##VIDEO ID:Fbz98i6BWzM## call the finance committee meeting to order on Wednesday October 16th um I have with me in the room Andy Oldman Dean htis um myy gron Tom Parkins Peter Twining and Town Administrator Greg federspiel don't see Mike on Zoom he may join us um so the first item on the agenda is is to discuss the long-term capital plan sent us an email which print it but it's not with me so where do you want to start grg that's all right I got it on my phone with the 26 to 30 fiscal year draft make more sense to focus on bonding and the facilities plan okay and hear your thoughts I think that's the harder of the two you know sort of the what I'm calling the regular Capital as I indicated bumped it up closer to the four million range versus three million um that sort of chugs along there are obviously some some issues to resolve but I think the long-term facility planning issues Loom larger take before you make that transition when you go to the three to the four that up with the necessary Road and pipe work I in your opinion does that keep us moving rapidly enough in the direction on pipes and Roads which I think are large part of the three and four for the most part there are some exceptions to that some so Chuck put in the the tapen street project in Bennett Street yes so those were two I think they're both Target around 4 million of piece yes um so those that's why I'm asking the question those don't fit into that that regular category and how do we bit those just again while we're speaking about this area so I put the TA one in um I don't show the better one yet depending depending on what happens with a library so I am showing significant money going to the library assuming it's not getting the but if it does that changes that that frees up half million dollars um and then that can be combined with some other fine tuning to get the Bennett project in the next few years but the benett project can un can withstand that uncertainty that it that it may be able to be substituted in for the library if we get the grant or not okay um just hold on gaale Mike Pratt has joined us via zoom and John round is in the room from the select board thank you go ahead de on tapping um one of the reasons why that was put on hold a couple years ago is because of drainage right away stuff has that been resolved that we can so now we have the green light yeah um so again before little diving into the detail maybe we take a 60,000 foot view of what it's trying to do um so so lot of Big Ticket items here um and Greg before you get which attachment are you looking at so this is the um facility financing plan okay thank so it's the one that has FY 26 all the way out to FY Gail Kathy B from has also joined us in the room sorry I just like to make sure Dani who here so just to explain what this spreadsheet is is trying to show it it's showing um what are potentially the big facility projects over the next 2530 years um we've already approved the the 7.5 million for water and sewer upgrades that's the voters have approved that um so I'm showing that the bond payments start in 27 um it's showing 23 million for for the P pass and and dredging work I'm making some assumptions about that number coming in a little lower because the potential or the p number little lower hopefully because of some grants and litigation so this is without grants necessarily correct that's so that there could be grants in addition to that yes number so about 21 of that is for p f assuming 5 million comes in through grants and 2 million are shared the dredging can I just ask a question about that so is that 2 million for the dredging assuming funds from other areas like Harbor funds are going into this because I think two million for dredging over this time frame is that's just the next grudging project it doesn't include others beyond that and that's assuming 2 million from the state right assumes a million from the state a million from the state but that's looking out to fiscal year 40 so I haven't plugged in another round of dredging beyond that so this dredging I'm showing it being funded 100% through the general fund not through the Waterway fund so making the assumption that over the 10 to 15 years before another phase scks in we would have sufficient funds in the Waterway fund that but the future is it possible to separate out the pfas and the Dron yeah because I see those as completely different they are in my brain I can certainly do that so just going down the list again big assumptions and need a lot of discussions I'm showing DPW garage 22 million ethics Elementary at 27 um new public safety building and some rehab to this building Town Hall about 30 million showing that out in 30 35 kicking in FY 35 um and then the next line U resiliency project seaw walls CT expansions so that is being proposed to be funded over that 25 30e period through Capital exclusions so as debt is retired existing debt and new debt is retired I make the assumption that we will back fill those Debt Service dollars into Capital exclusion dollars for that particular for those purposes now do does that preclude I mean the option earlier about whether we're going to pay off level funded or declining payments does that affect that calculation as well um it will affect it year to year but not not the bottom line total so it it'll alter those year-to-year numbers I mean if we have level funded we won't have that uh shot every year for Capital exclusion right well you'll still see sub decline but yes if you if you level if we do it in all the bonds but we could do it in different yeah okay yep so just to be clear you're looking at that starting 23 years from now roughly 20 22 years from now pretty far out no no I show that so if you go to the bottom of the um spreadsheet that last line if it's if it's a negative number got okay that's those dollars then become available for Capital exclusions okay so it starts in 30 pretty modest amount but then it ramps up fairly quickly one rock in a in a seaw wall yeah so it really it really ks in you know by by 33 and then 34 takes a big jump because we have retired high school so that's and then OPB kicks in exactly and then and then the last big project again it's a big number and it's a placeholder only um but I wanted to see if we could how we could absorb it if we had to is a as a relocation of the sewer plant in late 2040s um for or $70 million price day um and as an exercise it shows that we can do that without um a new rise in taxes at that level because there's enough in the system already but that ass that voters have approved those those previous STS but before we did that we would do a study AB see whether to keep it in place yes yeah so alternative is to build pretty high Dyke around the right around the plant wouldn't cost 70 million to do that right exactly so that is definitely an alternative that we want to take the tires on pretty hard great one question I'm sorry I wasn't listening so we spend about 3 million a year on capital is that outside of this plan completely he's up it to four million well if you weren't listening to that sorry so this facility plan that you see here is strictly what would be done through bonding and is separate from what I call our regular Capital which is again I'm proposing to be in that $4 million range going forward um and do we expect any stake funding for pfas oh we certain we hope to yes okay or it's Federal more could be Federal passord the state but if it's a federal passord the state and the state has discretion as who receives it correct okay so that MBTA right but the breaks on federal so then you see revenues right so so so those are the possible expenditures for Big B ticket items and then and then I obviously make a number of assumptions about revenues so the first line water Capital fee so we instituted a new fee for the meters bringing about bring in about 500,000 a year I'm assuming that we will keep that in place to pay for future water capit and then and then I assume that we would do a similar amount in the sewer with sewer fees ramping up to again about 500,000 and then I show those continuing on the duration of of the years um why are we doing it in fees rather than General taxes again that's a discussion that we can have it's it's you know left left pocket right pocket to be determined right yeah I mean it just I don't know so for for water you know it's it's very similar population right most everyone who's on 90 8% of the town is on on Town water 100% of people paying taxes and it made sense to do the fee because today if we need a new water meter we pay we buy it so it made sense to do the fee for the purposes of the water meter project because we would when I when mine broke I had to pay for a water meter yeah it wasn't you know it was a couple hundred dollars I think that my own inst that didn't include installation I had to install well on sewer it's it's a different store yes maybe a third Maybe maybe half of the homes thought it was two3 could be closer to two said two3 which surprised me% but yes yes in that range the column that's headed term and years is that's the bonds term correct thanks so I so two two different so a 15 year Y and a 30 year I just want to make sure I knew what it referred to and then I I show you my assumptions down below about the annual right service so moving down the revenue line again we are all points of discussion that we need to to come to agreement on um I'm showing CST as a as a new tax revenue phase one in 27 and then phase two kicking in by 2034 there get phase one approved um so then then we show current debt being retired what what how much we're saving each year and reallocating to new bonds um again for the school the same thing retire existing school debt being retired and reallocating uh those savings through new bonds um and then you see this retire liabilities fully funded and and reallocated so that's both the pension liability and the um op liability the Health Insurance liability what year does it come into so again I'm showing that 30 kicking in 35 35 but I thought we were going to pay oped before that I think we will okay little yeah okay not you know the pension may take a couple years longer yeah so I sort of heds my bets and split the split the difference and just remind me again Greg the pension impact is affected by health care so if Health Care Rises you every year we wait for the Health Care number and that does Drive the opep embedded cost yes so that's just something to keep in mind here that is a wild card a little bit yes and we're about to going to return to likely double digit inflation on health insurance hold on um Mike Pratt your hand is raised yeah I just had a quick question for Greg um you know leaving aside you know whether it's a deck exclusion or a capital exclusion or the regular two and a half like is there's somewhere in here where