind of level usually people like oh wait a minute we wanted we didn't want to pay we didn't want to do this like we didn't want to destroy this so I just want
everybody to know where what's going on >> all right hopefully this was helpful >> thank you very much >> no it is it is because we are all in the same boat coming up this following year for sure >> and we do have to get in front of it because it will be easier if that question gets brought up about two and a half >> everyone's on the same page. Whether
you're the school department, whether you're down here in the dungeon or you're upstairs and heaven, we're all going to be on the same page. >> All right. But if you guys send me an email, >> Yeah. >> I'll get >> But that but we'll we'll work on getting
that stuff together >> and that way we can have some consistent metrics that we get to you guys so that by the we get to November, you're already going to know what everything's going on anyway. >> And that's what we should, right? Honest to God. All I'll across the board. Yeah. it. You know, no one will have a question halfway through.
>> It doesn't bother me at all. I mean, that's that the more info that you guys can get. >> Yeah. >> It's again, there's nothing over there that anybody's like, "Oh, I hope they don't see." >> No. >> Is what it is. >> Same here. It's all the same. >> All right. Well, thank you for your time, guys. >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Appreciate you coming back.
>> No problem. >> So, just so you understand that you may want to leave those boards and you never leave those So, certain nights, you just better be on speed dial. That's all I'm going to tell you.
And we do appreciate it so much. All right. So, up first is the um we want to go over we have two pages here. So, we need to go pros and cons for article one. >> Okay.
And we do we have last year's cocon >> in the packet. >> I'm sorry I'm not a vote. >> Yep. You're fine. >> There you go. So the last packet the annual town meeting articles and building
>> and there's also special here. >> Y >> so annual sweep. >> Yep. The special is only young because three of them are standard. Yes. >> So what do we what which which are we starting there?
>> Special standards the order I have or anything. >> Okay. >> Special standards. This is >> the special tell me the >> yeah this the articles the draft of the article or the warrant I'm sorry. And
this is the previous pros and an example of the pre previous pros and cons for those articles because they're standard. >> Was that rare folks? >> Yes. >> Special here. >> Okay. >> And then these are pre
make sure we're okay. >> We usually start with something that we have >> standard read. >> Right. Exactly. The agenda was it for signing the frozen palms or were you going to go through those? >> I think we're going to go through the
ones we already have. >> Yeah. >> And then after that we will look at what we have to assign and maybe get some verbiage done tonight. >> Um >> Okay. >> You're going to leave early, so we're probably going to assign everything to you once you walk out. >> When that happens,
>> I know we won't. I promise. So yeah, we go through what we have and then >> yeah is a very light warrant in general this year. So we should be pretty close on there. >> Okay. Okay. So on the special article one we already have the answers from
last year for kind of the debt owed as defined in FY 2026 budget the found as the legal responsibility to pay these salaries. >> It's a little special on just so you have some background. It's pretty standard. We usually have the same
three. >> Okay. because we have certain amounts like you can't predict snow and ice so obviously those so these three are usually the big hitters here in common >> and these are printed out and they're available for the town's folks as they
sit down it's not so much stuff we'll discuss at town meeting >> and they are posted on the website >> we'll do with article one Yeah. >> So, Laura, do you want us to do the motions as we go?
>> You can't approve the special. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, article one, >> motion to approve as discussed the pros and cons for article one. >> Sorry. Sorry. Should we add at the end of that sentence, failure to pay would
incur certain liabilities and non-compliance issues, which is the same in article 2 because article one is not technically um worded as a con, >> right? just adding that last sentence. >> Mhm. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. We're good. Okay. So, motion to approve as discussed and written the pros and cons for article one salary account transfers of a special town meeting. >> Sharing olden motion. Kevin second.
Those in favor Joe Die I. >> David Mackey I >> Sharon Alton I >> Taran Deo I >> Alita D Maria I >> Snow and Ice is next or >> recommendations please. >> Where's the recommendation?
>> It's you after you do the pros and cons you do the recommendation for the article. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. >> Thank you. >> Motion to recommend article one salary account transfers of a special town meeting.
>> Sharon Nolson. Motion. Yeah. >> Karen Mayo. Second. >> All those in favor? Joy. I >> David. I >> Sharon Nolton. I >> do I do. >> So if she gets you >> Yeah, I got the kick. Yeah, I got you.
>> Pass it on down. Thank you. I am not a sound mind. Article two, snow and ice pro. The town is allowed to deficit spend for snow and ice removal during the year and then pay later. This dollar
amount will cover the approved cost associated with the past winters cost for snow plowing and treating of roads for ice. This dollar amount will balance the current deficit in the account. The con, the town has the legal physical responsibility to pay bills and balance
accounts. Failure to pay would incur certain liabilities and non-compliance issues. Anyone have any questions about that? >> No, I think it's still applicable. >> Okay. Are you okay with that? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Motion to approve as discussed the pros and cons for article 2, snow and ice of a special town meeting. Sharon Nolton. >> Sharon Deo second. >> All those in favor? Joseph Dvi I. >> David Matthew I. >> Sharon Alton I
>> Karen Deo I >> Alita I. >> Next up is a motion to recommend article two snow and ice of the special. >> Motion Sherry Nolton. >> Seconded Karen Dea. All those in favor Joseph Levy I. David Matthew I. Sher
Nolton. I >> Aaron De Maria I >> article three other kids it employment benefits the pro the other post and benefits trust fund was created to ensure the benefits coverage of retired employees of the town of South the town
hopes to place a specific amount of money into this fund on an annual basis to asssure the funds will be available as needed for our retired employees the con if we do not contribute to the other post office employment benefits trust
fund, we would risk future shortfalls in funding our employee retirement benefits. >> That's a pro. So I think the con is the free cash account will be diminished by that amount and not available for other
things. Okay. bring an opportunity to the other postemployment benefit trust fun with risk future shortfalls on your employee retirement benefits. So that whole statement is a is a pro
that should just you know scratch out the word con and you can append it to the employees period up above it. >> Yeah. And then the pan is you taking money out of free cash
um and spending it here and that money wouldn't be available in the free cash account for other things. that I can think of or you know or what's what are the other uh social tooling and benefits.
