Hello everyone. This is the finance committee. This is Tuesday, March 24th, 2026. It is 6:40 p.m. I'd like to call this meeting to order with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance >> to the flag to the flag of the United States of America
>> and to theublic nation >> indivisible indivisible liberty and justice for all for all. >> Under Mass General Law Chapter 3A section 20F, this meeting is being recorded. On March 28th, 2025, Governor
Healey signed into law a bill which extends the temporary provisions pertaining to the open meeting law to June 30th, 2027. Specifically, this further extension allows public bodies to continue holding meetings remotely without any quorum of public body physically present at a meeting location
and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. This language does not make any substantive changes to open meeting law other than extending the expiration of the temporary provisions regarding remote meetings for March 31st, 2025 to June 30th, 2027.
Well, hello, welcome everyone. I'm going to do a roll call of who's here. So, um myself, Karen Rouse is here. Uh Al Le is present. >> Cindy Brown is present. Zack Leru,
Christopher Thrasher, >> Gary Carrero >> present. >> And so absent, uh, Hugh Morton did indicate uh, a while ago he could not attend this meeting tonight, so he is not here. Duncan Law indicated to me he
should be coming in around 7. So we'll be on the lookout for Duncan. And I have not heard anything from Nancy. So I'm expecting her, but I do not see her on the meeting presently. So uh we'll just have to pay attention to when uh when
they pop in. All right. Well, tonight is the night. It is the night we've waited for to get all our uh recommendations on on the uh annual town meeting. So
Chris just emailed us the newest version and that's version eight. Is that right Chris? Do I have that right? It's version eight. And >> version eight >> and the changes are legal language related. Um no again
no additional articles, no changes to anything, nothing substantively different than what we've been doing, but we're just on version eight. That's correct. >> Okay. Uh so we can go off that one uh
and do our and do everything. Um so I've emailed everyone. So where we left off two weeks a last week not two weeks ago where we left off last week was uh in terms of the financial budget
we had um all had discussed in in come to to a conclusion of what the budget was and right after the meeting I did send that off to everyone that that was intended to be the budget that we would be voting on tonight. Um, Chris did Oh,
I'm sorry. I don't think I have my monitor on. Sorry about that. There we go. Sorry. Um, so so Chris had done his number searching and and there was a some um cherry sheet assessments
that needed to be updated. So they pretty insignificant in relation to it, but it it's worth cleaning up the version since we were we're going to be approving it tonight. So um I sent everyone that budget change today and I
put in the column. So the changes, so you have the original select board budget that was approved in February and then the changes that just got made to primarily change the cherry sheet assessments and that's sort of a revised
select board budget and then we take it from there as the finance committee. So the same the same $80,000 change that we proposed at the last meeting is still in the budget. So, there's nothing changed other than the um updating the select
board budget. Uh Duncan Law just came in and it's 6:45. >> Did any Did everyone have a chance to look at that? Are they >> Yes. >> comfortable with with the presentation and what's there? >> Yes. >> Okay, great.
>> Yes. It's always good to true it up to to our best information that we have. So, um thank you Chris for for catching that. So, um it's easier to to fix it now than try to do a motion change it into motion on town floor. So, it's it's much easier now.
All right. So, we um we can go right through we can start with article one and go right through the articles if we want to do that. I am going to does um is there anybody that feels
comfortable sharing the warrant so we can just see it on it's hard for me to share it and run the meeting and look for questions and answers. >> I'm happy to do so. I have it up on my screen. >> All right. Thank you, Chris. That's that's great. Thank you. >> Can I make a suggestion? Um I know we
might have done this in the past, but maybe wave the rules to read the entire every article. Are we just summarizing, right? We're not reading the entire verbiage of the article. >> We are not reading the entire verbiage. No. >> Okay. >> Yes. No, we did I remember we did that
one year and that was that was uh quite quite a task. >> Yeah. >> I think Nancy just joined us. Hi, Nancy. >> Hi. How are you? >> Good. 6:45 for Nancy as well. You didn't miss a beat, Nancy. >> Oh, good. I thought I was reporting late
for class there for a second. Well, you are, but we were we had a little technical difficulty. >> Good. >> The only thing that you did miss was we talked about the a very small change that was made to the budget today. Um, did you get a chance to see that in the
email? >> I did. I did. I'm >> Are you comfortable with that? Okay, great. >> I am. Thank you. See that on your screen? I think I pulled it up. Just want to make sure you >> Yes. Yes. All right. So, we're about to to go through start with article one. And
we're not reading every word of the of the article. We're summarizing it. And um before we get started, I just want to any member anybody who will be listening to this meeting after the fact may hear us uh well will hear us going right into
the articles and talking about it and making recommendations. So I, you know, as we've stated in previous years, we've talked about all of these things in various meetings starting in December. Uh we've we've held budget meetings with
all the departments. We've talked about all the budgets throughout starting in December. We've talked about the fiscal budget um with Chris here at every meeting every step of the way as the select board has done the budget. So many meetings we've talked about all of
the things. So tonight is the night where we've already had the discussions and we're we're ready now to go through and make the action. So when someone might hear us looking at an article and just voting, it's not that we're just voting on something. It had been
previously discussed at many meetings. So I just want to make sure that's clear. All right. So article one is prior year bills. If um if if anyone has no comments, then
we can entertain a motion and a second and then we can go into deliberation and then vote. Motion to approve. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Thank you. And I I'll Any any discussions on this article at this
point? >> Nope. Okay, Jess. I'm going to try to do the roll call in the same order. So this way um when you get all the the the motions, this way you're all set. So I'm
going to try to do the same order every time. Okay. So no no discussion. So Al >> I >> thank you Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Leu I >> Christopher
>> Mr. Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross I >> Duncan >> Duncan I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Ross eye. Thank you. All right. Article two is the line item
transfers going from uh there's three of them there. Uh we've talked about all those but um again if there's a motion >> motion to approve. >> Second. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any discussion on the on this
article. All right. I see no discussion. So I'll do a roll call. L >> Elise I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Lew I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton cross >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Ross eye. Thank you. All right, we'll move on to article three that is the appropriation to the
stabilization fund. Uh so as we had reviewed with the budget last week there was a schedule of all the free cash and so on that schedule had a proposal of going to the stabilization fund
182,00068 >> and that number has not changed right >> it's not changed that is the same number yes >> so if if there's a motion and a second then we can deliberate Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Second.
>> Thank you. Any discussions? >> Just making sure no one's hands up. No. Okay. All right. So, no discussion. So, then I'll take a roll call. So, Al >> Al leaves. I >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher
>> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross. I >> Duncan. >> Duncan law. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Ross. I thank you. All right. Article four is the appropriation to the
capital stabilization fund and in accordance with the schedule we had that is an amount of 180 182,068 as printed in the warrant. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve.
>> Second. >> Thank you. Any discussions on that? All right. So, I will take a roll call. Al >> Al le I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Leu. I
>> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stan Cross. I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> Karen Ross. I thank you. All right. The next article is article five. the
appropriation to the special education reserve fund and the article has 91,00034 and again that is in accordance with the schedule that uh we reviewed last week. >> Motion to recommend
>> second >> second. >> Thank you. Any discussion on that? >> Okay, I will um I hear no hands, no discussion. I'll go to a roll call. L >> I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Lew I
>> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Ross I thank you all right six
is the creation of a stabilization fund for collective bargaining in non-union personnel agreements >> motion to approve to establish the fund. All right. Okay. We got a motion to approve. Second. >> Second.
>> All right. Any deliberation on any discussion on this? >> All right. So, we'll go for a roll call. Al >> Le's I. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack. >> Zach Leu. I
>> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. No. >> All right. Thank you, Nancy. Nancy Stanton Cross. No. >> Okay. Duncan >> Duncan Law. I >> thank you Gary. >> Yes.
>> And Karen Rail's eye. All right. Um. All right. The next one is let's see sorry article seven. Right. This is the appropriation for the stabilization fund for
collective bargaining in non-union agreements. >> So >> Okay, go ahead. >> Second. >> Thank you. So this is to fund the previous article of with $108,000.