you can see kind of the the Allin yearof a-year percentage increase right so if you look at the very bottom of this spreadsheet line 22 look at line 22 it shows the projected taxing increase for just the bonding line line 22 of which I'm looking at something that's got like 90 rows 100 yeah look at the spreadsheet that's is titled facility financing yeah oh not CIP okay yeah yeah okay so it it shows three painful years it shows 27 28 and 29 as having to increase taxes for to pay off to start paying off new bonds so it show roughly a 3% increase in 27 due to bonds a 6% increase in 28 and then a 5% increase in 29 so you're looking at um 13 14% tax increase if we were to move forward with this plane and is there any reason why we couldn't defer the DPW garage I know they want it but that would be an option I mean pfas we can't defer can you delay you know can you yes I all of this is up to up to uh you know different options can you put that off for three years I mean yes you could um or do it for less than projected right so that's all part of the discussions are there different are there different projects that come in less money um Etc so again lot of lot of issues to resolve you but I'm just trying to present right um a scenario that says okay if we make these assumptions about these are the costs of the projects that's one big assumption right and then assumption about the year they take place another big assumption and then how we pay for it and there's projected taxing for on top of the two and a half when try to stay under so that's what that's exactly what I was going to ask so you add two and a half to all those to those three numbers correct right or slightly less right two two two to two and a half certainly has gener our history now you know again you can say all right we're going to work really hard to reduce operating costs and and try to find savings so so we can drive more money in the capital so again that's part of the discussion here about what what is possible but but but if you add that two and a half you get 5.4 eight and a half and 7.4 or cumulative it's like over 21% over those three years that's right painful now when we talk about the public safety building we've got that in there for 30 million plus Town rehab so it's less than three um do we have the land put it on or is that a potential fact that we would need land so again we need to kick the tires on different options yeah um if if DPW were to go up to the Old Post site public safety potentially could go to where BPW is now um alternatively you might be able to squeeze Public Safety and DPW up at the compost site um have to see if that's Fe y um could you put Public Safety at Sweeney Park and have new field someplace else yeah you know again lots of different scenarios here um and and they all to be explored yeah and they all impact the cost exactly right for sure so Greg a question sort of about capacity here I mean we look at roughly 225 million over 25 years and then we're we're doing three to four million annually which is another 75 to 100 you know we're looking at over 25 year period 300 to 325 million which is a lot um I'm just wondering about our capacity to deal with that and that and I know 25 years is a long time but that's a that's I mean if you think about it in as a as a ratio of annual run rate it's like 8X of the year's budget it's a lot of a lot of change and a lot of uh management you know a lot a lot of things have to kind of come into a line to do this absolutely the the unfortunately I think we also have a lot of pressure not just because of age of structures but because of what's happening with sea level rising storms right so Public Safety is in real danger um being flooded out and not being available to provide their services in that emergency because they're they're flooded out and can't operate um the sewer plant we've got to figure out something for that sewer plant to continue out maybe we can get away with a much less expensive approach by that building by making it a basically um need to explore that further and and both of those kind of wind into um doing something about the town hall lot and whether we can put some lightweight fill and start doing something in the interim or whether it has to be a dyke or you know that might affect the success of doing something in the interim like that might determine how soon we have to move Bond yeah yes absolutely I know they're not in the bond part they're going to be in the capital part but some of that will have to be B yeah that's a big i' got that again that sort of catch off 45 million for different resiliency projects um and what's going to be possible to get permits for right all of this stuff again a lot of variables yeah are the um permitting agencies G to change their tune and be a little more rapid in their response um given sea level rise and so those discussions are happening okay a lot of lot of communities are are knocking on G's door and the governor's door saying look something's got to give you we need either we need a more flexibility and be more definitive quicker responses so that we can start moving these projects so it's hasn't been resolved but the questions are being asked so hey Greg you have in fiscal 27 that's the DPW building 2.45 million am I reading that right got 22 million yeah rounded rounded to 22 yeah sure in fiscal 27 we're starting the bond payments I'm just looking at a summary Capital plan and it shows a column fiscal 27 facilities 21.4 five million right so again we're we're on the facility financing one which is a little shows the financing of that Debt Service it does show it in 27 yeah it implies that the project has started probably the year before and is yeah realistically you know 26 is going to be the design year and and all things aligned it would get started 27 so I've got that a little early in terms of pain I just I don't I don't see how realistically we can even entertain the thought of that in fiscal 27 given the cost of past and like you said you know Emergency Services got to move get moved away from seawater um water treatment like I that's that seems crazy so there's a bit of a domino effect though because the the the first Domino to fall in the planning that's been done would be the DPW garage to free up that space on um on Pleasant Street now What Becomes of that space you know again if if one option because of the problems of making a good field at Sweeny is so problematic some new thinking is perhaps we look for a new place for for the field and use sweee for a building location smaller foot trint you can deal with the water more space to deal with the water um but again that that needs engineering that's it's uh part of the work that needs to be done I I had felt that DPW current area would be good for like between the cemetery expansion a ball field and maybe some housing around the side you know it seems like a good thing to look at for that area because it's so you know there's so many residences that would be good for all but it it points to a more specific study that evaluates the different permutations of things and you know I mean certainly I don't I think we all kind of echo Mike's comment you know just you know it's hard to it's hard to otherwise rationalize the DPW garage survives the priority discussion when it comes to you know pasas and um you know it may be too um too weighty a process to make the public safety dependent upon a solution for DPW right you know we might have to just pursue Public Safety independently which means it doesn't go on Pleasant Street just just to right throw one thought out there but um right they are inter but they are interrelated so yeah yeah well potentially yeah they are and they're not I me they're only interrelated if Public Safety relies on DPW being relocated from its current spot yeah right to to build on what Andy just said there has to be you know there's always a plan ABCD so if plan a is using the the lot on Pleasant Street let's look at a plan B and C you know whatever whatever that is you know I don't building up the Foundation or seaw wall or I you know whatever I'm not the civil engineer but you know again plan b c and d and when we do that Central Street Culvert what impact is that going to have on the area around the fire station it'll help a little okay it's it's not going to help in the big big stor yeah it's G to it's going to prevent it from flooding in the smaller storm that it currently floods now but it won't protect it from the you know the 500e storm it seem a regular basis but anyway um what's happening that parcel of land on School Street that church is supposed to go up the church is still planning to go there still that's still I mean I agree that that would be a nice we actually talked to them recently and their plan is still to raise sufficient money they're still in the raising money phase but their plan is still to build the church out there and they don't want and the right they don't they don't want like any housing with it or anything they want to use the entire person is there do I recall there was a right of first refusal held by the town on that parcel or is that now expired there was one on the Cornerstone Church in that expired many years ago so it was for three years and I don't go ahead question Greg did did you explore it all it was brought up a little bit earlier putting together Public Safety and DPW with the former Black Earth site is that at all possible is there enough space there there could be we we don't know for sure but yes it's worth exploring develop yeah but it's all in one place which which builds some efficiencies in there yeah yeah I I think when we chuck chuck is on the line I think he's he's had some conversations with with our Engineers on that oh Chuck go ahead sorry just looking for the mute button uh so like right now we have a kind of preliminary design contract where we're investigating the School Street site we have uh Geotech and Survey going on there we'll delineate the wetlands at the bottom uh I'm definitely going to look further into you know collocating the public safety with the DPW however uh it just it needs to be said that the the way to do it would be to put the public safety portion building somehow situated along the frontage probably right at the corner where school and Atwater meet so there's a little bit of a shelf there and a lower uh you know lower profile than the you know higher up area where the you know current comp files are that would to to site any building down there would require the um LCD you know planning board zba special permit process that would allow a building to be there there that's currently not allowed that's why it wasn't really heavily considered in the facility master plan uh to do that kind of goes in the face of everything that has been said already when it was vetted out for CST