Okay, I will call the town of Essex Select Board meeting for Tuesday, January 3, 2023 to order. Speaker's in the cabinet. Okay. You adjust that. Greg, are there any? Agenda changes from staff. Any agenda changes requested from board members? Okay, then we will move on to public to be heard. Public to be heard is a time of the agenda when attendees can address the select board on town business items that are not on the agenda. If you'd like to speak during public to be heard, you can either raise your hand in the room or using the raise your hand function in the Zoom meeting room to find the button to raise your hand. You can float your cursor toward the bottom of your screen and there will be a pop-up window that says reactions. If you click on that, it will offer you the opportunity to raise your hand. I saw Mary post hand first. Okay. Thank you very much. Do I have to do anything with this? Everything I touched gets messed up. I am here because I want to talk about front porch forum. I wrote what I thought was a really nice composition for them to put on front porch forum because it had to do with helping citizens like myself understand what's happening politically. This had to do with our little group that we call poly talk which is open to anyone and we always treat people respectfully and it's been a great place where we can talk to one another about issues that come on and learn about what does this mean? What has anybody heard about this? And we don't all agree and so if anyone's invited and I feel it's a good thing. I wrote this letter to front porch forum inviting people to join poly talk. I included in it that we decided to further help people we would make a facebook page kind of like our sx page where people can write in and ask questions or say who's in trouble, whatever. Excuse me. And say there's going to be a facebook page so if you can't maybe type in a question and we would try to have somebody answer. Communication is all it is. So the answer that I got back from them was thanks for your participation in the local front porch forum. In general we do not welcome efforts to steer front page forum members away from front page forum toward competing local facebook groups so your posting below will not be published. Please consider using front page porch forum for discussions. Best wishes. And I got to thinking that front porch forum I know that our town supports it financially. Number one a lot of people aren't on front porch forum so using that as a vehicle to get the word out about what's going on in town is not maybe the best and then I've gotten some other information from others that at least three members of our community have been banned probably more and so if even one member of the community is actively excluded from receiving notices how can the town support it? And what they've done at least for the one person I know it's been nothing egregious it's just been that there was one little rule that was broken and most of us are forgiven for those. There's arbitrary censorship. They will decide what can be discussed and what can't. I've had other things turned away before and I can't even remember why they just didn't think that it was inappropriate and not that it wasn't appropriate I don't think they were inappropriate but they just they make it up to them what's going to be printed or not and the fact that they're a for-profit business means that we can't look at any of the financial records so we have then in my mind anyway of understanding a group that we pay a lot of money to that decides who will be heard and who won't be heard and I do believe in my opinion that in the past and I really hope that this is all over I think that it is I'm optimistic because if you're on a select board and in the past if you were on the trust well even the trustees then a member that's on you know like a select board member they can put a posting on any of the front porch form sites as a citizen you cannot so in the past I believe that there have been some members that have used this for political advantage even though it's been kind of hidden and citizens have not been able to respond so that's been something that's been kind of a sore point for me too so I'm thinking since this is a budget time I would rather that instead of whenever the next time comes up to support front porch form that we not support them and that instead we really work hard to get the word out about the town notifications notifications that we have on our website and the notify me the civic readiness all this stuff which I'm just learning about and I have signed up for and I would rather that we go that way rather than supporting as a town supporting financially front porch form I have supported front porch form myself because I do like to be able to see if someone has lost a dog or if someone needs some help with something but I think for the town to support it that amount of money is money probably not well spent thank you how much do we spend? it's less than $3,000 it is one of the if we survey people every now and then hear about how they hear about things that front porch form is one of the leading sources of people getting information from us we try to do Facebook we try to do the website we try to do newspapers but it is one of the wasn't that before we had our own new thing that we're starting now about notification it's been a while since we've asked it has been a source notification from the town to me anyway something we really should try to spend more time getting people familiar with thanks Mary I saw Bruce post hand up Bruce go ahead hi this is Bruce I'm going to say something unrelated to what Mary had to say Mary had to say and this is actually for Greg as the chief of staff and town manager for someone nice beard Greg but I don't know whose idea it was to decorate Sand Hill park this year and I happen to go over before a snow storm to gas up for my snowblower and the trees and the outbuilding and everything we're so warm and inviting you know Sand Hill park is dark dark dark so much of the year and to see that bit of festive brightness was really inspiring and heartwarming and I don't know who's responsible for that but I certainly hope Greg you would communicate that to them if that was your brilliant idea I congratulate you okay well yeah you can bank that congratulations for something in the future then but it was really lovely and I wanted to get that across to the staff and I'll keep quiet now I just want to note that Cindy Lane is over represented there tonight I think there are three of us from Cindy Lane at the meeting so thank you very much thanks Bruce did you want to comment yeah Bruce thank you very much for that that was the parks and rec department joint effort from them and I would be happy to pass on the praise thank you very much okay thanks Bruce Betsy your hand next yes Betsy done I'm just going to add on to what Mary was saying about the unfortunately the only thing I have an issue is is when it comes time for an election and the people who are in positions of power like you guys you have access to all five of the forums and you don't have to pay any to put your the town is paying but the individual person doesn't have to put anything down and I think that that is unfair advantage I think you're going to be running for something you have to have the same limitations that the person who if I was going to run but if I was going to run then I could post in my own front porch form area and I'd have to pay to be in the other ones to get my and I think that is I think that that is unfair I'm not sure that's correct though Betsy because when I have run and use front porch form for advertising front porch form is very upfront and insistent that I pay for those postings be paid for and I pay by the inbox I can actually pick you can pick which neighborhoods exactly you go to and you do have to pay for but I was pretty sure that that was where it was when I was running when I was running for office and so it's just been yanking me and when I heard Mary talk about it thank you maybe rules of change but when I ran for the thank you okay Patty Davis can you hear me yes we can I haven't been to a select board meeting in a very long time but I appreciate what everybody's saying and I do donate to the front porch form and I donate whenever I can for the town of Essex now that we're the town of Essex anywhere I can help what I want to say is what I would like to see is I'm glad that the select board we're putting our heads together I want us to figure out somehow to get to encourage people to not only post on front porch form or come to the polly talk meetings but not be shy to come to your select board meetings to talk about what they want for services in Essex what they want for how they feel about now that we're separate and what they want to give what they expect to get because I know you're talking about the budget and people are shy people do not want to come to the meetings they actually reach out to people that do come to these things like polly talk or do post on front porch form and I just want to announce that the town now that we're the town really wants and needs your input and I know only the town plan is not due until 2024 and that's only one little aspect but even if you have a concern everybody should have received a postcard if there's for two weeks in January Betsy can even speak to you more on this or can or anybody if we can just get people to come you're not going to be judged you are just welcome to come and share what you want to see for our new town of Essex now that we're all by yourself thank you thanks Betty anyone else I don't see any hands up in the room Mr. Chairman there was someone named Megan that was up there before with a hand up so there was it says Elizabeth Megan Elizabeth's hand iPhone you can identify yourself go ahead it's Megan Humphries joining I can provide some clarity in the front porch forum I work in communications the town has the ability to post across multiple boards because it's considered sort of municipal news and you can update everyone I think the difference is as a person you Andy can't post across without paying for it and paying for the advertising there's a little bit of nuance in there that makes the rules different for different circumstances I also wanted to talk just for a minute about another topic if I could one of the things is we have been thinking about Essex on our own and about the tax increase that is coming and upon our doorstep have there been any thoughts to the actual impact of that increase either from our fixed income residents or lower income residents has there been any feedback about that increase and any potential financial support for those residents that cannot afford a 22% plus property tax increase thanks for considering that yeah thanks we do have a discussion about the budget on the agenda and yeah that's been a concern and in fact we have not gotten very very little feedback at all from anybody about the budget that surprises me given how much further there was for increased taxes should the other scenario have played out and I do I think I'll be talking to my friends about coming to the charter meeting or getting a little bit more involved because I know it will really be a hardship for a lot of people yep we certainly get that and are very concerned about that but I don't know that we have any mechanism for including an income sensitive component to our own tax to our tax rate and I guess with regard to the front porch form your comments there's select board members are allowed to make two postings a month to all forums if you're essentially have two accounts if you're a select board member one as a select board member one as an individual you may you don't necessarily have to have the individual one but I do I have both you can post twice a month on business twice a month and you do personal ones as many times as you'd like as long as it passes the other rules that the front porch form has and I guess as it as a candidate as I've been a candidate in the past important form was very clear they read everything before they posted they're very clear I put something out there that was related to my campaign that I had to pay for so it was it was very they were very upfront on that and in Betsy I know it used to be true that select board members could post as many times as they want it changed fairly within the last four or five years to limited to only two posts so other rules may have changed also yeah in the old days all right thanks mangan your comments anybody else okay let's move on to our first business item consider adopting official copy those Charger amendments for town meeting vote Greg we had talked about this our last meeting and there were a number of items we asked to go look at there were I'm going to try to pull it up on the screen to share with everybody basically took the comments from the last select board meeting made some changes proposed them to the town attorney went back and forth with him a little bit and we came up with some language to propose tonight that staff and the town attorney are both comfortable with for to finalize to present to voters or at least for the two public hearings that are coming up so I will pull that up and happy to take any questions about any of the language that's in there the first one is the Charter that was basically just adjusting the section numbers the rearrange Charter there was one section where the town attorney had a recommendation let me just find that I'll do that in a moment Scott this was in section 117 701 the Charter referenced entities that don't exist anymore the Essex town school district the village of Essex junction school district since those have consolidated the town attorney recommended deleting those sections apart from that it's just the reorganization as recommended by the Charter review committee and the so the fact that you didn't bring up any legal concerns that was the question is rearranging inadvertently cause some problem seems to be okay correct any comments or concerns questions about that members we want to open to public discussion after each item or wait till the end works for you I think it'd be more beneficial to get feedback as we go through okay so any comments from the public regarding see if I can get back to my view here where I can see hands I see Bruce Post's hand up yep hi Bruce Post once Cindy Lane I was a member of the Charter committee and one of the things we did want to do is try to have better flow so I think you may have achieved that I do have a question on one particular section it's on the screen right now 17703 budget and it says an annual budget should be adopted at town meeting by the vote of the majority of