Um so just quick deliberation. So um I just have a couple of comments on it. So, I've been on the fence on this one. Um Gary last week did raise some some interesting points where it's working in
the town of Dartmouth. Um although it's a fairly new um article, right? Two or three years that you've been working with it. So, I'm on the fence with it because it it it in one sense it really does feel like there's a targeted funds that um could go against the
negotiations, but um but I'm I'm in favor of it with the caveat that let's see how it goes. So if it gets funded and if it turns out in a future year
that it is disastrous then you know there's the option to not fund it in the future. So that's that's just kind of where where I'm on the fence with that. But go ahead Nancy. Um I had already stated um when we had a discussion on
this that I I I don't like it um in principle but I also don't like it in application because there's no mechanism for how it would be done. So written asis and approved asis, we've got all these different unions and non-unions
and no mechanism for how because the unions negotiate at certain times of the year. So first ones in get you know first bite we got to take this we're and the people that are negotiating those contracts know that it's there and I
just don't think there's a mechanism in place to make it fair across the board and so in theory I don't like it but I could probably live with it if there was a plan for application and there isn't and that's why I'm not in favor. Thank you. >> Great. >> Thank you. And and I appreciate any
anybody that's not in favor of something, I I'd love to hear the deliberation of it. So to understand that, too, because um I like to hear all sides and you know, again, I'm on the fence, so it's appreciative to hear. Um Gary, who has that? Carrie, you've got
your hand up, right? >> And Chris does too. Chris, >> thank you. >> Yeah. So, um, in Dartmouth and and and in multiple communities, but I can only speak for Dartmouth, it's been more than three years. We've had this probably for six
years now. And, um, I can appreciate that there's no or maybe, and Chris can maybe chime in a little bit more on this, that we may not envision a um, a procedure, but I think there's two separate issues, two separate results
out of this. Um, as I mentioned last week, it's planning ahead. It's also um independent of what contract negotiations would be settled at. I mean, this is only a funding source. It's almost like I can imagine when the stabilization was first um uh you know,
established in in in communities where they said, well, you know, you're pulling money from the general fund. Uh what's the mechanism for using that? Well, we know the mechanism is a funding source. It that is truly what a stabilization fund is. only a funding source not to be persuaded one way or
another whether it's uh you know contract negotiations or we need to use a stabilization for a rainy day or etc etc and any kind of fund that we have that's putting money aside. So I want to be clear that in in practice and and and
I've used it for negotiations. It is not a mechanism for some a union to say well there's there's 100,000 in 10 years there's a million. Uh we know that that's earmarked for our union. That is not the case and that is not the reason why this should be looked at as that as
appropriately being set up that way. >> Thanks Gary. Um, go ahead Chris and then Cindy. >> Um, yeah, I I suppose my only comment on that as well is that, you know, when the town enters contracts, you know, really
with any contract, uh, you know, we're looking at, you know, what is it that the town can afford, right? And obviously this is um you know how the town funds it you know um
you know whether it's through free cash allocation whether it's through um revising lines you know I think as Gary said that this is uh a tool for the town. So I think whether or not the town
utilizes it, you know, utilizes um it in full in part um for some things not for other things. I think um it allows that flexibility and I would just say with regards to the process, you know, to pull money out of this fund, this has to
go back to town meeting, right? So I think there is that check and balance there. And again just based on my experience you know and same experience as Gary has mentioned you know that's been something that's gone back to town
meeting and discussed and uh and approved. So um you know to your point Karen I think um this is new or you know for the community and you know certainly um I'm
a little more than cautiously optimistic. I'm optimistic that it's it's going to be a good tool for the town. Um, however, I think uh again, just like with our other stabilization accounts, our free cash, um, you know, we want to make sure however it's used,
it's being used responsibly, um, and sustainably. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Chris. Go ahead, Cindy. >> So, I have two uh, one comment and one question. uh if it's in a stabilization
fund the question first if it's in a stabilization fund um what what mechanism releases it from the stabilization fund so the regular stabilization fund needs town meeting I know the special education fund only
needs the select board and the school committee what mechanism triggers the release of funds out of that account Chris do you know >> town meeting vote >> so So a 10 meeting vote on the regular stabilization fund. I think I'm right in
this. It's twothirds vote. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. So so you need a twothirds vote to release that. Okay. So that's one part. The second part of this, so let's say next year, you know, we don't tap into it and we add another $100,000 to it.
Now there's $200,000. My only concern about this is that we're actually funding contract increases with free cash. So whatever that current year budget is uh that these new wage increases would
be applied from for um you know there's a little bit it would be a little bit out of whack in that we're funding operations out of free cash using the pay increases out of free cash and that year's budget. So then the
next year you'd have to do kind of a big catchup because that current year's budget would not reflect the salary increases. So you know if there were enough in there to cover them all. So I I just feel like the budget would get out of whack for a year and there would
be a little bit of of a surprise. Oh, by the way, don't forget you've got to now add double the increase in your budget the following year because the current year you didn't have to apply the increase and now next year you have to absorb the previous year's increase in
that one. So I, you know, we're we're kind of on a regular roll here. People know how to, you know, absorb their budget, their salary increases into their budget. I I I just don't like the mechanics of it as to what it will do to the budget
process for the for the managers, for the people that submit the budget. And also, as was indicated earlier, this does not cover school personnel. And that's where quite frankly, you know, the biggest, you know, is there's is no secret about that. Obviously, the
biggest source of salaries because the biggest sources of employees are within the school. So, I I'm not completely sold on the necessity of it given the size of the payroll on the town side that it will
throw things out of whack. It's a lot of money. You need twothirds vote. Suppose you don't get the twothirds vote. Now, you've got a budget that's already been put together without salary increases because you're counting on that that account to fund it. Suppose twothirds of
of the town meeting doesn't approve it. Now, what are you going to do? So, I think it just creates problems. >> Thanks, Cindy. Um, Chris, is that your hand back up? I think it is, right? >> Yeah. And I guess just um, you know,
similar to using free cash and one-time funding, right? I mean I think how uh the fund is utilized to assist the town when it comes to um you know personnel cost over time you know what I would say
you know I'll give an example is you know let's just say you had a contract and it took multiple years to settle you know a lot of times you have to go back and you have to retropay that right
and so in the year of the impact. You know, there's I guess two ways to look at this, right? And obviously again there's multiple funding sources here. So, you know, one example is your
rather than it hitting in the given fiscal year where the settling happens, right? And then it's impacting your free cash allocation, your capital for that year. You know, this again is an option that the town would
have available um again to be able to to um aid with some of that some of the easing of the implementation of that. So, you know, I think again that's one option,
one way of you know how communities have used it. Um, you know, but again, I think that this is something that is new for the town and, um, you know, certainly as we move forward, um, you
know, we'll we'll watch and hopefully, uh, have some, uh, able to have some success with this here. >> Thanks, Chris. Um, Nancy, go ahead. >> So, I I really like what Cindy had to
say. she point out um several important points. At the end of the day, you're line iteming something for payment of union contracts, but you are excluding from that your biggest employer of
personnel. So you're using the town tax dollars and you are inequitably providing a catch-all funding mechanism for union for for all of the unions in the town with the exception of the schools which is the largest employer.
So I don't think that that's an equitable use of funds for everyone in the town because it's not across the board. And maybe if it was across the board, I'd think differently. And maybe specifically if it was I think Chris made a viable point with that catchup
for a retroactive application of a contra a contract negotiation and maybe if it said to be used for retroactive contra uh collective bargaining agreements and it was made to include the schools. I think that that would be
equitable. But as it's written and I just think that you it's it's not it's not it's on its face it's not equitable. You're not including all of the unions in the town. So I don't know how that's fair. Um so that's just my opinion.
Chris, can you be be be before Gary Chris the I know we we had just voted on the establishment of the of the fund in the previous article, but is there anything there's nothing in the article that says that the school would be
precluded? Right. There's nothing >> that's that's correct. and you know and I I don't and I think we had some conversation at a prior meeting and and Nancy I apologize because I I don't recall um that was the meeting that you were out um
>> you know but I you know one of the things I had mentioned at that meeting was you know when we had a previous discussion on really you know the purpose and the goals of the article you know from my seat I'm looking at it
through the lens of the town side I wasn't looking at it through the lens of, you know, the benefit to the school. And that's not to say that this article couldn't be a benefit to the school based off of again the flexibility it
offers and how it's written, but just solely through um again my lens. That's uh kind of how it percolated forward in terms of uh an idea worth, you know, the town's consideration. You know, I would say,
you know, again, similar to the other conversation, you know, my experience has been that the you know, when it comes to contracts and negotiating them, you know, obviously from the school side, I'm not I don't have direct involvement
in that. So when it comes to obviously the long-term, you know, funding needs of the school, I'm always available to sit down and talk with the committee, you know, Superintendent Roy, um, you know, the members, you know, just
like any other, you know, article within the budget. But I think that is just one thing, at least for this, I just wanted to make a note of um, that there was no intention here of being inequitable. It's just um again giving the town as a
whole more financial tools for you know what is a very large part of the budget overall. So um Karen I hope I answered that your question. >> Yeah. So I think because yes and so because in a previous meeting we had
discussed that the language did not preclude any union from those funds. And so that was kind of my basis on when my I you know supported that recommendation of establishing it. It and there's nothing that precludes any union from
using it. So um I I didn't feel it was inequitable because I there's nothing written that says it's it is inequitable. Um Gary, go ahead. So, um I can I can understand NY's point
about maybe on the surface it looks like this article is not available for the schools or um not therefore funding in the future. But I think what this town and and and I've been on this committee for 15 years struggles with is long-term
planning, not having resources available when when we need to negotiate contracts, when we have to purchase items, um you know, capital items, so on and so forth. And you know how many times now of recent we've had to hire
employees and bring them in at a higher level at a higher step. Uh that puts a lot of strain on budgets and uh serving on the personnel board. Uh I wanted to know what those amounts would be. You know we're bringing in um you know the
town administrator at a certain rate. We're bringing in to attract people. So I think it's more than just money sitting in an account. It allows the town flexibility to move forward with, you know, in three, five, 10 years from now, obviously salaries are going to
increase. I mean, that's just a given. And um I think it it's it's shortsighted to to not look at that, not look at the the progress of that and and not look at planning for salaries out into the future. We see it. I mean, I know that school sees it. Uh it's hard to retain
people. It's hard to attract people. So this gives the town another tool to look I mean it may take us 3 to 5 years to build this account up for it to even be anything that's worth discussing. But this in my opinion is the proper use of free cash uh along with capital items.