and the site for that facility from 128 and so on as well as obviously the 40b that was on across the street at Shingle Hill as well as the you know the rock removal that had been going on for CST and the uh consternation that that caused the neighbors you know that would also be part of that project so I would say that anything is possible certainly at this level we can we can certainly make it work but there are significant hurdles that I see ahead of time that you know kind of gets us bogg down in some of these projects where uh you know the it it sounds good on paper it works on paper it works with the select board and the fincom but then there's these other special interests that will uh determine whether or not that project can go forward and at what cost uh it would also take you know some Wetland uh conservation you know muscle to to do to do something in that spot so I I think it's a you know bigger uh bigger conversation at a town level at at some Point um but you know these are some of the pitfalls that we get into when we think about it you know at this level and not uh you know further down the road so um I guess that that's just my tale of caution on that one um we will look at it it's part of the LCD yes oh okay but it's no different from the compost site up a higher as far as allowing zoning it's the same yeah okay that's what I thought so but the the setbacks from the road are what are what it will require and you know it's not an ideal location from the from the public safety perspective in terms of response times and you know being kind of not in the kind of center of town which even if it went to Pleasant Street it wouldn't be in the center but you know we're just getting C you know further away and more in the single point of failure type of you know scenario if you know a tree comes down across School Street you know things like that are you know things that Public Safety thinks about you know more in terms of uh their response time and effort in that way so you know again it's totally possible totally feasible but there are significant buyin that we would need you know to to really bring that forward for the town parking lot I I think our options are so limited in term exactly we have to consider everything right yeah I agree it's yeah I'm totally on board I just you know that need to be said just going back to the plan at hand did you kind of do any banding on this to sort of say okay in an absolute best case scenario this 225 number might be 200 or 180 and then in the absolute worst case I'm wondering what that error envelope looks like it because 25 years is a long time and you know if we have a problem with like raval Pond or our water supply because of something or a some other peas comes rolling along in the next 10 years you know um plans change so I look I look at this as being at least plus or minus 50% yeah because say you know there's lots of things I mean in 70 years I mean we'll probably have to be doing some projects on the schools again um and so right upd we're replacing we're doing you know potentially other things yeah so I mean it's good to list out what we can thoughtfully you know identify today yeah but um it's you know this is Stratosphere level which I think is still useful to do difficulty you know making this with any Precision yeah absolutely it's I don't think we can hold anybody to but and you know you've you've taken a step Abit identifying a start time or some of these things which I think is helpful you know it's it's it's um you know it gives us something to think about and and relative to the other priorities and the and the urgency of things that you know jeopardize the town's basic functions you know needing to take precedence over things that are you know wants and desires yeah to to say the same thing that Andy just said like I would hope that this is you know if you thinking of bookends this is this is the right bookend the worst case scenario and you know like I mean if any like hopefully there's a way to come inside of this right it's up to 10% of our budget construction costs are going up and perating it's gotten more difficult and so if you if you follow these Trends I'm not not sure this is a book end but it's a great starting place I mean it's a it's a data point in the ground and I mean I mean obviously I'm a private sector guy I know there's other people on the committee private sector but you think of a leverage ratio I mean I'm thinking you're talking 40 million a year right roughly is annual Town revenue and this is over 5x right I mean I know it doesn't happen all at once but still that's that's not a good leverage ratio it will be up to 10% of the budget by you know the 8 million a year Debt Service that's assuming you taking all that debt and don't get dinged on a on a rating which like I believe you would Greg what did you maybe have on this plan that you didn't put onto this plan if anything um so the like I say the the Bennett Street isn't on there um and sort of future Bennett tap and type projects yeah we're not on here um we trying to fund some pipe work in in the regular Capital by taking the year off and doubling up that type of thing so it's light on pipe replacement um it doesn't have a major Library renovation or expansion um Bol part what are you thinking about there like what's that rough number well sorry to you know not I I know the Tres have Brandy something in mind and I think you know if we if we have the new Mason building come online for meeting space and programming space library is two doors down I think that that could right solve that particular problem so you know I think the library probably could could change pretty significantly and I think the Assumption in the funding for the library was if they got the state grant that the majority of the money could be raised via donations right I think so between the between the significant State Grant and donations you are likely to cover lion Shar the state Grant goes out the window if the MBTA Zing doesn't pass um just like so many other things and there's nothing in here for the senior center you're assuming assuming that's privately funded what happens if it isn't would it be in regular Capital so this has really caught the big items all foreseeable big items um equipment Rolling Stock all fits in annual pipes car yes surfaces yeah um it captures the bulk of the big ticket [Music] item so in some ways I think this terms of the Continuum this is more of a worse case than right least expensive case so we're we're paying for one school we're paying for two schools at the moment and probably by 20150 we'll be looking pretty seriously at a replacement for the I school because at that point it'll probably be about 40 years old hopefully but you know I think it we've sort of thought about this a year or two ago that we'll always be kind of thinking about school we build one and one drops off and soon as it drops off kind of think about the next one now enrollments going down but major renovation yeah you know but that sounds like that might be like in 2051 or shortly after this plan is sp commun is has hinted at you know multi-million five million plus minus renovation at the high school in the 30s some yeah but that gets effectively absorbed into our annual operating with debt with the school so again I don't specifically show that but do you take some of that Capital exclusion money to to do that for one year if you need to I'm just sort of try to look at it from the point of view of banding is what happens to this number in best case worst case yeah I think yeah I think DPW garage is the elephant in the room what DPW G to the elephant in the room as to when it makes sense to start that yeah unfortunately I mean it is it is a a need yeah but it just it doesn't uh doesn't rise to the same urgency as some other things at the moment not you know when you see that fiscal year 28 6% increase that's painful lot you know I me where Public Safety you know as as mentioned if they if they the whole thing got done as one yeah and there was some you know certainly uh cost efficiency in in approaching the whole thing that way well it's my understanding that there's funds available in the state for like building DPW garages and building Public Safety facilities I mean Rockport got something very its DPW facility that is afraid of losing they got an ear Mark for that um the state has um you have to apply it right but the state has um discussed the bill was written that it didn't go anywhere okay to create a municipal building fund similar to the msba okay um I there's a good chance that something like that will happen over the next five years y you know takes a while for these ideas to course I don't know if that just increases the overall cost I was GNA say money comes with strings does but there I think just based on the msba guideline there's a lot of sense to the strings the reason the whole msba process came about was because some school projects just going off into some crazy Direction and so the msba kind of really it defines a process and it puts some limits on it but there are some it's a push pull thing for sure not Sol on that based on what I've seen in some of my prior towns the numbers are staggering um if you're going to speak you need to speak Lou sorry yeah no side comment okay should we move on to the other report so the the spreadsheet as I said it focuses on that I call the regular Capital it does show those big bonds but the focus is [Music] those smaller items those annual item so again the the summary page lists the five years and the totals you know first the expenses and then and then the revenue sources for each year and so you'll see obviously that the bonding comes into play so and then each each year then is has its own spreadsheet has its old tab in the spreadsheet so um and they're pretty similar each year so you know DPW we have road we have equipment we have uh you know drainage and sidewalks um sort of standard every year items now have we made an effort to reexamine our time frames for replacing equipment and vehicles so I think it's something that gets fine- tuned okay um and for example the fire fire engine replacement schedule yeah has been fine tun the last year and this this can this assumes that that schedule is is going forward but you know I would think with the police vehicles going to Electric that that would extend out the replacement frequency and I don't know where we are on patrol cars for electric yeah they're not there yet okay um we do have the hybrids now but the for okay for the front line P trol cars they're not there yet for full electric they should be another couple years did we buy a full electric we have two full electric ad okay it must have been fine yeah there are police departments in other cities that have yes done those Frontline vehicle so do we understand