##VIDEO ID:U7Vo1IfmqOw## hey guys hey Chris how you doing good thanks sorry I was on mute there no problem um hey Will um when we go live we start the meeting I'll obviously mention both of you being here for the first time joining as school committee members um can you remind me I know I have it who who's voting through the chair we're live on hkam Ed okay thanks Bob I I think it's me is that right is the voting member I'm an okay I will say John I was traveling down to New Jersey for a vacation today and I didn't get a chance to read a ton of the stuff that I saw come in today so I'm trying to catch up so I don't know if any of that affects the vote or how that's handled but yeah I I think tonight you should be in good shape because okay um minutes stuff will you know obviously you weren't at these meetings so it'll be just a question of getting enough other members who were at the meeting meetings um passive house vote um I'll look for Dan to nod or shake his head that we'll get a little brief presentation on that so you'll know kind of what we're voting on for there and then the the the other one is just the um it's just paying bills okay got it yeah okay um for those I know we are live on hcam it is 6:00 right now we are just waiting on a couple other people I am getting some text message um messages for some people who are going to be joining in a couple of minutes so we will wait and give them some time to make sure we have quorum Chris I Jag root how we doing oh and I didn't say hi to Chris K when he came on actually I don't think I said hi to Dan I just asked him to make sure I wasn't saying something stupid hello everyone Dan is very useful for that purpose shake my head anytime so we've got a quarum but I am just going to give it another minute or two if nobody has any objections just to see if we get um I want to make sure we have enough people who were here at least at the last meeting to cover those minutes I'm realizing we may have a bit of a problem Chris Everly with the the minutes that we pushed to this meeting um because looking back through it I'm not sure if we can anymore put together a quarum of people who were at that meeting because our one of them was Nancy and our school committee reps I discussed it with um the vertex folks in house and we believe that as long as you took a vote um of a group with a quorum and that vote passed then the minutes can be approved if you wanted to confirm that with Town Council um you certainly could okay um but in general your two nothing vote of people who attended the meeting and voted would be a passing vote I did not go back and research Robert's Rules of Order to see whether or not there is an exception there but um yeah I sort of think you're right I I I actually thought it a bit at the last meeting but took the more conservative approach um well at the yeah I think at the moment I'm the only one on the call who was at that meeting or wait was J grp were you at that meeting uh I believe J gr was at that which one was it the July 9th yeah you were there it was yes okay [Music] um what happened at that meeting we approv there wasn't anything of oh was the submission the endorsement of submission of okay yeah um okay so let's do this first I'm gonna open the meeting at 6:04 PM welcome everyone to the Tuesday August 13 2024 um meeting of the elementary school building committee for the charleswood elementary school um this meeting is being conducted as a remote meeting in accordance with the governor's guidelines so procedurally just a reminder for everyone any votes taken tonight will be done as a roll call um before we get to the agenda I do want to acknowledge that there are two new committee members here um the uh school committee design have changed since their last meeting so um Chris Masters is the voting member from the school committee and Kyla mcweeny is the alternate member for the um for the school committee so welcome to you both thank you for agreeing to even further extend your responsibilities on the school committee by jumping into this um and so we will um you know certainly try to keep you as as updated as possible as we go through this meeting since some of the stuff may be a little bit more um familiar to those of us who have been with this for I don't know what are we at like two years now um close to that close to that okay um all right so agenda tonight we will have our period of public comment after which we will approve minutes which we'll discuss in more detail when we get there we've got some invoices to pay um we have to approve the um Construction administr ation for Passive house third party um and then we're going to get some updates on permitting as well as do we have design updates tonight no Bob's Bob we have some permitting updates okay all right so Bob Bob perfect timing to come in and just tell us we don't have any design updates tonight so um okay so we will try to move through this as rapidly as possible um so I'm going to to start with okay so no I'm not if nobody Minds I'm going to go out of order I'm going to save the minutes for later in the agenda to see if we get one or two more people to join who might be able to help put us over that Quorum of people um the um that we're at the meetings and then we can determine if we want to do something else if we don't have enough so if there are no objections I'm going to move right on to invoices and come back to minutes okay so next up we have invoices we have um two invoices in the packet that was shared with you today the first one is invoice number OPM 11628 payable to vertex in the amount of $ 42,1 33.33 the second one is invoice number 95421 00008 payable to Perkins Eastman in the amount of $400,000 the total amount in the invoice package tonight is $442,000 33 uh any questions or comments about the invoice package okay hearing none I would seek a motion to approve payment of the invoice package totaling $442,000 33 so moved okay motion by Bill is there a second second second by Jag Groot um we have a roll call vote so we will start with Bill yes Chris Masters