those eligible to vote present at the meeting now what does that mean does that mean from the floor or does that mean the next day at open to everybody who can vote I'm just a little confused by that well I assume it means those who come to vote since we since there's been a vote to move the budget to the ballot the those who attend the meeting the meeting is adjourned until the following day so it is considered still part of town meeting okay the polls are open and yeah I just I just wondered about it it's not particularly explicitly clear and I don't remember the the staggered course that moving to the ballot took but there you go that was just my one observation there thank you very much thanks Bruce and one of the things that we intend to do is I know there were a lot of wording changes that were proposed by the charter committee as well I have proposed to to Greg that we put a charter review on as a standing agenda item or at least have at least once a month going forward after town meeting to review that length those other language proposal change proposals that came from the charter committee so that we're moving toward you know potentially having another update next year that has some that clarifying language included so that thought that you've just raised may come up again and be makes sense to address thank you Andy there's the whole question of early voting and all that too which they're not actually present at the meeting although their ballots do show up there yeah it's a we do intend to go back and do a review of the wording changes suggested by the media as well thank you thanks Bruce Margaret a little card that says don't touch the microphone right here can you hear me so I went on the website and I have to admit I'm having computer difficulties right now and but any in any case when I opened the packet to read through the Charter Amendment and saw the page with all the underlining and the strike through and I was on the Charter Committee and I had no idea what it said or where things moved or what was going on and I was extremely frustrated so if I felt that way can imagine anybody who wasn't there trying to figure out what it was there was no key that said these are strike throughs because these are underlined because this got moved here this got renumbered there was no guidance on how to read that and it just looked like a mess to me so anyway my two cents were thanks Margaret the intent was there's only the one change the reference to the school district was the only deletion everything else was just a rearranging but yeah I guess you're right well if you look at it and some of it's purple and some of it's blue and some of it's just like what is this so it was extremely confusing so thank you Margaret good luck getting as we go forward we have two public meetings and we will try to see if we can make it clear what's going on there hey I see Lorraine Zaloon hi thank you I had the same concern that Bruce had regarding the budget I know they're and it looked like in the packet from Greg's recommendation was to add that vote the ballot to budget so I don't know if that's added if this in March to vote on would that also go into the charter because the way it reads it says that those eligible present at the meeting which I understand what you're saying that even though the meeting is kind of open is that how it's interpreted that the people voting and there's early voting and all those things that we said because I thought last time we talked about moving that meeting earlier so it's not the day before even to account for issues like early voting it's just I don't know that looks to me like it still reads like only people who show up at the meeting this time pass that budget the way we haven't passed so Lorraine we had a town-wide vote whether to take the budget to ballot that vote passed so we have to follow that regardless of what the language in the charter is I think the language in the charter does cover the fact that the meeting is adjourned till the next day all of the ballots show up at that meeting even though the individuals who cast them may not so it's the the balloting excuse me the ballot voting does count as part of town meeting so that's why that language is so valid people casting ballots are still at town meeting when they're casting their ballots okay cool and that's obviously legal has gone through that and it's just too bad that that part isn't included in that ballot the part that you have on the screen right now because there was another reference I saw it just saying that it was still open somewhere that kind of references back to it but it's just not clear from that one particular section I also want to clarify that this potential is only looking at the organization of the charter as Andy said earlier we're going to take a look at different but this is strictly taking the existing charter and rearranging it as recommended by the order recommended by the charter review committee right so we're not going to get any new language okay let's go then to go back to what Margaret saying then this part of the discussion you guys are breaking the discussion down into the different components this part is just about reorganizing in a more readable way and just that one change that I saw that you referred to that was noted on the side okay my proposal is that we go through chapter by chapter you know cover a chapter during a meeting so that we're you know sorry feedback I'm trying to somebody's got so we're hoping to review a chapter at each meeting that we have it on the agenda and agree on the language and then so that we're not trying to cram all that length of the language changes into the period of time that we're also working on the budget approaching next year's town meeting we're not this you know a yes vote on this reorganization doesn't change functionally anything except it removed or the proposal to remove the reference to the school district's fiscal year which is essentially irrelevant gotcha thank you um Betsy could you possibly on that first sentence put in parenthesis note meeting lasts until the end of voting on this subsequent day at 7 p.m it does say in there that town meeting is adjourned until the next day it says that right in the charter later on I'm just saying right there just so that people are aware because just for thanks thanks Betsy uh Eddie Davis um yeah I agree with Betsy but um my sentence is if we can just clarify every time you have a meeting up until March just say like what Greg said ballots cast are considered part of town meeting period one one sentence every meeting so everybody gets it that's my suggestion all right thanks Betty thanks hey anyone else back in the full screen view so I can't see hands now I can see right so do we I guess we'll get to the end and then we'll talk about more all right then the next go ahead Greg next one next one is about the ability to set fees giving the town the ability to pass an ordinance to set fees um this is as proposed by the charter review committee um we had talked about putting in another section another item in there that would allow the clerk's office to collect fees including licenses liquor licenses doing some more research into that not really sure if that needs to be part of the charter um we think it might be able to be done by ordinance and if not it's something that we think we can take up over the next year and do some more research um bring it forward as another round of charter amendments if we need to if we don't need to we could pursue it potentially already as a just an ordinance would that be covered under nine their activities at the town has the power to apply for a license possible or do we have it might fall into there the we looked to Susan found looked to Williston as an example Susan the town clerk um they have ordinance that allows them to set fees so it's just wanted to do some more diligence on we're exactly the right processes but um we think we might be able to do it without an ordinance change and this might capture it too any comments questions members any comments from the public on setting fees don't see any hands in the room or don't see any hands online let's move on to the next one okay next one is about just cause eviction and an ordinance allowing um the town of Essex to uh pass an ordinance against just cause eviction um this one has been stripped down quite a bit from what was proposed by the charter review committee the select board talked about wanting to simplify things um not being too prescriptive in the language of the charter taking that stuff up in an actual ordinance if we get to that case you talked about doing kind of a skeleton structure um originally was thinking about do we keep in you know what just cause eviction is there are some definitions in the previous iteration talking to the town attorney we recommend just keeping that very simple language about the possibility of passing a just cause eviction ordinance um my understanding of or my take away from the conversation about the skeleton language was to help people understand what this is we think we can do that through Q&As and public information um getting some some word out ahead of time before the vote um and keeping the ordinance or excuse me keeping the charter as simple and as straightforward as possible which is what is what's proposed here thanks Greg any comments, questions, board members I guess it's I'm afraid that that might be a little bit of a double edge sword where with the legislature be more if this were to pass in March with the legislature be more inclined to take this up and approve if it contained that skeleton language or if it is just a completely blank slate I don't know what the answer is I just in the legislature could add all of that language for us I don't know that was my concern at our last meeting because the way I had understood it was the language that was proposed to us was you know kind of the uh language that they were trying to push forward through the legislative body to adopt on a state level even if they do adopt this we've created an ordinance there's no state legislative you know if it's passed our ordinance won't be worth anything at the state level if the states wants us to have any specific content in it they will add it as the other if the that was my only concern because that was my concern at the last meeting like I said then I did say it three times I just wanted to throw that out there too that was one of the biggest things I was concerned about and I agree with the ordinance because then we can make it specific to S6 once it can be backed at a state level you know we don't have to include everything we don't we can include more maybe or you know whatever we decide but that's it's important and I'm glad to see it in here so any comments any comments from the public from the CD hands in the room CD hands online next one next one is the recall provision this one was modified a bit stripped down a bit from what the charter review committee had proposed the select board wanted to I think simplify this one as well clarify that the petition would go straight to the town clerk take out the involvement of the Board of Civil Authority which is what was originally proposed and just set the number of voters would have to participate in a recall and in an election and added the language about a recall provision not being brought against any one individual more than once in a 12 month period so that's what's proposed here I believe it captured all of those things there's also a 60-day provision that what was proposed didn't have a timeline requirement correct that if there's a petition that has to be acted upon within 60 days and we left the option for the select board to a point to fill the seat for current charter rather than triggering a second election to do that correct any just a really quick question the replacement provisions it's a May appoint a successor this has Shell which would which would rule in that case it also says that if the select board doesn't appoint then you have to have an election right but this says Shell this also in the event of a recall I read this as the select board shall name a successor in accordance with the conditions of the charter and that's where it says that you'll shall do it this way if you can't reach a agreement that's when it has a special election I read this as referencing that you shall go into that section of the charter making a replacement I just had a clarification question about item B where it says within 60 days of receiving about petition the select board shall call a special meeting is that within 60 days or is that they have to call a meeting within 60 days and then how far how long do you have to call the meeting is it the regular two weeks they would have to hold they'd have to hold a special meeting within those 60 days within 60 days okay that was the only thing I just had to I was reading it I was like within 60 days or call the meeting within 60 days and when does the meeting have to happen anything any comments from the public Brad go ahead you recall that you have spoken to us before and we heard what you've said so avoid repeating stuff you said before that would be good well I think there needs to be a understanding about registered voters and active registered voters and some of this language in this in the revised proposal is rather convoluted and not like to kind of walk through that so do you have specifics on what you want to I do in in section D of the proposal where it says the select board member shall be removed only if at least as many registered voters of the town vote as voted in the election where in the officer was elected if a voter votes in the election they're considered an active registered voter so Brad we've talked about this before we don't want to exclude people who are challenged voters that may be valid voters also they become valid voters when they verify their residency their challenged voters I mean we have almost 730 750 challenged voters only six in the November election validated their residency that doesn't mean all the rest of them are invalid voters that does not imply that the rest of them are invalid so let's take a look at section D again okay so in that first part you're talking about registered voters that voted they are active voters active registered voters in the second part it says at least one third of the registered voters of the town vote which ever is greater so you're talking about two different things in the first part you're talking about active registered voters in the second part you're talking about registered voters which is the total number on the voter checklist but they're not identified as active registered voters in the document