So I'm going to call the meeting to order it at nine minutes at nine minutes after we have the select board. We have Randy jewelry. We have to render the treasure. We have Dexter LaFavor. We have Victor wire. We have the budget committee. We have Orca media and we have Dave Delacorte, who's the Times artist reporter. So with that, do we have any amendments to the agenda, Sarah? Yes, we do. We have what Vick said earlier today regarding the, the truck purchase you just need to ratify. You just need to ratify something with the truck purchase the accessories that you're going to buy, because you originally rather you originally approved the additions for the one truck but then you voted on another trucks but you didn't approve the accessories. Let's do that if everybody agrees let's do that under the highway report. That makes sense. You're back Sarah. I'm back. That was Mary she's having hard time signing in. Yep. So, with that, the first item on our agenda is reviewing progress in the 2223 municipal budget considering coal erases and other issues. Budget committee to attend action on likely. And thank you to render for all your, all your hard work in terms of giving us that updated. I'm going to go back to the worksheet as well as the COLA worksheet what I asked what I asked to render to do is do a raise worksheet based on based on 3%. So we know what the total, what the total money in the cost is a 3%. And if it's a different number than that, which are very well might be, then we can just do it by percentage to get the budget number. But I guess, I guess for a, and we can, we can at some point during this spend some time quickly going down through the entire budget again. But the big missing item the big gorilla in the room if you will, is what we're going to budget for raises. Next July first, and then that trickles down to all the, all the subcategories that are in that as highlighted. Before we start talking about that, I would remind everybody that without those COLA increases, we're already at a 6.37% budget increase. So I would open it up, open it up for discussion. Is it 6.37 without any raises. Yes. And that's, that's with the raises that we just implemented but no further raises. And that's, and that's including the special articles that you're looking at Peter. No, I don't think so. No, it doesn't. And Peter. I think I have 8.28% so I don't know what report you're looking at. Well, that I did look at the thing which included the, the special articles, I'm sorry, I looked at the wrong. Yeah, you got to go above that. Yes, it is, it is 8.28%. Thank you, Duranda. Did every single person that worked for us either get hired with a bonus or a higher starting rate, or alternatively those who have been working for us get a raise with the last work that we did a couple of months ago and implemented immediately. Well, we've just barely implemented. I know it was a lot sooner than a couple of months ago, but I believe the answer is yes. I think the exception being the select board, we left ourselves alone. Well, we don't do it for the money. So, um, is there any person idea of what the percentage was for for the group, you know, the ones who got the kind of across the board went to a minimum of this and minimum of that. It's all over the place, Mary, but it's in the, it's in the existing budget numbers, you can see what that number is. The question is the question is in the hard part and I spent some time this afternoon a lot a lot of time but a little time, looking at the super price index, trying to figure out what an appropriate cost of living increases and as you know, depending on the rate of inflation is somewhere between five and a half and six and a half percent. The consumer price index of course is looking is looking back not forward. And it's depending on which one of their indexes you pick it's all it's basically all over the place, but I couldn't I couldn't really determine anything which was meaningful yes, Mark. You're muted. No. Okay, so the February is as published by the Social Security Administration for raises increases next year for Social Security recipients was 5.9% CPI. Right. Right. So it means pretty steep increase, say the least. And you know the challenge that we have is being on a run a half year half in this year, half in next year so you know, it's kind of tough to predict what inflation is going to do over the next six months. I agree. I agree 100% and of course the other, the other issue is, we just implemented all these raises mid mid year raises. So, yeah, I just I, I, you know, I've been struggling with this trying to think about what I think it's fair having the one thing I want to be sure of is, if our, if our premise is by implementing the interim raises which we implemented that we now right now at this point in time are paying our employees what we consider to be fair compensation. And hopefully that's the case with all of all the work we did going into that. Then the question is, if we're going to implement another raise in basically seven months. What's an appropriate raise to keep us in the same position, or what's an appropriate budget amount to keep us in this position. Yes, Mark. So, just another comment with the, I'll call it the market adjustments that were done just recently. We've got the VLCT compensation benefits report for the, for the various roles in our town government. We compare now very favorably with other towns that have let's say, similar amount of full time employees, similar population, services. I think Dorenda gave that gave us a copy of that report, probably before we started talking about the budget increases but we look pretty favorable right now, compared to similar towns. That's true. What I could, and I, you know, Dorenda if you disagree please speak up but we are, we are on the higher side of the middle of the pack I would say we are far from the highest, we are way far from the lowest but we're. Yes, I agree with what you said. So, you know, with that, what do we think the number is and obviously it has serious ramifications. Yes, Steve. Peter, I've also looked at this quite a bit and and but I think that that Cola effective next July should be no more than 3%. Would you please just raise your hand or something when you want to speak rather than just start speaking that would be helpful. Yep. Thank you. Go ahead. The sheet I have only has 012 and 3%. Is there something else that that we that it's case that we have a figures for more than that. I'm looking at the sheet you're looking at the sheet I'm looking at which Dorenda did this afternoon, which is the most recent is 3%. Well, now there was, there was an email previous to that that had one to, and then I screwed up on number 3%. So I sent a separate email for 3%. You should have the numbers for one, two and 3%. And then I figured you can make any combination of those two from there or I can plug them in as we speak. Okay, well I apologize when I saw that you changed the numbers I didn't understand that you had the one and two on the other sheet so I don't have it in front of me. I have the 3% sheet in front of me. So yes, Mary. I have a question. Mark has a question. Mark's had his hand up as well. I know, go ahead Mark. So just a, just a quick question because I don't have the, I didn't pick up the new 3% sheet so the new 3% Dorenda gives us what does a is a budget increase as compared to 9.32 The 3% would be 9.32. That's one. Okay. Yeah. And so the only other question I have, there's probably not an easy answer to this is, I'm just wondering if we went with the 9.32. How does that translate to an impact to the tax rate based on grand list, etc. How do we get from here to there. We can't. We don't know about the we won't know about the grand list until the spring. But the hope would certainly be my hope would be being honest with what we've seen the sales to be that we get a pretty good bump in the grand list, but it's very hard to I laugh when I, when I see these articles in the paper where these municipal folks particularly in barrier always projecting what the effect on the tax rate is. They're really, they're really shooting in the dark. You know, if you wanted to be really conservative, you'd say a 9% increase met a 9% increase, but it doesn't. So, just to clarify, so we, we looked to the grand list sales increase in the grand list to subsidize the increase. Correct. Okay. Thanks. I think we had a question before me. I'm sorry, Liz. Thank you. Dorinda on the spreadsheet that you sent us it also has below the various scenarios on the fourth tab called sheet one, the current policy for health insurance and then the health insurance with full spousal coverage because I know we've talked about that. That 9.32 does not include that extra 5000 does it. So that would be that would be an even more of an increase if we were to include the spousal. And I think, am I, am I correct in saying that I think I read an article in the, maybe the Times Argus about the education rate possibly going quite a bit down next year because of a surplus of funds. That would, I mean, that would have an impact to mark in terms of, and the grand list. I mean, it's a crapshoot right now to know what this, how this would ultimately affect people, except this might be a good year to do it. If we know that the education rate is going down. Right, but that doesn't affect what we assess for the town. I mean, our, our budget number is assessed, you know, the local portion is only assessed per what we have to raise to cover our increase. Right. Yeah. But it does affect, but it does affect the total tax bill potentially. If their rate came down overall, yes, but we have to give everything away that we get from them. So it's, you know, again, we're back to looking at the ultimate result is yes, it might be a lower tax bill, but we also pay out to the schools. So whatever that number comes in. I mean, I, I understand but I, but I often think people, people focus more on what they have to write the checkout for than what portions go into the town, what courses go into the school but maybe I'm wrong about that. No, I agree with you there but just, I mean that the subsidy for the education tax from a surplus is essentially a one year deal. You know this impact is, is, is carrying through so let's not lose sight of that too. Yeah. Yep, yep, yep. All true. My concern is that we had to make a pretty significant mid year or a quarter of the way into the year adjustment to remain competitive and to be able to hire people to be able to staff various positions in town government. In that case, by basically keeping our increases low and looking at where we're headed and again, it's really impossible from from right now to look forward and say, exactly what inflation is going to be. But I think, you know, we, we all can see what's happening at least right now. And I think while we're continuing in this pandemic. We're going to see that goods are going to remain scarce.  And again the soft feeds into the inflation and I think, like all of you, I spent quite a while this afternoon looking at this. The other two pieces here is that it costs the living adjustment is just that it is not a raise. So there's really two pieces to this. People are raised for continued work and assumably having more skills, plus across the living adjustment, or not. If, if in fact, inflation runs at five or 6% and we give three people are effectively losing two to 30%. And if that's the case, and other people raise wages, we're going to be right back where we were this year, and we're going to start losing people, because the labor market is going to continue to be. I think at least the way we're experiencing it right now. I think three is much too long. And I hate to say it, and hate to be in the position of having to raise taxes even more. But I think we just dug ourselves out of the hole. And we need to stay dug out of that hole. So, for me, the minimum is 5%. It's scary, scary, scary, scary. Yeah, I know. And you know, it's not like we've got a lot of places in the budget.  We have to. We have to pay for financial services, so that we can continue to run the town. They're just a lot of places for us to tighten the belt that I can see. One thing, the one, the one other area which we always talk about at the, at the last minute is there is the potential and this might be the year to do it and this isn't when we make the decision, but we can think about it is using some of the fund balance to offset what would be the increase in the tax rate. You know, take a look at the grand list see where it is. If we're at, if we're at something and where we are going to be there. Pretty quick between 10 and 11%. Maybe we can knock it back under time. I mean, I just don't know that's the thing that makes this process process so hard. It's going to be a, it's going to be a startling increase. No matter what, it's a startling increase at 3%. It's a little more startling at 5%. And it's a little more startling when we deal with health insurance problems. So, you know, just to finish up my thought, I do agree with what you said about COVID and I also would hate to see us backslide after all the work we've done to get to where we are right now. But absolutely. I just, and you know, who knows what kind of a town meeting we're going to have that that's a, you know, are we going to have a real in person town meeting where we can sit down and explain this are we going to be. Are we going to having, you know, are we going to do the same thing we had to do last year. You know, we just, we just don't know and we're not going to know I guess for a while right now. Right now I'm correct Sarah that we have to go back to an in person meeting right. It stands now the board has no authority to to authorize sending out absentee ballots to all voters and holding it by Australian ballot we just the legislature won't make that decision till mid January. Those based on what they've been doing recently they'll probably say the towns will get to make up their own mind about what they want to do. Who knows. Well the question tonight is and we are not. We're not finalizing the budget tonight. But the question is, what number do we want to put in and let's have to render put that number in and see where it puts us. And then we've got some time to think about it we've got a basically a month to think about this. And we can change it. Can I just ask one more question. Yeah, did we. I mean we really weren't through this whole time of budgeting, putting in inflate like, were people really budgeting for a 6% inflation. For repairs and for parts and things like that. We were trying to yes. So they did okay I didn't I don't really remember that piece. They were just going by oh well just raise it up a little bit because we know it's going to cost more. Because I think we also need to consider the fact that we might not have the budgeted enough in the general budget for just everything right there just we just don't know the cost of some of these goods that we may need to be purchasing. So the only thing I would say, Liz about that is, looking back at the history of this process over all the years. We almost always, not