yes Jag Gro yes and I am a yes so that is unanimous 4 z um to pay the invoices included in the packet and Susan I will sign that tonight and email it over to you um next we have the um the construction um Amendment for designer Services um Chris Everly do you want to just quickly walk us through I know we've talked about it before but just walk us through what we're doing here so this is revisiting a couple of things that we've talked about for um and formalizing them essentially we realized as we are finalizing this amendment that um the it's composed of two part parts the first part is construction Administration support for the passive house project process and the second part is what we discussed at our last meeting which is an additional service for the um uh Perkins Eastman for the meepa process to do an air quality analysis in reviewing the minutes and preparing ing the agenda um we realized that when we discussed about this in February much of our discussion um was around not whether we should do it but the process for doing it and whether that was appropriate um we had reached out to the msba and they saw no issue in the passive house consultant working for Perkins Eastman um the cost of this with markup is $87,900 um what this entails is it is the technical support from a passive house specialist during the construction process to ensure that we meet all the requirements of passive house when we get to the end of the project we went with Perkins Eastman's um consultant because Perkins Eastman is hiring them for the design process and paying them out of their base fee and so um it was a Synergy that was beneficial to the town versus uring this separately as a third party and um at the time the committee endorsed that as a consensus the other part of this is a $15,000 additional service with a 10% markup so it's $16,500 um and that is the additional service for the air quality study for the meepa process um which is a component requested by meepa as part of the single eir that the team is currently preparing so all in total this is designer Amendment 7 and it would be for $104,000 $14,300 um so a couple of of really quick just well three clarification points so that it's for uh you said $14,300 that's under the project budget not this is not this is a contract Amendment not something we're paying today correct um and then um this is within exis budget for this work from the original project budget correct it's we budgeted um if you recall I believe it's $300,000 for other project costs which at the time that we approved this process with meepa those were the or with um the msba too many acronyms in my head um at the time that we approved that with the msba it was um that money was put aside in support of um pursuing the 3% additional reimburse ment for the mba's opin um specialized energy code compliance so by uh volunteering to follow that code we're getting an extra 3% in reimbursement which is a significant amount of money right okay any other actually let me before we do that I did have a third thing for benefit of uh the two new members Chris can you give us like a super highle version of passive house or maybe or somebody I've heard it enough times that I I I can probably run through it really quick so passive house is similar to what many people have heard of uh lead it's a different organization it's a nonprofit that has the goal of creating um carbon free and highly efficient buildings similar to the way that lead is per um is dedicated to producing sustainable buildings as part of passive house they have a certification process where you meet their standards which include a significant amount of third party verification um it will um you'll be passive house certified passive house certification is one of the methods of achieving the specialized energy code that's been adopted by some communities in Massachusetts and is worth up to an additional 3% reimbursement from the msba um if you achieve that compliance so it is the most straightforward meth me of achieving that compliance and at previous meetings we have voted to support the passive house approach both in um earlier meetings during the feasibility process to pursue the specialized energy code for the additional reimbursement as well as the vote at the last meeting to um pay the fee associated with passive House International um as part of their certification process specifically to the amendment before you um a number of those thirdparty verifications require require specialist familiar with passive house who serves as the passive house verifier and so that is what this consultant would be doing for the amendment or for the the work under this amendment okay Chris so that John can I yeah I had one question so essentially that gives us Chris a net Savings of 3% um no so the msba um reimbursement process works as a percentage of the construction cost that the MS SBA cost shares in and so the grant program the $62 million that the town is getting a portion of that 62 million is um an additional so I don't have the numbers in front of me so I'm doing this slightly for memory but I believe hopton's number is somewhere in the neighborhood of 44% they assign each town a reimbursement rate and then as part of that reimbursement rate you're able to um there's certain things that you can do to increase that reimbursement rate it used to be that you would get an extra 1% so that's an extra 1% of the total Grant um or total eligible costs uh to achieve uh either chips which is um I think it's Coalition for high performing schools or lead they changed that program uh in 20 I think 23 and now they offer you 1% for certain lead points that you get and then 3% so instead of getting a reimbursement of 44% of your eligible costs under the grant program you're now getting a 48% reimbursement of your eligible costs under the grant program eligible costs since I know you haven't sit through nearly as many of these is the rest the SBC has um eligible costs are based on certain caps and thresholds that are built into the overall program so that for