just as registered voters a challenged voter can come to the polls correct but when you're talking about so Brad we're not unless I we're not going to change that language I think we were pretty firm the last time we talked about this topic that we're not going to exclude challenged voters because they are all valid voters potentially valid voters potentially yes until they verify their residency then they are not valid voters yes they are they can walk into the polls and vote that day okay so you've got convoluted language here I mean one on one hand it's active registered voters it does not say active registered voters it does not say active registered voters it says registered voters so a challenged registered voter it's implied because you are implying you are adding that implication it's not in our intent well this isn't acceptable language it's unfair to the voters thank you for your comments Brad that's he did you I saw your hand my apologies yep yep just before the meeting somebody commented that it was remarkable how well you could hear back there so I guess we'll work on that work on that okay Ethan can I just bring a point of clarification because I also read through this and it was brought to my attention but I read it and understood as it's written it does say at least as many registered voters have voted in the election where the officer was elected but at that point it doesn't matter if the same registered voters vote in that election it just matters that the same amount or at least one third of the registered voters come and vote again you know you could have 700 voters not vote that voted in the original election and you could have 700 challenged voters come and vote with the next election as long as it equates to the amount as the original election and one third whichever is greater then it's a valid vote because I read through it a couple of times and just wanted to help anybody I hope but if not alright thanks Evers yep thanks any other comments from the public see any other hands so let's move on last article for consideration is to allow for the possibility of a development review board once again vastly simplified language from what was proposed nothing against what was proposed but just trying to keep it simple the town attorney thinks the simplest option is to just take the existing language of the select board show the point members of the following permanent commissions and positions and next to zoning board of adjustment add or development review board for a state statute there can either be a zoning board or development review board so this would allow the select board to appoint one or the other and then also below that in the existing language the charter talks about establishing a planning commission the town attorney thought that that language was superfluous and could be removed so recommending that come out as well okay board member Collins my concern is that I understand the appointment but I want to date on that as to when it will occur that was my whole because we have a tendency to have a great idea and then idea gets pushed back and pushed back and pushed back and that's why the charter review committee gave it a year after the approval of the charter and I'd like to see some kind of a timeline remain and that in that one update any other comments I agree with that I don't know if it has to be in the charter but I don't want to like to see a way that it needs to be actually followed through on and kind of like what we did with the fees the power set fees we're giving ourselves the ability to do it but we don't know when we're going to do it so just kind of I don't know I agree with that and I'm also concerned about having a standing or in the charter that allows the select board to one year identify as EVA the next year or two three years down the line depending on the makeup of the select board undo that and what impact that has not only on the members of the board but also on staff and also on members that go in front of those boards so there's a request to have a timeline and I'm concerned about having the or in there the back and forth I suppose in that case scenario without input from town staff about what an appropriate schedule would be we want to arbitrarily set one for them Catherine told the charter review committee it would take a while to establish it when we said a year nobody said any different to us that's why we came up with the one year from when the charter passed was it one year from when it passes so say it passes the legislature on June 30th 2023 you then have until July 1st 2024 to establish a development review board it wasn't clear to me that you meant the passed by the legislature passed by the legislature and then from that date when it passes that was the intent of the board is that they would have one year from the date that it passes because we have no idea you know when it will pass the legislature so it could be and we don't even know if it will pass but that's why we're giving them the one year from date of passage and that's why we did it that way and that's why we wanted the development review board established that reasonable I think so I think the reason that staff was looking to not put a date on it was just wanted to make sure we had that conversation publicly about what the transition looks like, how it's going to get there it has come up in the past and it's been pushed aside in the past I would argue it's been for valid reasons if the select board makes it a priority that you want to do it within a year of passage we'll do it, you hold us to that you hold yourselves to that I think by putting a date in there it does give you more certainty it also takes away any flexibility if other or pressing concern to priorities come up so I could see either way I think the staff's concern wasn't necessarily about the date specifically as much as just taking the time to be thoughtful about it and having the time to figure it out and do the right process and engagement to make it happen I think a year is probably a reasonable amount of time to have those conversations instead of transition period up again that's me speaking that's not input from the planning commission the zoning board, comm dev staff and not knowing what are the things might come up in the course of a year we've had COVID, we've had merger we've had school districts merge we've had all kinds of different things that we haven't planned for come up and we've had COVID pop up so yeah I know but I'm just saying because things do get and to be passed to the side we'll get to it in a little while that was the reason for the specific date and we were really pushing not either or it was for a definite development review board and I agree with Tracy to take out the OR word we really wanted that board to be a step those are proposal what you what do you want to do with the word step and back in well to take out the OR and then to put in a date of about the wording that would say DRB would it be established within one year of passage of the partner by the legislature I don't know I'm just saying that you have to move the ZBA in section A1 you'd have to change the wording to say DBA adjust to development review board and if you want to put the date in that section and put it in that section or if you want to drop it down as I would bump B and C down to C and D and put it in a section B that development review board would be implemented within one year of approval from the legislative committee I'm thinking the most clear way so you'd give a zoning board an expiration date and then give a development review board a creation that way to transition because we still need the zoning board as what we are and then that gives us the year to transition from the ZBA to if they pass it and we just have the DRB in there and I don't know how that would read to them but I would think that we would be held responsible to have a DRB upon passage so you can put transition language in there and then the transition language comes out so the transition is completed so I guess one of my concerns that I'm having right now is we need to finalize the language tonight in order to get this on the ballot yes with the caveat if you have two public hearings and you can change the language after the public hearings so you could either make some amended language tonight if that's the path you choose and then have the town attorney review it and potentially change it again or leave it as is have the town attorney have the town attorney review it provide language for you to approve after the second public hearing that would allow for a transition period and I believe that the initial language did include transition language that came from the charter committee do we have any of that available or should I lock up a motion tonight so I don't recall if there was anything explicit in the the advice we got from our legal counsel was to make it just the or language in there so I don't know that he reviewed the rest of it and we can certainly as Greg said have that review part of the public hearing process do you want to thank you can you read that aloud I got to try and combine the two first clusters yeah that's what says it's hard to work live on a document you want to bring that language I guess just an FYI that should have been in the December 5th packet language I mean not that I'm saying we should wordsmith it now but hello first I'm Bruce we're not taking public comment right now but I can get the language if you want me to look for it it's on my computer have area okay so the charter review committee had proposed that select board shall appoint members of the following permanent missions and positions a development review board will replace the zoning board of adjustment honor before July 1st 2024 and zoning board of adjustment will be replaced by development review board honor before but not later than July 1st 2024 all appointed term shall end when the zoning board of adjustment terminates was there also language in there about the number of members we took that out so we took that out the last meeting upon recommendation we just want to make it clear what we're trying to put back in I had clarified it the language in there I believe was 5 to 9 and it was actually 3 to 9 in the state statute but I do have I do have a wording in here if you'd like to hear let's read it on the board yeah I just had to change the July 4th to within a year from passage of the okay to be clear I was only talking about those two highlighted ones I wasn't talking about identifying number of board members on each just the transition period but I also had a thought that if it is honor before language if we're not sure what that lift would be I mean would it make sense to say July 1st 2025 and then we can do it on July 1st 2024 if we're ready at that point in time within two years of passage and we can do it sooner right as long as it's honor before sorry you're pushing it out again the possibility of it yeah right the select board sets the town manager's priorities you know the sitting select for the time I shouldn't say we might not be here can make that a priority and measure the manager against it and so are we okay with well first of all going within X amount of time of passage by the legislature whether or not being certain or should it be something like the beginning of the fiscal year you know within the passage so that it is on a July 1 we want it to matter whether it's on I know there's you know this transition has to take place because the way projects are reviewed and that applications have to go up to a certain point and then they split between the zoning board and planning commission currently the shift to this new review process I don't know enough right now offhand about how long it takes is it just a you pick a date you draw a line and then everything after that is different or if you have to clear out a queue I don't know I don't know and you deal with in progress I think that's one of the details and it sounds like we can get that answer after this meeting and go from there Ethan I just have two questions as I'm merging these together the first was that the community advisory board that's something else well the commission on public safety is removed cemetery commission is removed and the energy coordinators all removed from that section is that replaced somewhere else so the select board won't appoint those positions any longer they're not appointed now so those were proposed by the charter review committee those don't exist today okay and then I didn't know but that's part of the discussion we have going forward when I said we're going to look at each of the proposed chapters that came from the so those will come up again the questions around those and then I do have a draft providing we follow through on so so I guess you say you have a draft so section 117 206 by select board that reads section A select board shall appoint the members of the following permanent commissions and positions item one development review board parentheses will replace the zoning board of adjustment the adjustment administration adjustment right yes adjustment within a year from passage of the amount legislator item two says the zoning board of adjustment will be replaced by the development review board within a year from passage of the remote legislator section three says the planning commission section four is the town attorney five is the town manager and it goes on to be my appoint such additional commissions and committees as they feel to be in the best interest of the town and all other appointed of our elective officers authorized by statue and then see the terms of all appointments shall commence on the day after the day of appointment unless the appointment is to fill a vacancy office in which case the term shall commence at the time of appointment the only thing that was changed was item one and two and then it was then bumped down item two became three three became four or became five and then five B and C became four B and C so I heard Greg ask for a second year in case it can't be done in a year with the provision of course that again the select board can say we know we gave you two years but we want you to do it in one is there any consideration of moving that date within two years rather than within one year and then I'm just government takes a long time I understand that Andy but how long have we been talking about before I even ran for select board people were discussing development review board and other things that we've just we keep pushing off and pushing off and my fear is so if I give you two years if I cave and say yeah two years and you come back to whoever is back to those life wars that we're two years we're not ready