So we take more out of that. >> Yeah. In other words, the con with spending money on that is that >> we're shortfalling people. We're not funding it. >> Yeah, >> we're not. >> We're shorting >> this fun.
>> Retirees. >> This is the funds that they need. >> That's a pro. >> That's a pro to doing it, right? What's not what's the con for doing it? Might not be much, but >> the con is >> you're not fulfilling our agreement with >> our retirement people.
>> That's the pro for doing. That's the reason you That's the reason those are all good reasons to do it, right? Those are pros, >> right? So, the con, like somebody would say, well, you took $25,000 out of the free cash, right? >> And I like free cash. And so, to me,
that's a con because now my free cash is lower and yeah, you got, you know, employee benefits taken care of, but our free cash is less than it was before. That's the con to this. >> The con is you start the following year
$25,000 in the hole, >> right? plus interest on that that reserve fund transaction. All you can do is hope that retirees die to reduce that op. >> That's the only that's really the only option to reduce OPAC. Right.
>> So you're just pushing the can down the road. >> Exactly. But we're trying to word it. Yeah. That that's exactly right. you've been safe. You know, our free cash is diminished by this much and next year, you know, we're going to have that much less to spend. Next, we'll have that much less in our
free cash account or other emergencies or things like that. That's the con. >> Yeah, we're forced to say these >> like you said, how do you put that into >> just what >> we've been saying, right? We don't want
to say someone has to die. No, no, we don't have to. >> We don't have to go to doing the con to doing this. >> Is it deferring the liability to a future period and and that becomes an easy
habit to get into? >> I mean, very easy. >> You more later, >> cost you a boatload more. You still have to pay the bill. >> Yeah. >> Whether you defer it or not, the bill has to get paid, >> right? So, so that's I I wouldn't I mean I >> So, it's still the the risk of the
shortfall, >> right? >> How do we work that? >> But isn't that already there? Do >> we know what the total deficit is in unfunded oped? Is it like hundreds of thousands? >> Yeah, it probably,
you know, it's >> that's a mistake. >> So, this is the the pros to voting yes. And is is this the con to voting? Yes. Where he was saying it would deplete our >> it's the transfer of funds, right? So
there's a good >> there's a good story to tell about why we would transfer the funds. Those are the pros. Why we want to do it? And the con is well, what's the ramifications if you do it? >> If you don't future. Yeah.
>> Not if you don't do it. Okay. >> It's if you do do it, what's the con to that? We've had this discussion before. >> I mean, if we don't do we not have a con. Is there no con? Maybe there's no con. >> We still have to pay the bill.
>> We still have the liability. It still needs to >> So you can just add that we would still have a liability and would it would therefore increase the future shortfall if you want to tweak it a little bit. >> Yeah.
An expense no matter what. People >> kind of have to vote for it. You can't >> Is that a relatively constant amount for 25,000 or has it been increasing or decreasing? Um this >> 25 is about >> the average.
>> Is it enough? No, never enough. Well, never >> we were really good year. It might go up a little slightly, but >> the rest of them, but I think you guys are
great job on >> Thank you. So, we may may or may not have a meeting next Tuesday. >> Oh, yeah. >> We don't know. Okay. We'll know. You know, if anything tonight, we'll make a motion that I can finish these up. Yeah. >> If everyone's okay with that. >> May or may not be able to meet next
week. >> Understood. Yeah. >> Yeah. No problem. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, sir. Have a good night. We would still incur the liability and risk future shortfalls in funding our
employer the liability and future. >> So we we >> Yeah. >> So we still incur the liability and we would risk future shortfalls.
>> Sure. >> That's a good tweak. All right. You comfortable with that? Okay. >> All right. So, we already vote it. Motion to approve as discussed and rewritten the pros and cons for article 3, other postemployment benefits of a
special town meeting. >> Sharon. >> Oh, sorry. Motion Sherry Nolton. >> Second. Karen Deo. >> All those in favor? Joseph DD. >> Sherry Nolton. I >> do. I Alita Golia I
>> motion to recommend article three other postemployment benefits of the special town meeting. >> Motion Sherry Nolton. >> Seconded Karen Deo. All those in favor Joseph DD I >> Sher I
>> Karen >> Mayo I community preservation act funding adjustment to be determined >> what what is that >> community re the community preservation
act >> so that is you see the CPA on the Yeah. >> Yep. >> It's 3%. The first 100,000 is >> non-touchable, I guess, and then the rest you get your 3% on. >> Back in the day, it was going to be one one and a half. When I went to town
meeting, somebody got up and said, "Let's get it all." >> Well, what's it for? Does it go to the state? We No. So, that's our little trust fund, I guess. Our a little >> Okay. >> box of money that goes to like Wall-E Park upgrades. >> Okay. Um there is some really good
clarifications of where it >> it does a lot of historical stuff too, right? Historical. >> Yeah. Like the police station. >> The one we really don't use ever is housing. Um we just don't seem to find that niche yet where the housing one the piece works. Although they did use some monies
to redo across from the police department. You know, I did the small crates over there. >> Right. Right. And then a lot of it goes into a general fund that they kind of use anywhere. So million and change went to Wally Park Lighting years ago. Um the alum
treatment at the lakes came out of there this past time around this past. Um so if you have any little project that you think qualifies this year they have none coming in front of us. >> Oh wow. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I think all you're seeing is
whatever this is about to do with, but we don't have it. So, >> yeah, this sounds like they got more money last year than they had anticipated. So, now they have to distribute that >> correct >> extra $70,000 to the funds
appropriately, >> whichever line item that they have to put it in. >> So, they they don't have anything coming in front of us and it increased by $700,000 last year. That's >> it is it's
you know and there's been appetites to lower that 3% but it never gets through town meeting. It just doesn't >> maybe when they read this >> 3% of what your value was 20 years ago or 15 years ago when they started it is 3% of what your value today is. >> Yeah. Because when you do when you do
the 3% then you get maximum um matching from the state. And I used to and I that goes every which way lately and I know for sure it's still matching. >> It's not like a dollar for dollar matching, but it's it's the it's the maximum that you can get and then in the
first round and then you do get some from a second round. >> Gives you a better shot, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Like you said there 700,000 >> which cannot be used to lower our tax rate or used on any any of the above.