always, but almost always under spend our budget, because we tend to project things high, not low. Now we don't understand the wages. Yeah, certainly in years we haven't under spent the repairs to our road equipment, but overall when you look at the budget at the end of the year. Sometimes it's $20,000 sometimes it's $30,000 but we tend to under spend their budget. So we're, we're fairly aggressive at the way we, I shouldn't say aggressive I should say conservative in the way we set our tax rate. I'll just agree with Phil on the whole cola business a cola is not a raise it's a cost of living adjustment, and, and 3% will be effectively less than the cost of living a year from now. So, that's what I said was. I know that's what I'm saying I agree with you. I'm agreeing with you. Why don't we have, sorry. Go ahead, Mary. Why don't we have the render put in 5% and we'll see what it is it should be probably are not round another 10 or $11,000 and then over the 3% add the, and unfortunately I did not print out that worksheet but if you add the 2% number she gave us and the 3% number she gave us the sum of those two numbers whatever the number is. Yeah, well this yeah. So it's 96 and 14 for so it's about 10,000 more. Yeah. But that would be much more than 9.32. I don't know what that percentage would be. Yeah, we're going to be over to we're going to be over 10 and we haven't, we haven't dealt with the health insurance yet either. So, but I just, you know, the whole question is, you know, how are the, I mean, we're trying to come up with what we think is the right thing for the town. But the ultimate question is, are the voters going to support this or not. I mean, historically. The voters have always supported us, but we have never proposed an increase like this before. That's for darn sure. But they're all dealing themselves with the, with the problems with inflation and every single thing they're buying are paying for. I mean, you can escape it. Especially if you're doing fuel to, to heat your house. Yeah, I'm sorry Dexter said his hand up for a while. Yeah, I'm sorry Dexter go ahead. Oh, thanks. I didn't come to comment on budget but it's an interesting discussion I just thought it maybe and I'm not sure how you schedule your cola raises versus other raises but maybe you could plan on a 3% cola raise. Maybe immediately at when the budget started and then allow another 2% you know up to the 5% level to be, you know, more of a merit raise thing partway through the year and then if it was halfway through the year you'd only have to budget for half of that amount. And I might be a way to soften the blow and the budget and still meet the objectives of the board. So, so just to be, just to be clear in my, in my memory we have never said what portion of the raise was colon what portion of the raise was merit. And the other thing we have, we have never done which, you know, we maybe should be doing but we never have is give individual merit raises, we've always you know everybody's gotten the same raise. You know what was cola was cola and whatever else there was if there was anything left was was merit, but it's not like it's not like we have divided it up in the past, but potentially we could, I guess. So you just touched on something that I was going to that I had my hand up for Peter is really is really looking at cola much differently than the raises. And I know from conversations that the Budget Committee has been having that's that's some of the conversation that we've been having in house just, you know, you guys just went through a huge market adjustment. If that's what we want to call it. And that is different than this cost of living, and even further than that experience people going and getting any kind of certifications going through trainings, you know, operating different pieces of equipment all that kind of stuff is really performance based and that's where the merit step step increase and come into play. So, I think that I think that it would be extremely beneficial for for you folks to entertain the idea of looking at the way that we've done things in the past, differently moving forward. Well, I don't disagree with you on any of that and we've certainly talked about it that took the question is. We're in budget time. And how do we implement that now and how do we build it into our budget. And that's a huge challenge and whether we're whether we're ready to jump into that world right now or not. I just disagree with you I mean I I've, I've dealt with personnel administration most of my life and I've struggled with things like that for years and you have you know, you have criteria and you say okay if you, you achieve this or get that certification or do this or that you get this increased corresponding increase in pay but at least it's definitely something that you know for this budget year is kind of out of reach, but looking forward and incorporating that type of a process into next year's budgeting process and doing the work ahead of time I mean the trains kind of past the station this year, as far as making those types of changes but I know it is something that the budget committee has been discussing and and just hearing the conversation. It felt like felt like just kind of making that statement to look at for the future was was appropriate. I don't disagree with you Victor. Yeah. I was just wondering I don't disagree with filler was or anybody. It's just, we have a pretty fortunate group as far as income goes right here tonight. But there's a lot of people in town that, you know, are retired, and I'm pretty sure that they're not going to get a five or 6% cost of living increase. So, I mean I don't know what you know, I think we should. I think you guys ought to take that into consideration, because probably the budget whatever you put in there probably the budget will pass but it's going to hurt some of the lower income people. No question. I don't know is. I mean it's got to be a middle point there somewhere. I would think. And as we've, you know, we've had the, we've had the bitter pill lesson this year about what we have to do to hire the people we need to hire and get them in place. And I don't know. Honest to God, I really don't know what the answer is usually usually those of you work with me over the years know I have. Usually I have some kind of an opinion on this and I'm stuck on this one. I guess what I'm what I'm recommending to, to bring this part of the budget discussion to a close tonight otherwise we're going to be here until 10 o'clock at night is that we, we plug in the 5% and we'll all have a chance to look at those numbers and think about it and also think about what everybody has been saying and the budget committee can think about it and we'll have some more discussion on this before we before we finalize the budget. The only thing I have not done is spending any time and I don't think there's a lot of money there but undoubtedly. If we go if we go down through this budget we can certainly find $25 or $30,000 somewhere. You know that's that's a painful, painful process to do but we pretty much a lot of these numbers we put in our are the numbers that people gave us for their budget we have an any discussion about. What could you do if we needed to trim your budget. Yeah Randy. We have a sense of what outliers still remain. I know Dorenda did some work in the last working budget that she provided, and she provided us something today. Are there a lot of missing numbers to still to come in Dorenda. For the most part I there's a few but I don't think it's going to be huge numbers I plugged in a placement. Like one of them is county tax we never get that till the very late. But there's a few there's a handful at the most. There is two different line items and again they're not big ones, but under. There was a lot of information there was we hit started a fund last year or $500 to go to the facility maintenance. There was no number of budgeted for that this year. our grant match we had discussed at the last meeting about kind of going back and looking at that one because I think we only plugged in $1,000 for that. And I know in the past it's cost us more than that. Let's see, future grant, we put $2,000 in. And I think right now we have let's see if I can find it. Was last year's like $19,000, $18,000 or something like that for grant matches? Is that what I saw somewhere? Well, I mean, we had that. We've got one that is a right now there's one that has to be done by 1231-22 and that's a $3,000 match. There's another one that is that one's completed. Let me see we have that one. We have a scoping study which is got to be done by 2023 and that's a $6,000 match. So there's a few here. But again, some of this is if it's a highway thing, it's an in-kind thing. And I will say I think it was the scoping study because it was alone that was because it was a grant from the current year budget. I think we put that amount into the current year budget. So depending on when we collect it, it might fall to our bottom line before we're able to get reimbursed for it. So it really is a and last year we also incurred at least two grants that I know of that came after we completed our budget. I don't disagree that maybe we should. I mean, here's what I'm saying, guys. We're going to take one last careful run through all these things and they're going to undoubtedly be some minor adjustments. But compared to this COLA question and the health insurance question, which we haven't even talked about yet, they're pretty small money. I'm not saying that $3,000 in grant matches isn't a significant number. But when you look at the total budget, it isn't very earth shaking. So we'll do the best we can to find two and all those numbers, Randy, at the end of the process as well as look for savings wherever we can find it. But I would like to and if if 5% is the wrong number and people would rather look at another number, let's look at another number, but let's let's pick a number and get it plugged in there and move on to the to the health insurance discussion and keep moving forward unless somebody has more comments or discussion that they want to do now, because we really will be here till 10 o'clock tonight if we're not careful. Maybe not 10, maybe nine o'clock tonight. Lace past my dinner hour and perilously close to my bedtime. Peter, will will this be discussed on the meeting on the fourth? Or will it be a later meeting, the budget? So when would we find out my memory is it's the second meeting in January where we finalized the budget? Is that not correct? I think so. Because I won't be here on the fourth. That's why I wanted to check. Isn't that correct, Brenda? Second meeting in January? It's all false to when we have to have our stuff in for the town report. And that would be like she sent out Sarah sent out a memo today that the people who have to write items for the town report have to have them in by the beginning of January, like the fifth or something. But when do we have to have this completed by January 20th? 20 years. Yeah, that town reports stuff is if I don't if I give people I've got to be able to put it all together. So those reports don't and the budget committee gets a little leeway because they're have to wait to see what the town does with the budget. But yeah, this is this is the issue with the legislature is that the legislature is not meeting about this topic until the 15th of January. And we have to want you have to warn where the meeting how the town meeting is going to be held, whether it's not going to be at Remney School, if that's even going to be allowed, or if it's going to be by Australian ballot. So we got a lot of deadlines, weird pipe ropes to walk. But I think I think finalizing the budget, the second meeting and that's usually what you do. And yes. Yeah. So it's 5% the number. Does somebody want to throw out another number? I'd like to see the 5% having proposed it. So yeah. And I kind of second. Yeah, Peter, I'm good with that 5% also. Okay, Liz. Yeah. 5% she's nodding her head. Yes. Yes, I would say to her into we're gonna we're gonna plug in the plug in the 5%. 10.01. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Um, so now, uh, and you may have some other items to render but the other the other significant item I'm aware of we need to discuss is this issue of how we're handling spousal health insurance for our employees. And as I think almost everyone knows, we have avoided violated whatever the right word is our current personnel policy and we are now compensating people for spousal health insurance to have our employees and the third employee where they would not be or or they are not currently getting any kind of compensation for that is out in the cold right now. And I think what we have been doing is marching down the path of the idea is that to be competitive out there in the workplace, we need to be providing spousal health insurance benefits. Right now, we pay 50% of the cost of spousal health insurance. So when we pick up the other 50%, it's like an additional $330 per employee per month. The render something like that in a dollar in a dollar or two. Right. The premium is 637 a month. So yeah, 15. And then we also we also pick up potentially the additional cost of the of the HSA contribution for this for the spouse as well. So, you know, my my thought on this subject is that we would a between now and July 1st correct amend our personnel policy and be budget and amount of money sufficient to sufficient to cover that cost as of July as of July 1st. And to the best of our knowledge, we have promised to two of our employees that we would figure out a way to do that or continue to compensate them. And we have a third employee right now is out in the cold is the wrong word, but not receiving the same the same level of benefits. So I don't know how everybody feels about this. It's another it's a significant it's a significant cost. We're talking about basically to cover all three fully cover all three spouses. We're talking about roughly $1,000 a month plus plus some money for additional HSA contribution as well. So it's a it's probably what a $15,000 thing to do something like that. Just for three. Yeah, for the three employees. Yes, for the three. Yes, Randy. Just want to make the comment that as you guys have this discussion, we really need to be thinking worst case scenario and assume that everybody that we employ that would be eligible for this service could potentially have a spouse, even though they may not now could change next week. Yes, it could. The other the other issue and but I disagree. It's where I mean, historically, we've never had a situation where everybody had spouses. So whether you project, you know, if we're talking about five people, whether you project five or four, you know, who knows what the other as we can do this. Let me finish for a minute, Randy. The other the other piece of this I have we I think we have to think about is of what if anything, are we going to give people who elect not to take our health insurance? And that is definitely a big savings. If that happens, what's the what's the appropriate amount of money to compensate them? Because from time to time, there are people where where they can go on their spouse's health insurance at some cost or maybe some minimal cost. And that obviously is potentially a huge savings for us. So to give them an incentive to do that makes some sense. But I would like to I would like to incorporate that whatever we do, I'd like to incorporate something in our budget costs to cover that and and agree what what that benefit would be. Do we have a buyout option currently? Yes, $1800. It's basically what close to what they get put into their HSA, nothing towards the premium. The only other thing that I was going to say, Peter, to that effect was that as we become, you know, more attractive of an employee or an employer, I mean, and let's just say we do have turnover there, you know, in just because historically we've we haven't had people that have had spouses. The opportunity is there. Oh, I can, Randy, I, I, I totally understand. But what we've also seen is that the compete in the marketplace, when we're trying to hire people, people we're competing against are more and more covering spouses. So to be competitive. I mean, that's what that's what's gotten us in the position we're in, basically. I'm not, I'm not making an argument against this. I'm just saying the potential impact. We as we as we explore these options, we need to be looking at what the potential impact is and not necessarily just what it is today. I'm not arguing against it. I just want to make sure that people people aren't isolating themselves to today's situation. But the cost of who knows. So the question is, I guess what I'm what I'm suggesting along in the short of this is I'm suggesting for tonight or tonight, we plug that $15,000 cost in. And then we're going to talk about it again. In January, unless anybody disagrees with that. Well, I think plug it in. We may as well see, you know, the worst case scenario as far as impact. Yeah, I agree, Peter, that we should plug that in.  