then it's going to get pushed off again and I don't mean to be and I get it's a lot of work but I just hate to see things keep getting we'll get to it we'll get to it well that's just my feeling but I'm only one person sorry Greg and if that's the choice we'll do everything we can and we'll make it happen I do ask that you take into consideration other existing work and workload this is primarily going to be a community development project with the planning commission and the zoning board they have a town plan update that's due a year from now 2024 they've got zoning updates they have other projects that are working on the town plan is a big one though and that's going to take up the bulk of the year 2024 they can probably work concurrently on some of these things but if they can't for other reason the town plan is going to take priority because that is also the law that has to be updated by 2024 March 2024 depending on how much time they have with other stuff that leaves four months to do a transition period well I was just going to say I'm happy to wait until which date is more appropriate and what the lift would be and it sounds like from what you say two years but I would also like to hear from Catherine on all of the intricacies that you were talking about earlier before starting a date Ethan could I just throw a partial maybe possible compromise out there that we could consider the end of 2024 by the time it gets adopted in let's say June or July it's usually about when they're taking up an office in our same chamber and that would be July 24 possibly another six months still meeting the middle grounds not to mean anything I think so again we have to we didn't upset that some language finalized tonight again we can tweak it going forward I mean I'm I like the two years from option especially given the top plan work that needs to happen in the next year and you've got a built in excuse to push it off right there I think so let's start with a year and we can change it next week in two weeks so we're going to have a public hearing grab feedback from staff we can so we can also pause and go for comment from the public and then come back to this question and see how I did so Bruce has put his hand up first Bruce yeah yeah well first of all before we talk about a date and I did craft the date language as part of the commission yeah if you have an option between a meeting board of adjustment for development review board neither one is a permanent commission as Tracy pointed out a select board could say ah we've had enough with the ZBA let's go to a DRB and then a year or two later the composition can change and let's go back to a ZBA so I think you have to fish or cut bait make up your mind quite frankly and I would support a DRB secondly if this passes we're going to have a vote in March I would presume and if this passes that's a pretty good indication that you're going to be going to a DRB and you can start planning for that this is not a shot to the moon and it's been done on other communities around us smaller communities and you have a time to start thinking about this and I would imagine that our charter change is not going to be a particularly controversial charter change and I would bet it would pass the legislature and so you have a reasonable confidence if you pass a DRB in March as a vote here you have time to start thinking through these things and Ethan's got a compromise for the end of 2024 I think that's fine but you also have to make up your mind I think you're going in that direction I commend you if you support a DRB and not make it optional because that is dodging the question you're going to keep kicking the can down the road and you're not going to have potentially any stability so I support the DRB I don't think the option is good policy making or even good for the future of a ZBA or a DRB or the planning commission because they would be affected by that instability so thank you and I said I did put a date in there and we did adopt a date because there's been pushback to this idea starting when I was on the board in 2009 Pat Scheidel and Linda Myers just this was like a third rail I don't want to touch it and I'm sure one of the reasons they don't want to touch it is because the developer community is very comfortable with the relationships they have right now and it might change and I think it's time and it needs to change thank you very much thanks Bruce Betsy Betsy Dunn so the language you have with the year from legislature approving the charter change works both ways because they may not take it up this first year of the biennium and if so you would have until the 25 that you would end up having the year from when they did it so I like the one year from legislature approval of the charter that it has to be in place and I do think it has to be in place in a certain language so it's not so wishy-washy and when Bruce was saying that oh Lolly it just went out my head he'll come but I do think that's the right thing to do that have it done and you bring up the town plan well you know that law was passed to have this new town plan back in 19 so they've had a lot of time to kind of get themselves ready and geared up for this whole new town plan it's not in this last year that they should be looking at that that would be poor planning on their part so and the fact that the city I hate using this because I just don't want to talk about but the city managed to put together their DRB very quickly and I think that we can do it too thank you Ken Cigarillo Cigarillo as you said one thing you need to remember is that when you institute a DRB the planning commission is relieved of a lot of work development process review process that they do now they will no longer have to do that means that if they're working on the town plan they'll only have to work on the town plan they won't be having to do development review at that point so if you were to institute the DRB let's say July 1st, 2023 right from that point on the planning commission is doing nothing but planning whether big complaints if they don't have enough time, they cut meetings short because there's so much workload between planning and development review fixed, DRB fixes that so when you're thinking about stretching the time out the longer you stretch it out the longer the planning commission is stuck with double duty Mary Tron Mary Pulse I wasn't going to say anymore but I have to say thank you to Dawn for bringing up the facts that we keep kicking things down the can the can down it seems like it's true for all the years that I've been involved in going to meetings I can come back to the next one to list all the things that we've talked about that have not been done and there's always an excuse for it or it disappears Memorial Hall was only last year we were talking about Memorial Hall and nothing's happened a bunch of us went and signed up to be on a board but it's like it doesn't exist anymore there's never communication to tell us what's happening and it's not just Memorial Hall it's also wanting to I'm a little ticked off with this committee because you know the Charter Committee because they let go the idea of district representation way back for years people have wanted district representation I took part in all these meetings where we said this is what we wanted and then now people are saying well no we never wanted yes we do and no one still we're not going to have a discussion about it and what is it going to take so generally I'm just supporting Dawn I think that it's time that we start putting dates on things or actually work on things and not kick the can down the road thank you any other comments? Petty Davis I think this is the best select board meeting where public participation and people are speaking up this is what this town needs and my only tidbit is get everybody all stakeholders involved get everybody at the table and the audience attend so all these again I'm going to say all these meetings that are coming up in January for anybody to come you need to be yourselves like you are tonight show up try to get your neighbors to show up and I commend the select board for listening to the public I think this is great that you're listening to the public because we are serving you and that's a great game thanks so much thanks Petty I don't see any other hands bring it back to the board we wanted to I sense that the our language is gone so that answers that question it seems to be answered I think the the debate centers now around whether to require completion of the DRB within one year 18 months or two years which has all been discussed here well I had a a new light shined on me thanks to the public because in the case that the you know say they do adopt in July they don't and it's next July we have the possibility of it being one year we have the possibility of it being two years I would feel I think you know if I had to put my best foot forward on it I would say then the 24 because that doesn't force us into a year it doesn't force us into waiting two years it gives us you know if it's adopted it gives us the reasonable amount of time to accept within you know that gives us the also on a planning side of things too because as 24 wraps up you know we have the holidays and people aren't as busy you know water projects aren't happening in the winter gives us some time to adjust set up the board get a fresh start on the first of the year and move forward with it in the year of of 25 so those are just my thoughts and I am more than willing to compromise or think outside the box with anyone so point of clarification for me you're talking a date explicit of end of 24 regardless of when it's approved or you're talking 18 months if it's you know if it's in the whole every year to plan for it you know what I say let's wait two years after passage and the time plans finish and hopefully by 26 or 27 we have a DRB I'm not the language that's written in there I must have wanted to go 18 months from passage but I just feel like that's still 25 if it's not passed it's one next session but the select board can make it a priority to have it happen soon this is just a requirement charter and then there's the whole implications if you don't make it what's the penalty right it's suicide I guess for violating our charter that's anyway I don't know if we see her down if that's 12 months we don't have to agree I'm fine with 12 months I'm fine with 18 months understanding I'm fine with 12 months I'm fine with 18 months understanding that Greg is going to go and have and next meeting it may move from 12 months to 18 months 18 to 12 it gives us a starting point for discussions but I don't think that whatever we say tonight is engraved after passage we're approving this we are approving this language that will go in the public hearings we need to include the change in the organization in the organization the deletion in the organization originally the motion was passed for organization of the charter just to move things but it was presented tonight with the deletion which becomes a change does that need to be included in the motion for us to adopt tonight so Greg do we need we need motions tonight or do we need a consensus I think the language was in the memo it's something about adopting the language or approving the language adopt an official copy of the proposed charter amendment is what you're going to have to do is the language for a motion and since this is essentially five questions do we need to have a motion for each question no I think that's going to come once you make a motion to put each of these things on the ballot right now you're just making a motion to adopt the official copy of the proposed charter amendments as included in the packet and as amended tonight so the language we could use is it has been read to the public so it could be an emotion as read to the public as amended as amended in the meeting yep that's the last one right any comment on that unless anybody ready to make a motion I don't see anything written out but I can try and pull it up so make the motion that the select board will adopt an official copy of the proposed charter amendments as presented with the amendments made in the meeting to section 117-206 appointments by select board second second thank you Tracy whatever you think you need any other discussion so this is so then we do we next have to warn they've already been warned they've already been warned okay okay all those in favor please say aye aye those they may motion passes 4-0 thank you so much well all right move on to the next agenda item consider authorizing select board chair to sign a letter to Essex rescue and Greg yes so as you know through the budget process rescue has requested a per capita amount of $18 per capita for fiscal year 24 that's a 65% increase up from the past fiscal year we're expecting something on the order of a 20-25% increase from them there's also a big increase the previous year this would affect all the municipalities within Essex rescue's service area that's the town of Essex city of Essex Junction town of Underhill and portions of Jericho and Westford we've all had similar concerns no complaints about the service service from Essex rescue was great just some concerns about the rate of increase and the costs Ethan and I met with some the managers and some also select board officials of the other communities we drafted up a letter looking for additional feedback and contributions to Essex rescue those are laid out in the letter asking that Essex rescue provide quarterly financial reports asking that each member municipality have an option to place a voting member on the board of directors asking for an independent financial audit and asking for an independent operational assessment just to try to have a little bit more insight and influence going forward to hopefully avoid such large increases going forward I think that is going to be the case I mean from what Essex rescue has told us this is getting them to the point of being stable financially being operational stable but just after two years of large increases we wanted to have some more of conversation and some more input because it is something that is as we go forward if we keep seeing increases like that at a certain point we will not be able to absorb those so that is the information in the packet Ethan you have been part of the conversations I don't know if you have anything else to add to that I just wanted to reiterate that everything that I heard from all the other municipalities was that everybody is more than grateful for Essex rescue and the community in general is a huge supporter and by no means is this a shot at Essex rescue or any discredit to your guys of service it is just concerns that were shared across