It just looks forward instead of us being trying to catch up every single year with funds that are not there to be spent. And and and I'm always an advocate of let's plan ahead. Let's look at the next five years. Let's see what the workforce is going to look like
because we're going to be paying a lot more and that's just the name of the game if we want to stay competitive and retain the employees that we have. >> But Gary, what what happens if it doesn't pass at town meeting? What happens if you don't get a twothirds vote at town meeting to release those
funds? How are you going to go now go back and redo your budget that you just you just did probably to the penny in figuring out what your resources are? You're you're taking a big risk at town meeting that you're going to get a
twothirds vote to release that money. >> What happens? >> Town meeting town meeting will vote as it as as it should and as it will. It's the education process that goes along with this. It it's it's letting the town know
that listen, we have an issue in town and we may not want to talk about it. That schools can't retain people. Health insurance is too high. you know these what does the next five to 10 years look like and and town meeting knowing that are going to want to have the best
employees that we can the most qualified employees that we have so it's education but this is just a mechanism we we may be 3 to 5 years before we drain on this account you know but I go back to planning and any town meeting member or anybody that goes to town meeting is
going to want to see that I've heard it from the public that you know the capital items for instance you know why are we why aren't we funding this particular item. Why do we have money sitting in free cash? We have um you know equipment in disrepair again for any what sells me on this is the
planning and and what it what this account can do not next year but the next goound when we have contract negotiations. That's that's really what this is about. It's education and retainage and um attraction of employees.
And we've struggled with that and and we still do >> and we will. >> Yeah. >> So, you know, it's interesting, Gary. So, I agree with some of the things that you said and then I have challenges with
some of the things you just said. So, I agree. You know, it's it it never hurts to have a flexible pot of money that's there to be used in a way that it's needed. I would be more supportive of what for example what Chris had said
where you when you have a union contract that's retro that goes back two or three years. So the retro piece falls into there. I don't really agree with if somebody is hired at a higher amount than than was budgeted for as a
replacement that you use this funds for that because that's only going to take care of it for one year. when you get into the next year, that increase is going to be needs to be baked into the budget. So, you can't tap this fund every year for that incremental piece.
So, you're just setting yourself up with a budget. So, I support some of it, but I don't support other aspects of it. So, I appreciate these are examples, but in and they're dollars that are flexible.
it gets funded and then when the time comes, you know, we'll all have that conversation. There'll be a warrant article looking to use the funds in some way and then we can um make recommendations for or not for that particular use. But
I appreciate the the examples of the flexibility, but I don't agree with conceptually some of the things that we're talking about. >> Yeah. I mean, I can agree with I can um appreciate some of the conversations, but again, I'm only speaking on the successes of it and and and being used
in practice and and I wouldn't sit here and recommend an article if I didn't think it was financially sound and it wasn't really what we want for long-term planning in the town. I just keep going back to long-term planning because, you know, we lack that in some cases.
>> Yep. Thanks, Gary. Al, we haven't heard from you, so go ahead. I just wanted to echo basically what Gary has has said, so I don't need to go into any elaborate detail. I can understand what you're saying, Karen, about um you know, using this this pot
of gold, if you will, and then the next year there's no pot of gold in there. But we need to plan. We need to look to the future. We can't be going handtomouth in this town every year, year after year after year without
having some mechanism to to fund the future, whether it's, you know, 1, three, five or 10 years. So, I just want to echo uh my my general support for what Gary uh had been saying.
>> Thank you, Al. Um Nancy, I think you've got your hand up. >> Um so during the course of this conversation, the first question, one of the first questions were does this include the schools? And the answer was no. And then
as we continued the discussion, it was well the way it's written, it wouldn't preclude uh the schools to have use of that fund. So what's the answer going in? Do we have a definitive stance that this would be for all unions? And then
the other issues would flow as to whether the mechanism is there, whether it's a good thing funding it in one year and not having it in the next. Those issues obviously are viable. But I I want the answer. Is this going to be for
all of the units, collective bargaining units across the board? And if it is, then that takes care of one piece of my issue. But we've heard two different things. The first question was, "Oh, no, the schools aren't involved." Well, there's nothing that precludes them. So, are we
saying it's our representation to the town? This is for the town across the board and with this is us being good financial managers and, you know, looking for the future. Um, that might have a different spin. I still don't like it as it's written. I think that I
I like the retro piece of it. Um, but we're in a town that is always catching up and nip and tuck of every dollar. So, if we're going to blindside ourselves and think that this isn't going to come into play sooner than you think it's going to come into play while you fund
it, I with given our problems with funding to begin with, I think it's going to be used much sooner than we would think. Um, so again, the question is, is this across the border, isn't it? because that answer needs to be be very
transparent before the town because if it's oh no this is just for the town side um I think that people need to have that before understanding of that >> Chris go ahead >> so as written it offers the flexibility
um and again I think uh in in working on this article and presenting this article, the discussion's always been again to offer the town as a whole the flexibility. Uh again, I I use the retro as one example, but I also don't
necessarily want to to say that that's the only, you know, option or thing out there that we could, you know, benefit, you know, from this funding. And I think to Karen's point that she mentioned earlier, you know, um,
you know, just like with any stabilization fund, right, or, you know, usage of free cash, you know, there's a lot of conversation that goes into that, you know, if one-time funds are being expended. um you know whether that's through an individual committee or you know certainly here in this forum you
know but what I would say is going forward um you know that's a conversation that's going to need to be had you know and I think as Gary said you know there's a lot of education that needs to go into that and you know if in the future this is something where again
there is a request um put out there to say hey is this is this you know this fund is this source a a good use to those dollars and I think that's a conversation to be had, right? Um again, so that you know, if that request does
go to town meeting, you know, it's with the idea that it's um you know, being used responsibly and and obviously sustainably over, you know, the the multi-year period, you know, the period of the contract. So, um you know, that's
that's my take on it. That's um you know certainly um you know again I can't foresee every um you know potential use in the future but I again as it's written I think it provides the town with the flexibility
you know to address problems as they arise or address new challenges or issues as they arise. So thank you. >> Thank you Gary. Is your hand still up or is it up again or Okay, go ahead.
>> One last comment and this is to NY's point. You know, this is one town >> and you know and I I would I would hate to see that the account gets funded in the first year and they get spent in the next year. I think we build it up. The plan is we build it up and we we hear
the the the request from the schools and that's equitable. We we need to make sure and I'm not just talking about the municipal side. I'm talking about the schools that we we retain the the people that we need to we pay a competitive wage and I would not support this if the
schools weren't included. That that's that's just we're one town. This isn't we, you know, I think the the the adage of it's the town side, it's the municipal side. We kind of have to maybe shy away from that a little bit. and and and if the schools came and said, you know, well, we need a portion
of that, or the town came and said, we need a portion of that to get by. Yeah, I wouldn't be in favor of that. That's what this account will do in years to come. I'm not saying that we're going to fund a million dollars in this account in the next year, but it's a stock. It's a it's a it's it's it's in the right
direction to get these contracts fulfilled and to get make and I keep saying it, we retain and we and we are able to hire competitive with competitive wages. And so I would only support this if it was for the entire town. >> Thanks Gary. Yeah. And and I I agree
too. I mean when we had discussed in a meeting that it didn't did not preclude the schools then that made me more comfortable. There's nothing in the language that precludes. So it's it's an open flexible um dollars.
>> Yes. >> Anyone else? All right. Um, are we in a position? We're ready to take a motion to have a motion to um on this article. >> We already have the motion. Yeah, we >> do. Oh, we already do. This that was the long deliberation. See, I forgot. All
right. So, with no more deliberation, I will take it to a roll call. Thank you. Um, Al Didn't hear you. Al, you're on mute. >> My My wife wishes that I had a mute
button, I think. Anyway, Ellie's eye. >> Thank you, Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. No. >> Thank you, Zach. >> Zach Leu. I >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. No
>> Nancy. >> Nancy Stanton Cross. No >> Duncan. >> Duncan Law. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> Karen Rouse. No. And you know, I'll just say the reason I said no, I I I I am on the fence and I'm
in support of it, but I would like to see a more policy and a procedure and more uh meeting of the minds on what this would be used for before we fund it. Thank you. All right. So, we'll move on to the next. >> Just so you know, Karen, so that was
split. That's four yes, four no because you was not here. >> Okay. >> Just so you know. >> All right. Well, that is what it is. It is what it is. So >> that is the recommendation. We are split split down the middle. All right. Um
the next article is article eight which is the authorization to borrow in anticipation of revenue. So that's a one that comes up every year. So the treasur >> motion to approve, motion to recommend. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Any discussion on that?