And I know this is all coming at once. And we're all trying to figure out how to keep this budget down. But at the same time, we don't want to go backwards. Okay. Well, and the other the other piece of this is, which I really don't want to be doing is getting forced in a position where we have to keep using the word violate. I'm not sure what the right word is, but violate our personnel policy to be able to hire people. That's that's bad practice. So what? You know, it's a two pronged. It's a two pronged. It's a two pronged problem. It's really easy to change the personnel policy, but you live with the consequences of whatever decision you make, obviously. Peter. Yes, Mary. When you say amend the personnel policy, are you talking about deleting siblings? Or are you talking about something else in terms of what we're doing? We're talking about about four spouses. Instead of paying 50% of the cost, we would pay 100% of the cost. I understand that. But I mean, we are currently in noncompliance about paying or not paying for the spouse. Am I correct? Well, as Dorenda pointed out to me this morning, it depends on on how you consider that bonus money that we've that we paid to a few of our employees. That money was intended to compensate them for that for that cost, but we are still we are still deducting the amount of money from the employees pay. Yes. Right now, which also has which also has ramifications because of the way the bonus money is taxed and the way that cost trickles down through our various other fringe benefits compared to if it's a premium payment. It's actually a little bit of a discounted, a little bit of discounted dollars, but not so that money wasn't just a sign on bonus. Well, Randy, there's there's the there's the interesting question. It was intended to compensate them for the fact that they weren't getting spousal health insurance at this time. So is that a sign on it? Certainly was not a direct payment for health insurance. So I guess you could you could call it a sign on bonus. You could call it. Whatever kind of bonus, I guess you want to call it, but that's what it is. It's not a direct. We did not start. We did not start paying that 50 percent of the premium. No. And that. So I guess where my where my head goes with this is, you know, we're talking about a $6000 bonus and we just looked at the numbers for a 50 percent spousal, which was what, 38, 22 or something like that. So so to me, if it was intended to cover health care costs, then we're paying almost double that and granted, some of its in taxes and all that kind of stuff. But but we're exceeding the health care premiums that it would take to have their their spouse covered for the other 50 percent. Maybe. I mean, the question is, what did we need to do to hire these people? And and also when do we get? I mean, we had a discussion this morning about, do we do we square this up a year from this July? And the problem is that leaves that leaves the one person who doesn't currently have that situation waiting for another 18 months. I'm just I am very anxious to get this situation square away. And yes, you know, does that mean that more of that money was signed on bonus and, you know, this and that? Absolutely. I mean, we we did a sloppy job of of implementing this. And I'll be the first one to admit it. But I think we've got to our intent was to provide this benefit. So I think we need my feeling is we need to step up and do it. But can we defer it sometime? Can we potentially do the bad thing, which is to give that other employee some kind of a bonus to offset some of that cost? Sure, we could, but I kind of hate to do that. Yes, Brenda, can I get a clarification on the HSA? So we are giving the employee 1850 and the spouse previously was 500. So is the spouse going up to 1850? Undecided. Well, you want to put number plug in. I got to know what to plug. But what we're saying is it's a separate issue, I guess. I don't know what we do about the HSA. Yes, Steve. Brenda, is that that's an annual? The HSA, the figure you just said? Yes, that's an annual. We pay it in two installments. We pay it on January, the first payroll in January and the first payroll in July, but it is an annual thing. OK, Peter, I'm I guess I would be saying let's let's plug this these numbers in for that insurance and the HSA. And let's see, you know, we're going to have to have that other discussion, but to see where this comes. And I want to remind everybody, and I've said this before, and but this this town votes in over seventy thousand dollars in special articles. And what we're trying to do is for the benefit of the town, all of these employees that we're we're trying to keep up. These are people that are working for the town for the benefit of everybody in the town. So, you know, I understand that we're we're we don't want to just keep throwing money out there. But we spend and it's voted in every year over seventy thousand dollars in special articles. So I'm saying let's plug these numbers in and and we can have that discussion. But we need to plug something in. Well said, Steve, I was thinking along the same lines that I think it's time to look at the special articles. This might be a good year to do that. Well, I was thinking about that, too, making it harder instead of easier. But yeah, may happen. Well, you know, it'll be interesting to see when we are proposing whatever our increase is, whether it's nine, ten or eleven percent, whatever it comes out to be, maybe that will cause our our voters to look a little harder at some of those special articles. I would tell you, you know, we don't have a lot of a lot of control on what happens on the special article front. Well, we do, if we make it harder to get on a ballot in the first place. Well, that's true. But we've already we've already crossed that river and how do you mean the only way you can make it harder is make everybody get a petition. But I know, but anyway, so is this is the said yes or no? The number is 10.76, I believe. That's just doing this quickly. So that's with the special articles. No, no, no, no, no special articles. OK, that that seven six, covering covering three spouses with an equal HSA for the full cost of the health insurance and an equal HSA contribution. Right. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Anything else we need to talk about on the budget tonight, Dorenda? No, just do you want me to plug in those? The question would be I can plug in the five hundred dollars with the recreation and do you want me to change the grant number? So it's two thousand now? Yeah. What do you think? What do you think, Board and Budget Committee bump it up to four? I mean, it's kind of a it's kind of a crapshoot number, but it certainly looks like we're going to have more than two. Yeah, I think that makes sense. Yeah, I agree. And I guess and I guess I'd say plug in that five hundred bucks. And that's just an oversight. And by the way, plug in the ten thousand dollar a piece bonus for the select board. Oh, I was ready for Randy to fall out of his chair. So how much did you say four thousand? Yes, four thousand. Yes. That's what I'm suggesting, unless anyone disagrees. And I didn't fall out of my chair, Peter, but I started to dial 9-1-1 from the heart attack I was having. OK, well, as long as I didn't see you loading your AR-15, Randy, I wasn't too nervous. I already loaded. Mary said it very well. If we were in this for the money, it would be a different world. But we're not 11.01. Let's see if we can make 15. Just kidding. No, it will be that with the special articles probably. Yeah, well, there is no way. There is no way for us to guesstimate estimate any idea what the grand list is going to do, right? No.  Lister. Yeah, Lister. Yes. There's, you know, I'm not even sure that the grand list.  This year with the following year.  It's like where we are with us, where we are from last year or from the previous year when it comes to our you know, coefficient of dispersal and, you know, so it's really even if we have a great property increase, that this the state may penalize us for last year. So it's it's not I'm just talking about education, but it affects us as well. So, you know, so it's just because of the property that the properties have increased is no guarantee that will be a match for match grand list. I understand. Yes. And the other side of it is we have an assessor doing it this year and not the people who've been doing it in the past. Right. So we don't know if that'll have any impact on anything or not. Right. Anything else on the budget? Anyone? I think we're certainly scared me to death. It should. Anything else budget committee? I think we'll say. OK, so let's move on to treasure support, Brenda. Um, I sent to a budget status. I don't know if anybody looked at it or not looked at it. There is, I mean, we're five months into it. There is several areas that we, you know, parts are areas of concern. And maybe if you can look at that and then, you know, when you're looking at the budget, that might help you decide if you need to change some of these numbers. Legal fees alone or is two hundred and seventy two percent over, you know, at a two percent, two hundred and seventy two percent increase in the budget. So. So just going down the list, it's, you know, we know which we can't help, you know, highway repairs and things like that, but we're over budget in quite a few things. Good news is we're under budget and some things as well. But yeah, yeah, we are. What I always do is exactly what you said. I look through the I've looked through the current year's numbers and see how we're doing with what we projected. Now that we're overall, we're at 50 percent of the budget. So we're a little under where we were a little over where we should be. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So I do have one other one other quick item under the under the budget report is I think most of the select board is aware. One of the members of the road crew ended up getting two pairs of boots instead of the one pair that he should have gotten. And Victor and Shane and I met last week to talk about a number of items, but among that was the was the boot thing. And the three of us are saying that, you know, we, meaning me, Shane, Victor, contributed to this contributed to this problem in some way. I I do not believe, despite the fact that he says I told him he could have two pairs of boots. I don't believe I ever told him that. I can't believe I told him that. But the fact is Shane did give him a purchase order for two pairs of boots and he bought two pairs of boots. So Dorenda has been holding that hundred and sixty dollar bill to Lenny's in a band. I told her to put it on orders. It was in the orders for today. And we paid for the boots and I'm hoping we'll put that behind us. Shane has met with the road crew and going over the thing again, that it's one pair of boots in each town fiscal year. It has nothing to do with date of hire and some of the other stuff that was brought up in the process. And we're we're putting that behind us. So for for me, I apologize if I caused any confusion on on the on the boot issue. I certainly didn't mean to and neither did Shane. So that's my report on that. Yes, Torenda. My suggestion was we applied it to FY twenty three. I just think we need to make that clear because that was the recommendation. And so. So let it be reflected in the minutes that the treasurer's recommendation was that we. Apply it to FY twenty three, which means you would get no votes next year. Tonston put one pair away. Wait, so is there a vote on it? Or is this just a recommendation? I think it makes sense. For. For the year to get to it. We're going to have I mean, if you want a motion on this, let's have a motion and settle this once and for all. I understand, but. The problem is, is I just feel that, you know, the way it's been presented was, you know, a little bit different than what went down. And I asked if it should apply to twenty twenty three. And that wasn't said. That's all I said. And now you've got two people said that's a good idea. You know, I feel it's a five member select board. It's not a two member. Let's stop. OK, willing to make a motion that we make a motion on the subject that we can vote on. So we can. I know that that that the. Purchase of those boots be applied to fiscal year twenty three. I'll second. All in favor of that motion. Hi. Hi. Opposed? I say no. I say no. OK, so it applies to twenty twenty three.  I mean, I'm telling you, we're going to have some meetings with with the road crew because no matter what we seem to do, we can't get out of trouble with them. Listen, if the guy is in need of boots, if his boots fall apart and fiscal year twenty three, you guys can buy a new pair of boots. We gave him we gave him a purchase order to purchase those boots. I didn't give him the purchase order. I didn't direct shame to give him the purchase order. He gave him a purchase order. That's all I'm saying. And he went out and used it and bought a pair of boots. And now we're telling him that you, Mr. Employee, were wrong. You shouldn't have purchased those boots, even though we gave you the purchase order. So I know that it feels strongly that you applied in twenty twenty three. We voted that it should apply to twenty twenty three. So that's what it is. We've decided and it's done. And who's going to deliver that message to him? Victor, me, I guess I'll do it.  