communities and we do really appreciate your guys of service and to mention Essex rescue does have some representatives here who might be willing to speak to this all five of the towns as we met we really want this to be a collaborative relationship we want to continue that relationship we want to work together and just want to have this as part of that conversation the next step forward any floor member comments I would just recommend to change the date on your letter it says 2022 good catch sorry representatives from Essex rescue do you want to make any comments wanna introduce yourselves thank you for allowing us to be here tonight I will say first oh sorry Colleen Ballard executive director with Essex rescue President Board of directors Essex rescue it was a little shocking to hear that there was a letter put together and collaboration that was outside of any communication with myself or our board I appreciated a heads up from the town of under hill that this was coming my direction for full transparency there was a member of this select board that was invited to join our board they were emailed they didn't show they didn't write back and then to receive a letter where they participated in this was concerning we're here to collaborate together and this doesn't really feel like collaboration we have been completely open to any sort of audit financially operationally financially it's not in our budget to do so we're happy to do it at the expense of the towns if that's what you would like we're not obligated legally to do that happy to do what you need to feel like we're being fully transparent with you that's not the issue but funding is an issue and that's why we're in the predicament that we're in I think to follow on with what Colleen was saying a little bit I've been a member of Essex rescue for a number of years been before the select boards of all the towns a number of times I think during each one of those representative meetings have asked and solicited for feedback and inclusion in our community advisory board I think the the attempt at collaboration and transparency is not meeting the expectation from either side so I would hope that if there are more deliberations about what makes for a good working relationship between us that we would be included in that there are some things in that letter request that once it's sent and reviewed by our organization more thoroughly we can come back to you but that presents another cycle of deliberation and coming back with feedback from what you're asking of us and I think Colleen referred to here totally open to the idea of an audit of our operational policies and procedures of our accounting books but I think one of the biggest questions has got to be to what end because an audit is going to usually expose something that you're looking for in terms of either mouthpiece or misappropriation and if it's transparency that you're looking for then that's a spot at the table with us as we review our own internal procedures and organizational workforce which we did come to you earlier this year and describe the radical changes that we've taken on so as we've said open to those requests but that is going to sit outside of our operational budget and where we have finances for so if that's something that you're looking to ask of us it's going to come at the expense of the towns and happy to participate in that dialogue about the value of that and what we might be able to attain as far as a working relationship without those pieces in place because audits are one way to get something to a destination but not the only way can I ask a question which select board member was invited to a meeting that they didn't attend so Ethan it wasn't an invitation to the meeting per se but it was when you sent email back to me and I responded with any questions comments please let me know we're getting the community advisory board back together and we don't have a formal start date I'm sorry but it says we don't have a formal start date set up for that group yet because you're the only ones who have responded with any and I mean you to begin with you did yeah and that was I just wanted to clarify all that because I thought I might have missed something I searched both your names by any means if I was it you know if I can be invited to a board meeting if there's a meeting that I don't know the times things like that I will more than gladly be a part of it and show up and that's great to clarify that the value of having you guys participate with us is clear a community advisory board isn't a community advisory board when there's only one community member on it so the solicitation with you was a back and forth of hey until we get that going we're open to any questions any information you need and I think that's what felt disingenuous about the letter coming from the five towns collectively when we didn't know anything about that yet we're just looking for open canter between us and you know that'll go a long way to calling some of these questions about like where is the where is the where are the gaps any other questions any other questions for us so by law you don't have to have an audit done at all no and for full transparency again we have an external accounting firm that handles all of our books as well as our tax tax filings and corporate filings so for a number of years they were handled internally by organizational personnel we never suspected malfeasance then and we don't now either but we do have that added layer of protection thank you good comments from the public Betsy that was for some reason blanking so I've looked into this it was staggering when I saw the differences in the pricing that was happening and I looked into what was going on on it so apparently and Colleen address your remarks to the board yes Mr. Speaker so they used to have students that their volunteerism is really lowered there's a strain on them and they used to have a program out of UVM where med students pre-med students would come and they would volunteer and do their hours working with the EMS and that would be really good to get back of why it's lost I'm not sure but there's also a system of when they go out on a call and it's a lift assist person who's down and can't get up on their own they need help but they're not reimbursed by that by insurance or by Medicare and we know how poor those reimbursements are if they even gave them it so I'm wondering if there aren't grants that are available for them that they could look into and get some actual money that way and with the mutual aid system that we have between the Colchester and the surrounding towns when they come into Essex and take care of a call because we're out on a lift assist we don't get paid but they get to take the money that they're using for our people and not getting paid so we need the mutual assist as well but we do need to do something about that maybe someone else should be going out doing a lift assist but I know that when you get there it could be something totally different than just a lift assist so that's why they're there only if they go to the hospital so I was thinking those things and also there is a different system that's out there and I don't know if we need to look at it because it sounds like Colleen and team is really wanting to be reactive and involved with our board but you know Burlington has EMTs that are hold it into their fire department maybe that's a direction to go but the person who I was talking about is but do the EMS personnel have to participate in the fire if there's not a person who's still that they're supposed to be there to take care of if they're hold it into the department that's what they didn't know and but if we don't have currently that I'm aware of data base of how many lift assists they do in a year and how much time that takes away because on the day shift they only have two trucks going around I think that's been shared with us you have it for a year that's good they only have two EMS trucks that are going out during the day shifts because they have four people on and two for each one but on the evening shift there's only three to four people there and one truck that's going out at all so we need to get better reimbursement for their time so we need to talk to the state for that any other comments Petty Davis I'm listening carefully and what I'm learning from this whole conversation is again I keep repeating all stakeholders have to be involved before even our select board makes final decisions I think everybody needs to be at the table from now on because and one other little tidbit about the rescue it's just a little fact one fourth of the Vermont population in three years will be over age 65 and think about it how large our population of Essex is so that is a priority and it should be taken seriously with all everybody at the table included and the communication needs to be better thanks any other comments my name is Will Moran I serve as the emergency medical services chief at the Vermont department of health I think the perspective I can provide on a daily basis work with folks from across the state I see EMS systems from a regional standpoint that are private not for profits, private for profits fire based and municipal based what I can give you tonight is a little bit of sort of the state's perspective on what's happening in the evolution of our EMS system EMS when we think about it today as compared to 20 years ago looks dramatically different the level of professionalism that is expected from the public level of profession that's expected from our health care partners has changed dramatically for someone to become an EMT is 140 hours of training for someone to become a paramedic is upwards of 1500 and that's just enough to get you in the door so when we think about our pre-hospital care providers today we're really thinking about those folks who have chosen to make this a profession and as we think about the evolution of EMS and the level of the extension of the emergency department that EMS is out in the community that comes at an increasing cost that I think many communities today are facing the reality of one of the things I can say about Essex Rescue is because we do keep an eye we don't track the data explicitly but we keep an eye an ear to the ground as far as what's happening for per capita requests when we look at the funding model that EMS primarily relies upon today to support operations is that the funding model today on a per capita rate ranges between a dollar per capita upwards of 60 and I heard a recent proposal that was over 110 so when we think about where Essex Rescue has been historically and where they're proposing they go you're still very much in the bottom third from a state's perspective on the per capita funding rate what I would really consider you to think about is what you're getting for that Essex Rescue has been a leader in paramedic level care more than 10 years they are their folks on their team not only are leaders within their community their EMS community they're leaders within our state community and they have many folks historically that are on national commissions and really driven the evolution of EMS on a national basis and we have all benefited from that so when I think about the challenges that EMS faces today I think regional system reform is one of the issues that comes up time and time again just a few weeks ago the Vermont League of Cities and Towns entertained and hosted a forum and they invited EMS service chiefs from across the state to attend they attended it as well and system reform system funding reform was one of the main issues that was highlighted by many of the services that participated we think about the way that EMS is funded today it comes from really three principal places right we have reimbursements that are provided by the insurance companies or our government based healthcare entities such as CMS so Medicare and Medicaid and we have private donations you know we have not seen an increase in our increases as far as reimbursements for services rendered right and that services rendered is really just the call right so when someone calls 911 and the ambulance responds and the insurance company pays $560 for that even though the ambulance service spent $1000 to provide that high level of care that reimbursement addresses that single moment right so that 50 minutes of the ambulance was on the road and the crews were providing care it does not address the cost of readiness and so we know that EMS services rely heavily upon municipal subsidies to support the operation because you can't support it off of reimbursements alone but I think many communities to cross Vermont because Vermont has historically been a predominantly volunteer system which allows the cost to remain low what we have seen is that as our number of volunteers continue to decrease there has been a greater reliance upon more and more paid positions to meet the community's needs a success you responded to 3044 requests for service last year across the communities that they serve substantial and it takes a tremendous amount of money to support that operation you know this conversation is being had in many communities across the state I think folks are looking for both an economical solution but also matching a solution with what the community is capable of providing as far as financial support so I think when you think about in the long term what the right solution is for your community I would urge you to participate with the invitation of Essex Rescue and with sounds like what is the asset of the communities is to get involved in your organization and hear from your organization and learn about the organization I can tell you that the private not-for-profit services that I see that are the most successful when it comes to community engagement and communication are those folks that do have community active participation on their boards of directors because oftentimes it will help avoid situations like this where Essex Rescue staffing model which was very successful for many many decades for probably 40 years they were very successful in keeping their costs substantially low but predominantly working off of a volunteer model we know EMS is changing we know the evolution of EMS is present on a trajectory where you will see more and more paid positions the EMS workforce and this was detailed in a report by the American Ambulance Association earlier in the last part of last year identified the EMS workforce 20 to 36% of the workforce turns over every year so potentially every four years you turn over the entire EMS workforce so we're looking for opportunities to retain really high quality EMS practitioners that comes with knowing that you can have a reasonably