>> All right. I'll do a roll call. Al, were you are you ready to vote or did you have a we're gonna make a comment? I think he was ready. All right. So, Al, >> I have a a comment and then go ahead and then I will vote. Yes. My comment is
that it's always tricky to uh authorize the treasurer in anticipation especially considering uh maybe not the uh you know the the the the town side but the state side of
revenue because of their position that they're in. So I am right smack on the middle of the fence on this one and I'm usually not. So my vote is >> you want to deliberate for a second? Do
you want any just for if if you don't mind? I don't want to belver this point, but it just >> to me it's a it's a to me it's a standard um just in case something happens during the year and something comes up and the treasurer does need to borrow for some reason for something,
they have the ability to do that without having to go to town meeting. So, >> all right. >> I think it's to to me that's that's the the element of that. >> Okay. >> Yeah. This is this is a standard article um >> right >> in all in every town meeting that I can
remember. >> Okay. >> Um go ahead Nancy. >> So, is this um so it's standard but there's no capping language about what that loan could be. Is that my
understanding? like there's no cap. >> That is that is correct. >> Well, what what typ how it typically would work is that it would be based on the anticipated revenue. So that's why it's kind of worded the way it is. It's
borrowing in anticipation of revenue. So you wouldn't be able to borrow more than you were expecting to receive. So, it's um um I I I don't know how else to explain it. Um
Gary, what's the uh what's the language for that type of borrowing? It's uh revenue anticipation note. So, it's >> Well, well, not necessarily. So, this this is this allows the treasurer to let's say for instance, we were planning
to build a brand new school or a or a highway facility. This gives the the treasurer authority through the select board to enter into uh purchasing bonds. Basically, that's what that's what this is doing. This is not has no it has no
whether it's a TAN or RAN or or a bond or a ban. This just gives the treasurer the ability to do that. That's all it does. >> It doesn't it doesn't say that we're going out and borrowing a hundred million dollars for a a highway department. All it does is give them the
authority to do that in in case, you know, it's it's it it's kind of an antiquated article if you if you think about it. But under master journal law, town meeting has to give the authority to the treasurer to do that. >> Yes. >> Right. And just to further Gary, so the
treasurer couldn't go out and incur debt that it wasn't already the principle and interest wasn't already in the budget to pay for. So it would be an anticipation. So there's no new debt that can just
>> miraculously pop up. >> No. >> Okay. >> But great questions. And Nancy, is your hand back up? >> Well, it's the lawyer in me. It doesn't say you can't do it. It doesn't It
doesn't say you can. the treasurer has the authority to take a loan out for with the expecting of the revenue to be it contingent upon the revenue coming in. And right now, and I haven't been here that long, we're constantly the re
what we're going to have is always a bouncing ball to begin with. So, it's always going to be hopefully that it's there. It's expected, but sometimes something gets pulled and it's not expected. And there's no there's not it doesn't say that. It's a general
authorization without it saying we're specifically saying it should be used for this and it only can be for this and based on what the revenue is going to be. But it doesn't say that. So you're taking you're doing a cop blanch and expecting
that this to be used as a fiscal proposal but you don't have any further definition of what the boundaries are for that. We know what we want the boundaries to be but as it's written there are no boundaries.
So Karen, this is a standard this is a standard article >> um that's written in a lot of town meetings and the stop gap is the border selectment and ultimately town meeting and then ultimately the voters. So it just it just the first step of that is
the board of selectment that would put a uh you know a project on the warrant. Uh then let's just say that the warrant, let's say um just using let's say it's $100 million highway department building town meeting would then put that on the ballot if it was a debt exclusion
without that author without this article the authority for the treasurer to borrow. We couldn't borrow the money. So this is only allowing the treasur to borrow the money after the stop gaps have been put in place selectman town meeting and ultimately the voters
for debt exclusion that that I I there's really no much I I can't explain any more than that. is really it's not like the treasur can go out and borrow on her own and and and incur bills and rack up this only under master law. This allows her to do that if in
fact it's gone through those processes. If it goes through those processes and this water article isn't voted on, we can't borrow the money. Sounds backwards, I know, but just >> but right Christopher, you've got your
hand up. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, so I I certainly recognize this is a a a standard article. Uh, it is funny. I I have often wondered about the specific language uh having seen seen this in previous years as well as to, you know,
where are the rails uh for this. So, I'm going to be voting yes, of course, because it is, you know, a st a standard request. But I I am curious if the language has evolved over the years uh to to be as as unguarded I guess as it
>> thanks Christopher. Yeah I mean in the way I read it it it's an anticipation of revenue. So it's something that's in the budget that's already anticipated. So again, it's not it's not this new debt to pay for a truck that, you know, it's
it's it's all in in the budget um in anticipation of revenue. Go ahead, Chris Vitali. >> Uh just on the language itself, you know, I I'll just make a note that every single year, town council reviews this. Um, so if there was ever a concern or
there was ever a change that was needed, um, you know, council, you know, just like with all of our other articles, uh, does make sure that, uh, those guard rails are in place and, you know, that we're in compliance with, you know, the authority that a lot of this comes from through Mass General law. So, uh, if
there was ever changes, you know, in the state law, you know, where we had to be more specific here or if there was, um, again, those required changes, you know, we would work with them on this, um, as we do with the other articles. So, thank
you. >> Yeah, you could think you think of it too, Karen, as um, even NY uh, as the revolving funds. Without the authority of town meeting, those revolving funds can't be spent. You know, it's a just a mechanism that allows uh more
transparency than anything else that it goes to town meeting and town meeting says ya on this article, the revolving funds uh any any financial article. This is just another one that no financial impact because it has to go through those those steps. But without this, we
can't we wouldn't be able to borrow any money. Not to say that we would, but it's just a insurance in case we have to. >> Great. Thank you. It looks like no other questions. So, are we ready for a roll call? >> Okay, I'll start with Al.
>> Als, >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross. I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I
>> Gary >> Yes. >> and Karen Rosai. Thank you. All right. Article nine is the acceptance of the capital improvement planning committee report and funding of capital. Um
>> motion to recommend the listed items. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Any discussion or deliberation on that? >> I see no. All right. Right. So, I'll take a roll call. Al >> Al le I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack.
>> Zach Lew. >> I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> Yes. >> and Karen Ross eye. Thank you. >> Karen, can I just ask one question? Not
that not just maybe because on the HVAC for the school is that a complete um system or is that is that um a repair? I guess >> that would be the that would be a
significant upgrade. There is uh that the Macover school has very limited uh AC or HA excuse me HBAC uh functionality. So it there are some units that are uh in the building now,
but it it it is a a full upgrade to the system. >> Okay. So that work will be done in the summer, I'm I'm assuming, right? When school's out. >> That is correct. It would not take place during uh during uh instruction. >> Okay. Thanks, Kristen.
>> All right. Thank you. All right. Article 10 is the salaries and stipens of elected officers. >> So moved. Thank you. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> All right, I'll go to a roll call. Al
>> El Le. >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy >> Nancy Santa Claus. I >> Duncan >> Duncan M. I >> Gary.
>> Yes. >> And Karen Rouse. I thank you. All right. Article 11 is the fiscal 27 budget appropriation. Uh, as we talked earlier, we had our meeting last week that finalized it. We had a very small change that, um, got
made today, about $20,000 relative to fixing up the cherry sheet assessments. And so, um, the updated budget would be the budget that, uh, I'm I'm asking for a motion on. >> So moved. as second
>> as printed. Thank you. >> Can somebody just Can somebody say the dollar amount? Karen, you have the dollar amount for the record. >> The dollar amount of the whole budget. >> Whole budget. Yeah. >> Um one second, Gary. I'm just thinking so the folks at home
can >> for of course I don't have that one up but one second and I think we can get the budget I'm Sure. Um on the town website shortly after this meeting.
Um all right. So the total revenue is 59 million. Whoops. One second. Sorry. Let me make sure I had the right one.
59,366400 is the total revenue of this budget. Oops, sorry. I said the wrong number. It's Scratch that. It's 60 million10567 and that includes >> 601751067. >> Okay.
>> And that includes 426,050 of free cash. Ma uh pardon me madam chair. Uh so the additional change that had been previously discussed is that that is uh going to be taken up during the free cash articles. Is that correct?
>> I'm sorry I asked that again Christopher. >> So the the $80,000 change that had been previously discussed that's going to come up in the pre-cash articles. Is that correct or is that >> that would be in this article. So so >> so you would need a motion for the >> this is the budget. We're we would be
making a motion on the budget as a whole which in so John I was just pointing out that that includes 426,050 of free cash. So that does include the 80,000 that we had discussed in our previous meeting
which was 80,000 additional from what the select board had finalized. So the the motion on on the on the table right now is is the finance committee recommended budget. We don't need a further motion. Is that correct? >> Correct. Right. >> All right. Thank Thank you.