the difference I think between what we're looking for and what they seem satisfied with I don't have a good sense on that especially out west you know in the western part of the country that more of a willingness to go that route so I a I know what the um the last DPW meeting Chuck was explaining how like on the warrant we won't have tap and Street reconstruction specifically we'll have it under that 4.5 million would go under Road resurfacing drainage and sidewalk and like pipe replacement or all the things that wind into it it would go under that so that he can have more flexibility so is the extra 450 for Road resurfacing is that um a contingency in addition to those are separate so so the taen would be a stand alone right so that has a $4.5 million all-in project both water and sewer pipe Replacements drainage right upgrades and repaving would be a item on the on the um the specific item on the warrant or it would just he was saying that it would go under the generic items even though that's what it's for we wouldn't we wouldn't we wouldn't itemize out pipes versus the drainage versus the paving it would be 400 4.5 million Bond request for that project but it seems to me that on the larger DPW projects just like any other project that they should be identified separately and have the money allocated to them separately right so that does this so it wouldn't be added in like he's talking about it would be a separate separate yeah so the tab and Street reconstruction be a separate item on the warrant as a bond it would have to be a separate okay I think there's a different thing we're driving at here which is the specificity this is what Dean listen very carefully it is how much specificity there is behind the money allocation there's a lot of lack of specificity currently which we may desire we may desire but no but bear me out yeah which is the question is how much specific there there are extremes here ladies and gentlemen but that that is a important planning issue in the implementation as Dean pointed out the specificity now is fairly General and allows for therefore monies that turn out to be available under that General project to be used in the example of pleasant to do walker uh it can be applied within the same language now that's something we want or not it's misleading to the taxpayers and I think with the larger projects they should be identified separately just like all the other large projects are and if they have acccess money it goes back that you don't use it for other things um because the money was approved for Pleasant Street in a year when it wasn't used for Pleasant Street it was used for walk a road instead and and I just think that for the I'm not talking about the little stuff I'm talking about the large projects that I think they need to be identified separately and the money has to go for that project and therefore they have to fine-tune the calculation on the request as to what they money they really need for that project because right now there's no incentive to finetune a calculation because they know if they overstate it they're just going to use it for something else instead of losing it that's where I'm coming from on I know that's where you're coming from the question is one of management and the question is how tight do you want to we force that on every other department and Chuck has his hand up too that'll be Chuck yeah so I guess you know I can expand on this a little bit I think Dean and uh Peter you know thank you you they kind of hit it where where I was going with it is you know I don't I don't mind if you have a $4 A5 million appropriation for tapen Street to put it towards tapen Street my problem is that in the implementation if it comes in at 4.6 what do I do and the answer is so far the way I've been able to accommodate these issues is to like have a generic road maintenance line or a drainage and sidewalk line and so if I need $100,000 extra in this you know in this situation to finish the sidewalk then i' ought to have that money available and so I think that you have mindes ex yes and so that's why so it's it's a little of column A and A little column B like like Peter just said it's um you know there needs to be a understanding that it takes a lot of things to go right to get these projects done School Street is a you know my go-to example right now because uh you know that was a probably three to 4ish million doll project but you will not see a three or four million appropriation for School Street in any of our previous budgets because I handled it on a looking forward year two years three years out and I was able to accumulate the appropriate amount of chapter 90 funds and pipeline pipeline work funds and roadway funds and all of that stuff so if there had been a$3 million or $4 million School Street appropriation I you know I would have still needed those other generic lines to make sure that the entire project came done because we will hear it the other way if I go back to town meeting five times for School Street like that doesn't that doesn't look very good and it doesn't instill confidence in the work we're doing but I will tell you very much there is there is an incentive for me to keep these projects on schedule and on budget and I worked very hard to do that and so I I hope that we all appreciate app that it it does take a lot of work to get that done and I don't you know I don't get to keep the money I don't you know it goes right back into the next roadway or the next sidewalk or the next pipeline or so on so that that is my incentive to keep these going and if we came in at tapen Street at 4 million you know in a scenario where that's all generic lines and I had half a million left that would go right into Bennett Street the following year I again I don't I don't keep it uh so like I again I don't care if there's a four and a half doll appropriation for top and Street I just need to you know make sure everyone's aware and we're very open and transparent about that I'm not trying to hide anything it's just this is the reality of getting these types of projects done and I think we have a track record now that these projects do get done and they get done on time and they get done on budget and same thing happened with Walker Road and Pleasant Street I didn't go back for an additional you know $5 million or whatever for Pleasant Street I used a certain amount of money to get Walker Road done because it was a need and I went back to for the appropriate amount of Pleasant Street funds to get that job done as you see it constructed now we also were looking at other alternatives for you know other Road space in Pleasant Street as you all know for if we needed to send pest or you know Lincoln Street wellwater up to grav Pawn so there's a lot of moving parts that I need to be able to uh you know pull from these buckets and everything but there needs to be a certain amount of uh discretion to get them done and that is that is the bottom line and if if we go the other way I'm I'm afraid that it won't work as well I'm not disagreeing with that Chuck but the philosophy of the finance committee is to tax the taxpayers for current expenses and it's not to put a number out there and say okay I'm going to tax the taxpayers this year and if I have $500,000 Le extra I'm going to use it next year or I'm going to score save up money for three years to put it against a project because that just goes contrary to what our philosophy is and for every time we build a building there's a specific amount and I think for the larger tpw projects there could be a specific amount well we get unit price items for all of this work so like in the in the other example right now for Pleasant Street we designed additional work for Pleasant Street extension and for uh old SX road so like that work is now included in that appropriation but I never I was never specific to you know if we'd be it's all comes down to the big climate at the time the numbers for the budget are just the budget there's a whole level that comes after the budget so I appreciate that that's your uh you know approach but like that that's not reality like reality is that we need to we need the money available when I need to spend it and we need to have the money available at the beginning of the job to sign the contracts so like I get what you're saying but like that's just not the reality um I I'm I'm happy to give you the the budget of 4 and a half million or whatever the project is but that's not necessarily how it's going to be executed and I think it's worked so far and like I said there you know if if you want to call it a threshold that we go above it certainly you know it makes sense I guess if there's a bond but if the bond is not enough I will need those other discretionary funds to to pay for the work okay thank John any question Kathy yes I had a question um so Sarah you mentioned the larger DPW projects did you have a dollar threshold in mind um what might con because I I agree with the philosophy of the fincom it's been you know how we ran things in private sector so but usually we had some sort of a dollar threshold or duration in mind that we could Clearly say okay these types of projects need that Clarity that definition I think I think we would need information on what specific projects have cost what the numbers are around that in order to to make that think that might help with the discussion though if you had you know right so if I could chime in because I I I think the way that Chuck I I recognize that Chuck is doing what he needs to do to kind of Advance the work that needs to happen in town and there is a lot of fluidity in the in the construction Market relative to pricing in the bid Market at any given time can be can vary um and you know maybe and I'd like to continue to get I I understand I respect the policy but but I'd like to be able to give him and uh the the flexibility to to do his job as he advises us he needs to do it if there's ways we can come up come up with you know being a little bit more upfront with the taxpayers maybe a project um gets identified as um Pleasant Street and here are two other contingent uses y you know kind of kind of an approach um and and maybe also sharing with them hey this is our best guess at what the what the value of this work might be um but this could this could be plus or minus 20 % um and so in order to accommodate that if it goes plus 20% we have this other chapter 90 money save maybe we report that chapter money chapter 90 savings or any other sort of acrude money on a year-to-year basis just comment on that um so at the federal level the way that's done for really large billion dollar projects is you have a risk and opportunity register and when you're planning a project you outline the risks and opportunity you dollarize it and you use that bottom line figure to develop your