This just sits there. All right. So, you know action on article 4. >> We have two speakers and generic. >> Yeah, >> we do. >> Yeah. All right. >> What is it?
>> Yeah. The numbers are a little off on the graph. >> Okay. >> Yes. Because >> did we did we do three? Three is no longer on. >> No, we didn't.
>> Right. This is >> right. >> This was a placeholder in case >> we moved some of the capital from the budget. >> This is the most current draft of the special funds. >> Right. So article four was article four article five >> that we're talking about now.
>> So this Yeah. So so the the three is really four >> that's what I changed but I didn't know which was right but I thought four >> five we don't do anything with >> that. Yeah that's not anything for our
>> preservation. Don't you do pros and cons? We do pros and No, because we have Do we >> We do recommendations. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Really? >> Oh, >> really? >> Yeah. So, we we do need pros and cons. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Okay. So, I I was writing. Yeah. >> So, proposed pro the transfers will allow additional monies allocated to open space, historic resources, and community housing to serve our community's needs allowable under the CPA. >> Yep. Okay. Um,
con, if we do not complete the adjustment, we will be out of compliance with Mass General Law Chapter 44B. >> Yes. >> I like it. Short and to the point. >> There you go. >> Execute this. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> If you can read my writing, >> I have your email.
>> Call me if you can. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Very nice. >> So, I made a doctor. >> I don't think I'm that bad. That's what I mean. This is technically article five. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay.
>> Four. Don't be four. >> There will be four. >> It doesn't look like three is going through then. So the number I gota >> motion to approve as discussed the pros and cons for article 4 community preservation act funding adjustments.
>> Motion Sherry Nolton. >> Seconded. Karen Deo. >> All those in favor? Joseph DD. >> Sherry Alton. Julian may I. >> No, we do not have to do a recommendation. Correct. >> No, you do not. Okay. >> Okay.
No, on the time. >> What is What were these additional? These are the pro past pros and cons for the standard articles. The ones that say new article, the pros and cons need to be written. This other piece of paper,
uh there is one I can't remember which number it is, but pros and cons of this article >> one thing >> um would be an example that goes with whichever article it is. I found that at
the very last minute so I didn't get it in. >> Okay. >> Um it looks like articles from 2022 article one matches with article 8 tax incremental financing. >> Yes.
>> Yes. Yes. Y >> on the Yeah. >> thing. >> I don't know. >> That's not part of it. No, it's not. Ethan. >> Yes. Article is article. Yes. >> Okay.
>> So, new articles six. >> All right. The beginning anyways, right? >> That's valid. That's not >> That's not article two. So, really article six. Okay.
Oh, so now this money is going that way. Okay. >> So this is leftover monies from the from the doing that project. >> Okay. >> So you have to bring it back in >> to something else. Six. >> Six. Appropriation of borrowed funds. Okay. Yes. This is this is the starts
here with the financial. >> Okay. Do we have the dollar amount that's flipped over? >> Someone threw around 200,000 I thought. Should that be in the >> We don't have real numbers. >> We don't know. Okay.
>> They were like just estimated thrown around. >> Yeah. >> But shouldn't that >> Shouldn't know that. Should it be here versus >> somebody's going to ask that question? >> No, we just don't. >> We're too efficient.
>> Like we're ready for it, but they just don't have it yet. So, what would you like us to do, Laura? >> I don't know whether I think until we have >> a number >> a number. I don't think recommendations
would be >> appropriate >> appropriate >> to pass up article six >> but I don't know whether trying to come up with a pros and cons or we take a time to think about it.
>> Right. We could So you're saying you don't vote on bringing it to the meeting but we could come pros and cons too. >> Yeah. Could >> Right. >> Or we could we Yeah. I just don't want us. >> No, I'm with you. Yeah. >> Or try to um figure out something.
>> So, would the pro be that we're not losing the money? >> Would we lose that if it's not transferred to another project? >> Turning these funds back in from this project will then offset >> other capital items which which is looks like the fire engine >> is nominated.
>> So, the pro is that it's lessens our burden on >> Yep. >> on purchase of the new capital new capital items. >> Yeah. lessen burdens. >> Yeah. >> The same with the con, right? The con is if we don't do it, we're back to uh borrowing more money.
>> Yeah, we would have to borrow it, >> right? We think this number is around 200 grand roughly, >> right? Somewhere. Yeah. Rough. Yeah. >> She's writing fiercely over there. You got it. We are just 200 grand under. We're both writing.
>> Yes, but you're better. >> And even if we they're drafts and don't >> at least we have something we can these are. >> Yep. Yep. Absolutely. >> Oh, there's a copier down copy before. >> I'm not these aren't going to be done.
I'm gonna have to look at these tonight. Oh, because I'm just writing. This one I'm writing short. Okay. We don't open until 8:30. So, let me meet you at breakfast at 4 if you want. All right. So, article six is being
adjusted. Article seven. >> Do we have to vote on our pros and cons or no? >> We're going to hold it. Okay. Okay. Just kidding. That was interesting. Ideas. Idea. Yes. Okay. >> Are you around next Tuesday? >> No, it's my daughter's 12th birthday.
>> All right. They're definitely working on >> All right. Article 7, fire apparatus. >> I'll be here. >> Acquisition 1.1 mill to pay cost of purchasing equipment a So, folks, it's not a ladder truck. We're not getting a second one.
That should say fumper. And >> why would we say or any other amount? Why wouldn't we say not to exceed any other amount? Could be 10 million. It could be. >> But what if it comes in at 1.2? >> Yeah.