plain job that allows you to have a roof over your head and food on your table so when you think about the support that you're looking to offer Essex Rescue I would urge for you to take those things into consideration and to think about what is it that your community expects when they pick up the ambulance or when they pick up the phone to call for an ambulance because it isn't a guaranteed thing it's not guaranteed and when we rely upon the EMS to provide that service it does take a public and private partnership to make that possible so that the community can expect very high level quality of care when they do call line 1 if there's anything I can do to leverage the resources of my office please don't hesitate to reach out great thank you thank you for that comment it's I don't think we're talking about not funding Essex Rescue to be clear there our major concern as Greg said at the beginning last year we had a substantial increase and I understand completely that was in order to stand up on additional ambulance and we were told last year what to expect this year and what we got was significantly different and that's really the source of our concerns that what we were told last year is wasn't going to be as big of an increase as what you've asked so that's I think that we just looking for a way to understand better also have to have and I agree with what was just said we'd have someone on your board and I understand that the advisory board has not been reestablished yet that would absolutely help because we could have much more communication back and forth the other thing is other than that how we can have a better for I guess it's the word I'm looking for do you also have any other comments you want to make here I guess what we're being asked we've we've had some discussions you know in executive session about what to do around this and we've posed this letter has been posed is it the consideration whether we want to sign it to see a hand up here you know I was just wondering why can't we get a committee together where you would also have volunteers from the community to talk about this whole issue because Essex Rescue is something that's very important to all of us and I think if we had some kind of committee where we could work with them you know it would be a good thing I thought that somehow we were talking about having a public safety commission but that's kind of gone by the board maybe that would have been something that we could have worked in but I think if we can make this a community issue where we can all kind of work together take the time people that want to be on the board or volunteer whatever it might be helpful that's all I think that's part of the intent we don't want to force a committee on them by appointing our own committee to talk to them to establish a committee that then I just feel like there's a sense of polarization which I don't think anybody intents but I feel and though I'd really like it if we could just say hey that's not the intent here we'd like to find a way to make this work for everybody Ethan I just wanted to add a couple comments because this is really difficult for all of us especially myself being the representative and the Slack board member and one of the things that I hear from the community members from Essex Rescue and from us at the Slack Board here the hardest part about this whole relationship and Essex Rescue in a whole is it's not just what I think it's not what the Essex Slack Board thinks there's five communities that if one of these communities says I'm not paying this year then all of a sudden there's four other communities that have to figure out well can we raise up to 20 to continue to fund Essex Rescue then no means do we want to under fund Essex Rescue or lose Essex Rescue but we may have a concern one concern and let's just take the list for example I'm not saying one was one way or the other but there's five concerns here just for example maybe one came from each community so it's so hard to take them all together and say well we can help in Essex aside and bring more members of our community together to help because there's thoughts from from under hill and there's thoughts from Westford and Jericho and that was really one of the main focus points in our conversation and I apologize for not reaching out before because it was such a I couldn't speak for everybody else and I had a couple concerns of my own but it was not the whole picture and that is still the hardest task that we have here at hand and that was kind of the thing when this letter was thought of and brought out was which one of us five communities is going to give Colleen the heads up are we all going to call Colleen and say hey we wrote this letter we take an initiative here and can somebody from this municipality think about these things so as we move forward I mean it's going to be hard to involve all the community and I totally agree that's the most important aspect but I just wanted to throw it out there again that you know we have it's not just us it's five other communities and we all have to agree you know really because we have to support Essex Rescue and all five of our communities have to support Essex Rescue and we have to have a plan forward where we can all do that and that's going to be the challenge but I think it's achievable and you know this was just a let's say a starting point of continuing and building and you know cherishing the relationship that we do have and that was brought up many times I think Greg can attest for me too is in no means was this ever meant to be malicious against Essex Rescue it was just meant to be you know can we help is there a way for us to lend assistance in any of these ways or you know create something that's more than what we have now so I just wanted to share those thoughts with everybody. Yeah you want to respond? So Peter Murtollo President Essex Rescue so look I think the getting the towns together has always been a balancing act of like how much information is needed wanted expected I also want to make it clear that what we're trying to do is help inform and get the context across because this isn't about responding to what is under hill need what does Essex need what does Westford need you all need the same thing need ambulance service 24-7 and that's what we are here to provide the the challenge that we're facing is getting you the right context to understand that as will was alluding to there are several factors that are coming to bear over maybe a period of time that we could have seen it earlier but now we're seeing it right at this point that are affecting the decisions that we're making and the money that we're asking for it's certainly an open book to figure out if there are other options that are going to help us do this better that's always a conversation that we're open to but the main point that we're trying to get across to you and the other four towns is the context for how we got where we are so that there's no misunderstanding when this goes before the budget committee that there's no real other option we didn't come to you with $18 per capita because that's what feels right and I understand the frustration that there was a different story at a different time believe me that doesn't make me feel good either but the reasons for why we got there and why we're here now are pretty straightforward and we can track back to help you understand the context of where we are and what the potential future might look like so I would ask for more openness and candor and less demands of like audits and expectations about organizational representation because we can answer most of these questions in a discussion as I said before if what's going to make the relationship feel strong is an independent audit we'll do that but there's not any money in our operational budget to do that so that'll also be a conversation about how does that come about and how do we justify the need for that I'd like to exhaust all the other opportunities first for getting you guys the context and understanding so that it's clear that while $18 is a jump it's still the lowest price that you're going to get for ambulance service either Gracie? I would just like to reiterate what I said when you were here in front of us for the request this is not meant to be adversarial this is meant to be a conversation I would never this is not a judgment or calling into question the value that Essex Rescue provides to this community I don't think anyone would make that statement however I think it's important to note that this is coming from a place at least from my perspective that we feel as though we are doing our due diligence as the fiduciary body of this municipality so I just want to make sure that that comes across that this is not a judgment call this is not questioning your value this is not meant to be adversarial it is not an easy conversation it's not particularly comfortable to be in this position I'm sure it's not comfortable to be in your position right now but I just want to make sure that I do voice that and that is understood totally and I appreciate you expanding on that a little bit for complete candor I'm outside of the clinical role at Essex Rescue now so my role is a fiduciary for that organization as well and as a member of one of the towns that we serve that's my point back to you guys about before we ask for audits and organizational reviews let's have the conversations maybe we can get to that level of due diligence without engaging those other resources so before we put a demand or a request out in a letter that says please do these things in order to get these things conversation might be able to get us to a point of understanding without spending that money and time because that's also not just like they're waiting in the wings they're going to come in tomorrow and do this stuff that's a long runway to get some of those things done and we're all busy doing things like keeping the ambulance out there so I don't take it defensively but I do just want to make sure that we're working openly and collaboratively and that is going to require some more of these difficult conversations but I think it will get us past the point of making assumptions about what we feel we need before we've actually exhausted some other opportunity appreciate that thanks oh good evening I'm Dan Roy I'm the finance director here at the town sorry I'm Dan Roy I'm the finance director in here at Essex for four months I'd like to reiterate what Tracy and Ethan have already said no one's ever had a disparaging word say the services provided by Essex Rescue I would like to clarify that the purpose of an audit is not to find fraud or misspent funds or anything of that nature financial audit is simply to prove that the numbers are justifiable just and a true representation of the functions of an organization so the purpose of an audit is not for a fraud and I unfortunately feel that it's too bad that that kind of word has been tossed around because no one's ever accused of any one of that so I feel it's a little bit of an excessive leap to say an audit is going to try and find a fraud thing you know having been here for four months and presented you as a board with a 22% tax increase and gone through the process of you asking questions and the community asking questions about it that's the correlation that should be made here like we are just simply looking for justification of the increases that we're exhibiting we're not denigrating the services and we're not saying we'll never do it I think it's just feel like it's looking for answers just like it is with our current budget situation so I just wanted to throw that in thanks Dan anybody else so see if there's any hands up what do we want to do I make the motion that we send the letter with the understanding that we're open for further discussion he signs the letter with the understanding sorry I don't have it in front of me so that we with the understanding that we're open for further discussion with SSRSC I'll second I'll second for discussion I do have a question is it appropriate for me to ask you may ask the SSRSC do you guys plan to attend the next board meetings I think Westward is next and then you tend to do you plan on attending those meetings for this same letter so full disclosure like we just found out about this letter yesterday and the meeting for you guys today so as soon as we get information about the other select board meetings we will plan to attend and discuss this with them as well this is wasn't a long runway to figuring out how to respond to it so yeah it's been pretty much just we weren't don't have a clear view into whose meeting next if you guys had been the first it was just by happenstance that that's when we heard about it just wanted to share my concern for the reasoning of the question and I'm sorry if I with any of the other board members but being a part of this you know I read it had the opportunity to make changes but I was also in the meeting with all the other people and there's some points that were made that were very clear and people you know we went back and forth many times but what if one board wants to change one thing you know what I mean after hearing public from their public this hasn't been a public discussion until the meeting is presented to the public it's not only a joint letter agreed so I just one of my largest points in the whole time was not to be demanding in the letter you know it's just I have a hard time seeing this going through live communities not getting the backlash I need to get a microphone for the room again thank you those are my thoughts thanks Ethan it says any others any other thoughts Gracie I have questions around will recommend including the full Essex Rescue Request we've already done that it is already in our budget correct? in there now you haven't finalized the budget yet and part of staff's recommendation do fund the full amount after this conversation tonight and I kind of pine for the moment that I think it's going to partially answer your question too this is part of the challenge that Ethan was referring to about where five communities that are all customers if one of us says we're going to fund that $15 an hour and another one says $18 another one says $18 per capita another one says $12 per capita how do we do that we're trying to come at this with all five communities on the same page and this is what the representatives from all five communities my follow up to that is on the following conditions we ask so that doesn't tell me that funding is contingent upon these items happening and being funded by Essex Rescue it just means the entertaining of our ask I think that's fair that's part of the conversation for the discussion that Don