contingency budget for that particular project that way the money stays clear and delineates one project from another yet you're still transparent about any high-risk items or things that could go over a traditional budget so you don't you don't peanut butter spread you know 10% contingency 5% no% contingency you figure out based on a a reg risk register okay I think we beat this into the ground so sir I do have a question yeah probably just diving into the question about are we front loading this Capital plan or how is it going and I'm just looking at fiscal year 26 and the largest Capital requests are of course with DPW and and that's the building and tapen Street reconstruction but that that comes in at about almost 7 and A5 million in the next year the the the budget year we're going to be talking about very very shortly the next biggest item on this list is the harbor and I'm wondering how much of this is current or can be defrayed but that's numbers like six million let's put that off until we actually talk about capital okay let's not get into the weeds tonight well the only reason I ask is that when you add this year up we're talking about 11 right and when you look at the overall plan if you're bonding to start in fiscal 26 at 11 as opposed to eight or six or something that's just what I'm asking about here yeah the total request for 26 can me it just over 20 million right right but the next call but look at the next I'm recommending just and so one of that is from Taxation and fund so they've taken off the Sweeney turf field the big thing in the harbor is a boat do we need a Bo the the you know that's that's all Grand funded down the road I just took that out completely and and the dredging you know again I deferred that until 27 and you a third of that comes to gr can I can I just ask what is the tapen street project basically a replacement of all pipes meaning storm water water and sewer and reconstruction of the roadway and what's and what's the ballpark cost yeah four four and a half million four to four and a half million and when when are we thinking of doing that so I'm showing that being bonded in 27 so that's three years out roughly oh no two two fiscal years out two fiscal priscal how many calendar two or the other around fiscal years are like halfway into the current year so we're currently in fiscal year 25 right now but we haven't gotten to calendar year 25 yet so we so fiscal so fiscal 25 we're in we're saying caen street is fiscal 27 so basically two years yeah right oh we'll be planning fiscal year 27 a year from now yeah a year from now we'll be talking about it 12 months from now we'll be talking about it time accelerates well and I thought that you started projects before you paid for the bonds you do yeah typically do we need the bond we need the bond authorization okay okay but we don't pay for them right so that those percentage tax increases are misleading again right there some fine tuning that can happen stretch those out in in order to put a project out to bid we have to have authorized the bond right but they don't actually issue the bond until they're into the project and that's when we start completed you can do Bond anticipation not and that's when we pay from our taxes is when they actually issue the bonds not when they do the project so help me out here so I'm just thinking of the school as an example we do an override and both towns vote on it and our tax rate goes up before before the project no okay yeah two years two two years later typically can we stretch that out me what's the B so can you get authorization for a bond to get going on a project but then actually build a taxpayers like five years out or is that too far you I think you can I'll have to double check there's a limit on years you can push it out you're just incurring more interest because you're your ban you're paying just interest you're not paying any principal so you'll you'll incur more interest but you're delaying with the pain yeah it's just kind of working to what you're talking about which is how do you give this team more flexibility don't reach at the taxpayer quite as early right right so again that that's the kind of different scenarios you can look at um going back to that bonding spreadsheet cost you something to do that which is the interest that's charge too okay so are we good on this yep thank you we obviously want to spend some time each looking at it you know so again there's a lot of information a lot of assumptions um Kick the tires pretty hard on this one and you know when we meet again we can you know dive that much deeper have the Selectmen looked at this or they getting they'll get their first look on Monday and what's likely to be our next step in this discussion Sarah well what do we what do you feel we need to do we need to begin to together selection decide on how we're going to put this together in the priority of the items because the priority is all it's all about the priority of the items right and what information do we need to in order to prioritize the items that's the question that's the discussion I think so input from the select board after they have an opportunity to hear it feedback from voters it would seem like finance and board and should focus on A Five-Year Plan um with a fair amount of intensity yes and then a 10-year plan with some degree of flexibility and then we should look at Greg's 25e plan and not go holy crap we didn't expect us you know and that that's kind of the world I agree with you on that Mor I'm just saying I think that fiveyear is a discussion with the selectman once they have a chance to look at it with the intensity you're talking about is I think it means setting the priorities of the various pieces here okay so we're through a long-term capital plan for tonight right right okay the next is the review of the MBTA communities act fiscal analysis which I apologize I sent out very late because it was very late before it was completed and recalculated as I looked at the numbers I said something's not right and I had erroneously done calculations that full buildout based on 224 instead of 324 units looks like I didn't fix the typo in one of them yeah um so as I was doing this my thought process was because there's so much contention around that rkg report and whether 34 units is reasonable and all that I thought well it makes sense to do it do the numbers based on that and also the worst case scenario of full buildout so that people can't complain say we were cherry picking that's kind of where I was coming from but but as I look at it when you talk about the the full buildout of 324 units it seems to me it probably makes more sense that that would be over 20 years not 10 oh so your question on that was to apply 20 as to all numbers in other words the full build out you just you you or the for the larger number the larger number of units only for the 20 and the smaller the three 134 for 10 I'm I'm just confused over what which numbers do you want to apply we can do it either way um but it's certainly 134 versus 324 you're not going to have built in the same time frame right I I I thought your question was a good one and I thought it should apply only to the 324 that is that was where my mindset was coming from okay I I yeah I I think I think first of all I like the approach of showing the two scenarios like I think that's a good thing but I I think that I think that these units could get built a lot quicker than people think because you know we're trying to compare it to the way things have gone and sure right historically you know I don't even know the numbers I'm sure Sarah you know how many you know additional units per year but but that's it's kind of apples to oranges because it it hasn't been able to be done just by right right it's been you know permits and zba and D so this is it's a different it's a different world so I think they could get built a lot quicker you think the other thing Mike is when you're talking construction and all the stuff I'm looking around you don't even complete something for two years after you've bought purchased the land so you're really talking about the first units probably won't come on for two years and so that's kind of why I think it does spread out a lot because you know you either you know you might have to acquire the property that takes a while um or if you have the pro just everything seems to take forever to build I mean I how long I think someone on the committee actually lives in bliman ccle right but how how long did that take I didn't think it took that long and that's what like Eight houses 10 houses where you live do you know how long the construction process was mean for blindman Circle yeah yeah yeah exactly years 10 years 10 years house was done in 16 and I think they started by the discussions on the inquiring the land in six now how long the approve the planning board took I can't give you specifics yeah I'm talking more just actual I understand that that that land had a lot of right permits and all that kind talking from when that all settled like when they started digging foundations to you know sell in the homes but anyways I I I just think when money's at stake and a profit is to be made you know um I think things can get done quickly I don't know how long Sawmill Circle took and Michael you asking for when they started building houses or when they started acquiring the land yeah yeah I'm I'm talking from when they put the first backo on the ground to dig a foundation to when they had a sales I think that was about seven years if I look at the permits that apply look at the dates on on when the discussion started I think it's more like seventh it's 10 when you're talking about buying the land in that level yeah so are there other comment are there any comments on this would you like more time to look at it and send me comments I I I haven't really read it afraid I have't I'm not going to be effective um how pressure are you under to get this to them that's that's the question so the public hearing is on October 28th and meeting packets are done on October 24th so I would say I need to get this done by Monday or Tuesday of next week so we send one of our comments yeah we'll just send you comments yeah send me comments yeah like the 22nd or 23rd or something like that um 21st and 2 yeah okay thank you Sarah while this is all fresh in your mind yeah um the potential loss of Grants can you tell us how you calculated that what the what you do as a percentage of town activity or did you specifically up the the task force had done calculations which were assuming an average of 1.8 million over the next three years so I round it down to 1 to two million and then I also listed under the grant section um the potential areas where we could receive grants I I think that the concern with grants is people want to to look at