I was in February. I had no idea that he got a pair of boots in November, November or October. OK, is there a way to really care about another pair of boots? What's going to what's going to stop stop each the other two road crew from saying I want a second pair of boots, too. It's because I read the personnel policy to them and said this means one pair of boots every town fiscal year. That to me and Shane knows that and they now know. So that that issue was taken care of. The only issue is, is it fair to penalize our employee for a mistake that I think we the town made? That's the question. And we voted three to two that that's what we want to do. So unless we vote to rescind that rescind that, that's what we're going to do. I think it's I think I understand her in this point. I hate it when we make mistakes, but we've made a lot bigger mistakes than one hundred and sixty dollars, and I'm sure I'm sure we'll make more despite our best efforts not to make mistakes. But I really don't want to talk about this anymore. If that's the decision of the board unless somebody wants to make a make a motion to rescind the previous motion, that's what we're going to do. You guys a promise. I make a motion to rescind the previous motion. I don't know if anyone wants to secondly, all second that. OK, so rescinding the previous motion means that we're going to have to have a third motion to pay for the boots. Do you want to include paying for the boots and you're rescinding the previous motion? Yes, if that that solves the problem. Yes. OK, and the second agrees with that. So now we now we need to vote on this motion, which is to rescind the previously approved motion and pay pay Lenny's for the boots and not penalize the employee. All in favor of that motion, please say aye. Aye. I have a question before we vote. It's never been a question of whether we pay Lenny's or not. It's just a question of whether or not he's going to get another pair of boots. Then that's fixed. You're correct. Yes. So I don't understand why we have to have to pay Lenny's because we're going to pay Lenny's. He got a pair of boots. We did pay Lenny's, Mary. We have. OK. So I miss I miss I said pay Lenny's. It's it's whether it's whether we're going to allow him to have a pair of boots in the next physical year, which starts July 1st of twenty two. So now we need to vote. So all those in favor of that motion, please say aye or raise your hand. Aye and opposed. Aye. Mary's opposed and Phil is opposed. So now it's three to the other way. Are we through with this for tonight or forever? Yeah. OK, thank you. Um, OK, moving right along here. And believe it or not, we're not that far off schedule, which is hard to hard to believe for about 20 minutes behind schedule. Reviewing and perhaps modifying the enhanced energy plan all changes must be made no later than 15 days before the January 4th public hearing. So we do have one more meeting to potentially make changes. I guess your next meeting after now rereading the energy plan. Yes, Sarah, just be clear. Your next meeting is the 21st, so you would not have. You would have. You're right. You're right. You're right. You're right. OK. So if we're going to make changes when you make them tonight, I spent having read it quickly once before. I spent about an hour and a half today going through that and trying to make sure I understand it the best I can. I don't know what to say. I don't have any specific recommendations on change. Like it seems like a lot of stuff to me and there's a lot of goals. There are a lot of goals in there and a lot of work that needs to be done. And I just wonder if we're ever going to be able to accomplish all that work. I looked at all the stuff, the select board and the planning commission are supposed to be doing and how are we ever going to find the time to do all that? I don't know. But if it's in the plan, it's a plan that doesn't mean we're going to accomplish everything that's in the plan. So that's really the only comment I have. Have you seen the climate action plan for the state of Vermont? Yeah, well, I mean, this reflects a lot of other stuff which is going on in the world around us. Not just what's going on in the little burger of middle sex. And, you know, I think it's a I think for what it is, it's a well written document. It's just when I when I look at. When I look at the work that it's going to require, I just wonder how all that work or how even a heavy percentage of that work is going to get done. And I certainly have no idea whether we whether it's even feasible that we're going to meet those goals and objectives. So, you know, this gives us by by including this in our town plan. My understanding is it gives us better standing. Sandy and Act 250 hearings and other administrative hearings relating to. Relating to energy proposals in town. Sorry, yes, this is Sandy Levine. My understanding is that if this is adopted by the town, it would be referred to in energy decisions at the state level that they would be making. So it potentially it potentially gives us more control about how things are these things are rolled out over time. But, you know, when you sit there and read these goals and objectives of they realistic or they possible, you know, I don't know. But we're just going to have to do our best to do whatever we can do, I guess, is the answer. And it's all part of the time planning process. It's an aspect of the document. I'm sorry, Mary. It's an aspirational document. I'll say I plans over it. I didn't have time to really read it carefully. It's really hard how you take one piece out and another piece falls. I mean, it's really hard to think of how you might have ended. That's exactly right. That's exactly right. Yes, Steve. Peter, I also read that from one side to the other. And I went back through it again. I mean, I guess I have questions, but I guess for me, some of this, I really need to try to digest this a little bit more before I make any recommendations or other than one thing that stood out for me was one of the things where they were talking about subdivision regulations are revised and adopted or road ordinance is adopted to discourage further upgrades of class four roads. I don't think that's a wise thing to put in there in the sense that we have a couple of class four roads in this town that would benefit the town and benefit probably landowners. If, you know, as people build out, there's a couple of these class four roads that would it would benefit so you did not going up the road and back down and then going all the way around and doing the other end, it would be beneficial to go straight through. So I think something like that I don't think should be in there. But I again, I really need to look at this whole thing again and digest a bunch of this before I make a lot of recommendations. Peter, do you see do you see Dexter? Yes, Dexter, I'm Dexter. I guess I don't need to introduce myself. I'm on the Energy Committee, the Middlesex Energy Committee, and I've been on the Energy Committee for several years. And we've been going through this document maybe for almost a year. I think we started in the spring as a committee. The review of the document never really gained traction with the committee. I became really the sole reviewer. And the committee has a number of objections to the plan that haven't been addressed. And, you know, personally, I just have concerns about it as well. The committee did not endorse the plan. The committee felt that it needs more time to really digest it and understand it. And, you know, be that known that it's been on the table in front of the committee for nine months, more or less at this point. And the committee of people who are, you know, wholeheartedly committed to good energy policy are ones who would make this a priority more than others. And we just haven't had a chance to digest it as a whole. And I think, you know, like what Steve brought up about Class 4 Roads, I think that's an example of some of the problems with this this plan and some of the objectives. And to summarize it from my viewpoint, it seems to put, you know, energy renewable energy objectives higher than any other objective. It overlooks the needs of the individual, the financial needs of individuals, the financial needs of towns. And, you know, I think how that relates to upgrading Class 4 Roads is a good example. It's basically saying, you know, we've got to make energy energy reduction a priority over people's financial situation and other economic needs. I just think that that's bad policy and I also want to mention that about the state comprehensive energy plan. This middle sex enhanced energy plan is based on the 2016 state energy plan. That is due the new one is due to be upgraded in six years, which is 2022. It is to be released in January. This plan will be obsolete. The data in this plan relies heavily on the 2016 plan and it will be obsolete the day that 2022 report is issued. So I think we'd be wise from that standpoint to delay and think about incorporating the latest guidance from the state into the plan. And it goes to like what's what Steve and Peter were saying was that they just didn't have enough time to get through it. I think the energy committee and I'm not here to speak for the energy committee, but as a member of the energy committee, I think that we'd like more time to really digest these things and have more dialogue with the Planning Commission. So just I just want to understand my understanding, Sandy, of the reason for the public hearing January 4th is so this could be voted at town meeting. Is that correct? That's correct. So it could be on the ballot on meeting and just if we make the decision, some kind of decision for more time. And certainly there's time between now and January 4th for any comments or suggested changes. They can come out as part of the part of the public hearing process. But if that isn't enough time, then we're saying I don't know what we're saying that we're going to consider at the general election. Is there is there some? Is there just hold on a minute, Sarah. Is there some reason, Sandy, other than just a just a goal to get this behind us that we wanted to vote on at a town meeting? And the effort was to have it be voted on at a time that we're voting on other things, and that would be either a general election in November or town meeting. And secondly, you'll remember this is held over from before we had this, you know, by and large prepared in 2020 and presented it to the Select Board. And did not because, you know, covid and other things and everybody was dealing with other things did not move forward. So we took a step back, went back, worked with the energy committee. Theo was a representative from the Planning Commission, who in my understanding, he went to nearly all of the energy committee meetings to work through and, you know, incorporate changes that that were were recommended from that group. So, you know, is it is it already a year older? Yes, it's already a year older than it was from when it was originally presented to the Select Board. Other comments, anyone? I had a couple more. OK, go ahead. But I would if you have if you have specific changes you'd like to recommend, I would suggest you submit them in writing. I mean, I don't know what I know the board's going to make it might make a decision tonight and I feel like my comments might be helpful to the board's decision. Go ahead. The document contains a lot of goals and the goals in the document are derived from the 2016 plan. They are taking statewide numbers and. Applying them proportionally to middle sex. So there is information in the plan like it states that 58 percent of the energy consumption in middle sex is commercial. So it's got a lot of numbers in there that just aren't based in reality for middle sex, that generic numbers derived from statewide or sometimes regional numbers and they're not valid in their goals. They're in there as goals. And the concern is is that, you know, in Act 250 compliance with the regional plan with the town plan is a requirement that may be true in certain aspects of our town zoning as well. And in the committee, the energy committee was clear that they did not want energy policy to drive land use policy. And this document clearly links land use policy to energy policy. And the last point I want to make about about the energy committee's request was that compliance with these goals and recommendations be voluntary for the people of the town. And again, as this relates to Act 250, Act 248 and local zoning, these goals become mandatory and the energy plan can be used as a political weapon to stop development if the development or the town is out of compliance with the energy goals of the plan. And remember, the energy goals of the plan are based on numbers based in 2016 that will be out of date in January of 2022. I think that's all I had. OK, thank you for allowing me to continue here. No, that's not so just to be clear, though, this is your personal opinion, not an opinion of the energy committee. Yes, the energy committee really didn't have time to consider the report in whole, nor did they have time to develop an opinion as a group. And we met last night and talked about this and they encouraged me to come tonight and and speak for myself. Can I just clarify, Dexter, when you said they do not endorse it, you don't mean to say that they've looked at it and said, we don't endorse this. They have not yet made a decision to whether or not to endorse it. Is that correct? That's correct. OK. In a perfect world, Dexter, how much time do you need if you've had two years? I've been through it, but the rest of the committee hasn't been able to engage. They're not really the document is really kind of all you read through it. It's not the friendliest thing in the world to. It's not like easy reading. I'm not giving you a hard time. I'm just saying I've been able to look at it in two years. What's the likelihood that they're going to look at it in another year? Are we going to be sitting here next next October in the same place we are now? You know, I guess that goes back. You know, I think that that's a good question. And I think it's symptomatic of what's going on here is that this is like a state down a state down state handed down template that dumps a lot of responsibility on the town like the energy committee, like our staff that are already working hard to do what they need to do. It's just more, more workload without a without a means to to complete it. Can you imagine if we had to hire a staff to to to to implement the plan? How much time would the energy committee hold on a second, Sarah? How much time would the energy committee need to come up with a specific list of recommended changes? And I know you know, you're I I'd say three or four months. We went through all the sections except for electrical use. So that'd be the last section we'd have to review as a as a group. And then we would have to meet and and see how our comments have been addressed in the current plan. So I think that's at least two meetings for us. We do meet monthly, but we have a hard, you know, we have a hard time getting people. It's only three of us last night. Oh, I know the issues. I know the issues. Sarah, yes. OK, I just want to make sure that the board understands that you don't have to make a decision tonight on this. The last day to notice this is January 28th. So in other words, the board can hold a hearing on the on the 4th of January. As long as you have as long as it's on the warning or not on the warning, that's the final deadline. So you do not have to make a change. All you have to do tonight is make changes to the plan. Fifty within 15 outside of 15 days before the public hearing. That's not that's not either accepting or denying the plan. You can do that after the public hearing. Does that make sense? We can also make changes after the public hearing, correct? You can. Yes. That's what the public hearing is for. Otherwise, there would be no point in having a public hearing. So I guess I guess what I would suggest is that we go ahead and unless people have specific changes tonight, we've we've forwarded the plan to the public hearing process as it currently exists and encourage the energy committee and anyone else who may be interested in this to come back with suggested changes. And then we're going to have to make a decision after the public hearing, whether we're going to go ahead for a town meeting day vote or whether we're going to going to need more time and potentially either have a special election, which I I always hate special elections. But if the worst case is if the worst case is that had to wait until next November or maybe the maybe the primary, I don't know. But anyway, we can make we can make that decision down the road. But I don't think we're I mean, I'm not ready to to recommend specific changes tonight and I haven't heard the only specific change we've heard is the suggestion from Steve about the class four, the class four roads. Well, we did hear a recommendation from Dexter to delay it right now. Oh, I understand, but he didn't have any specific changes. Right. Right.  