>> Yes. Yes. >> Um so does anybody have any uh do we have a motion in a second yet? >> If not, we'll do it again. >> Let's do it. So moved. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any other discussion on the
budget as a whole as presented? Okay. I will um do a roll call. Al >> Ellie. Ali's eye. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. Hi
>> Nancy. >> Nancy Stanton Cross. I >> Duncan. >> Duncan. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Rails. I thank you. All right. Uh, article 12 is
the funding of the marine service enterp marine services enterprise. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> All right. Roll call. L >> Al Les I >> Cindy
>> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Lew I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Ross I
>> we're halfway there >> I know I was just looking are there are there other enterprise maybe we can do them all at once do you think we've got article 11 which is And shellfish. Isn't that separate that from marine services? No.
>> And the town article 14's the beach. >> We'll just do them in order. >> We'll just do them one by one. Okay. >> Process. All right. >> Right. >> All right. So, what article we we on now? >> 13. >> 13. So, article 13 is the funding of the
W waterline enterprise. Um, so so moved. Second. >> Any discussion? All right, I will do a roll call. L >> H le I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zack Leoo I
>> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Claus I >> Duncan >> Duncan I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Rose I Nancy isn't this exciting stuff
>> fascinating love it >> this is your first time through this one >> it is I'm glad that there's not so many Warren articles All right. Article 14 is the funding of the town beaches enterprise. >> So moved.
>> I'll second that. Uh, any discussion? >> Nope. Broke call. L. >> Ali. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack. >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy
>> Nancy Stan. Hi. You said I, right? >> Yep. Duncan. >> Duncan M. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> Karen Ross. I >> Sorry to cut Sorry to cut the line, Cindy. >> Yes.
>> Article 15 is the funding of community television. So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? I'll do a roll call. Al. Oops. Wait, someone raise your hand up. Go ahead, >> Nancy.
>> Um, how much is how much is left in this fund? I I know it's not this. >> Do we know that number? >> Oh, um, >> fortunately, I don't have that in front of me, but I can certainly have Nicole follow up with what the balances of that
account. >> Okay, thank you. >> Uh, Gary, go ahead. So, um this message uh this um question is for Chris. Uh Chris, is there a concern going forward for the access grant money that we get from um
uh from Spectrum that you know now that communities are no longer uh well, you know, a lot of residents are no longer uh on cable and they're streaming or whatever, is there a concern that this the fund will somewhat diminish over the
next few years or Uh yeah, I mean I think it's going to be something of a slow decline, you know, and I I just think when it comes to these type of agreements that the the
town enters into, you know, and as I'm sure you know, it's very um I don't know if monopolize is kind of the right word here, but you know, it's a very structured process with similar outcomes community by community. So, I I think
everyone's kind of seeing the slow decline. I think, you know, at some point it's going to be something that I'm sure the state's going to look at, have to get involved with, but in the meantime, yeah, I mean, it's it's something that, you know, we'll have to be mindful of.
It's not going to be in the next couple years, but certainly um you know when these contracts come up for um renegotiation, you know, after the set period of time, that's when you'll see the change.
>> Do you know do you know when um our contract expires? >> I I don't, but if you want to give me a couple minutes, I probably could find it. >> That's fine. It's a 10ear contract, right? >> Yeah. It was just I think it was just
renewed uh a year or two ago. >> Oh, okay. I >> I believe I believe we're on the the first half of the >> Okay. So, we have time sometime at least. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do we have a motion in a
second on this already? >> I believe we do. >> All right. Then, uh if no further discussion, I'll do a roll call. L >> Al leaves. I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I
>> Christopher >> Christopher Rasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stan cross I >> Duncan >> Duncan I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Rouse I. All right. The uh article 16 is the established fiscal 27
maximum expenditure limits for revolving accounts as listed in the warrant. >> So move >> and a second. Any discussion? >> Second. Second. >> Any discussion?
>> Uh this is Chris. I just have one note I want to make on this article. Um so this article um it's going to be tweaked by council a little bit more. Um but this article serves two purposes. So the first is setting the maximum expenditure
limit. Um also uh the couple of these accounts are increasing the highlighted ones that are noted here on the screen. So those amounts are going up from prior years. So, um, I just wanted to make a note of
that for, uh, Fing Pong's attention. >> So, so does the language change with the with with the, uh, legal beagles or does the um, uh, expenditures change? >> So,
the expenditure, the dollar amounts don't change. The >> the legal ease is, the legal ease is going to change. more or less for the intent of the article. The intent is to set the maximum expenditure limit. Um, also including the fact that some of these
have been have increased from what their prior amounts were. >> All right. So, aren't we really mostly concerned about I I I know how expenditures can change and that's the the legal ease,
but from a dollar standpoint, >> this is locked in. This is locked in. >> Yeah, the dollar numbers are not changing. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anything else? All right. So, uh we have a motion and a second. So I
uh roll call. So Al >> Alise I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Lew I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross I
>> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> yes >> and Karen Ross I thank you. Um, article Thank you. Article 17 is the acceptance of the
Whoops. Whoops. >> Sorry. CPC. >> That's the CPC. Thank you. >> I'm I'm rushing here. >> Thank you. That's CPC. Um, any uh motion, please? >> Motion to approve.
I'll second. Any discussion? >> Could you scroll down, please, Karen, to see what the funding projects are because I may >> Oh, that's right. >> I may have to recuse myself. >> Both Al and I need to recuse ourselves
because the historical uh society, the Bell School um item is on there, but you still have six other voting members. So, >> right, we're fine. Okay, great. Thank you. >> Um, do we have a motion in a second?
Right. I'm getting lost now. >> Yes. >> Yes. Thank you. >> All right. Um, if no other no other comments, I'll um Al, I know you're just going to say >> abstain. He's going to >> abain. Abain.
>> Thank you. I'm just asking you to say it. So, thank you, Cindy. >> Hey, >> Cindy Brown. Abstain. Thank you. Zack >> Zach Labru. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. Yes. >> Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton Cross. Yes. >> Duncan >> Duncan Law. Yes. >> Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Rouse. Yes. Thank you. >> All right. We're waiting for a little scroll. There we go. Um, article 18 is
the appropriation for the waterline enterprise rate study. >> So moved. >> Thank you. Second. I'll second it. Uh, any discussion? >> Karen, could somebody just give a brief
like two two minute or a minute? >> I think Chris Vitali can do that. Um, hi Gary. Yeah, so this is um, you know, the town's essentially our our
water department. You know, approximately 200 homes are serviced every year. Um, you know, the board select board sets the rates, the user fee rates. Um, you know, we purchase water from Fall River at a certain
price. Um, you know, there's a set markup that has been the past practice. Um, you know, I think when you look at this as an operation, you know, if you were looking at a town department, um, you know, there's not a dedicated
full-time staff person that's overseeing this operation. The operation itself is, um, you know, the functions are separated and spread across multiple departments and staff. Um, so there's not really a full picture on it. And I think one of
the things as this operation continues to uh grow and expand and add more customers to it um you know, there's going to be additional capacity that's going to need to be put here um into the
operation as a whole. So, um I also note that that fund at least in the last few years has been um you know pulling from its uh retained earnings. And so I think um you know the goal here would be to
look at you know what is the cost of the town? You know what investments do we need to make into that operation? uh and ultimately go to the board uh with a recommendation on uh any changes that
would be needed for that fund. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Chris. All right. Uh sorry. Do we have a motion in a second on this? >> I don't know. So moved. >> Let's do it. Thank you. I'll second it. Uh any any other further discussion?
All right. I'll go do a roll call. Al >> think he stepped away. >> Oops. Catch him at the ends. >> Okay, we'll catch him at the end. Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher >> Christopher the Rasher. I
>> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross. I >> Duncan Duncan Law. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> Karen Rouse. I And let's see if Al, are you back? Nope. All right, we'll keep on moving. Um,
so not so Al temporary stepped away. So we'll >> Right. We'll leave that open. Leave it open. >> We can leave it open. He he we I guess we can have him go back in after. Um, all right. So, article 19 is the appropriation for replacement roll off
container. >> So moved. >> Thank you. Second. I'll second that. Um, any discussion? All right, I'll do a roll call. Uh, Al, are you back with us? >> No. >> All right, Cindy.
>> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> thought we lost you, too. Thank you, Nancy. >> Nancy Stan Claus. I >> Duncan. >> Duncan Law.
Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Rosai. I know. This is such exciting stuff. We're on the edge of our seats here. Uh, all right. So, the next one is article 20, which is the appropriation for retention of foreclosed
tax title properties. Okay. So, um, >> so Al is back. Do you want to go back to 18 and 19? Oh, Al, we missed you and you didn't vote on 18 and 19. If you want to register, >> I would like I would like to say I for both.