>> You know, so we we just >> if is that I >> I think you got to have a cap of some type. I mean, that's cheap. That's just better right now. Not easy. Yeah. Hey Chief, if you want to pipe in
there, >> I don't know. I get to ask you, but >> I mean, is that how we normally do it? >> It is. >> It is. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> I think >> Well, I I think we know he's not going to go for like 1.3 1.4. He would have a lot of explaining. He
would make a decision between Chief is here. Oh, there he is. >> I'm sorry. I stepped out for a moment. >> That's fine. >> Right. Sorry. How How can I help you tonight? We're just going over the pumper truck and um the question was
it's 1.1 million or any other amount. Um should we cap that? You're probably pretty close to 1.1 anyways. Correct. We are um the 1.1 is pretty much
I I it's not the final price on our truck but it's very close to what we estimate the final cost would be. I think other amount was only because they wanted to put the down payment towards that and that would take that 1.1 down but the total expenditure and the total
expense to the town >> would be 1.1 million. >> Okay. And you don't see it going higher than that >> at this time? I do not. No. And my it's my goal to keep it below that. There there are things we can do to, you know, that we would have to work with the
vendor to say, "Look, it this is where it needs to come in. Figure it out." And they'll they'll they'll have to figure it out. >> You probably never should have told me that. >> Well, I can tell you there's the base truck price ain't of the industry now is
right about where we are. >> No. And I and I I'm just having some fun. Yeah. And you're fine. We're fine with that. We're just going over verbiage and we had that was the question. >> Understood. >> So I would leave any other amount in there. >> Um just to we've been safe all these
years. >> So >> Okay. >> These aren't for us to reward. >> Oh, that's right. This is part of the >> Well, can you change that from ladder to pumper? Well, we can we'll recommend that. >> Okay.
>> So, be an accurate description >> and these are basically at the attorneys now getting it. So, they might have already tweaked that per se, you know, because actually today the emails went out and there were several pieces that we all um you know, the paving didn't say million dollars, just said paving.
>> That was identified last night at the select board meeting that the language should say engine and not ladder. So maybe already it's been changed. >> Yep. >> Just not our our current copy. That's all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> We'll see to see if the town will appropriate 1.1 million. Any other >> amount to pay cost of purchasing and equipping a pumper truck or whatever they want to call engine >> for the use of the fire department and for the payment of all cost incidental and related. Therefore, to determine
whether this amount shall be raised for by taxation, transfer from available funds, borrowing or otherwise or to take any other action therefore. >> Is this where the monies from article six are coming? >> That's what the hope is that that dollar fund will go as a deposit on this. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. >> So, essentially, if article six is approved, >> right, >> there's no reason article 7. So if you're gonna approve article six and deny article seven then that's doesn't make any sense. But anyway
correct >> but the pro is really for this one is really to be locked in >> for a contract price at at current cost >> instead of incurring the increase.
>> Yeah. Yep. And the con is if we don't do this, >> costs will be higher. >> It's kind of the opposite, isn't it? >> No, that that's the pro is do it now to keep costs down because they only increase in the future. The con to this
is the fact that we incur debt. >> Yeah. >> To do it. >> Yeah. Wow. >> Okay. So, if we say approving the purchase of the engine will lock the town in on
current pricing which are increasing. >> Yeah. >> And then additionally, the pro is the funds approved in article six would go to offset this, >> right? >> Yes. Yep. If approved.
>> Yeah. >> We can't assume they are. >> Card. Okay. Okay. Okay, so article eight is the tax incremental financing
title that's race tax implement financing between town and WGI, Inc. for the property located at 34 to 36 Hudson Drive, South Lake, Mass. the TIFF agreement which which tiff
agreements provide for real estate tax exemptions at the at the exemption rate scheduled set forth there and approved an economic development incentive program. Welcome initiative only application submission is to Massachusetts economic
assistance coordinating council. The copy of the master agreement is on file with your town clerk. Authorize the select board. Okay. We don't know the numbers though. Right. >> Right. So this the old one has >> y >> the numbers
>> the old one the article pro the tax increment financing is provided for the improvements only to 8 to 10 million >> and do not ex exist and not the existing building. So this was for wallally computer. had another building already up. Normal revenues will continue to be
collected on the existing building. Okay. >> Is there an existing building on this one as well? >> There actually is, but I don't know where this is going on that property versus we don't have any information. >> Okay. And is there going to be a
limitation? We don't have any >> to you know one year's increasing three years 10 you know is it going to be a a scale or is it just okay you don't have to pay anything >> I didn't bring my eight ball because it just went we gave you numbers with it
seven seven million if we don't have any information >> so how can we vote on it >> and how can it be presented >> oh they there's numbers in the works apparently >> we just didn't get them Wow.
>> Must be a fancy person buying Hudson Drive. >> What's that? >> Is it a fancy person buying Hudson Drive? They just >> It's a Westfield Gauge. Westfield Gage has been there quite a while. When they came in, I'll just say 15 years ago. They did get a tiff agreement back then >> to build
an existing life, but they want to expand. >> Yeah, same thing. So, they this has been on the books for years, negotiations, >> and I think recently they just leased out a couple buildings more down there. So they must have finally figured out >> they want to buy it instead. >> Yeah, we're ready to to actually build.
They have always owned the property. >> Okay. >> The problem we're running into is >> I believe the tiff agreement was brought up last night at selectman's meeting and they didn't have any numbers then either. >> Okay. >> So fast forward to us tonight to do pros and cons. We don't have any numbers >> at all.
>> So we can't do anything. >> So the pros get Yeah. The pros we really can't do. The the con would probably still apply. by the town, but we'll have to wait to receive full revenue for the >> That's exactly true. That is the con. >> It's just the pro. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And we Yeah. I'm assuming it's going on
that same property just like Wallally had the same thing, right? He already had a building up. They put another one on the same property. That's why it's probably And it may even end up being worded the same way other than the dollar values. >> Stay tuned. >> Okay. >> Sorry guys. problem.
>> It is a problem. >> Yeah. >> Article nine, >> lower required minimum senior property tax exemption age from 70 to 65. >> Oh, >> new article. >> No property taxes. >> No, lower lower to see if the town will
vote to accept provisions of Massachusetts general law 41, which allows for adjustment of eligibility requirements for senior property tax exemptions. >> Exemptions. >> Exemptions. Yes, that's what I >> exemptions. >> Hyper focused on >> including exemptions. Oh, I hate one
words. >> That's what I read. >> Yes. Boy, I can't get out of my mind. >> Yeah. Property tax exemptions, including reducing the minimum age requirement, for example, to 65 years of age as of July 1 of the tax year or take any other
therefore action. What does that really mean? >> Yeah. I know. Wow. >> Yeah. So, would they be exempt from property taxes completely? >> I read it. >> I love it. My husband's 67. >> Let's throw another birthday in, right?