Anyway, we need to move forward to this, but we don't want to we don't want to move forward and create a problem and make a mistake either. And, you know, I guess the other thing about delaying it, and I'm not sure how how germane it is, but if this new state energy plan is coming out to update this to be in conformance with the new state energy plan might make some sense. I don't know how different the new plan is going to be from the from the old plan. I have no idea. It's radically different. Sandy, do you have a comment on that? I don't I don't I haven't I don't know what the new energy plan is going to be, obviously. And I do know that sometimes those get delayed as well. And there's nothing stopping changing this. It needs to change based on the new energy plan when that's adopted. But this is essentially what actions would I think. Actions and goals for middle sex in light of the state's energy goals and policies that are both in statute and in the state's energy plan that's been in place since 2016. Well, I guess I guess what I would suggest is a motion to move forward with a public hearing as as plan and and see where we are after that. And I don't know whether it makes sense to delay or not. That gives me some time to think about it and all the rest of us in time to think about it. We've got a lot of play and a lot to think about. But I don't see any reason not to go ahead with the with a public hearing. And we may get some other some other good comments at the public hearing. Right. So yes, Sarah, what you should do is just is just not make any changes to the plan before the public hearing. That's all you have to do. The public hearing has already been warned at the yin and yang. So you're going to have to have it no matter what. Right. So we don't need a motion. You don't think you need a motion. You just have you haven't made any changes. If you'd made some changes, you would have had to you would have had to make a motion on those. We don't need to take any any action. We just we just don't make any changes now and wait to life for the public hearing. That's right. That's the way it's warned. OK, perfect. OK, anything else on that subject? So now. Considering the following motion that the public good necessity and convenience of the inhabitants of the town of Middlesex require discontinuance of an 832 foot long segment of Dolan Road, such segment being I'm not going to read this whole whole thing to you, you all got it in front of you. Way behind. This is this is a way, you know, the end of our our process or not the end of our process, but the next step in our process of having this not be a a town road, but be a trail. And again, the reason for the reason for doing this to remind everybody was that if we kept it as a class four town road, we were going to incur significant extra maybe extravagant expenses to upgrade that road to to meet the required meet the required standards. So by making it a trail, we we dodge that expense. And certainly the condition it's in now, it is it is virtually a trail is in our road. So somebody willing to make a motion on that, we do we need to have discussion? Where we stand? I'll make that motion that we have that segment as a trail. I'll second it. No, no, we make the motion that we are discontinuing it. Right. And you know, yeah, I don't know if this needs to be read into the record. Do you want me to read it really fast so we can just get it into the record? Go ahead, please. Go ahead. OK, so the the motion would be that for the good public, the public good necessity and convenience of the inhabitants of the town of middle sex required discontinuance of an 832 832 foot long segment of Dolan Road, such segment being the class four portion of the highway, which segment is further described as being 190 feet north, northeasterly of Dolan Road's intersection with Boulder Contangled Town Road and proceeding in her 32 feet on and along Dolan Road in a generally north, northeasterly direction. Steve moved to approve that discontinuance and that wording, which I'll put into the minutes. OK. And Liz, who said I said. OK, thank you. So all those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? OK. I think it should note also that the select board did a viewing of the road. I forget the date November 8th. Nobody remembers when we did it. Oh, wait, just I got to say something here. So you guys, you also you were sent the report of findings of the town of middle sex left ward. That's what your that states that states the entire procedural history. So what you're going to do is you this is when this order here is what you just approved for the public good and necessity convenience that happens. The blah, blah, blah. Now I just need someone to designate as a legal trail and then we're done. So can someone designate one more? We need one more. We've discontinued the class four road. Now we need a second motion, which is to reclassify what was formerly the class four section of Dull and Road to a trail. Right. So moved. Thank you, fellas, or a second. Second. OK, seconded, Steve. Steve. Yep. OK. All those in favor of that motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? OK, thank you. You guys are just going to need to sign the order and then we can record it and we're done. We'll send it to the state of Vermont. Thank you. OK, so do we all need to we all need to sign it? Well, do you say how you should? I mean, OK, we leave it out there. OK, OK. Thank you. Highway report. Victor. Yes, would you like to entertain the the body for the new truck, the body and the wing and the plow and the sander? That you got. I assume you got a copy of it today, right? Yes. Yes. And it's for the eighty two eighty six thousand two hundred and twelve dollars. So the the issue was Shane Shane called me last week and said, are we all set to order the equipment on the truck from Tenco? And I said, well, I can't remember exactly what action we took on that. I went back and looked through the minutes. He went back and looked through the minutes and we couldn't find. I know we discussed it, but I don't think we ever agreed that that's what we were going to do. Initially, we were going to get a get a second proposal, which basically didn't work out. We needed to go with Tenco and I think we had discussed that we would go with Tenco, but I don't think we ever actually took action to do it. So that's absolutely correct. I wanted to make sure and considering that we were going to have a meeting tonight, I wanted to make absolutely sure that we had it in the minutes, that's what we wanted to do before he placed that order. So that's why it's come before us again. So I would appreciate a motion that we pursue the Tenco proposal for the equipment on the new town truck. Is there someone willing to make that motion? I'll make that. OK, everybody, everybody spoke. We're all excited to I'll move it, Liz. OK, and is there a second, Phil? OK, all in favor, all in favor of accepting the Tenco proposal for the equipment on the new truck, please say aye. Aye, aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? OK, good. What else have you got, Victor, anything? Um, we got the we finally got the freight liner back and it's running. The liner was out for quite a while. Yeah. And it's back and it's working. So now we have three trucks. We're kind of in. And we have our new road crew member of work. Yes, we do. We do. Come on, we could go Monday. We could go yesterday. Yeah. Yeah. Steve McLaren. Yeah, he's learned his route. He's all good to go. That's all good to go. The problem with the concentra or whoever it is, lost his drug test. But we're doing one with that. I'm even up to get one today, please. Yes, I believe you did. Yeah. OK, thank you. Any questions for any questions for Victor? OK, thank you, Victor. Thank you. Uh, so here we go, the fund, the fund goes on and on. Considering a townwide COVID-19 mask mandate is permitted under special legislation signed by the governor in November 23rd, 2021. Action likely comments, thoughts. What do you think? I don't think we need one.  And I'm just not sure there's another business that we have that has that kind of traffic. I don't I just I just don't think we need it. Well, I think Roots gets a lot of traffic in the filling station. Yeah. And it's mandates, masks. And sticks and stuff sticks and stuff would probably be the potentially the other one. I just think I just think that. The state really passed the buck to us. If there's if there should be a mask mandate, it should come down from the state, it shouldn't be a 10 by 10 decision. So I, first of all, resent that they impose that on us. Our road crew is dead set against a mask mandate in the town garage and the town vehicles, the fire department has written us a letter saying they are dead set against the mask mandate. Sarah has implemented a mask mandate at the town hall.  I mean, we've never been able to give out tickets for our dog ordinance or a junk ordinance or any of our other things. And I can tell you, I don't plan on spending my winter going around with a clipboard, checking to make sure that people are wearing masks when they go into these places. So I think it's just beyond beyond what the town has the capability to do or enforce. And I think we got to rely on the individual businesses. So I did reach out to Red Hen to ask them what they thought about this, if they were in favor of a mask mandate. And they said that they were. They said that it's easier when your business is not an outlier in terms of having a mask rule and they like the fact that their employees don't have to be. You know, wouldn't have to be and they still do, you know, have to speak to customers who say to them, why do I have to wear a mask? And that makes it challenging for them. So they are 100 according to their email, 110 percent in favor of a mask mandate. I did send this email to Sarah, but I don't know that she sent it out to you guys. So I just wanted that for the record that Red Hen is 110 percent in favor of a mask mandate. That's why I would prefer that it come down from the state and not from us. I mean, what what's going to happen if we do have a mask mandate? Who's going to enforce it? It's still going to be their employees doing it. I mean, they can say I'm just saying that this is what we're going to do today, but who's going to enforce it? Oh, yes, Victor. Yeah, it's it's I agree with you from a different aspect. Pretty hard to legislate personal responsibility. Hey, nobody's saying you don't nobody's saying you can't wear a mask. And and, you know, as far as, you know, as far as it's your own personal responsibility if to wear a mask, if you want to protect those around you and yourself. So I don't see any reason for mandating it, because like you said, nobody, nobody, there's nobody to enforce it. I also read some articles about or I didn't I'm sorry. This I heard this article on the radio from an epidemiology standpoint that. The mask mandates work when they're statewide. Because everyone has to do it and that there's no sort of reason to believe that a town by town is going to have any effect. Because you'll go to the next town. I mean, I go to bury no one wears a mask and bury in the stores or half the half the people do, right? So, you know, that's not protecting the greater good of the citizens of Vermont by having a mask mandate. I'm all in favor of masks and I'm all in favor of mask mandates, but not necessarily on where the towns are required to make those individual decisions. I think that probably has little effect on a town or size. And I think honestly, if anything, it's going to cause more divide among regular townspeople. Then cause actual preventing of death, which masks do help with. So that's where I'm coming from.  I am a resident of middle sex and I just hopped on about this mask mandate. You know, even if it does come down from the state, nobody is people are going to make their own decisions about wearing the mask. So I definitely agree that having the town do their own mask mandate isn't going to make a difference on if people wear the mask or if they don't wear the mask, that's just what I've seen and what my opinion is. And I work in Williston. So, you know, I definitely see the different different people wearing masks or not wearing masks. And it just it all depends on their comfortability with. Society, I guess. Yeah, thanks. Sarah Chelsea, I need your last name. It's Sharky. Sorry. OK, that's fine. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, Chelsea. Other comments I see you zoomed in, Sandra. I did. I agree with Red Hand. It's it's it's truly a tough one. I mean, I I kind of think we should have a statewide mask mandate, but that doesn't provide any any enforcement either. But I would say when we had the statewide mask mandate, there were a lot more people wearing masks than there are now. But I think a lot of that has to do with people just being sick and tired of wearing wearing masks. It's interesting. It's interesting in Montpelier. Most people seem to be wearing masks inside. Most people, not everyone, but most people. And I agree in Barry, it's a different world over in Barry. It seems to be a little bit of a different world in Waterbury. So I don't know. I don't know. But I guess if if no one if no one wants to make a motion that we implement a mask mandate, we're not going to implement one. Chris has his hand raised. Excuse me. I saw that Chris has his hand. Oh, I'm sorry, my Chris. You're muted, Chris. Thank you very much. I would be in favor of mask mandate, even though it is not forceable just as a statement that we think it's important and would help the Red Hand out because then it's we're doing it not to be standoffish or but we're required to do it, even though they're doing it already. The other rationale of saying it's not going to make a difference. I don't think we would apply that to our energy policy if we have an individual town and energy policy designed to help with the global warming and the climate change, you know, a lot of towns are acting individually with the understanding that it is however incremental is going to make a difference. So I think it can be an important political statement to make. Even though it's not enforceable, I understand it's not enforceable in any practical way, but some people will respond to it just because if the town said to do it, it's the ordinance here and it just gives a little bit of a nudge to folks who might not otherwise use a mask. Thanks. So let me ask let me ask you all this or go ahead, Sarah. Just want to get into the record that Jeff Koons speaking, as I think I sent you that email today, Jeff Koons speaking as a resident was also opposed to the mask mandate. Let's get that out there. So I've been thinking about this and the question is, is there possibly middle ground here like can we have a resolution that the town of Middlesex recommends mask wearing indoors? It's not not an ordinance. It's not a mandate. It's a recommendation. I mean, does that mean some of some of Chris's thoughts and some of the thoughts of the Red Hen give them a little give them a little support or backup without having a without having a mandate? I don't know the answer to that question, but it's just an idea I have. I've seen you have a question and then Dexter. Yep. Thanks for taking my comment. JJ VanDette, I live in Center Road, a new resident of town. I am just here to express my opinion that we should not have a mask mandate. Red Hen is doing a good job as they are. I'm in there. I have a little bit of an espresso addiction. I'm in there often and they are people walking without masks. They asked me to put it on. I've seen no conflict over it and I'm in there three to four days a week. I also frequent routes, get a lot of my vegetables at Roots. They have great organic vegetables, mask mandate they adhere to. No problems there. When I go to sticks and stuff, got a lot of work to do in this old farmhouse. No masks, no problem there. So the businesses are doing fine as it is, no additional regulation, no additional hurdles, no questions about how to enforce this. Less is more in this instance. That's my opinion and I hope you consider it. Thanks. Those no fix and stuff. Where's a mask? Is that what you're saying? They don't have a requirement and I've been in there probably once a week for the past few months. You see them rarely at sticks and stuff, which is people wear them if they want to and they don't if they don't, which is, you know, their preference. Dexter. I just want to, you know, really take the same stand as JJ. I don't support a mask mandate. I think that the current situation that businesses in town are doing is working quite well. I think this is something that should be voluntary. I also want to point out that it seems like one select board member reached out to one business and is using that as a basis to suggest that the mandate is desirable by business. And I'm just going to state that there are many other businesses that have not been contacted and haven't had the equal opportunity to share their opinion yet that I would not advise putting a lot of weight on that one piece of information. Thanks. So what is everyone? What about the idea of making it a recommendation? Can I speak to that, Peter? Thank you, Sandy Levine. I will say I found it helpful when the Planning Commission held a public hearing and there were members of the public present for to be able to say it's the town policy to have a mask within the town offices. There were people there, no idea who they were, no idea what vaccination status was and so on. It just I felt it equalized the ability of people to participate and to participate safely in town government. So I guess I would support to the extent you can, continuing a policy to have masks with me within the town. Well, I think I think we are and correct me if I'm if I'm incorrect on this, Sarah, but but the plan is that in the town hall, the policy is going to be masks are on. So not in the fire department, not in the town garage, but in the town hall. Yes, as speaking as town clerk, I can only control the town clerk office. I can't control all of town hall. That's that's the select board's purview when the town clerk policy is that people coming into the town clerk's office need to wear a mask for all sorts of reasons, the least of which is that we've got tiny space and I don't know who's what vaccination status is going on here. I'll be quite frank with you and tell you that when we don't have people coming in when it's to Rinda, Cheryl, Eric and myself, we don't wear masks because, you know, I'm boosted, the trend is boosted, we're all we've all feel very comfortable in what we have. But so I don't want to wear masks all the time. But on the other hand, I don't know who's coming in. I could have I had a guy come in the other day with someone we know and love in town who doesn't have who had COVID last month, who is has not been vaccinated, who will not be vaccinated. He came in without wearing a mask. I have to worry about a 99 year old person living on my street coming in and whether or not she's vulnerable. Therefore, he has to wear a mask. Did he wear a mask? No. But, you know, I have at least I don't have any problem kicking people out ever on situations like that. So but you guys have to control town hall. Well, I mean, potentially that potentially that that's an easy one. We can adopt a policy which says our policies that says in the town hall you wear a mask, but that isn't that isn't a townwide mandate, which pertains to all the businesses in town. And I can I can tell you that Dorenda, I'm not going to follow it if I'm the only one in the town hall or if I'm there with I was about to say that. So so how do we how do we deal with that? It's it's going to make some responsibility thing, I guess. I don't know if you make the policy that it's that it's mandated that you wear a mask here, then even the folks working here have to wear a mask here. That can't be that can't be selective. Well, I agree that that's that's the problem. So I'm firmly against a mask mandate. I believe it's personal responsibility myself. And I agree with Dexter and JJ. Those businesses that are that are asking people or have their own policies. They're handling it well. Let's leave it at that. I do believe less is more here to follow up with JJ. Can we pass over it and just not vote on it at all? Yeah. Yes. Would you like to make the motion that we pass over less? Just wondering. I don't know that I'm ready to do that right this second. OK. Comments or questions? I know that we pass over the townwide covid mask mandate. Is there a second to that motion? I'll second that, Peter. OK, Steve, so it's been moved and seconded that we pass over the mask mandate question. All those in favor of that motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Abstaining. I don't think we heard from Liz and Mary. You're abstaining, Mary. Yeah, I'm opposing. Oh, OK, you're opposing and Mary's abstaining. So I oppose it, but yeah, I'll oppose it. OK, so we have we have three voting in favor of passing over it and two and two opposing, so the so the motion passes and we passed over the article. Not to say we can't take it up again in the future, but you decided for tonight. Um, OK, here's a good one. Considering the school's request, WCUUSD's request that the town mail out the WCUUSD ballots for the March one two thousand twenty two school meeting to all active registered voters. All five towns in the school district must agree to this action likely. Did we get any update on what's going on in the other town? Sarah, by chance. Yes. So here's what we know so far. We know that last night, Berlin just did what you do with the TAT mask mandate. They passed over it, so they didn't make a decision. Their next meeting is the is after the deadline for for the school district's deadline to have a response to this. And Berlin, Eastman player voted in favor. And so did Worcester and Kallus has yet to take it up. They have a meeting next Monday. And the decision needs to be made by the 15th. It has to be unanimous. So if if Berlin has voted to pass over and there's no time for them to reconsider, it's not a unanimous decision. So. It's not going to happen. Right. It's Christmas Day still on. I'm sorry, I don't have all the face. I am. I am and we're just hoping that you will vote on it one way or another. Who knows whether Berlin will have an emergency meeting just to address this. It's a little surprising and disappointing that they did pass over it just because it makes it easier, I think, all around to have a uniform method of mailing out the ballots. But didn't you say Eastman player? Oh, past it. Past it. That's OK. OK, yeah, approved. They will they will mail. So, Chris, I'm don't don't don't we need an emotion that you're going to pay the cost of doing that? I saw your letter saying you were going to do it, but it's not part of the motion. Is it? It's not, but I hope we're dependable enough that we'll do what we say we're going to do in terms of paying the cost.  I think that's happened last year. Is that right, Sarah? Yep. Was there any problem? Was there any problem getting paid? With the I'm trying to remember, I think there was an issue. I'm sorry, Peter, for speaking out of turn. But the I think there was an issue about labor. One of these years, there was an issue that might have been two thousand nineteen when we had all those special elections and we started charging the school district because we had so many costs involved with, I think, four or five special elections. But as for twenty twenty, I'm trying to remember. I'm trying to, you know, it's such a blur because I don't know what the state paid for, etc. Derrinda knows. Derrinda's got her hand up. Yes, Derrinda. Well, I was going to say, I thought COVID money covered the mailing. It covered the mailing from twenty twenty two. I'm still dealing with the I'm referring to the twenty nineteen when we had those special elections, we started I don't know. I was talking about last year they covered it. Yeah, there was a problem one year. The only question I have, Chris, and, you know, help me out here is, why should it be the town's responsibility to do this? Because I think it makes it a more uniform process. And my my impression is that the town clerks got together as a group and talked about this a year or two ago. Sarah, is that correct or not? Or am I just remembering? So the bottom line is that schools, school districts have no authority to administer elections, period. Full stop, something we've gone through repeatedly since two thousand nineteen. We used to be the Middlesex Town School District, and I was theoretically the clerk of the Middlesex Town School District. And therefore the relationship between running a school election and was much clearer and it has not that legislature hasn't caught up. The Department of Education hasn't caught up. The Secretary of State's office hasn't cut up. So basically town clerks are in charge of running school elections. The issue is, as always, because we have a merged school district, we all have to act in the same uniform way. And so we can't have people voting if the, you know, coming in and asking for absentee ballots, it's got to be uniform because we've got these five, we've got these five towns merged into one school district. If you do decide to mail all ballots, I would do what I think Eastmont Pillar is going to do, and that is I would just turn over a checklist to Eastmont Pillar to jet service and let them print and mail all the ballots. And, you know, the school district can send their, their ballot, which they format, they can send it to jet service. I wouldn't do anything except receive the ballots when they're returned and put them into the box. There's also something to consider that we may have another school election involving the Barrie, the Career Center, Divert, Divert Vesting or whatever from Barrie Town School District or the Barrie City School District. So that is going to be an added complication. And in that case, again, all the towns, we've got many, many, many more towns than the five towns have to also agree in the same voting method. So this is a pretty complicated. situation. So what I'm hearing is we should do it. I'm not making any recommendation, but Dorenda has her hand up. So I'm. I just have a question. I don't know if it's even relevant to this, but the school district is asking us to do this, but yet we are asking the school if we can hold our election in their building. And from what I understand, we're getting a little bit of a kickback from that, that that may not be possible. And so I just find it kind of ironic that we're asking to do this portion of it, but yet we can't hold our election there. I don't know if there's any comment on that or not. Give me an election, Dorenda. The town meeting that we've asked if we can use the school. We haven't gotten a definitive answer, but the rumor mill is that they're not unless we bring in a cleaning crew at nine o'clock at night to clean the school or something like that.  