>> Thank you. Appreciate that. Welcome back. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, uh, article 20 is the appropriation for the retention of forced tax title properties. So, I can't really read this on my screen. Um, it's
too small. Chris, is this um the one that sets the amount or does this just give? So, this one sets the amount of up to 5 million. >> That's correct. >> I'm kind of reading. All right. >> Yeah. And I can try and zoom this in. Uh
but um following up on the board conversation, I think we had talked about um the dollar amount that the board had talked about at our last meeting. However, um you know, council did review this. This is one of the articles that is still under review just
again because the laws are so new around this. Um but yes, this would be um a $5 million um request in the form of a borrowing
>> or up to five million, right? Not necessarily a $5 million borrowing, but >> yeah. So I think the intent of it is as um you know properties became available that the town was looking to retain
um you know this would be a funding source for that. So you know any given property may or may not be $5 million. It might be $500,000 or $750,000. So, um it it would be highly unlikely that that
full amount would be um >> would it always be included? >> Would it always be included debt or excluded debt? >> So, the discussion with the board uh would be excluded debt. It wouldn't be something that would be within the town
budget. So even if it was as small as 500,000 500,000 we would probably absorb but well maybe not because I don't know where we would come up with half a million dollars even. So even if it's something as as small as 500,000 they
she would use excluded debt to pay it back. So this has to go to two two votes. Correct. >> That's correct. if it if it moved forward. Um that would Yes.
>> I think there's a better shot if it were a lower number. >> Yeah, there was some I'll just note that there was some board discussion around that. Um you know, and I think it you know, one of the points that was discussed was just the cost of real
estate and properties. Um, you know, depending on the size of the property and the location with in town, um, you know, it you realistically funds, you know,
maybe a couple, you know, a couple of purchases. Um, >> but I think they said 5 million just again so that you wouldn't necessarily have to go back um to request, you know, additional authorizations to borrow um
again within a certain amount of time. Um yeah, so that was kind of some of the discussion with the board. >> Great. Thank you, Chris. Uh Christopher Thrasher, go ahead. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. So because
uh it's my understanding the language on this could change, the number could change. Um are we planning on meeting again between now and town meeting? I would assume at least at least if if directly before town meeting we would be meeting. Is that correct?
>> Yes. So um it's a good question Christopher. We we certainly if this is up in the air, we can certainly not make any recommendations tonight and we would have an opportunity at a future meeting to do that uh if if we so chose. So
absolutely. So we we would be meeting yes again. Um and if as Chris Fatali has been talking with the select board, the finance committee recommendations would not be in the printed warrant. they
would be a separate standalone um sheet of paper. So that changes that uh logistics very much where otherwise we would need to be voting today to get it into the warrant for it to be finalized and printed. But uh
having the the new opportunity to have it again as a separate sheet gives us a much further time before town meeting to um to to change something or or make a recommendation. >> Excellent. So I I do have some some
concerns uh or more more questions and and it sounded like uh some of the questions I had were similar questions being asked by the the select board as well. So at this time I would actually move madam chair that we uh uh table the motion to time certain our next meeting.
>> That sounds fine with me. Is everyone okay with that? >> Yes. >> Great. So we are going to hold. Great. All right. So we will hold on article 20 for a future meeting. >> Yeah. >> All right. Okay. Article 21 is the
appropriation for a public safety training sessions. So moved. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any discussions? All right. I'll roll call. Al >> Le I. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I
>> Zack. >> Zach Lru. I >> Christopher. Oh, >> he's on. You're on mute. Christopher. >> Yeah. Christopher Thrasher. I. Sorry. Too many buttons. Thank you. >> Thank you, Nancy. >> Nancy Stanton. Cross. I >> Duncan
>> Duncan Law. I >> Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Ross. I thank you. Uh article 22 is the appropriation for grant matching funds. >> How much is that? >> Uh that is 75,000 of free cash.
>> So moved. >> Motion. Second. >> Thank you. Any discussion? All right. Roll call. L >> Al le I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack >> Zach Lew I >> Christopher
>> Christopher Thrasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross >> Duncan >> Dun I >> Gary >> yes >> Karen Ross eye. Thank you. Um article 23 is the appropriation for school
technology. So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any discussion? >> Uh Karen, one question. Uh maybe Chris or Nancy can answer this. >> Is this more for um
uh like hardware? Are we are we replacing um are we replacing like Chromebooks? Is it >> Christopher? if you're answering. There you go. >> Yes. So, uh basically this is a this was
uh pulled out from the original uh school department uh requested budget. Uh it would be uh having to do with our replacement program for Chromebooks. Uh as you may recall last year, uh we we started working on a kind of a tiered uh
rolling replacement approach as opposed to allin-one uh doing a you know one lump sum of replacements all at once. So this this would be part of that for sure. >> So So this isn't obviously not buying Chromebooks for everybody. It's it's it's complimenting
replacing old and getting rid of the old and replacing the new. Do we do we repair them in house or >> certainly and this is basically this is what this is part of uh what was considered in our our recommended the
school committee's recommended budget. Um this would be the the I think the second pardon me the second or third year of of a of a roll out for replacement that again does not have a single lump sum or single lump year
where everything is replaced. Instead, we've got everything on a uh on a rolling uh four or five year schedule. >> Okay, great. Thanks. >> Uh any anybody else? >> Uh Chris Vitali has this hand up.
>> Oh, I think it's been up. >> I think it was an accident. >> I I think Yeah, I I think it was back from the um the tax title. I uh I just think I wanted to make a note at the time that the $5 million was voted on by
the board. So the dollar amount is not changing. It would just be uh the the legal ease necessary for the article. So um I think that was my only point, but um it's was tabled. So
>> thank you. >> Thank you. Um we have a motion and a second on the table. >> Correct. Al has his hand out. >> I'm sorry. I I'll go back to the tax title. Uh the number is too high. I I
can't support it. >> I think it's too high. I mean, I I we haven't had any significant tax title takings in many, many years. And even if we were to start, I mean, I think it would be a while. and the thought that
we would have property that we would want to retain and not uh either sell back to the family or sell at market uh within that time frame. I mean I I think it's too high as well.
>> Yeah. So I I know I know we're not voting on that tonight, but I just wanted to to weigh in on it. >> Great. Thank you. So, we had a motion and a second on article 23, >> right? And if no further discussions on
that article, I will entertain I will go to a roll call. So, Al >> Al le I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown I >> Zack. >> Zach Lew. >> Christopher, >> I will expressly abstain from this vote. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh Nancy >> Nancy stand cross >> Duncan. Dr. Law I >> Gary >> Yes. >> Karen Rosai. Thank you. Um, article 24, the acceptance of a personal property
tax bill exemption. >> So moved. This is the one for eliminating small properties of low low value. Yeah. Under $10 or $100 or whatever it was. Uh, so moved.
Is >> there a second? Second. >> Thank you. Is any further discussion on this article? >> Right. >> What is the what is does anybody know what the impact of this is? Like um what
are we talking I mean it really can't be a lot of money. I guess >> uh I think cost more to send the bills out than the money that it would collect. I think that was sort of the premise, >> right? Between the postage and the
clerical cost to process the bill, it's more than what it is worth, >> right? >> More than a stamp. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I'll tell you, I don't mail much any anymore, but I had to go and buy stamps
the other day. Holy cow. Stamps have gotten pretty pricey. I I hadn't bought stamps in a long time. You know, I had forever stamps from forever ago and I replenished them and I couldn't believe how much more stamps got. But I digress. Sorry. Go ahead. Article 24.
>> All right. So, we are going to go to a roll call. I think we're ready. >> Oh, yeah. L >> I >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack. >> Zack Lu. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher I
>> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> yes >> Karen Ross I thank you um article 25 is to amend the personnel bylaws this one
probably is not financial related >> this is our first one >> here tonight >> it is you know our Um, just on that point, I I do not believe it is. Um, this article is still being worked on by town council. Um, you know, and I I
guess Cindy just doubling your hat for the personal board. Um, so just council is going to be making some more um uh specific changes within the draft language um because there is some
language that they want to retain within the existing bylaw. So, um they're going to pull out what they, you know, feel um uh meets the intent that I think we were looking for as part of the um the proposed article that you see here. So,
um if you're tableabling the other discussion on article, uh 20 um the committee will have enough time. And I'll also note there that um I'll send over the draft to the personnel board and if
>> um if council also wants the finance committee to weigh in, we'll also get that over to uh >> committee as well. >> Yeah. Typically the the finance committee passes over does not offer a recommendation on items that don't have
a financial impact. >> Right. >> Right. >> We make no I think we make no >> no recommendation. Right. That's what it is, right? >> Yeah. Yep. >> We also take We think we take a vote on that too, Karen, don't we? >> Yes, we will. >> Right. Yeah. >> No,
>> Christopher Thrasher, go ahead. >> Yes. Just as a brief aside, I understood that the understanding of the finance committee would probably not take a recommendation here. Uh, Miss Brown, I would be very interested to hear between now and town meeting your thoughts on on these changes.
>> Okay. Um I do you I can have a discussion with you right now. Do you do you want to take three minutes now Karen to talk about >> three minutes? >> I'm gonna while you do that I'm going to look up last year's recommendations and how we worded it. Okay. All right. Good.