Let's go. >> November 16. >> Another reason I married you. >> Finally, it worked out. >> All these years. >> She was just happy getting a lower price dumpster.
>> You beat me. say, >> you know, if Paul Connley was here, he'd because he is at that age bracket all the way around >> and he would know this >> literally because it's his world. >> It was his world. You could explain this and
>> require annual annual application to the local board of assessors with eligibility based on ownership state residency for minimum ownership state residency and specific financial limits but it doesn't say
>> I don't hear totally tax >> but it's a I think it's little >> it's a a small amount and >> and I go to mass.gov gov and it's so we can't find that page. H I know like um a little bit off the
dumpstick or a little bit off your water rate a little >> does reduce >> it reduces >> that should be reductions >> but that but the law the m the clause 41C the the language is exemption >> is exemption >> yes
>> so it's just not setting the dollar value on that exemption >> no you have to >> because I reverse back to that law I'm sure >> yeah it Yes, it's mentioning the law specifically in here. It has to have minimum ownership limits, uh minimum
state uh uh residency, um income limits, asset limits, and you have to apply annually. So, it's not just a gift. You actually have to do stuff >> qualify. >> Yeah. Okay.
valuable information would be >> but the mass general law says exemption. So this is mirroring the exemption. This question is going to come up. >> So so I would recommend in our pros and cons >> we specif we we state that the the pro
is it's not a full it's not it's just a reduction. It's not or that's not really a pro because it's reducing tax. The con is it's reducing the tax income. It has to go to the assessor of the application that he would have a
template about here's the age requirement, here's the residency, here's the income requirement. So people would know it doesn't apply to me. >> Pro would be helping >> the pro helps keep seniors in their house.
>> Help keep seniors in their house. >> Um as the exemption is exemption, >> it's less money for >> Yeah, it's rejection. It's it's based on qualification, you know. >> Yeah. >> Kind of explain that a little bit more than just, oh, this is an exemption that
there's qualifications that you have to meet, >> right? >> And maybe not spell out the qualifications, but >> Well, you just refer back to the chapter. >> Yeah. You say >> the nice part about these when it says >> what or Paul write this one.
>> Yeah. Requested by the select board. So they will gladly answer all and any questions. We we can't we don't So, >> you know, perhaps it the only change is
the age requirement. Do we know if the residency, the income limits are all the same, just lowering the age? That makes it simple. >> Yeah. The >> That's what it sounds like. >> Yeah. All of the qualifications are tied to the Mass General law. It's but the
mass general law allows the low the age to be lowered to 65. >> So it's already in in play just >> and it's it says typically 70 but can be as low as 75 or 65. >> Okay. >> So the pro is passing the article assist
seniors aged 65 and up to uh to stay in their primary residence. Con the property tax amount collected would be reduced decreasing towns uh town revenue. Right. >> Yeah. Good. Okay. >> We learned something new today,
everybody. >> Did we? >> All right. So, before we go too much further, let's go back and and make these motions. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Let's do that. >> So, article six, we we can't do what's what
>> I was going to say. Did you >> just wait? >> I would wait. I would Let's draft these up. Okay. And then >> and then at the next meeting we will vote. We can go right through the >> the special's done. That's good. >> Yeah. There's nothing. This is a little bit more. This is a little more challen
>> Yeah. No, understood. >> Okay. So, article 10, South Granville Regional School District annual budget. >> These are not anymore. No, I don't think so. >> That hasn't changed, right? It's the
pros there for the tank. >> The con and yep, good >> article 11. >> Fine. >> Are you going to vote on that or are we going to do them? >> We're not going to vote on any of them until >> Okay. >> next week. Yeah, I'm with you. Yeah. It's just going to be easier and cleaner
>> to do it all the time. Um, we keep referring to next week. Are we going to have a quorum next week? Because I know I will not be here. Did Dave just say he's not going to be here and Alita said she's not going to be here. So, we're still good. Okay.
>> We're going to have to be. >> All right. >> Or can we or um or another day you need >> You're going to be here? Is Paul going to be here? >> Yeah. >> Paul's out of town still. next week too.
>> I was out for two weeks, right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Oh, I thought he was last week and this week is this weekend next. >> Was he here last week? >> He was. >> He was. You're right. >> Yeah. And he said two weeks. >> Yep. You're right. Okay. >> We need to know if R.J. can make it next
week. >> R.J.'s He's just >> What happened? >> I thought I saw his arm in a sling this weekend. >> Yeah. >> Oh, >> was he thumbing again? Cuz no one's picking up. He got >> He went down to the school to like He was like walking around the track. >> Yeah. >> Jeez.
>> Yeah. >> Well, if he can't work, he's probably bored out of his mind, so he was taking a walk. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. He and he texted me late. He just said, "I'm so sorry. I can't make it tonight." But he but he is up and running. So, um >> Yeah. >> Well, I mean, if we're going to get
close, I will probably be in the car on my way back from Boston. I can try to get in that way, but right >> I have no idea idea when this officer's meeting is going to end. >> So, but I know I would not be in town for 5:30.
>> Let's Let's just deal with it. Let's see. Mr. >> Are you available next Tuesday night? Asking for a friend. humor. The problem is you do everything with one hand because that that would be
my issue, right? How we got, you know, home left hand. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. >> I bet you have to say yay. >> It's not fun. I had a college friend had her arm a truck hit the her arm. Yeah. Went against an old door like 100 years
old. >> Yeah. >> Practice. We had to help her shave, do her hair, take a bath like three months. >> All right. So, article 11. That's when you call a friend. >> Is the um
>> debt debt authorization for >> 600,000 capital improvements HVAC boiler project. >> What we have to close the school next year and we put a brand new boiler. >> We're not closing the school next year. >> We're not closing the school next year.
>> Right. >> Like you said, seven, eight years, >> right? >> Okay. >> We're going to put a bus stop and housing. So, we'll need the furnace. >> Okay. >> We could use the building for something. True. >> There'll be a new senior center. >> That's written very It's a double
negative. Vote not to disapprove. >> Why don't they just say vote to approve? >> Cuz the lawyer touched it. >> Jesus. That >> literally the hell are they asking? Yeah. >> That's ridiculous. >> That's why some things don't get passed when they're
>> Yeah. >> up for a vote. Like you know the marijuana thing. >> I was gonna say the marijuana but at least >> you got to read it three times to know what you're saying or do >> disapprove. It's like not to approve
>> to approve. So article 11 pros and cons are fine. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Article 12 grammar readings for district debt authorization. So, a yes vote.