history a lot and I think the and of course in 2024 was 4 million but three and a half million of that was for water and sewer enhancements for LCD so that was unusual however I think that as we have more Capital infrastructure projects more climate res resiliency and the state has put aside 300 million I think out of some fund to use as M matching grants to secure more Federal monies and if they get the federal grants then they allocate them out at the state level so they're not federal grants anymore um so there's no need for a local n local match is covered by the state state yeah right okay so um there seems to be I think this one to two million a year is probably low um I think there's much more opportunity for Grants but I wanted to be conservative and and I think that the town has increased its grants recently because we hired somebody to do Grant right I mean so they're paying more attention um and we don't know what the numbers I mean I was just kind of going to the total other end of the extreme from our conversation a few minutes ago about you know 225 million over 25 years divide that annually and say okay what's the percentage there and percentage is all over the map but it probably would come in a little more than a million or two but I don't know um I certainly can add into the verbiage that there's 224 million of infrastructure I mean if that's our um infrastructure needed you know I I I I think it's very dangerous to speculate on what might happen you know I mean like I I agree with the point that if you look at history it's lumpy and so to try to like do a regression and say what is history gonna do going forward that's risky but I also I think it's more risky to just speculate and say we think that this is going to happen in the next three years I mean I don't I don't like speculating on interest rates or stock market like you know cuz who knows I mean so maybe the better approach is like you said on the number of units and you you know position it as book ends and you say you know it could come in at this but it could come in at this right so it could come in at zero and it could come in at two three four I don't you know whatever I mean so over the last 10 12 years youve had a grand total of about $22 Million worth of GRS now of those of that 22 million five plus are very definitively labeled as as GRS that could have been withheld under the three original Grant sources that the law states the challenge we have here is that that list has expanded and we don't know what's going to happen going forward that maybe area where the court sort of Reigns in the state a bit they're going to do any reigning in under the Milton decision they they say look the law said these three and no more you can't you can't do more than that I don't know again we're spe and I disagree with that to some extent because I think that grants that the state gives out are discretionary and they have a whole bunch of criteria and I don't see why they can't have one one of the criteria that they look at is did you comply wouldn't be it wouldn't be a reason to deny it it would just be a factor in determining under a competitive Grant of determining whether you qualify but it's not a denial which is different than what I mean the legislation says you you can take these grants away but I also think that they can use their muscle to say okay we're going to take that into consideration um but know and for example they just announced last week or may week week and a half ago new grants that are incentive Grant so for those of you who have complied you can apply for those infrastructure monies but it's specifically targeted to folks who have complied so it's just it's a moving Target the only thing that some of the towns they're issuing grants and saying these are conditioned upon compliance right so so the library grants that we just applied for yeah they're waiting to announce the the decision they delay the announcement pending the December 31st deadline s Sarah just a very specific comment along these lines in the grants area the second paragraph that closing sentence these could add up to millions of dollars I think goes in the right directions but it's too weak so I'll I'll change that to 224 million or or or say we have 224 million of infrastructure yeah I would go to where Mory was a few minutes ago which is to put into more detail because it's just we have a two things going on a changing circumstance which I think is the resiliency issue and I think part of this paragraph is in the is trying to predict the future which I know can't be predicted but it just seems too too soft okay yeah right well I was under the impression it was state grants from the state budget but what Sarah is saying it might influence federal grants as well if it's if it's blow through the state yeah because the state has full discretion on who they give it to which is and there's tons of grants that are that way yes and I think that's part of what you're trying to get out here we need to say it just a little more forcefully I okay we we should be careful about the figure that we draw yeah I'm not asking about figures I'm just tone we don't know what the worst case best case is I mean I I could I say that this could have to millions of dollars particularly given the fact that we've got over2 200 million dollar worth of infrastructure future infrastructure projects planned for the future coming okay that would have a bigger impact would you could you also say and resiliencies becoming a brand new topic of concern yep I don't know if you want to go this far but there seems like there's three things that are really driving our Capital plan resiliency water quality or water delivery and then um infrastructure buildings and it's a little hard to duck from any of those yeah but but those are the drivers so people aren't thinking oh they just want to buy a lot of fire trucks that's not and of course buildings include schools I mean I don't want people forget that we've got school Renovations and other things that come into play here right okay when can we expect some result from the Essex Elementary Study like that was going to determine how fast Essex was going to go as well it's not as oh the feasibility study yeah um so that's probably going to be a year long or so process to get to the point of understanding what the project uh budget would be that then goes before town meeting in each time yeah so there's not much chance of that happening you know I would think that it's yeah I would think I mean there's a lot to be done it's a small project though ably speaking right uh look at Lexington High School yeah right but uh it's you know usually these things present at like a November town meeting a vote uh it's possible it could run through to the next spring but I would say sometime in the next year and a half well to 18 months yeah to be clear on this so you comments to you by Monday yep that would be great y and if I have concerns over any of the comments I will talk to people to see where they're coming from on their comments summary of the select board fiscal year 26 priorities do we have a to-do list from that um last yeah I don't think anything specific came out of it okay more just kind of hearing what we were what we talked about okay a little more high level this valuable to me because I wasn't there neither was I okay so I'm I mean anything you can offer I but it will be in the minutes okay okay right fine I just I wanted was an affirmation of the longrange Capital planning being a high okay there's pretty much agreement across the board on on that yep um I think M and Andy both spoke to some of the challenges of making that the definitive plan that that you know that's in St it isn't so there's there's always that challenge play yeah right that's quick sand recall there was any discussion about priorities specifics no no well they did mention the big three and and the DPW was in so that does have support so it was Essex Elementary p and DPW were the big three they were talking about I believe right well and we kind of summarized that you know our our Focus tends to be on DBW fire right we also sort of said that a lot of times we start a process of evaluating things but we don't know what the political wins and I think encourage the Selectmen to try and feret that out a little more or better or whatever maybe there's no maybe there's no answer to that but you know we can charge down all these models and scenarios all we want but at the end of the day if people throw up their hands about a DPW building it's that's where it goes no I think that's very real and then the only other thing was and I know I beat the source dead but if we get revenue on the same expense page in the book we're flipping forward and back a lot so do I need to meet with Andrea to go through the budget book or do you think she's pretty well set and understanding what people are looking for um that probably be okay um to find out what's doable and what isn't yeah okay okay okay next is liais on updates I think you heard just part of the DPW by beans in my comments um that was a very Central that discussion you will had and so forth with um I think the other one has been also hidden in Mor's comments about trying to be clear about what is the priority here um because there can be a lot of time spent looking at things which turn out to be lower priorities so that was a sort of another theme of that discussion um I know you looking for at least I read you as looking for the process issues about process and I think two things struck me it may be difference for Dean but one is the number of biders on anyone project is very small a b they're very repeated so uh so we're not dealing with a wide range of of those capabilities that are interested in working with our town in with its requirements so that that struck me um I think the other item was that when we when we get the bid we really have an idea of what the bid should be you know it's $500 for pipes and tar per X unit of footage I mean we we have a Target in mind that is fairly well known to us given the number of projects we're dealing with so we go at it with that understanding and and looking at whatever the bid comes back um that should be no surprise to anybody here given the professionalism of the DPW um um and it I guess the one thing thing that struck me was the next step which is I think the increased professionalism as we go along of the DPW is an important priority in general um and I think as we're faced with more water requirements uh we need to be prepared to understand that the professional level of people who run all this equipment has probably got to go up uh as we think of the Staffing changes that came up in the discussion about some of the things they're not necessarily C this is an operating comment that in terms of the type Personnel on their