So, Dorenda, I have a meeting with Jen Miller Arsenal tomorrow morning at nine and we will discuss this and I will point out that the town of Middlesex has an easement over the school property that we put in place before the merger that provides for access. But that being said, there probably is a significant concern about the covid. You know, and, you know, they're looking after students and teaching and staff and things like that. So, but I will get back to you folks after I meet or get back to Sarah after I meet with Jen Miller Arsenal tomorrow morning. OK, thank you, Chris. I mean, the irony of this is that the legislature can have a special session to pass this mask mandate thing, but why didn't they take up the issue of town meeting and how that was going to be conducted at their at their special meeting? It's just irresponsible to me that we're not even going to know what they're going to do until after January 15. And at the same time, we may or may not be able to use the school. How the hell are we going to have a town meeting if we can't use the school? We're going to have to put up a tent somewhere. I mean, I don't know, which is it's frustrating to me that we can't get can't get clear, can't get clear direction on this. But we've got what we've got, I guess. But yes, if you could get back to us, that would be. I will. OK. OK, so where does that where does that leave us on the valid issue? I think we should do it. As Sarah said, it's not going to be a tremendous problem for her to do it and has to be done uniformly. And I just think that we shouldn't, even though I think we're. We want to use that building. I just don't think that we should withhold the ability of us to do something that we can do easily. And I'm not even certain, although Chris didn't address it, that they have the capability to do is townwide mailing themselves. But I agree that we solve problems, Mary. I'm sorry. Money. I just made the snarky remark that money solves all problems. I think the other thing is that if the statute says that they don't have the authority to do elections, that it makes sense for us to support having elections that are valid elections for those places where our kids go to school, even though if we have difference, other issues, I agree. I agree. So are you willing to make that motion, Mary? Can I before you get going, I just want to just raise some another issue. We're going to have you're going to have if you vote to have all the school ballots mailed and let's say town meeting is held in person. It's going to be it's going to or we're going to have a really weird dilemma. People are going to get these ballots in the mail. They're going to they're not going to know is this all of the election? I mean, there's no consistency. If we were, I know that as a town clerk, I feel much more comfortable if we did, if it were one uniform approach. I realize we can't do that because we don't have the authority. You don't have the authority to do that, but we're going to have. Whereas it stands right now, we're going to have an in-person town meeting. People will have to request absentee ballots for the town meeting, except all they can vote on our town officers and perhaps the energy plan. If it gets to that stage, then you're going to have to have, but everybody is going to receive a school ballot. Dude, do you know what I mean? It's it's it's really kind of mixed up. I guess my question to Chris is why is the school district taking this approach? Why don't they just since since we're we still have to hold the town meetings the way our towns have voted to hold town meetings? Why are you now insisting that everybody be mailed a school ballot? Sorry, I don't know the answer to that, but I will find out and relay. I really don't know the answer to it. OK, well, the board's not going to meet again. My guess would be it's COVID related, but I don't know that for a fact. But the school board knew that we still have to have time. We don't have the authority to mail everybody complete ballots like we did last year. Australian ballots, right? You know what I it hasn't to me, it hasn't come up in an in-depth discussion like that.  And I guess my second question is what's with December 15th? Deadline, why can't you guys go to the to January? Again, I didn't set the deadline, so I don't know the answer to that either. But I will get you know, if you want to. When to know when you are next meeting is the twenty first. I think it's already a loop point because Berlin passed over. Not if no, because they're not at a time to have it done if they had a meeting. But you're right. I mean, that that seems out to me that you need the uniformity in order to report to happen, because it's one one can hold up the whole gum up the whole works, which doesn't make sense, but I mean, they the time has not expired yet. OK. But again, like, like you just said, the authority to hold elections rests with the town. So why would the union school district need to have all five do it the same way? Isn't it really up to each individual town to decide how they want to handle this? I think we were looking for uniformity to avoid conflict. In terms of. Now it's fireman or anything like that. Is it or what whatever your agreement is to merge? Is it that everything has to be done? It has to be done exactly the same way in every town. I don't think that's in the Articles of Agreement in terms of the again. Handle. Elections, I don't think that would have been part of the Articles of Agreement. So I know you got your hand up, Sarah. Just last year, Berlin also didn't mail. They didn't mail everything out as well. But this Rosemary was going to she was I think she was going to take. My understanding was that she was insisting on mailing out the individual ballots and I believe that then the school district come in and pick up the cost or send something to Jet Service. I believe they kind of intervened in the Berlin situation. Didn't they last year? Do you remember? I don't remember that. It's just, you know, that's I'm wondering if that's another scenario that if that, you know, that the school district should say find four towns voted for this one town's not going to do it. So there are ballots, so we're just going to send everything to Jet Service. I don't know. You mean a mailing list of voters? Just give us your checklist. But then, well, then why wouldn't we just do that? I don't know. Generally. I don't know why why why do it for the obstructionist? Yeah, I don't think I don't know. Thanks. That's his hand up. Yeah. Oh, I don't I've got a lot of frustration with the WCUSD. They're just basically conducting business without public comment. Chris, not understanding the basis for the request is just a symptom of the dysfunction over there. They are not a good neighbor. I think Berlin is very much aware of the lack of neighborliness as the as the district tries to sell off land to the mall from the elementary school property. So anyway, I just wanted to quickly say that that I don't see any reason to be excessively helpful to that district right now. They've got some real functional issues. Thanks. So I'm still going to make the motion. It may not even get a second. Make the motion, Mary. I just did. Well, we've come across. I'm sorry. OK, I make the motion that the town of Middlesex mail the the WCUSD ballots for the March for 2022 school meeting to all active registered voters in the town. Is there a second to Mary's motion? There you have it. So the motion fails for for lack of a second. Yeah. So is there a motion to pass over? What are we going to do? It's on what you want me to leave lights on? Yeah, just to put you on. I'll make a motion that we pass over that. I'll second that. OK, what's been moved and seconded to to pass over the request, which will allow us, Chris, if all of a sudden Berlin steps up to the plate and as a special meeting, God knows, we've been having plenty of quick special meetings lately. So we could come back and we could come back and reconsider that, depending on what happens and you want to take a vote on that? Yeah, I haven't yet, but I will. So all in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstentions or did everybody vote aye? Yes, voted aye. OK, unanimous. We've we've we've passed over. Chris, well, while we got you here, I do I do just have one other comment. And I am I have been very concerned about the Seesaman issue as well. And I I do really understand all of all the covid stuff and everything that's that's been going on, but we've had a lot of, shall we say, obstructionist type behavior on behalf of the school district when it comes to using the school, whether it's for summer concerts when the kids aren't even in the school, etc., etc., etc. So at some point in time, we need to focus on that and figure out what the rules of engagement are going to be. And if the school district really is going to deny the town access per the terms of that easement, we'll have to consider pursuing legal action or whatever we have to do, I guess. I haven't read that easement in a while, but my memory is it was pretty pretty broad straightforward, but maybe it is. I don't disagree with you because I read it the other day. And I think it is pretty clear that there's access and not with permission. You know, I think you coordinate, but it's not a I don't think it's a matter of grace, in other words. So let me just describe the obstruction for me, please. What that means access. OK, like we tried to do something and we were told no, we couldn't do it after this was for the capital spending plan. We had something to range, Susan and I, now I can't remember what it was, but they said yes and then they said no. And who's the decision-making or who said? I assume it was the principal. I have no idea. I'd have to ask Susan Clark, but it was a little bit disheartening. And I will say, Chris, that like as we're thinking about the future of the town hall, we have to be very sure that we have access to a building to do our town meeting, you know, have large groups of towns people in it, which is was intended to be the school. And I just feel like, you know, we are not getting that vibe from them right now. And maybe it's just COVID, but we're we're feeling like it's not our building to have town functions in that. But who is the they? I mean, is it the principal of the school or somebody from the administrative offices or both? I think for our town thing that we were going to do, it was the principal said no. But I don't I don't want to say that. I don't quote. Yeah. All I'm saying all I'm saying is we have a new we have a new superintendent in place. We have a new principal. We have there are a lot of moving parts to this, but we need to clarify what the rules of engagement are going to be on this easement. And if we can't agree with the school district on what the rules of engagement are going to be, then we have to we have to seek other action because it is it is important and it was an important consideration when we agreed to give away our school building. Well, Peter, just for clarity, we we didn't agree to give the school building the legislature compelled it. But but we took protective action purposely for this purpose to be able to have access to the school, not only school, but to the school property too. And so we built the easement in for that. For that very reason, I agree. The intention of the intention of the easement was that there wouldn't be an issue. Right. You know, I understand COVID came along. I'm all I'm saying is it's a it's a good time when we're discussing some of these other issues. And maybe you could just bring it up to bring it up to Jen when you're talking with her tomorrow morning at nine o'clock and not say we need to deal with it today. But the town is very concerned that we need to figure this out. Right. I will. Thank you. Thank you. Good night, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. OK, so we are on to discussion already the structure of the Middlesex Volunteer Fire Department and whether a question should be put to the voters on the March 1st town meeting action possible. I asked Sarah to put this on the on the meeting for tonight because at our next meeting is when we have our monthly meeting with the fire department. And my sense has been correct or incorrect. That there isn't a lot of interest in going ahead and putting an article on the warning to restructure the governance of the fire department. But I don't know that when I've when I brought it up for discussion. We don't have very much discussion. Nobody says anything. Nobody says nobody says here next. So I think it's time if not tonight, it's going to be time at our next meeting to fish and cut bait and either say we're going to go ahead and put this question of whether the. Town changes the fire department to the Middlesex Town Fire Department rather than the independent entity or whether we or whether we don't. I would also also make the comment that I feel over the course of the last year that we've made tremendous progress in terms of our relationship with the fire department and they have made real progress to address some of the issues that we were that we were concerned about. So, you know, maybe the thing is for the time being, we say we keep we keep working on working on what we're doing and that we don't we don't cause a big fewer in town by by putting this on the town meeting day ballot. I don't know what the sense of the board is. But I think now we said we were going to make a decision on this in September and we never did, then we were going to talk about it. I think in October or November, we never did. So here we are. What's your pleasure? Steve, I agree with you, Peter. I mean, they have they we have made a lot of progress with the fire department. I think things are working a lot better. I do apologize. I did not get in touch with the town of Waterbury like I was going to to get their sense of of what they are seeing or feeling from this. But I I think that for now, I think we should. I guess my feeling is that we should keep trying to improve that relationship with the fire department and keep things going in a positive direction. So I guess I'm saying that I don't think it should be on the ballot for this town meeting anyway. Thank you, other thoughts. Yes, Phil. I I would agree that they have made some progress and this that even the tone in terms of how they approach us is much better. However, I think we should put it on the ballot. I want to point out that we as a select board have the authority to make this change. But politically, I agree with you, Peter, that if we move forward, it's a question that we really ought to put before the voters. I think the model that we have is very outdated. There are very few of these nonprofit fire groups left around the state. And for me, I have a hard time getting by the fact that we provide, we literally own all of the assets that they use. We provide ninety nine point nine percent of their funding and a critical piece in having it be a town department is that the select board gets to appoint the chief. And I think that's a critical piece moving forward. So I would urge that we do put it on the ballot and try to resolve this once and for all. It needs it needs to be a town department. OK, I would agree with Phil. And I just want to say that if we do put it on the ballot, I think it's really important. I have a hard enough time understanding the pros and cons of either one that we need to have a very clear one pager for the town's people to review because they are not going to know what they're voting for. That's my biggest fear is that they have no idea what this even means. So if we decide to put it on the ballot, which I agree, meaning. So I guess what I meant to say is I don't think we alone should make that decision. I think that if this if we make this decision, it should be brought to the town to review as well, but that we need to educate the town about what this is, because it's it's not entirely still to me clear the the overall benefit besides the the the the chief business. I mean, could we leverage more money in other ways? Wouldn't that be great? You know, I don't know. And so I think it's super important that if there's someone who feels comfortable doing this one pager and it's not me about the benefits of one over the other, that has to be part of it. Well, I am.  