>> Exactly. What's a yes vote? >> A yes vote will vote it down and a no vote votes for it. >> This is a guy to see if the town of South will vote not to disapprove
>> because it's debt. So, you can't vote to approve it. You're voting not to disapprove it. >> Right. Well, not disapproving it means you will allow the debt to be incurred if so needed. >> So you vote yes
to allow it to happen. >> Right. >> If necessary. >> If necessary. >> This is why things don't happen. Right. >> Correct. Right. >> So, we're good with 11 12
district debt authorizations. >> It's the same. >> It's the same one. >> It's literally the same one. >> Yeah. It's just a different debt, >> if you will. >> It's different reasons, >> right? >> It didn't pass. It passed last year for the track. Other schools were supposed
to do something they didn't do. They weren't aware of it. So this year it's coming back through and each school has a portion of it. Last year finished off was paying for every page like if years past but due to the way things are written today each school needs to take a piece of that.
>> Yeah. So this all refers to retiring bonds. So is indicating that you're taking money from bonds that are retiring and just you know reusing it again. But do we know that's the fact
that we're not incurring more? >> That's not true. So let's see. >> A yes vote will allow funding from retiring bonds to be used to pay the new debt source of the school capital. >> Essentially the principal and interest we would pay every month on a bond that's going to be retired taking that
principal and interest buying a new bond debt coverage. >> But are we sure that what's falling off and what we are putting on offset each other? being orders. >> Yeah, >> that's that's that's my question. This is the school. >> The schools.
>> So, we don't know. >> The good news. So, the 192 was for all three towns. Okay. So, they had to vote, which we I we chuckled earlier today. You know, town would two pupils have to vote 192,000 towards the track and approve it and
then it flips out to their portion of it. We as a town put a h 100,000 against our number with the CPC funds. So we you know ours will drop down because we I did ask at that meeting about the interest like when we the acred interest
where South's not going to have to pay >> a dime on that acred right because 100 grand comes away. I think we ended up I don't know if it was 60,000 in the end. You know the number isn't at 192 because we already put 100 down or we will be putting 100 down on our side then we some left the course but but not that
big number >> right but >> but I understand what you're saying how much debt is roaming off >> right because the 600,000 number article 11 does the same thing. So that's $792,000.
Is there $792,000 in debt falling off? I doubt it >> because I know that when um we did the renovations at the high school and all that, the school was asked to reduce
their requests from say $500 $600,000 a year to three $400,000 a year. So this is not apples and apples running off. No. And putting on >> adding it to my list of questions. No. Yeah, because we're not voting on this tonight anyway. So, we'll just add it to
the list to get answers. >> Yeah. So that we don't mislead. >> I think our process was better. >> What process >> of how we do things >> thing that we did the two days and did our questions and went through everything and then got our answers. And
>> you mean our Saturday meetings >> and we were done already by now? >> No. >> So, we looked at the calendar and and we're probably right where we were last year more or less. What's we're running into difficulties is we just don't have all the information.
>> Oh, >> certain things are only being let out as needed because we are an advisory board. >> So, we don't need to know where >> numbers fall under financial. >> They do where you and I come from,
>> but the new south, not so much. But I will promise you next year, >> L or High Water, we will have numbers. And I don't care where I'm sitting. I am not putting up with this again. >> Yeah. You >> because we all need to be transparent and have them. And if we're going to be going after the schools like we are to
be very transparent so we all understand each other. We can't be sitting here worrying about what our numbers going to be. >> This doesn't work. No. >> Do we need improvement somewhere? Sure we do. And we're all about improving and and and
we still need numbers. We shouldn't be in the dark on everything. I mean, I was really shocked at the meeting last night with the health insurance thing. I mean, that's a huge ticket and I don't know. What do you mean you don't know? How's
that possible? How's it possible you don't know? >> Is it a million? Is it a million fell? >> Doesn't the policy July September? >> I don't get it. I know. That's a huge number. >> Welcome to South.
>> Okay. back to our bonds. >> So, I did have a conversation with Nicole Parker today over that. And honestly, they're still negotiating. So, they really couldn't go into the weeds with us because they just the the deck isn't dealt yet. It's close. They really
are hoping to go to town meeting with with whatever they wanted, right? A percentage or new insurance. the whole package, pray to God, will be at town meeting because if it's not, they're another year out unless we have a
special again and then as you we all know insurance, right? That stuff doesn't last. Every everything's always moving >> and the numbers already fixed though. I mean, I thought >> there was a fixed number of a million dollars. They've added $250,000 to that to help with the negotiating and blah blah blah. But
>> that's why I asked last night like, "Hey, where we at? Just >> Yeah. help us understand why you need 250,000 and and it's in the works. I can't say any more than that. And you know, it's and it's all good, but it is frustrating. >> Yeah. >> Because you promised the town's people
at the end of the day, which they even allowed us to open Pandora's box, which is which is wonderful, right? Because it's never happened before. So the town's people believe in the process. We we're allowing them to negotiate. So it'd be it'd be unfortunate at town
meeting if I have to get up and say it's just 250,000 and I know you don't you don't need to know right now. >> It's not it's a very hard cell, >> right? >> That's a very hard sell. >> So hopefully it gets worked out. I truly do hope it gets worked out. But that's
why I brought it up nicely was just where are we with this? Because if you don't ask, you know, >> yeah, >> no one tells us. So, but you know, >> yes. So, these we really can't just stick
with these pros and cons until we Yes. >> know what's falling off and what we're adding. >> Yeah, it would be nice to know that. And we already have them written anyways from Yeah. from the past. So, >> we can tweak it. We can >> Yeah. We don't know whether
it's just you that part list. Okay. They're strange my list. It's okay. >> 13 out of school out of district school assessment. >> Is that number real? Laura 660.
>> Oh, good. Good. Thank you. >> Yeah, close. >> I thought it looked familiar. >> So, that's article 13 approaching condo there from last time. Article 14, roadway construction. It
should say a million dollars in there. At least it will. And same same thing as written from last time. 15 is the annual budget written from last time. >> 16 is the meals tax adoption.