>> Um, so my my thoughts on it, I mean, I think that the concept um, and and I have not met with the board as a whole on this. So, this is purely my own thoughts. So, the personnel board has not met as a as
a body to discuss this article yet. So, um, uh, and and we will in in the coming weeks. Personally, my thoughts are that, you know, I think it's a it's an article whose time has come to some degree that
the uh with with the addition of the new town administrator and the amped up responsibilities of what now is the assistant to the town administrator, including more uh human resource training and more human resource um uh
interaction and responsibility in that office. Uh I think it's helpful that the uh office of the town administrator and the select board have a much more um uh governing role on this than the
personnel board. Our staff, we are not in town hall. we are not there seeing what some of the duties are that may overlap and the the number of employees that the personnel board covers now is
um you know it's I don't want to say it's diminishing but it really is a very small group of employees. I mean it's only uh part-time non-union employees. that does not include um uh employees that have a
contract. So for example, the town administrator, the director of um of senior services, the uh IT director, we do not oversee those employees because they're subject to an employee contract that is negotiated directly by the
select board. So the the scope of employees that we cover is relatively small and it's it it's kind of awkward because sometimes department heads will come to us and uh they might um you know talk up a job
or use a job description that we really as board members have no familiarity with. So that was really what kind of put me over the edge that I think that will the personnel board eventually be phased out probably as a result of this.
I don't I don't see why the personnel board would still be in existence. So I'm very comfortable with it provided the policy maintains what the personnel bylaws have. I mean, anytime we change a job description, we're supposed to go to
town meeting and then it's subject to approval of town meeting. So, you could hire someone in September and not know until town meeting whether or not really the job description that you changed or the pay rate that you set is technically
approved. So, it's um it's a little bit um it's a little bit awkward the way it works right now needing town meeting approval. So, that's kind of my two cents to it. >> Thank you very much. It Yes, it does very much. My uh you know, my chief
concern is making sure that there is still of course oversight uh from you know, the select board ultimately and it sounds like I will say if you're comfortable with them, it sounds like I'll be comfortable with them. So, thank you. Yeah, I mean, you know, we're like the the the personnel board, you know, we're not familiar with, you know, all
the idiosyncrasies of, you know, FMLA and all the different, you know, uh, protections that are in place for, uh, for employees. Not that we would ever, you know, knowingly certainly violate them, but, you know, the the the process
would would certainly eliminate any any risk of us violating those. But it's still in, you know, we're kind of on the outside looking in on so many of these situations. And I think that this this fix provides a much better transition
for the employees involved. I know Gary and I have not had a chance to talk about this, but we will have a meeting again soon. >> Yeah, I agree. I think uh human resources has evolved over the years. Uh not only that, we don't we don't we don't we're not
>> the board the board has never been um you know uh talking about benefits, talking about salary ranges, talking about uh all these things that need really you need that now. You need it on both sides of the schools and the and the town >> to um to make sure that the town is
protected, the employees protected and um you know the personnel boards are kind of an antiquated way to go about that. >> I I totally agree, Gary. All right. So on that note, I will be looking for a motion to make no
recommendation on this article. >> Second. >> All right. Uh if no further discussion, we'll do a roll call for no recommendation. Uh Al le no recommendation. >> Cindy Lindy Brown. Um yeah, I no
recommendation. Uh, Zack >> Zach Leu I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thr. >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton cross no recommendation. >> Duncan >> Duncan no recommendation >> Gary
>> uh no recommendation. >> Great. And Karen uh I no recommendation. All right. So article 26 is very similar. It's the appointment of a tree warden. Um, again, I don't think that has a financial implication for us that
we would need to make a recommendation. >> Move no recommendation for article 26. >> So, move ahead. >> Thank you. Any discussion? All right, I'll do a roll call. L >> Al le I >> Cindy
>> Cindy Brown I Zack. >> No recommendation. >> Zach Le. >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Cross. No recommendation. >> Thank you, Duncan.
>> Duncan law. No recommendation. >> Gary. >> Yes. >> Karen Karen Rosai. Yes. >> Oh, we're getting a little uh Yeah, it's it's hitting us. We're almost at the end. So, article 27 is um
amend article X, whatever X is. I'm sorry, I don't know my numbers. Um the general >> the general bylaws, oversight, parking restrictions and penalties. So, this one actually does have some financial implications. So, this is raising the
dollars and it looks like maybe we had a placeholder before, but now it's showing the parking fee would be $200 in here. >> That is correct. Yes. >> So, moved. $200. Good. >> Second.
>> Okay. Any discussion? My only discussion is I think it should be $500, but okay. If you want to go with 200, >> that seems ridiculously low. Again, if you're going to go through this effort and change to try to make this
impactful, that for parking, $200 just doesn't wig wiggle the needle enough that makes it impactful. >> I I would I would modify this and I'm just going to toss this out. There is parking violations, $200. I'm okay with
300, whatever it might be. However, the bylaws of the landing commission state clearly that you cannot park, a person cannot park over 24 hours. And that's where I would I would really
nail it. That's where I would really say, "All right, you want to park overnight down at the point, for example, thousand, pick a number." I, you know, I'm not I'm not pushing it, but I just think that needs to be reviewed because
we're only dealing with half of the the problem on this as as I read it. >> Well, you also want the attorney general to approve it. So, you know, sometimes if you throw those big numbers there, then the attorney general feels that
it's userous for us to charge such high. So 9 So 950 Cindy. >> Yeah. >> We'll see if this sticker shock at least. >> I don't think this went far enough, but okay. So, um, anybody else? We have a
motion in a second. So, I'll do a roll call. Al >> I. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack. >> Zack. Hi. Zack, I think you said yes, right? >> Yeah, he did. >> Okay, thanks Chris. Chris Christopher
>> Christopher Thrasher. >> Nancy, >> you're on mute. Nancy, >> she moves. Sorry, I'm back. Um, I wish it was more, but I >> Thank you, Dun. Duncan >> Duncan I
>> Gary >> yes >> Karen Ross I thank you. >> All right so article 28 is oh this one amend the zoning bylaws access. So this one's
>> you know we not talked about it because it really doesn't have >> direct financial implications. So the zoning most of the zonings never uh don't directly do that. I mean we can always make the argument validly that every thing we do has financial
implications but >> um ahead >> and I was just going to make that exact argument, Madam Chair, as I do every time we get get around to these. anything that would affect uh anything that could affect assessments and therefore affect uh the uh uh the tax
revenues I think is is is pertinent but uh I understand I may be in the minority of that so thank you >> thank you >> well and just to to that point even if it does affect an assessment it doesn't change the levy so it does not bring in
additional dollars to the town so it doesn't have it has implications to individuals but not it doesn't raise the levy to bring more more revenue into the town. >> Good point. >> Yeah. >> Um
>> I move no recommendation. >> Great. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any further discussion? Okay. Uh roll call. So this is no recommendation. So Al, go ahead. >> All is no recommendation. >> Cindy.
>> Cindy Brown. I no recommendation. Zach >> Zach Lew. >> Christopher. >> So, this is tricky. I vote no to no recommendations. >> Okay. Got to have a little fun once in a while. All right. Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton. Cross eye >> Duncan >> Duncan I >> Gary >> no recommendation. >> Great. And Karen Ross eye. No recommendation. Okay. Um, article 29, if
we can go down a little. Thank you. So, this is amend the zoning bylaws for building height. Um, >> I move no recommendation. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> All right. Any discussion on this one?
All right. Roll call. Al >> L is no recommendation. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Bar. No recommendation. Zack >> Zach Lew. >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher no to no recommendation.
>> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law I >> Gary >> no recommendation >> and Karen Ross I. All right. Article 30 is more zoning bylaw. Article 30 is
amend the zoning bylaw for the keeping of dogs. >> Oh boy. >> Okay. >> We'll see how many people are left in the audience when by the time we get to this, but this one this one will take
hours. This could take hours at town meeting. >> Is it five dogs? Is it six dogs? Is it four dogs? Is it seven dogs? >> Right. All right. It sounds like um it's not a >> motion for no recommendation. >> Second. Second.
>> Any discussion on this? >> All right. Al >> leaves no recommendation. >> Cindy, >> no recommendation. I wish I didn't have to be present for this discussion. >> Well, maybe maybe you don't have to.
Maybe you'll be watching. Uh, Zack >> Zack Lru. I >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. No recommendation. >> Nancy. >> Um, Nancy Stanton Cross. No recommendation. Thank you.
>> Duncan. >> Duncan L. No recommendation. >> Gary, >> no recommendation. >> And Karen Rouse, no recommendation. Thank you. All right. Article 31 is the amend the zoning bylaws for flood plane
rec regulations. >> Oh god. >> I'll I'll move for no recommendation please. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All right. Roll call. Al >> Al le. No recommendation.
>> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. No recommendation. >> Zack. >> Zach Le. Hi >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. No recommendation. >> Nancy. >> Glad I'm not on the zoning board. No recommendation.