instance they'll pay up to a certain dollar per square foot which is what the increase was in August of last year that led to a much higher grant for the town than we were originally um expecting and also there's certain um limits to uh fees they'll only reimburse up to a certain amount of design fees and OPM fees um in the same way that they'll only reimburse up to a certain amount of change orders or a certain amount of construction costs so those caps establish what the msba considers the eligible amount under their grant grant program and then the percentage is how much of that eligible amount the msba will give you as the grant got it thank you Chris just a follow up to John's uh questions on Where this money is is coming from I appreciate it's that $300 $300,000 bucket we set aside are these the first two items that we're pledging against that 300,000 so the balance is roughly 200 um no and I'm I'm going to get the exact number because you're asking very pointed questions and I want to make sure I give you accurate answers um so just a the budget is available for everyone within the financial package that was distributed um in the meeting packet that I gave out and what Susan sent to all of you um earlier today as part of this we have other administrative costs which is 300,000 the largest item that we have build or committed against that fund is the um I the hund maybe the right number um the largest amount that we have build against those costs is the um the additional controls support from IDs that was part of um vertex amendment to um IDs is going to be useful in refining the control system and analyzing the control system so that we make sure that we're achieving the eui that the town set out to meet and so they're 138,00 was already um put against that 300,000 okay thank you okay any other questions okay um before I seek a motion I do want to just acknowledge that another Committee Member Tiffany a rander has joined the call um so especially for minutes purposes we'll have five votes on this one um if there are no other questions I would seek a motion to approve um amendment number seven to the contract for designer Services as included in the agenda materials so moved okay motion by Bill is there a second second second by Jag root uh roll call vote starting with Bill yes Chris Masters yes Jag root yes Tiffany yes and I am a yes so that is unanimous 5 to zero um next up we have updates on permitting um so I'll I'll take this and then I'll turn it over to um Dan to walk through so um on August 5th we met with the planning board and on um the and we previously continued the concom hearing on the 30th because we didn't have all of our um comments in time to have a response for them so the next meetings for both concom and planning board are Tuesday and Monday of next week um I believe I've circulated to most of the committee those invites if they're interested in attending um we'll update those as the um logins become available I believe they're both supposed to be remote um but that'll be confirmed when they're posted as public meetings um the initial feedback that we got from the planning board was generally positive they did have some questions about various aspects of the project um we did have one a butter who chose to speak and just relay some concerns that they had about how close they are to some of the drainage outfall and that wanted to um to share that and just make sure that that's taken seriously um we are in the process of waiting to get back the uh planning board peer review comments we haven't received them as of yet we got an update from the town planner that they're expected early this week and then the traffic comments are expected early next week so we hope to have some of those to possibly talk about with the committee but I don't know that we're going to have a revision to move forward and present to them also um I sent just before the meeting um for everyone's records a letter that um came from the zoning enforcement official who is the um uh the building the the full-time building inspector there's been some turnover the building department there's currently a part-time building inspector who's been brought in to assist and Mike Shepard has returned to the building department on a part-time basis to support them and they all happened to be named Mike so one of those miks wrote a letter to the planning department in response to a letter that John had sent um to the building department in support of What's called the do Amendment we had used the do Amendment which um uh way back in October um when we were in the feasibility process to go to the board of appeals to discuss the bulk of the building because by right you wouldn't be able to build a three-story building in this area the do Amendment prohibits um zoning restrictions that are unreasonable for school uses that's the the short version of it and we um went to the board of appeals to just get their Buy in that a three-story building should be permitted on this site under the Dover Amendment for the Hopkins project we also used the do Amendment for several um items and also had buying from the former building inspector Chuck kadlick about um the how the do amendment applies to certain zoning um areas where the project was not meeting that we reached out with John um a letter was prepared and sent to the building inspector to have him weigh in on how the Elwoods projects zoning um was similar to the Hopkins project where we brought in Town Council and had them prepare a letter we offered to either bring in Town Council again or if he was willing to agree to the parallels that um this project shared with what we were looking for for um for zoning he ultimately agreed with that position so that we didn't need to involve Town Council which saves us the the town legal fees of bringing Town Council in and he wrote a letter that granted us um a waiver of certain requirements one being the um the buffer from the property line the parking count the um forgetting the third one as I sit here let me just pull it up for my notes Frontage