was referencing and I think it's also we don't know what the future is going to bring and we don't know what other options are we don't want to be Essex Rescue hopefully this will give some of the assurances that everyone's talked about so to be clear what we're voting on is whether to have the select board chair sign the letter for the town of Essex with the proviso that we continue discussions with Essex Rescue and the way the memo is written it says that we ask for those things the intent is stated in the letter that we would fully fund them it's later in our agenda that we're probably hopefully going to finalize the budget so that is we don't want to request any other discussion excuse me a process question but I'm just throwing this out there but it says community doesn't sign what is the step there after that I'm just asking for clarification for us in the public I don't think that's our problem okay it would be Essex Rescue in the community that it doesn't participate unless another community says no we're not going to fund you or they're going to fund you something else in which case then I don't know what if we've already approved our budget then it becomes problematic for right so the way the letter is written all five communities to the group that put the letter together and that they would fully support the funding but can't guarantee that that's going to happen if somebody doesn't choose not to fund then there's discussion Essex Rescue is going to have to have a man with us any further discussion anything else okay move to the vote all those in favor motion please say aye aye posed motion passes four zero again we are going to discuss our budget later tonight our intent you know our discussion at this point to this point has been to fully approve the number that you've requested and I'd like to continue dialogue with you thank you for your participation to me and all of you okay let's move on to business item five C consider approval of fiscal year 2022 fund balance assignments like Greg or Dan that's going to be Dan in this part hello good evening again I don't if it's awkward for nobody can we close the door on a can you just hold racket yeah I think it's an open meeting we don't want to imply sorry so Dan fund balance assignments yes so currently so we have an audit draft in hand that we've had for a couple weeks our current general fund fund balance as of the end of fiscal year 2022 June 30th 22 is a little over 6.6 million 6.65 million in terms of our mandatory unassigned fund balance we have to take 15% of our current fiscal year 23 operating budget which is 16.675 million so that's a 2.5 million dollar unassigned fund balance that's basically our emergency on if you will so the purpose of this tonight is to give you information on the 2.5 million beyond the 2.5 million for further assignments by the board what we've proposed is there's a 740,000 dollar balance that's available for you to consider assigning what we are suggesting is that 540,000 dollar be assigned for future tax relief and 200,000 dollars be set aside for capital tax especially in light of losing 41% of our tax base and losing about 200 to $210,000 from the fiscal year 24 capital budget because of our tax base portion there are a couple other elements one is for fire equipment that was ordered in fiscal year 22 but was not delivered by the June 30th so by accounting rules those things get expensed in fiscal year 23 those amounted to $46,728 and then the final element for your consideration for the memo is $4,800 set aside for health and wellness which is funding already set aside in the fiscal year 22 budget that was unutilized by staff members we're just looking to utilize it for future use within health and wellness initiatives so those are the four main areas that we're looking for your consideration and approval for that unassigned unbalance thanks Dan any slick board member balance go ahead I'm sorry I think I'm loud now I was just curious about the assigned for a major related cause is that 90,000 included in the tax reduction as listed in the memo for that 540 so that 90,000 is not within the 540 are you looking at the spreadsheet it could be 600 I'm sorry if I confused so FY22 right but it wasn't used there's 92,000 so 90,661 yeah the 90,661 was set aside previously by the select board so that is not included in the 740,000 for consideration tonight 540 for possibly future tax reduction so if you look at the spreadsheet in the packet I kind of shaded three things in blue kind of together one is I don't have any shading but okay sorry maybe it's not but it's the 90,661 which Ethan's referenced I see it the 103,000 for personnel cost which was another previously approved select board item which was previously 200,000 and then assigned for future tax reduction 596,733 oh that's that so that's the total that I'm sorry but that's the total for the balance to assign 740,084 93 no those three elements are outside of the 740,000 in consideration for tonight okay do you have it I guess I do not get better but do you have a photo for the so I'll expand on a little bit so the three items we just spoke about total 790,000 which are basically basically your 21 or earlier assignments that have just been carried forward and somewhat utilized since that time the potential to take 740,000 is kind of on your table to assign 540 which could be joining this group as future tax reduction related items and then 200,000 would be set aside for the capital fund to replace that gap which I just spoke about so really there's 1.33 million if you accept our proposal there would be 1.33 million set aside for future tax reduction of which 600,000 is already being used in the fiscal year 24 budget which you've been presented with okay and just a clarification for me we're still at 22% we're still at 22% we're just we're roughly still 100,000 for a percentage yes okay thank you so I raised the question I've raised it before in past years about the economic development $713 it's been out there for years and I understand that there's a restriction on it from 2015 oh before that before that so my question then is why it's not in the restricted category so we don't the implication then is that it's not available to be reassigned if you have different types here you've got non-spendable you've got restricted then you have assigned and you've got that it's always been my understanding that once something's assigned this liquid choose to reassign it somewhere else unless it's restricted so if there are restrictions on that I know it's a small amount of money but it's just always I raise this question every year and you finally told me today that it has that's fair to say if it's an externally proposed item you know it would need to be a restricted balance like the item that we have in there is our reappraisal funds which is obviously going to go to the reappraisal happening in the next couple years so I don't know the source of the $9700 so I would need to investigate that to see if it's truly an external source and I did some research today and it's I don't know when it came to the town it was some sort of economic development group or entity that sort of disbanded gave the town some money and the select board at the time adopted some restrictions on it so it's almost it's been assigned it's not I wouldn't say it's totally restricted and this is where my I'm not an accountant I'm not a finance expert so my understanding of the words may be probably different to not as accurate as dance there are some caveats and guidelines and any reference to route how that money could be spent I think there's a fair amount of flexibility remember we proposed to use $1500 or $3000 the fiscal year budget for 24 from that which I think qualifies it talks it's loosely speaking it's supposed to be spent towards economic development purposes we've applied it in the economic development fund in the budget this year looking to support some of that work so there's guidelines around it it's not as restricted as like the re-appraisal funds where it can only be used for this very one specific thing or clerk's records so there are some restrictions but I think we can start to look at how to use that money and spend it I'm since having it sit forever get it off the books or reassign it if we can't reassign it then let's I don't think you can reassign it I think we can do a better job of spending it right and then the remainder of the other three items there and I thought the 103 that's in the assigned for personnel costs some of that the 64k is already committed for FY23 yeah so that's been part of the transition costs to get me into place and also some of the consulting work that Sarah's done along the way okay and the I see the spreadsheet that it says for future tax reduction will say the I guess the intent there is you would propose that to go into future year then there's been a proposal to use 600,000 this year 400,000 the following year 200,000 the next year to possibly clear out what's still hanging around and feather down use of unbalanced for tax relief yeah I mean it's not an official plan obviously you only have the 600,000 in front of you but we do kind of have that vision to phase it in if things can change we can't commit dollars for future yeah explicitly right anybody have any other comments one thing that could be entertained is to do we think we're using enough this year Ethan question I think we should use the money not all the money but use more money this year $100,000 is a percentage on the tax increase we're really worried about mitigating the impact on our community it goes far saying using million dollars this year but probably won't happen so I'd say 100,000 but you can't hold the three quarters of a million dollars for future tax reductions that can be used for anything besides future tax reductions it can be assigned to anything this is the tax payer dollars they need to be given back and in my plan if I have the opportunity to serve on the board again a 4% increase is more than enough next year to suit this budget that we have we got $200,000 going back into capital that's quite enough I'd suggest throwing 300 in there but I wouldn't put it in my pocket and save it for later I don't think that's the right thing to do one thing to remember is that every 100,000 you put in this year for tax relief you have to make up next year because you're not getting that revenue so with if you went with a 4% which would be $400,000 you would have that next year doesn't include inflation you put in I guess that doesn't be above more than the $600,000 my apologies you're right that would be 10% but that would still leave $200,000 would still leave $530,000 not including any future if there is or isn't future amounts just the not a math way so I'm really slowing this how much of this fund balance what we need to use to get the proposed tax increase 19.9% 19.9% so right now we're at 22.04% so 19.9% we're talking 2.1% you can call it roughly $200,000 to $220,000 okay I just I'm sorry to me selling 19.9% is we've come under the 20% we thought and we've done due diligence if we've got it I think now that's just me very great to Andy's point not saying don't do it but just to understand the implications and the causation of what happens and every dollar you put towards reducing the tax rate this year you're going to have to make up next year and then stop so if you're, Ethan if you're targeting 4% budget increase next year epithetically that's 4% that's normal operations that's everything and then if you factor in the fact that we need to count for $200,000, $300,000, $400,000 here's your 4% right there before we even have any budget increases for operating costs salary increases, benefit increases gasoline increases any of that so just being careful about what you do because you have to make up for it and you pay for it later any money you put down now you pay for it later reducing the tax rate this year likely increases it for next year but if you pay 22% this year and you're only paying well you'd be $600,000 so 6% say 10% next year if you bring it down to $19,000 you can stay around $10,000 again so max you'd be $12,000 on your numbers you just gave on the scenario you just gave you'd be $12,000 if you went down to $19,000 so you could still hold it around $10,000, $19,000 this year for the year after that you could pay a little harder there's a lot of things that are going to happen a lot of things to change I think record high inflation I know a ton of families that are struggling you know just something to be considered you all know this one of my goals coming into the budget year this year was to get us back to the point of normalcy and stability as quickly as possible the faster you eat that tax increase the sooner you can get back to normalcy so do you want to do a big increase this year and then another pretty big increase next year and then another pretty big increase after that you get to that point of normalcy or do you want to absorb as much of it as you can this year and even with that that's with the 600% $600,000 towards towards fund balance and as Dan said we're looking at a plan of feathering that down over the next few years $400,000 $200,000 face it out that's something that we have now that we know we have without promising anything for next year the way we've been doing the budget the way we've been accounting Dan thinks it will be in a similar type of situation next year no promises I don't know what the future is going to bring but cautiously optimistic cautiously predicting that we will have some additional fund balance next year to help with that feathering and so maybe as opposed to a $200,000 difference we have to make up each year maybe we can do $150,000 or $100,000 depending on what money we have there to sort of feather in feather out you also might want to consider and I don't say this lightly I've been on my mind what one of the speakers said earlier about what the budget means for our lower income residents our fixed income residents and it's a lot $350,000 sorry I'm just speaking all over the place today $350 on the average tax bill which is what we're looking at this year is a lot of money um to counter that a little bit you haven't heard from it you haven't heard from anybody saying that 22% is too high and I can't believe I'm saying that but I thought I'd see a 22% property tax rate increase but do you want to get through the public hearings and see what people say and see if you have any more comments and then decide if you want to apply more money towards the fund more fund balance towards the tax rate this year and see what that brings and take a cautious hedge or bets that will have some more next year to help feather it in and