background is going to become ever more I'm going to say probably specialized and potentially expensive but that's my assumptions and that's for example relevant to the water department yes the water department so is it is that uh any kind of commentary on the current vendor fast we start talking about Hopper being one of the new measurement points or potentially very true very much in the water department not that that's directly what I think your question was Sarah for us to talk about but it's it's a sidelight in it takeway we were close to um in the water if we grow much more the guidelines are instead of having two full-time equivalents we were going to need a third so there might be another facility guy down the road because of additional water um that was the one of the because we were asking about the DPW um costs associated with the development because we knew we were going to find finaly this um and you know he he really felt like the sidewalk improvements in any intersection stuff would be put on the developer whether that's happened to date or not I don't know but um I I I'm comfortable with the numbers that you used in in the letter that's where we came out yeah he didn't really have a lot of discuss but that's where we came out in the two conversations we had okay any other Leah's on updates Mike and I need to get well yeah we approved the um Long Hill Stu with CPC that well Annie and I had a chance to meet with the chief okay I left my notepad at home and took all the notes but he's pulling out his um just to read my writing but you know from memory I mean there's some some little news I mean not little news but the call Firefighters are working out well just happy with that integration such a relief very U feel very strongly that the grant will pay for the CBA units good so that's a good what units the scuba the breathing units and I think the fill station too if I'm not mistaken um the big ticket items are you know refunding the the fire truck which I saw in one of these the $300,000 a year that got depleted got to get ready yep so just express some concerns about that but it appears to be the line item there um what am I missing oh Staffing talked a little bit about the new oer requirements we are going to be held to compliance for that so future Staffing I think the chief is concerned about getting a deputy on board at some point what the new oan requirement um requires for four Personnel on site oh we're back okay so is now becoming a requirement yeah and OSHA driven by OSHA yeah so it's employee safety yeah you Al you also mentioned that the safer Grant could offset the cost of the SCBA we know the sa grants no yeah which is you know and that that gear you estimated was 250,000 oh wow expensive yeah yeah Bo seems like we could encourage our um police to maybe be volunteer firefighters as well help that for in now there was some discussion too about the the fire vehicle replacement and maybe your notes will come in handy here but the chief felt that we could order it now but not be on the hook for it at some point yes he had uh yeah he had U spoken to I think one of the vendors and it was there was an opportunity for us to get a later model but new engine that um was today's dollars today's dollars preceded the emissions upgrades that are now required on those rigs which a add to the cost and B reduce the reliability of them um so we changed in the vehicle replacement schedule no because it's there's a there's a two two plus year Le yeah um so what he would be seeking is permission to place the order now andent on yeah um sub funding appropriation the vendor indicated his willingness to sign that contract because he can always turn around and sell it if we to somebody else as long as it doesn't have any kind of weird v as long as it's not too specialized so he said that they could make a they could you know sign a contingent deal of pending appropriation y Reserve which haven't been able to do in the past yeah okay with the intent that the actual purchase gentlemen wouldn't be how many years out two at least two years out I L that's the the build Cycles I didn't know if you were gonna say longer that's actually why I asked it' actually be three meetings okay it's otherwise they're still borrowing the Lindfield engine um and is that going to continue in well our engine's working isn't it got a coolant leak at the moment because I see it around town yeah yeah it's a fingers cross it'll the way the chief says a fingers cross it'll start where you get at yeah otherwise we got a tour of the uh the new ladder truck yeah very impressive very very pretty it's got a it is the Leatherman of Fire they on the street a lot yeah well they've been exercising it and they've been taking it you know because it's got ALS so they've been taking it on some calls with the ambulance well I can think that ALS is a disease and they were I thought it had ALS and I thought doesn't get ALS behind the American Legion I think they were training on it or something yeah so I think that's the highlights yeah good for no notes here yes for notes and that he can't read okay okay um now do you have any issues with the town budget that you need to discuss in advance there so you're stuck with me terms of the current phal 25 yeah yeah there's nothing unusual there's nothing okay okay of major concern yet okay um budget preparation schedule so you're meeting with departments still right yeah so we haven't started maybe we hav we haven't started those formal they're getting under way with their operating budgets now okay with the intent that they will conclude November to me and then and then we sit down and do the f t Okay so from our point of view it's a de early December yes yeah so yeah according to my notes which I can't read either Andy Mis L we have a meeting scheduled for October 30th um we have one for November 21st and the Essex incom has made the suggestion they might like to meet jointly with us good and and that's that's over and above the 21st that's another meeting no that would be the meeting on the 21st because they wanted a Thursday and we're meet that's a Thursday where we're meeting so I suggested I haven't received confirmation but I suggested that November 21st would be a good day and then we have a December 4th and a December 16th meeting 16th I think is joint was select Bo we present the budget that's okay number 16 yeah so do we have anything regarding the budget to do on October 30th right well I think more Capital more capital okay I think the focus should be on Capital okay okay when's the joint meeting 16 current 26 year longer long okay what are you asking Andy when the joint meeting was because I had Monday December 16th with the select Bo all right because I I had something on our calendars for the 18th is that that was wrong I think we had issues with the 18th day of the week is the 18th yes I had an issue with the 18th because that's CBA 60,000 yeah okay so 10 it's it's 10:30 I mistyped it on the agenda it's 10:30 be capital okay Andy is that entry on your calendar of 12 being relevant or is that a m I just deleted it mistake it's atic Cod yeah okay so we're good on budget scheduling y okay I don't okay so the next is the special town meeting warrant articles in your email I printed out and left at home do I have these I don't feel like you don't have the official articles I gave you a summary he gave us an email the email spreadsheets the capital spreadsheets yesterday okay thank you zon zoning amendments to comply with the new MBTA 3A requirements I I have the email yeah yeah I'm looking at it too okay yeah and so we we'll have that fiscal analysis and I I plan to speak on that article so do you as a committee want to take a stance I'm recommending one way or the other on I think we should be the I mean because it has Financial consequences yeah yeah do we have to vote on it tonight you don't have to prior to the thir I need to put the warrant with your your recommendations is it in this one has to go to the printer um got it right here okay yeah okay so that should be the 30th okay so we need to make a recommendation with respect to the zoning amendment to comply with the new MBTA 3A requirements isn't isn't our written advice really the it's based on the facts am I missing something here no every every warant article that has financial implications we have to make a recommendation of yes or no we recommend or we do not recommend what would you recommend on the floor I understand all of that if you're writing and getting comments on is the heart of that it's a financial recommendation and it's am I missing something here it's financially this is a we get more grants I mean than than we this costs us right therefore yeah but yeah but hold on so there's different subjective inputs and you could put in different subjective inputs and come out with a different conclusion so that's part of the issue Mike I'm not say it again please Mike I I didn't follow that there's a lot of unknowns right like in other words you know do you use the 350 units or do you use the 130 or do you use zero or do you assume. 26 new students per unit or do you assume 75 or5 like there's there's a ton of different variable subjective inputs and depending upon which ones you use you come to a different conclusion therefore well so I think that therefore it's not cut and dries is all I'm trying to say oh okay I'm sorry I thought that led you to a certain right recommendation or non- reccommendation well every individual obviously does their own subjective inputs and comes to their own conclusion but there's no like hard black and white you know facts I mean in terms of a conclusion so so are you looking for a recommendation a second I'm looking for a motion to do what to recommend the warrant article on the zoning amendments to comply with the MBTA communities act we recommend it you okay I make that motion you're gonna second it I'm gonna second that any discussion what set of a given what Mike just said that's why I asked to repeat it what set of assumptions would you like us to be considering given the fact that there's a wide range of assumptions all well we've done this financial analysis yes I understand that okay yeah so the question is is does the finance committee recommend meaning that these zoning amendments be passed meaning does do we want to protect our eligibility for state grants is this something that is we should do in order to protect that eligibility that's that's that's another that's a side car to the the memo that it's a core comment what's that it's not just a side comment it's a core comment I mean from the finance committee but it's not it's not part of the financial specific financial analysis that that was done it it matters I'm not saying it doesn't matter I'm just saying it it wasn't in the financial analysis that we did specifically