>> Already pulled it up. Okay. from Chad Jubidy. >> That was Chad. >> All right. So, meals tax adoption to see if the tow will vote to accept the provisions of Massachusetts general law
chapter 64 L section 2A authorizing a local option meals tax of point of 0.75%. to be imposed on the sale of restaurant meals within the town to be collected by the commonwealth and distributed to the town or take any other action you all.
>> So the the pro would be additional tax revenue >> coming but the con would be not all of that 75% comes back to the town actually
very little of it >> or less people will actually be going out just to protest it. Right. But I know I did some reading about that and not all of it flows >> really >> back to the town. Actually the majority of it stays with the state >> really
>> on the new piece on the point. >> We need to know that I think really >> if we want to research that a little bit more I I was kind of shocked that that whole point set a does not come back to the town. Oh,
>> so >> trying to remember where I read that, but I was like, hm, why why do we want to do this? >> Yeah, I'm going to stay out of this. >> Um, okay. Well, it's more work for the people that own restaurants because now
>> tax section 2B says all sums received by the commissioner under this section shall at least quarterly be distributed, credited, and paid by the state treasurer upon certification uh blah blah blah. The uh each town that
has accepted this section in proportion to the amount of sums received from the sales of restaurant meals in that city or town. So it is saying that anything collected >> will be paid back >> will be paid back. >> I don't but this is referring to section
A 2A. >> Correct. But section section 2A is only the a city or town which accepts this section in the manner provided in section 4 of chapter 4 may impose a local sales tax upon the sale of restaurant meals originating with the city or town by a vendor at a rate of
75% of the gross receipts of the vendor from the sale of restaurant meals. No excise shall be imposed if the sale is exempt under section six of chapter 64H. I haven't looked that up yet. The vendor shall pay the local sales tax imposed under the section to the commissioner at
the same time and in the same manner as the sales tax due to the commonwealth. That's section A. >> All right. >> Section B talks about the distribution of funds. Section C talks about when it takes effect. And section TD D talks about the uh the
commissioner making available to any cities and towns any information necessary. So what was the B? Read the the B again. All sums received by the commissioner under this section shall at least quarterly be distributed, credited, and paid by the state treasurer upon
certification of the commissioner to each city or town that has accepted this section in proportion to the amount of the sums received from the sales of restaurant meals in that city or town. Any city or town seeking to dispute the commissioner's calculation of its distribution under this subsection shall
notify the commissioner in writing no later than one year from the date the tax was distributed by the commissioner to the city or town. >> Have we included any revenue in this year's budget for that? >> No. >> No. >> No. We just can't because it didn't
pass. Okay. You can't estimate, you know. Yeah. And it takes it also takes trying to >> so the con would be of increased tax burden to customers and um increased
burden to the restaurant owners for paying additional taxes. >> Well, they're just going to have to make recordeping. Yeah, >> you're right. You got to file the report. burden of the record keeping >> which state of Massachusetts putting
that in a nice little FBO account and earning interest on it. >> So that's >> calm down truth. >> That's my banking brain. >> That's what they're doing with that. They're going to offset some town They're going to offset some uh some
state deficits. They letting by earning interest on that >> that we're not allowed to earn. >> Exactly. >> Then they only pay it back to you quarterly. Yeah, >> but you got to select it every single >> So the pro is it would reduce right some some of our budget in theory. The the
pro is we would get it. Yeah. Additional revenues probably >> tax would I'm not writing. Do you want me to write >> is >> the additional tax or cost >> to a consumer? >> Taxation
>> to to the consumer. Would it reduce the traffic that our >> well businesses see? >> Folks from town don't eat out. If you been reading the news, it's everybody else coming into town. So >> I eat out every Friday and I'm either in Southic or Graanby
>> did it all through co. >> That was my humor. I'm sorry. >> Sorry. >> Yeah, >> we go every Saturday. Yeah. >> Yeah. I I just go between two towns though. I don't know. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um >> all the gods are >> Yeah. But the con is it's just another
tax or another tax burden on >> I do we want to say residents or consumer consumers. >> I would say consumers. >> I say consu consumers because of people coming in town if they know that we have that excited that Roma opened back up.
>> People I work with in Connecticut almost open. I'm like you've been? Yes. Oh >> yeah. I couldn't get in from Yeah. So it' be another tax on consumer an additional tax on >> an additional tax on consumer um
additional tax on consumers. It's that simple. >> Wow. which could force which >> which you know something about which could force >> yeah I know >> uh >> for.75 >> it's not 75 cents it's just the fact that we're taxing more
>> 75 cents on $100 so I mean it's not a lot it's the fact that we're taxing more the additional tax which may >> just another cause the consumer to think twice about where they >> or people coming in from other >> how does it tie back to the residents
>> that that It would increase their >> it it would it'd be an additional tax to >> those consumers >> consumers residents and non-residents dissuading non-residents potentially
dissuading non-residents from coming into the town of Southwick to I'm not Anyway, so >> spend money. >> It's petty for their purchase. >> I mean, Connecticut did that statewide with a 1% additional tax for meals
across the board to everybody, >> but the town's getting none of it, >> right? >> So, at least we get something. >> True, true. >> I I just You're throwing things around. just of the additional tax burden to the
consumer residents of non-residents you're dissuading are you adding to that would let me calm down for a second and then I'll >> just be the additional cost to consume >> yeah if it's going to cost >> you know this is ice cream >> oh yeah
>> oh yeah >> yeah I already stirred up it >> they were all excited >> and yes all the towns around us are at 7% %. Yes. >> Or what? >> Set wall 6.25 and then
>> and then add this 75 is is the 7%. >> So home's already there. Westside's already there. Westfield. >> Oh, they already charge the extra. >> Yeah, >> but they have a nice revenue stream. The big E, >> right? >> Six Flags. There's there's reasons, you know, and I see that volume, but
>> Well, yeah. When you you when you're going to Six Flags, you already know you're spending $7 on a bottle of 50 cent water. >> Yeah. So, it's all good there. >> And and I like I say, I don't think any of us are against 75 cents on $100. Some of us might just be against another,
>> you know, what it boils down to. >> And this is all like takeout meals. >> Anything. It's >> so It's not It's not like your grocery store you're going to >> No, it's meal. >> Yeah. But your grocery store to go park
your grocery that part. But >> yeah. >> Yeah. Oh, it would apply to those. >> Oh, yeah. Oh, >> yeah. Because that's prepared food. I think that's how it >> Okay. >> to be a restaurant. >> We actually take in quite a bit. I We did the math out a while. I did the math
out a while ago and it's there was millions in sales that this town does and I just I looked and said, "How?" It's I just don't see it. But, you know, I don't know what the Southan does in liquor sales and I don't you know what I mean? Like you don't see everything. You see on the surface, but you don't see
everything. >> I think I think 18 million was the number they were. >> Yeah, something like that. Yeah, it was up there. >> That's a lot. >> It truly is. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But if you go to the the state's website, it's it's all there. It's not, you know, that's not out of the I literally thought it was out of the sky
number, but it's it's legit. So where's 18 million come out of our south of little our little, you know, restaurants and and seasonal businesses? Just it's a big number, >> you know. It's a lot of pizza slices.