um the frontage because of the amount of space that we have available um given that we're contiguous with Marathon um we had a similar issue with that with um Hopkins because Hopkins is land landlocked and the other one was the landscaped Islands within the um the parking lots to not provide those which has multiple benefits um including it's much easier to snowplow when you're on critical operations and trying to prepare the um the site for kids the next day so he was in agreement with all of those items the most important of those is really the parking in my opinion because um the town planner had reached out to us and expressed that he felt that um under the zoning law we would have to go for a special permit under the way in which the parking was proposed parking is a complicated issue for a couple of reasons one is there is no parking standard in the town bylaws for a school the closest um cons comparable would be for a daycare and given that there is not that comparable the parking calculation is to some degree developed as what's reasonable by the design team and submitted based on standards that are available the standard that was submitted was um one of the things we discussed with the planning board and so as part of that discussion um I think within the working group we agreed that parking should be looked at but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to go through an entire special permit process in order to look at that parking so by embracing the way in which we calculated which is to use the local lot and also the lot at Marathon in order to make that calculation it allows us to move forward and still do what we think is in the Project's best interest to add some available parking but to not have to go through a special permit process in order to do so is advantageous to the project itself and so Dan has been working with his team to develop some of some revised Road configurations and parking configurations and so I'll throw that up on the screen and let Dan speak to that sure hang on before let me just I want to break break this up a little bit so Dan before you go into that does anyone have any questions about the guidance or the approval we received from the zoning enforcement officer as it relates to the do Amendment here okay just wanted to give everybody that opportunity now go ahead all right so we um in getting these comments back about the parking especially I think our team felt that they they weren't really misplaced um we are providing 200 paved spots at the building but the ultimate end goal of the am the amount of staff is around 180 so when this building is fully populated 180 staff minus that uh the handicap spots and any potential other spots that you deem to be for some other use it leaves pretty small margin for any kind of visitors or any other any other use um so we we did really hear that and kind of looked at this again and said well what could we maybe do and what came out of it is this drawing is on the screen right now which is where we felt that we could shift the athletic field um to the west and by Shifting the athletic field we'll be able to split that overflow parking area that existed that we had in the plan from the whole from the start which had 60 or so spaces in it and kind of break that into into two pieces and leave an overflow parking on the west side of that field like we had but take some of that and put it on that Eastern side of the field and pave it and actually provide a more another parking area which is where Chris is circling now so that was kind of part A we also heard when we went to kcom that there was some concerns about our Entry Road and how our Entry Road came in to the uh to the Rotary and then you know went off goes off towards the east side and then it it but it was encroaching before this drawing it was encroaching on that buffer zone for that Wetland and there were questions about like well why can't you guys just shift this thing a few feet or 10 feet or whatever it is and get and and move it out of that buffer zone which we also felt was that was kind of something that was you know legitimate concern like that really was something we thought that does doesn't hurt the project at all to shift this 10 feet get out of that buffer zone avoid that um and provide this extra parking which I think is a benefit to the project because I think you know if we can get you up to I I don't know what the exact number is right now because this is like a work in progress drawing right now that you're seeing um I'm G to Guess that looks like more than 20 spots that that Ashley was able to get I think looks like more like 40 so maybe you're you're going to be 240 or 230 or so paved and then another looks like 30 or 40 in that overflow lot so we thought this was kind of a a real benefit to the project plus kind of a good gesture towards both planning board and the kcom of us doing something that was seemingly my is small but is something that they both would appreciate us getting out of that buffer zone and creating a little more parking kind of breathing room for the future so are there any questions about where direction we're going this this is pretty representative the drawing of the direction that we're going to be going in then did did you add another 20 spots or did you take away some from the Overflow parking um it looks like I it looks to me and I didn't count these yet but it looks to me like she added she did lose lose a few spots in that long lot that's going east west um that one Lo because you have the entrance road to that parking area now right so you lost probably five spots there uh but it looks to me like she's been able to add at least 15 spots more than the Overflow had before so I think overall it sound it looks to me like you're going to be 15 spots or 16 17 more to the good than we were before and so we hope to have this resolved by the time we appear before the committee again so that we can share this update um there are a couple of things that dance team's still analyzing um one of the reasons we had an unpaved