we didn't try to after that money well you tried to well we say there's a potential loss of Grants and that's all I mean people when we say that we're saying that under the 134 unit scenario build out based on the assumptions made um that there's a cost to the town of 38,000 over the full year of the buildout for 324 units were saying that there is a benefit to the town of 8 189,000 when we look at the 10-year over 10 years for the 134 units we're saying it will cost the town $3,800 and over the full build out at 324 over 10 years but we're going to change it to 20 it would be a benefit to the town of 18,900 and then there's a potential that if we don't pass it we could lose grants or presumably more than those dollar amounts yeah so I think one way to think about this is we all have our personal views about things right but we're on this committee because we're supposed to look at things through a financial lens and that's what we do and sometimes we I personally sometimes vote for things from a financial point of view that aren't lined up with my personal views but that's why we get paid the big fcks to be here okay so and that's what the recommendation is it's our commit recommendation from Financial Point of View financial standpoint only not our personal opinion so the way I look at this financially very narrowly and I'm not thinking about affordable housing and all that stuff is how is the town impacted financially if we do not approve this and and when I think of one to two million or more or less I get worried about that I also get worried if we don't comply and the state comes in and says okay Manchester you didn't comply but now we're going to Overlay this the way we want to do it on you and now our 134 and 324 units looks real different like you know they may dictate something that we have to comply with and that gets a whole lot more expensive so that's a risk and I I'm concerned about about that so when I kind of look at those two things and and I also kind of reading the tea leaves say okay if the state does if Manchester passes this at our November meeting but the state throws it out in January or February we could hold another town meeting and just unroll this thing so when I look at those sort of scenarios personally I'm like from a financial point of view I think I would recommend we support this because it's safe and it's covering ourselves a little bit and we have a a back door we could back out if we needed to so that's the logic that I look at this from I have friends who live in Milton and other places and yeah I don't like unfunded mandates and I could stand on the hillside and with a you know and fight it off but that gets really expensive and I think it potentially is kind of dangerous for this town so my question Mor is what's the backout you're talking about I'm sorry I don't follow the state throws well the state says no we're not going to do this no if they vot in the milon case okay they luse the case the outcome of the Milton case understand could change we just in February or January or sometime just say we're just going to unwrap what we did in November y we're GNA undo the zoning changes so I don't see a whole heavy risk no I don't either in yeah this and I think it's safe to recommend it so that's the way I would articulated a second on the motion or we we have a second okay disc we are in a discussion pH great so I think your your analysis shows that under the lower unit or the higher unit construction it's pretty much a wash so there's not a financial harm based on those assumptions right right in either s so then it reverts to what more just and then sort of feeds into what more just the risk of not any more discussion I I'll just obviously I'm in the minority but I'm still going to speak my piece I mean I've I've run these numbers uh and I've come up with an analysis that would show that the town would actually be losing somewhere between one and two million a year now if you tell me that that offsets 1 to two million in Grants a year then I guess it's a wash but I personally don't think we can expect one to million a year in Grants from the state now maybe I'm wrong I guess hopefully I am but um if I go into it from that approach I just I think it's a very risky proposition and in terms of passing it and then just like pulling the 180 if you know the state backs down or whatever I'm not as confident about that because the I mean correct me if I'm wrong but that does require a two-thirds approval or am I wrong on that no majority just majority both ways even to undo it okay okay any more discussion well I know you know I know we're looking at it from a financial lens but we're also kind of Representatives of the town and I know the people I talk to on this the response has been from we don't need a train station to you know how dare they tell us our zoning and and you know that's seems to be like a it's more of a philosophical thing that they shouldn't be you know forcing this on us but what's that have to do with the financial piece well that we're representatives of the Town we're we're making a recommendation on behalf of the finance committee we're not representing personal opinions of people in town or our own personal opinion it's merely from a financial standpoint does it make sense to support the zoning Amendment that's what we're charged with doing for any Financial item on the does that make sense yeah okay okay let's take a vote Andy yes Dean no myy yes Tom yes Peter yes Mike no Sarah vote Yes okay next item is CPC funding of 250,000 for the 3 million land conservation deal that we heard about at our last meeting on Long Hill from CPC so I'll make a motion to support the expenditure of 250,000 in P CPC funding for the purpose of a conservation restriction on a portion of the land being purchased by Green Bel Essex County Green Belt we voted on this last meeting we did not vote a recommendation on the warrant article we voted to support it support it okay this is a recommendation on the warrant article okay I'll second 0 seconds any discussion take a vote Andy yes Dean yes Mory yes Tom yes Peter no Mike no is there vote Yes the next is the approve the app payment of a fiscal year 23 bill for Consulting Services related to to the 40b appeal which was misplaced and did not get paid with the get paid so since the fiscal year 23 books have been closed this requires a new vote at town meeting to spend the money what's the it's just under 10,000 I don't put the exact amount in my head it it will be in the in the motion in the article it's 9,000 and this was to pay bills and Thomas correct we we hired bills and Thomas I make a recommendation to vote Yes to support this second 0 seconds any discussion vote Andy yes Dean yes myy yes Tom yes Peter yes Mike yes Sarah yes storm water regulations update to comply with new EP requirements I'm assuming that's not a financial article yes what the regulation what is it yeah is there going to be any um more definition of what it is yeah there's it's a lot of it's a lot lot of word smithing but basically we have to limit our discharge it's just um um requirements for managing storm water from projects okay oh okay so that's different projects not just it's both what the S water it comes from projects so we're we're under um pressure from EPA they if we don't do this they're likely to slap a consent order on us to comply they could add penalties to that if they wanted to conc so so we approved new storm water RS a couple years ago based on D the state D um unfortunately D's model that we based it on didn't um have all the updates that EPA wanted oh so that's why we're doing this a second time around I see so it's a fair assumption this doesn't have financials right so I make a motion that we take no position on the water water on the warrant article with respect to storm water regulations second any discussion it's not going to cost the town anything One Way or Another Not that we're already it's not going to be more vote doing okay um take a vote Andy yes Dean yes War yes Tom yes Peter yes Mike yes votes yes that was yes to not take a position is that right right yes we take no position and the next is a possible petition article requiring zoning amendments to be approved by ballot this is the same article that was defeated at last Fall's special town meeting so that has no Financial impact so I make a motion that we take no position with respect to zoning amendments consider did we take that position last time yes yes thank you seconds take a vote Andy yes Dean yes my yes Tom yes Peter Mike yes V yes that's all there is right well there's possibility of one more I left off that list what's that and that is the potential of re uh of amending the current short-term rental bylaw that the town has um So currently we have a week um bylaw that if you're renting for less than for six days or less than we need to get a permit um there's concern that with the new state law that will stick in starting in February that allows adus by right in single family home districts um that we may want to have additional safeguards against those adus being used for short-term rentals sort of undercutting the purp of them in terms of helping with the housing got it diversity and would you um use the short-term rental definition that's the state in the state which is less than a month most likely but there's there's also then additional limitations in terms of um you know is it owner occupied or not is the main building owner occupied or not um so glosser has just approved a pretty rigorous um new bylaw that really tries to prevent proliferating of for fals I I get that you could try to connect the dot and make this financial but I'd argue it's not is that fair I think so Mike I mean that's the motion I'd like to make that we do not take a position on it a second it's not even present well I think we have to sort of see it writing don't we think make a Mee maybe we should say we'll make a recommendation on pound meeting floor okay Mike yeah that works okay TR have a second second take a vote Andy yes this is it we're deferring to tell meting on it why do we have to vote on because it has to go in the stupid printed warrant we're gonna okay continue Dean yes M yes Tom yes Peter yes Mike yes Sarah yes anything else we need to go over at our 10:30 meeting we're going to work on Capital and if there's anything else that people want covered in that meeting um please let me know um by the 23rd if you can I like to get them posted the week in advance in case something comes up and Wednesday comes real fast the next week with the 48 hour notice requirement um with that I'll take a motion don't move second you second second yes vote Andy yes Dean yes m yeser yes Mike yes Sarah thank you all thanks for that free to me what's created looks good  with the season almost over how did we do on our la