There's also the financial record case side of which I brought up. I think the first came on as treasurer that we are paying all of their bills. We are we handle everything. We get. We pay for the insurance, you know, through their budget and all. But they do nothing. So I don't understand why they are a separate entity. And yet they file a tax return using the sixty some thousand dollars that we provide. And they also put a depreciation on the vehicles we own. And it just it doesn't make sense. It's like it's and it's been a concern for a while that it's being done that way. But if they're their own entity, they should have their own checkbook. We should hand money over to them and they should be handling it. But again, the town's been handling everything. And so it's like we're half into a separate department and half not. Right. I agree. I agree that we should put it on the ballot, but I think that we have to have a point of view. I don't think we can just put it out there and say, oh, you guys decide. So I guess I'm saying I think we should advance in some ways the points of view the field was done, but really do it in an educational way. Because I I mean, if I were faced with this and I didn't know what had been going on and we didn't know the full extent of the support that that that the town is giving us, you know, you're tempted to just stay with the way it is. I mean, I think we have to say we support having it be part of the town. So we have more control over the substantial amount of money we're giving them. Well, we definitely if if we're going to put this if we're going to put this on the town meeting, we as a board need to be prepared to say to the town that we put it on there because we support this and we think it's the right thing to do. And here's why, you know, in a perfect world, which unfortunately, I don't think we're going to get, it would be great if we could get the fire department to agree that this was a good thing so we could say to the town people, you know, the fire department and the select board are in favor of this. And here's why, whether, in fact, that can happen or not, I don't know. Well, we haven't asked we really at the next at our next meeting when we have the fire department here, we're going to find out, find out how they how they feel. I mean, there is there is, as you all know, some risk associated with this, that we might we might lose the progress we've made over the last year because a number of our firefighters might get upset that we don't want to be on a town fire department. I don't know the answer to that. But there is some risk that that something like that could happen. And we'd be right back in the right back in the in the soup again. But for me, the principle, and this is what I've been saying all along.  So it's no secret how I feel that I don't think it's right that the town, as Dorinda said, we pay all the bills. We provide all the money. We do all all of that. And yet. And yet we have no real control. I mean, we ultimately have control because we can say, you know, starting next year, we're not going to put any money in our budget to support you and, you know, good luck or or we're going to restrict the amount of money or whatever. But on a day to day, week to week, month to month basis, we have no control because once the voters approve that budget, we're we're into the next budget year and we're paying there. We're paying their bills again. No question. Yes, if it becomes a municipal fire department where we appoint the chief, does that chief have to be for middle sex? I don't think so. I'm not certain about that, but I don't think there's any requirement that he be for middle sex. I think we should probably find out. I found out. OK, I found out when I did research on this two years ago. No, he's not an elected official. The only reason why people have to be for middle sex for certain positions is they're elected. They're elected.   If you if you decided to have an appointed town clerk like East Montpelier has an appointed town clerk, you could she or he could come from anywhere. So the other the other question about this chief business is when we were talking about this the last time, whenever it was a couple of years ago, I think the concept and the idea was that the fire department would come forward with a recommendation for who would be the chief and we would approve it. So yes, we would actually be appointing, but they would do the recommended. So it's not like it's not like we're going to we're going to start interviewing people to see who we think would be the chief. At least that's how I think it would go. With the people who are on the volunteer fire department, they'll be volunteers if we're giving them stipends. Yeah. Yes. The answer.  And I think that we I mean, I felt like we had a breakthrough with them. You know, this summer, I can't remember the timing, but where we were, you know, saying this is not a bad thing, right? Like this is a good thing to be a part of the town. And and that, you know, we still we want to support you and we want to be there to be able to help you more, really. And, you know, I mean, I'm hoping that we continue with these, you know, monthly meetings that we have with them. I find them really useful and, you know, I think they have done a great job. And I think that's even sort of more of a reason why it's great to have them as a part of the town.  OK, so the process is going to be and I don't think we need we need a motion right now, but I believe we've got we've got a majority of the board or in favor of putting it on the putting it on the ballot that when we meet with the fire department in two weeks, we have a discussion about this and and tell them what we what we plan to do and that we hope we're going to have their support. And I don't know whether we should be warning them about that. I don't know how we how we want to handle it. I mean, it'll certainly be in the minutes. It's not like it's the secret what we've talked about tonight. Well, I'm yeah, and I'm sure they'll probably check in with Sarah or someone who attended the meeting too. I don't know to be truthful. I don't know whether they pay attention to what's on our what's on our agenda or they don't. Yes, Phil. We approach them and say that, you know, we've had this discussion. It's our intention to ask the voters. However, if they as a nonprofit want to voluntarily become a part of the department of the town and we have an agreement between us that that they will do that and we want them to do that, then, then we can vote and they can vote. We can vote. We wouldn't need to have a vote of the town. It would be an agreement between the two parties. They would come in under under our umbrella. I don't know whether or not they would do that faced with the idea of a vote or not. But it might be something that's worth throwing out there that says this is our intention. However, maybe we can come to an agreement. That's an interesting idea. It is. I just don't know. I mean, the question is the question is before before our next meeting, when we need to make this decision, should some some set of us or should I have a conversation with Jeff, the president of the fire department and say, you know, what do you think about this? We want to talk about it at our next meeting.  It seems to me as though probably the better thing to do would be have an open front meeting just bring them there and just say, look, you hear the minutes, the minutes are posted. I can send the minutes to Jeff and you they'll they'll know by then. I think their meeting is isn't it tonight? I don't know where it's no, it's on it's it's in the 21st. Well, they meet the first and the third as well as we do. But one is a work meeting and the other is a business meeting. So tonight might be the work meeting. Oh, but I'll be happy to send it to Jeff. I think someone did have a conversation with them before the meeting. And I think Phil's idea is an interesting one. Give them time to think about it. But I also suggest if we go ahead and we put it on the ballot, we put it on the warning that we have Rob helper draft it so that there are no questions about the legality and all of that. Totally, all you're doing is, as you know, we've gone to we've talked to Rob about this and smartly so the board never. The board never created the wording that that would prevent you from using the town buildings that are that is the fire department. But really, all you're doing is creating a town fire department. Shall the shall the town create a town, a municipal fire department? That's it. Well, and then and then the budget money, if that happens, the budget money goes to the town fire department, not to the nonprofit. And I don't know how we I don't know how we handle that from the point of view of our of our budget. We just got to be careful that we do it correctly. Yes, it's a budget. Well, if anything, they shouldn't really be in our budget to be on our line budget, if it's a nonprofit, it's no different than somebody submitting us a petition every year asking us for money, because that's really how they're operating. They're not, you know, so much operating under the town of Middlesex. It's a big special article every year.  Yeah. Yeah, maybe they should go to the town for their appropriation, not be part of our budget. Exactly. So what are the towns you said there's just a handful like us? Are all our neighboring towns, municipal fire departments like Worcester and Berlin and volunteer ones? I believe they are, but but don't hold me to that off the top of my head. It's been a while since I was doing research on that. There was there was a I can't remember. There was a town in the Northeast Kingdom that had a similar situation and basically just created a department and restaffed it. Everybody was quitting. They fired the rest of them and said, OK, we'll start. They came back much stronger, which is kind of an interesting piece that's been written about in several newspapers. You know, we're not the only ones going through this. It's, you know, there. There's some real issues here.  And they're the last I knew they were down to seven firefighters. Right. Are they the one that goes through this? I would, assuming everyone agrees, I would just I would just like to have a conversation and I will I will try and have it face to face, assuming Jeff will agree with me and try and go over these points with him and see if I just can't warm warm him up because the way the way he goes, the other guys, the other guys will follow him and just see what we had come up with. I mean, it would be it would be really nice if we could agree to agree. And it didn't have to go to a town vote. I agree. And I think better and and and easier for the for the taxpayers to understand. Is there any care you can offer them?  The carrot, the carrot is that we're going to work with them in the same way we work with the town office and the and the highway department to help them in any way we can to support them, to back them up, see grants to do to do whatever it takes. We work together as a team to try and provide the best fire service we can to the town of Middlesex, but you know, unfortunately, we've been giving them but giving them a lot of that for free as Derrinda points out. I mean, we do we provide all their clerical support. We do we not only pay the money, but we we pay the bills we do. We arrange for the insurance. We do everything. Well, what about the stick that would make them want to, you know, the stick would be that if we're going to if if it's going to continue to be a nonprofit that the proper way for it to be is that it needs to be it needs to be a special article and it goes to the voters every year and it doesn't include budget and they need to they need to take over the administration of their own bills and prove non-profit entity. I love that. I love that. I think that's the stick, isn't it? I think so. I think that's good. I'm glad we're not willing. You know, we've decided that we're not willing to confirm. However, however this evolved, that we ended up operating the way we're operating. It's not proper and it's not correct and we're not willing to do it anymore. So you've got to decide you've got to decide what you want to do. And we think we can bring real value to the table. We think we've shown that over the past year. We've supported your increase, your dramatic increase in your stipends and other things that we've worked well together. And we want that to continue. Yeah, well, really just to keep to accept the status quo going forward, if if if you decide that you don't want to do that. This has been a really fruitful discussion, because I think we've really gelled on the issue. The pros and the cons. I mean, just in the discussion you're going to have with Jeff. I'm going to I'm going to put it in as positive a light as I positively can. But I'm but I'm but I'm willing to talk about the stick because, you know, the the the carrot isn't as strong as the stick sometimes. Well, that's exactly right. Anyway, great. OK, so I'm all set. I know what my I know what my mission is and we can look forward to taking this up at our next meeting. We need to approve the minutes of November 16th and November 30th. I move the approval of those two sets of minutes, November 16th and November 30th. Your second. OK, all in favor of approving those minutes, please say aye. Aye. Aye. You've got enough people signing the orders to render. I believe Mary, could you sign when you came in? I did. I got them. We're all set. OK. Correspondent Sarah. No. I usually forward all the correspondence I get right away to you guys. Yep. OK. And any other matters come before the board tonight? Then I'd say we are adjourned. Thank you all very much. I'm sorry for five minutes on the meeting, but we had a lot to deal with. Sarah, we got a lot done. Sarah, we do have to come in and sign something though, right? The select board that assigned the it's there's no big rush, but I'll I'm going away for a few days, but I'll just leave it out there. It's the it is the quarter of the Dolan Road. OK, I'll stop that tomorrow. And for the record, if you have not ordered or purchased Sarah's book. Oh, stop. You must. I am riveted. I'm up at night reading it and I just got to a part where I'm like, what? She gets a text from who? I just want you to know that there was a great New York Times review and it said it's an Amazon pick for the month of December. This is a New York Times pick. I put it on my Christmas list. Santa knows I want it. I I swear it's a noble tomorrow to buy my coffee. Thank you, Mary, the buddy else want me to get them a coffee while I'm there. Thank you, guys. Do do I know you? Yes, of course. Thank you, Sarah, suffice it. Suffice it to say we're very proud of you. So proud about your book. It's like other families. Thank you very much. You're very nice.  Oh, I'm going to get it signed, too. I'm sure you guys want to go home. Yes, you are home. We are.