lot was to limit the um impervious area so we have to revisit that we don't want to grow that by more than 10% because then we get into a project change notification for meepa so we're trying to avoid that um and so we're looking at the right Middle Ground to to meet all of these things one of the things that Dan um in discussing this pointed out is that while moving this out of the buffer zone is helpful very quickly you start to approach the buffer zone for this Wetland to the north and so it's really about slotting that inappropriately this also preserves the possibility of a future connection to the new development that's coming in with the pered road that's already here so that's something that we can continue to look at although that's not currently inis ised as part of the project it would be a future change or maybe a potential drop off in that neighborhood um as those homes are not sold yet so and we wouldn't be Paving the entire thing we would actually pave the lot the new lot and then up to like the curve of the right by that Wetland and stop and then that road would become what it was always envisioned as which was a a kind of a access road for the fire department and police and so those are the the pieces of this that are still evolving that we hope to finalize by the time we go before the um concom and planning board with a formal modification are there any anticipated cost impacts or is this would this be considered a minor U change from cost I'm going to guess this is going to be more this will be more expensive because that's going to be real a real paved lot with drainage connected to the drainage system and you know curbs and the whole and the other one's just an overflow lot was never envisioned to have any of that so there'll be a cost impact to it I don't know what that exactly is at this point but again I I think overall it's probably a small impact for a pretty big gain and I I think that as we get into the cost impact one of the things that we're going to look at um is we've had a a couple of changes since our last estimate we've had the additional drainage based on the um the planning board set that was added to deal with the a lot of the um high water table issues that we were dealing with now we have this additional parking that's going to be added in there so a lot of those site features we're really going to get an understanding of how much of a cost impact they have as part of the estimating process that's going to kick off um I think beginning next week or 23rd the 23rd um so the 23rd drawings will be released we'll circulate those to this group so you all have a chance to look at them if you choose to comment you're certainly welcome to comment and we'll distribute a um a Excel spreadsheet where you can add your comments and we'll add them to sort of the master comment list um at the end of the day but during that process that everyone is commenting on the updated drawings will also be um estimating them and we expect to have that estimate in early September so we'll bring that back to this group um I believe we're reconciling on September 12th and so we'll bring that back to this group once we have those estimates and if we need to discuss the scope of some of those modifications to bring the project in line with budget expectations we would have that discussion at that time that cost impact would be covered by contingency or does that fall under a different bucket we were one 1.5 million under the um construction budget at the last estimating cycle so the thought is that um the drainage improvements are probably in line with that there may be some addition there um the decision to use con contingency versus um using um scope Cuts is always uh one that's up to the committee the committee would ultimately make the decision about whether they want to scale the design back or whether they want to change the um allocation within the budget we'll also be reducing design contingency which is as we move into 60% so there'll be money because there are things like we don't draw we we just don't then there's money there's contingency held during the design phase and met it out during the estimating process based on where the drawings are at so there's there would be there's a possibility that this would be absorbed by that design contingency okay so the the additional drainage you think is in the 1.5 range and then this additional parking and Paving I know there's not an exact figure but is there a ballpark on that not at this point no okay I mean we were in a good we were in very good shape leaving the DD estimate so I don't think anybody we don't have any none of us at least on the design side and I would speak I think vertex would agree that we weren't in the position where we would be concerned about this no if if anything this likely brings us back to budget reasonably close to budget um in the context of you know we're in the hund I think or were we 123 million yeah the construction estimate so um you know as a percentage of construction I think we're going to be in a reasonable we we believe we'll be in a re reasonable place as a percentage of construction after these changes are added in but certainly we'll be looking at the scope of this as those estimates come in and whether they need to change or be reduced or modified as the project moves forward and ultimately that decision comes back to the esbc when we meet in mid to late September got it thanks and just one last question obviously new to this committee that neighborhood that it's kind of to the right of that parking lot that sorry what that's a yeah that neighborhood is a new development or it's a it's a Toll Brothers development that was permitted about a week before Hopkins was permitted yeah it's happening now termining okay what roads are those is that whan CH where is that right now it's all Forest well it was forested okay so this oh got you on the wrong side it's it's off it's off blueberry development right blueberry got it yeah that's right okay and there's talk of connecting that development in road to the