>> It's good ice cream. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. So, pro, the town would receive additional revenue from the meals tax. Con, the additional tax would have a financial impact on restaurant consumers visiting South establishments and may
potentially dissuade non-residents from purchasing from South restaurants. Sure. >> Sounds good. Yeah. >> Yes. Thank you very much. >> Gosh. >> All right. So, article 18.
Okay. Did we have this limit before? >> What's that? >> Did we have this limit before this article 18? >> Yeah. Spending. Yep. This Yeah, this I'm here. >> Yeah. So, they must have it, right? To see if the town will vote to amend
any to include the following revolving accounts in addition to the existing ones. So, they want to add these to it. 818. >> So no tax was 16. Over here it says 18 >> 17. There's nothing we have to do. >> Over here I have 15 16
17 18 >> 18. Okay. Revolving funds annual spending limit authorized standard. Revoling fund annual spending limit authorization. >> Is there anything special about these
limits, Laura? Like changes or new or anything like that? >> I don't think any of them have changes then. Yep. Okay. Okay. So, 19
community preservation and their budget. They're not doing anything this year. So, it's just a matter of the numbers. >> Yeah. So, it's just a boiler plate. 19 20 >> right like normal 3,900.
>> It's an easy one. >> Yep. >> And it's worked well. >> Yeah. >> So it's all set. >> Yeah. >> Any questions? Okay. Last thing is the uh example finance committee example data.
I know. >> We had to update uh dates and names of course. >> Yeah. So, no, Dr. Zilowski, >> I know last year we went through this pretty good. >> I'm no longer associate. >> Yeah, >> I made it.
So, the only thing is it says a comprehensive review of departmental budgets with the exception of school budget, but we do a pretty good job of I know there's a lot of gaps, but I would leave that in there because
we don't really have any say over the budget. You know, people people think that we approved the school budget and brought it forward. >> Yeah, that's true. But it's the school committee that >> But it's the school committee. So I think that's why we put that in there before. >> Yeah, that makes sense.
>> Just the name changes then. And then uh there's no dates in here. So >> that's the main check Anderson. >> Anything else wrong with it? Everybody else okay with that? So hopefully >> Yeah. Yeah. I read it the other day when
we got it. Yeah, >> we just have a quick vote. That's nice. Once you get this one over >> on the committee writing so it can go into the budget books this year. Yeah.
>> Okay. >> So, we want a motion to approve the finance committee primary responsibility >> listing. >> Yeah. >> With the name change. >> With the name changes. Yes. going to approve as written with name change updates. >> Yes. Sharon Nolton. >> Karen to second.
>> All those in favor? Joseph D. I >> Sher I >> Karen I D Maria I >> Laura is there anything we're missing for tonight. >> Oh you guys are making me nervous about
pros and cons and recommendations. >> Yeah >> in the forum. >> We'll work on that. Like I said, there are different delay. >> Are you available any day in? >> Yeah. Yeah, I can do
not. My daughter is 12 back. That's the only >> the last before she's a teenager. >> To this year, >> she's not going to a concert. >> Okay. >> What singer did you fly in? >> The age though, huh? >> In Georgia. And it was just one of the
big ones or something. I don't know. >> That means I've known you for 12 years. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I actually didn't know you. You just at least crying in the window. >> But the the joke is the second I found out I was pregnant, I was not in a good
se, I went right to a massive Sunday. >> We actually met years ago. What? You break the window. >> Told my husband. >> I know. >> That's odd. >> But okay, we're going to go with that.
>> All right. >> I don't know. So much. >> Do we need to make a motion to adjurnn? >> Well, that way. Yeah. Yeah. >> What do we want to do for a date? >> I don't know. >> What is everybody else available? >> I'm available. I need to >> Tuesday's the day I'm not available. So, yeah, just good.
>> Okay. You move on to Monday. Monday. >> Is there anything that we need from the select board from Monday night? >> We don't know. >> Or do we want it to push to Wednesday? >> I would like to see Wednesday only because >> god forbid we come down here and we
still don't have certain numbers because they didn't approve it yet on their end. >> Yeah. >> You know what I mean? >> Okay. >> So, I'd rather I'd save every Wednesday. >> Okay. >> That's much better. >> Yeah, >> that'll probably help David as well. >> Yeah. Yeah, it definitely would. Yeah.
>> Okay. And honestly, it should be quick, right? Cuz we'll have >> when you send out the email, put date change on it so that they're aware that it's not >> send an email out tomorrow. It will not have documentation attached, but just to
make everybody aware Wednesday capital letters, >> see if the room's available and all that. >> Yeah. I just rather it Yeah. Does Wednesday work for you though? >> No, Wednesday >> for deadlines. I mean, it's not this
isn't stuff that >> this is pro and con. No, no, no. >> No, you got to what I needed. Yes. And I just think >> taking our time and >> No. Yeah. Yeah. >> Rather than, >> oh, we voted for half. We didn't vote
for half. That'd be >> Sorry. No, you did. >> We grouped appropriately. Now I can use a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. Sherry Nolton seconded deo. >> All those in favor Joseph I
>> Sherry Nolton I >> deo mar I. >> Okay.