>> Duncan. >> Duncan Law. No, no recommendation. >> Gary, >> no recommendation. >> And Karen Rouse, no recommendation. Thank you. All right. Article, we must be close to the end. Article 32. Oh, we got another one. Amend the zoning bylaws
table of use revisions. Um, oh boy. Um, okay. So, again, another uh >> Oh, this is to Isn't this to set up some new zones in Adamsville and uh somewhere
else to allow for certain vendors? Yeah. Um, no recommendation. I make a motion for no recommendation. >> Second. >> Any discussion? Roll call. Al
>> Al le. No recommendation. >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. No recommendation. >> Zack >> Zach Le. >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. No to no recommendation. >> Okay. Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton. Cross. No recommendation. >> Duncan. >> Duncan L. No recommendation. >> Gary. >> No recommendation. >> Karen Rouse. No recommendation. All right. Article. Are we done yet? We're almost done. >> Article 33,
amend the zoning map, village commercial zoning district. >> All right. This is what kind of goes along with the previous article. Uh motion for no recommendation. >> Second. >> Any discussion?
>> Roll call. Ali is no recommendation. >> Cindy Cindy Bar. No recommendation. >> Zack. >> Zach Leber. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher no to no recommendation. >> Okay. Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton cross. No recommendation. >> Duncan >> Duncan L. No recommendation. >> Gary >> no recommendation. >> And Karen Ross. I no recommendation. >> Keep scrolling. And as Chris keeps scrolling I keep hoping we're done but
have >> one last one. Stacy Lane. >> It's the anticipation. >> There we go. >> Article 34, acceptance of Stacy Lane. Um Chris, maybe I know the select board talked about it last night and and maybe
um can you help? There was I'm not sure. As far as I understand, the planning board has signed off on it, but it's not signed off on the select board yet. Is Can you help us out with that one?
Yeah, certainly. So, uh this has been something that's been uh in the works for several years now. Um you know, we have a process when it comes to street acceptances. Um you know, it did go
through um and the definitive uh plan was finalized with the planning board. Um we did have um comments from our various departments on the condition of the roadway. Um one note on this was it
did receive conditional approval to move forward. It has an order of conditions that's still out on it. They have to request a certificate of compliance. The discussion at the board meeting on Monday which was a hearing for um the laying out of the street or accepting
the street layout. Um I I think the order of conditions is just pertaining to uh some seeding grass seed along the roadway. Um you know to satisfy the conservation commission's uh concerns
there. So they do anticipate that that's going to be done ahead of time meeting. the approval that was um made by the select board was conditioned that they'd got the uh certificate of compliance through concom and as part of
their approval it also has to be done prior to town meeting. So um the board won't sign off on it if it's not done in time. So that is uh the discussion for Monday. >> Great. Thanks. And this is one that's always we always struggle with road
acceptances because it it if a road is accepted and it's not complete or work proper by the contractor, then it becomes the town's issue to deal with. And so we've historically if all the
check boxes have been done and the select board is in favor of it, we've traditionally voted uh make the recommendation in favor of it. Um, but we this one's always a tricky one. So, um, or the the road acceptances are
always a little tricky. So, they are financial, of course. But go ahead, Al. >> No, you answered my question. I was going to say, what does what does a private way have to do with, you know, the finances of the town, but
you did a great job in explaining that. So, I'm I'm good. >> Thank you. Thank you. Um all right. So it's so it sounds like it's just all the boxes have been been
checked subject to um seating. So uh would the committee like to make a recommendation on this at this time? And again any if let me just say if we made the recommendation to
to recommend this if before town meeting if the select board didn't get satisfaction the finance committee could change its recommendation at town meeting. So, if we, for example, if we voted to recommend this and then assuming that
the grass would be um taken care of and the contingencies would be released and then we found out that that didn't happen, the finance committee could change its recommendation at town meeting to be in correlation with with the the select board.
>> Move that we accept we move for recommendation to accept Stacy Lane. Second. >> Thank you. Any other discussion on that? >> All right. So, we'll do a roll call.
>> Ali. >> Cindy. >> Cindy Brown. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Christopher. >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy. >> Nancy Stan. Cross. Eye. >> Duncan. >> Duncan. I
>> Gary. >> Yes. >> And Karen Ross. Is that the last one? >> Yep. >> Yeah, we made it. >> Good job, everyone. Not bad. All right. Wow. Okay.
Um Chris Fatali, you're welcome to stay, but I think we're just going to wrap up our next meeting schedule if you want to. >> Sounds good. Uh yeah, and I I'll follow up. um you know I think you mentioned at the beginning of the meeting so the
board uh is just moving forward with preparing the warrant with the inclusion of the articles. So uh recommendations draft motions will all be uh separate this year as a as a separate handout a supplemental handout. So um any
committee here needs but thank you guys so much. Have a good night. >> Thank you so much for for uh all your hard work. So, um, this was a nice, um, easy process for us this year. So, especially with your first time doing this, it's it's gone very smoothly. So,
thank you. >> Yeah. No, thank you all. I really appreciate it. >> Thank you. Good job. Thank you. >> All right. Um, so, uh, we're about to wrap up, but we do need to just schedule our upcoming meeting. So uh the two two
other hurdle now that we've cleared all the warrant articles which is a tremendous hurdle. So um usually in the warrant there's a a one-page summary by the finance committee on the state of affairs of the town. I will say
that it if I haven't read it recently but if I think if I read last year's it would be not different at all to what this one is. But um we can I'll circulate that and then we can um anybody who has any
comments or edits we can freshen it or or let it stay uh stay as is. And then the second thing that I typically do is a very highlevel five minute presentation at town meeting. So I would
anticipate doing that again. Um, I'll share last year's slides and I'll update it. Um, but again, same story, different year really. Nothing there's nothing there's nothing different this year than we've had in the past. So, um, I'll I I
can update that and to see if there's any other comments or thoughts that we could um would want to include in that presentation. So, even though I'm making the presentation, it's really on behalf of the finance committee. So, um I want to make sure everybody isn't on board with it as well.
So, having said that, so we will need one more meeting and then um we we will hold a meeting a half hour before town meeting um or meet just in case there's again in case there's something that we
need to vote on and and change a recommendation u for town meetings. So we will meet but not really anticipate having a an agenda there just to to meet a half hour before town meeting. So our next um so what works for every
so town meeting let's see is May 5th I think >> May 5th. So we could either do the 14th April 14th or the 25th >> is that that's election day. April 14th is election day. The 14th is election day. Okay,
>> we could do does the 21st work for everyone? >> Yeah, that worked for me. >> Two weeks before town meeting. So by then we'll have the presentation finalized and um and then any any outstanding issues we'll uh the select
board will have. Does that work? April 21st. >> Yes. Great. >> Yes. Okay, Karen, while you're noting that, I don't want to lose um Nancy. Nancy, I have a question. Did you receive the material I sent to you for the audit
committee? >> I did. Okay. I did not review it. >> Okay. No, that's okay. I I don't I just want to make sure that you saw that there will be a meeting next Monday at town hall. >> Okay. Thank you for reminding me. >> Okay. That's why That's why I wanted to
make >> What time is it at? >> Um, oh boy. I'm gonna I'm gonna say it's at six o'clock. If it's at If it's not six o'clock, I will send you an email. >> I'll send you an email with the correct time if it's not six. >> Uh, thank you. >> Dick Dick Brewer is usually the one that
schedules them and he usually makes them at six. >> So, thank you. >> And it's at town hall. >> Okay. >> In the in the select board's room. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, and it won't be terribly long. >> Do you promise that? >> I promise. >> Okay.
>> I promise. >> All right. Okay. So, uh, I'm going to ask to pass over the minutes because I haven't even looked at them. Um, I have no correspondence to share. Our next item is meeting schedule topics for next meeting. So, we're going to do April 21st.
And so the topics will be town meeting prep and if anything else comes up uh to talk about we'll add that to the agenda. >> Will we be discussing that article that we passed over regarding the tax title? >> Yes. Yes. And so any so article 20 as
well. So let me make my notes. So article 20 which was the tax title one. >> Correct. and town meeting prep are the two items so far in the agenda. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um well everyone, we made it. Now, what are you going to do with all your Tuesday nights now? >> Enjoy them. >> Watch the Red Sox. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. >> I know. I like it. All right. Well, >> motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Thank you. Just thank you everyone for your hard work and dedication and coming to all the meetings and it's it's a lot
of work, but tonight's the night it put it all together. And so, thank you everyone for staying on, staying firm, watching the meetings, paying attention. And I know I speak for everyone else, Karen, that that I want to thank you and Cindy both because you're you're a great
tag team for all you do. I mean, it's just uh remarkable and you're so both so smart and on top of the game. So, I'll I'll I'll speak for myself, but I think I speak for everyone else.
>> So, thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. So, we got a motion in a second to adjurnn. So, this is our last roll call in the night. Al >> I'm sad. I
>> But the answer is yes. >> Yes, >> the answer is I >> Cindy >> Cindy Bar. >> Zack. >> Zach Lrew. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stanton Claus. I >> Duncan >> Duncan. Hi
>> Carrie. is >> yes >> yes and Karen Rosai good night everyone >> good night and thank