corner of that parking lot is that how I understood there approved subdivision included Road included the road shown okay so I don't have their current plans available um but we have always dis the town after they approved the subdivisions um the this is what was presented I don't know what they're planning on with their current what they're building um because I haven't looked into those permanent plans but the esbc has never made any distinction of connecting to those roads it was something that was brought up recently because the um subdivision has those roads and is moving forward at this point um there there's been casual talk that that's an opportunity for Walkers to get to school via those roads okay but not as a general traffic orun no it would never be a vehicular route okay that seems crazy okay got it okay got it thanks appreciate it it would always be like a walking path at best got got it okay got it thanks always been in existing walking path that way got it thanks now if you expect more pedestrian traffic through that Future Path would that in any way change the the overall layout of the traffic or the movement uh traffic movement for the school for the I think for the purposes of the planning board process that we're going through now the vehicular access to the school is going to remain off of Hayden row um I don't think the design team wishes to imply that we're going to have a vehicular connection at that location because it introduces an extra um complication for the residents who live in that area who may be concerned about that becoming a popular route for parents to bypass Hayden row traffic yeah any other questions so at this point we don't have to take any action related to this um do we need to before we go back before the planning board with it um I don't think action is necessary unless the esbc wishes to take action all of this fits within the um various design discussions that we've had over the course of the job and we continue to have so I think um if something becomes contentious then I would look to the committee to take a position on it um but what I'm reading from this publicly noticed meeting is that the committee is generally okay with proceeding in this direction yeah that's that makes sense and so I do just want to kind of give space for a second so yeah does we've heard some questions some great questions about this do anybody have any current objections to this shift okay then yeah so I think you've got General consensus so I think we can we're good to move ahead okay is that it for permitting uh yep and design updates as well since they're sort of one I say technically it was a design update so um okay so I think what I want to do with regard to um minutes um if there are no objections because we have the little bit of an issue with the July 9th minutes where we don't have enough people to make a quarum who were at the meeting um as I said Chris Everly I I agree with what you got from vertex I would just like to verify it um with town clerk's office so so um I just would prefer to be safe and I think that those you know if we wait another meeting on those minutes it will not be the end of the world um so if if there are no objections I'm going to go ahead and table the July 9th minutes one more time and we'll pick them up in the next meeting um that being said I think we do have enough people who attended the July 25th meeting um so does anyone have any questions or comments or Corrections on actually can whoever is doing the screen share would you mind just taking that down sure yeah thanks um any questions edits Etc to the July 25th 20124 minutes okay okay uh hearing none I would seek a motion to approve the minutes of July 25th 2024 so moved motion by Bill is there a second second second by Tiffany uh we roll call Bill yes Chris Masters yes Jag root I'll abstain since I did not okay and Tiffany yes and so those are approved four Z to one yep and um okay and then I will just confirm the other piece with Town Clerk and we'll get those July 9th ones taken care of as well um do we have any other business tonight I don't believe so you can all Dan's got Dan's got something um passive house has the uh we do have the paperwork from them which for the actual certification just like lead they have a kind of a certification paperwork they send that they want signatory on and it has to be from either the building committee or school or however you want to do it so who would be the person signing the agreement with pass passive house which is the one I think we voted on for the amendment six Chris um passive house certification was not an amendment it was at the last meeting I would imagine passive house would be the 3317 that's the 3317 yep so we voted on that at the last meeting as a committee so if it's just the signature that's really it's a signature I don't know who it is confirming that vote so I would think that's you John okay all right so John I'm gonna have them because they do it electronically so I'll have them send it send to me okay is that also the payment the payment is coming from Susan that's why I [Laughter] asked I don't know if Susan's still with us she is I see her down there so is it Susan or is it John I think John should sign it okay okay then you coordinate that yeah is the building committee chair okay okay I'll see if they can copy you Susan so you know what's going on but I I I can ask I don't know what'll happen worst case we pass along the electronic request for a check and then the check gets that gets processed as an invoice and then that invoice goes back to John to be distributed with uh payment okay so I will look for that all right if there is no other business I would seek a motion to adjourn come on nobody wants to adjourn the meeting so moved Jag rot is there a second second okay um motion by J grot second by Chris roll call vote Bill yes Chris yes Jag rot yes Tiffany yes okay then we are adjourned at 6:47 p.m. um thank you as always to hcam um and thank you all for joining this evening have a good night thank you thank you thanks byebye