phase it out the more you put applied this year the more you're paying later on versus just getting it over with and I would add to that Greg that you're probably more vulnerable to the volatility of inflation and other costs if you have to mirror your tax rate to follow costs your tax rate isn't going to be a 4% or 5% increase each year it could be the 10 one year could be 15 could be 3 you're going to be following the true expenditure cycle a little bit more always chasing that number this phase in plan allows us to have a softer landing a little bit sooner it's a big hit this year 22% is a lot but it allows us to have room in the fund balance to plan to try and get to that 4% to 6% range or whatever that new normal is going to be so instead of taking 1.2 million and doing it all here and being 15% or whatever it might be next year could be 15% too and who knows when we ever get out of that cycle of having it be 15% that's the thinking behind it too yeah I totally hear it I agree with that thinking I just I hope I'm wrong when I say this but in the 4 years that I've paid taxes and Essex there's never not been a fund balance and it's never been less than $200,000 so I hate to say that I hope to get away from that one thing to consider you gotta remember is that we now have a contract with the city of Essex Junction to provide police services unspent police salaries are a big portion of what contributes to our fund balance we will have to share that back to the city of Essex Junction in their contract payments so we will only get 52% of fund balance generated from unspent police salaries so going into the future our access to or whatever fund balance is going to be diminished so we can't count on the same level of fund balance we've had through the years here just to reiterate that when I said earlier that Dan looking ahead thinks that next year there's a chance we're going to have fund balance again fiscal 24 may not and it may be a lot less than what we're used to and part of that is because we've made adjustments to the police for budgeting about 90% as opposed to 100% or the 95% that we've done in the past so that's going to take away some fund balance right there you know the fund balance is largely in Dan can add to this but it's a large part of it is personnel and staff openings and so when we have police that aren't positions that aren't filled every month that that position is open that's where the fund balance comes from we have a community development director which was Discarned Fiscal Year not fiscal year 22 but when we don't have a fiscal director for months that's going to create fund balance when we don't have an admin person in the recreation department for a few months that's going to create fund balance we hope those don't happen we don't budge for them because we don't know when somebody's going to take a new job when someone's going to leave when those openings are going to happen but those are often the big driver of what creates the fund balance and there might be going to add to any other big drivers yeah I mean that's precise and you know we've taken out a lot of those buffers whether it be police or overtime you know those those items have been hit harder in this budget cycle than they would have been in the past so you know there's just leaner budgets even though the tax increases 22% the budget is leaner than it has been in those regards yeah it's interesting that it's actually a 7.4% budget reduction right? yeah sorry so I'm I'm just going to tell you where I'm thinking I can't believe what I'm saying I have in the past very much a proponent of give the money back as fast as you can but the the concern I have is that we have two years in a row of double digit increases if we tweak this too much right now because again you don't have that revenue source not going to have as much fund balance going forward to add back to it and I guess also in the spirit of our discussion earlier about waiting until we get input from our public hearings we want to go with what we've got and then we can adjust later because we can change we can reassign fund balance whenever we want regardless of what these guys say regardless of what they recommend that's the reality they may not like it and they might advise against it but we can do that so at this time if we made the motion to go with the fund balance assignments it could still be changed later on is that what you're saying? still could be changed before we have to warn the final budget number Mr. Chairman in the essence of time I'd like to make the motion that we approve the fund balance assignments and the amounts that were indicated in the chart provided now if I do I need to state these amounts for the motion or not thank you Don thank you Ethan for the discussion we did not go to public comment any public comments anybody pay for you to go to public comment or we vote on this any hands in the room I don't see any hands online I do Lorraine hey Andy thank you guys for the discussion you know it's weird because I think the weird thing is just not knowing how the public feels about this vote we probably feel about the same way that you guys do and the lead up to the merger my expectation was about this amount which of course was over a 12 year period but that didn't also incorporate my expectations for well what happened with inflation plus the healthcare costs and plus the assets rescue servers so there's other things that impacted that would have been even bigger had we merged too so from this public members standpoint it's just not a surprise to me so I don't know if that's why other people aren't really weighing in I don't I have no clue what people think about this budget for me it makes sense to rip the band aid at this point we're done my big concern is the capital budget in the future for stormwater because Dennis Letts warned us for that on that for years and years and years and it is severely underfunded and we're already seeing some collapses here so I just hopefully cautionary tale in terms of risk assessment and throwing good money after bad I would hate to think also that with that excess of fund balance this year that maybe it's an opportunity to also take some of that money toward the capital budget just a thought because according to Dennis that storm is coming and we're woefully underprepared so thanks there is a $200,000 transfer included in this recommendation to capital I saw that just saying that may not be enough we're talking about the capital budget here in a minute please Patty Davis I concur with Lorraine because what I'm hearing from residents is take care of the infrastructure and everything that we have now without thinking of building new ones we need money in capital for just our increase in population and people think that this 22% increase is supposed to be paying for that and the maintenance of what we have that's why you're not getting a lot of feedback at least in my neighborhood thanks thanks Patty thanks selectable member comments we have a motion on the floor to approve the recommended unbalanced assignments all those in favor please say aye aye motion passes 4-0 thank you to fiscal year general fund balance work session so I will share my screen again so I think we have answers for the most part to the remaining questions as it's rescue we talked about earlier tonight fund balance assignments we just did senior is the one kind of outstanding question at this point let's move forward if the junction decides they want to keep sharing it's a benefit to the town financially and we can adjust if and when we get an answer to that and lastly a few more personnel changes actually brought the percentage increase down to 22% just over that's Travis or HR director had filled out a few more updates based on hires we also realized that we hadn't been allocating some personnel as we were thinking we had so that's like for instance salary chunk of that should be going to the water sewer accounts we had some in there but not as much as we thought we did so made a few allocations like that which brought us down to that 22% that's pretty much it for the update but happy to try to answer questions and dance here as well if there's anything else that we missed that you're looking to have answered three questions I'm happy to get 22% yeah thank you for all your work all of you so this is just a discussion I don't need anything do we have any public comments see any hands up hands in the room okay next item is consider adopting fiscal year 2024 municipal budget and warning public hearings do we have a final amount in that motion that would be what was just up above in that chart we don't put it in because in case you had made any changes that's why 15 million 401 15 401 401 152 thank you and you reached out to me some questions earlier about the language of the warning the warning that's in the packet says this warning for the budget budget of this amount with an increase of such and such we actually have a decrease if we only warn that we're having a decrease it sends a very different message than if it also says there's a decrease in the budget but there's also a 22% tax rate increase I think we need to include some if it's all right I think it is I was trying to do some research and the clerk's office was as well today I'm pretty sure that a public hearing just needs to identify what the nature of the public hearing is about so I think there's flexibility there opposed to statutes saying it must say exactly this and exactly this language so I think Andy's right in terms of being clear about what the public hearing is about and what the impact is going to be on the average taxpayer so at this time I make the motion to select or adopt the physical year 2024 general fund budget and warn public hearings for the fiscal year 2024 general fund budget and they amount to $15,401,152 to be held on January 17th and January 30th, 2023 so I can thank you Don, thank you Tracy for the second discussion I assume right the wording of the warning is not part of the motion so you clear that up all those in favor please say aye opposed say nay motion passes 4-0 thank you for that now we are moving on to the discussion about proposed fiscal year 2024 capital budget and 5-year view Aaron Dan too so we didn't make any changes to the capital plan from what you saw last time didn't sound like there were any changes desired we kind of left it as is Andy you had some questions about some of the accounting that's in there and showing of the balances and projects and what money is there you're right we need to spend some more time on that this year matter of time what we really focused on was the money that we knew was going to be coming in which is about that $322,000 that would be raised off the 2 cents on the estimated grand list that's what we applied that's what we assigned Dan, Aaron, Catherine Sonic and I are now meeting weekly we have a lot to do that we want to do with the capital budget as far as cleaning it up clearing out projects that are done making sure balances are accurate building out that 5-year plan Aaron started working on what a 8-year placement schedule would look like for vehicles Charlie and I have had that conversation as well if you pull in the back so I think there's a lot of work to be done but as far as what you're seeing today what you saw a couple of weeks ago is really focused on that's the quick overview yeah I don't really have much to add I did spend some time taking a look at an 8-year plan as Greg said but I think I agree with his thoughts as well this is not the year to jump into that both feet I think it's something we work on and refine moving forward and as for all the assignments of which project line items require the two cents I think those are pretty much hammered out with staff on those those are warranted at those locations other than that I don't have much more to present to you folks tonight other than fielding any questions questions regarding any changes that we made or addressing some of any questions my question is going to be kind of the same one from two weeks ago but the $200,000 that is proposed to be in the unassigned capital undesignated undesignated capital yeah assigning it into undesignated is that the same as this $322,000 or those in two separate folders so the $322,000 as you can see on kind of page 35 of the packet it's been parsed out amongst six categories or so the undesignated amount really outside of those categories and could be applied it's like say if there's more stormwater event it could be applied to that particular fund group as well so it's not really saying $200,000 is going directly to stormwater it could be as the needs arise if something a little more dire happens and it rises up the priority list an undesignated amount could be designated to a particular one of these project type I'll just finish up real quick but my added concern that I had at the last meeting and the reason for making that suggestion was the amount requested and the amount that was being proposed didn't line up and I understand that the capital tax has changed now because of the tax web or the grant list I should say with the capital tax but I was hoping to use that $200,000 almost covered the $531,000 that was requested as a bridge year that way next year you can have a plan forth and say we changed vehicles and we changed a little bit of our planning for stormwater and all these other things and then there's a solid plan forward where you can say we don't really need to ask for let's just say it's $380 next year whatever it might be and if we can get a capital tax we can increase it even better but in my opinion it's going to be underfunded this year pay for those projects that you asked to have funded complete them you're investing in the town I understand it's going to be unassigned and it can be used for things but I mean it's specifically laid out here for certain items and I'd hate to see it go somewhere else some of those things are just being paid from other sources like for instance the park stuff is coming from impact fees it's not that we're completely on funding projects that we're taking out of that request many of them are funded from different sources yeah it's a combination of things Ethan to start with your question about the undesignated if you go to page 42 of the packet at the bottom of the kind of big chart there we estimate that we're going to have $626,000 of undesignated capital at the end of fiscal year 23 includes the $200,000 we just signed there so bring it up to $826,000 page 42 of the pdf yeah page 42 of the packet I don't see $600,000 I see $900,000 and $400,000 and it's on the green part Ethan all the green pages stuff let me share my screen again $626,000 at the bottom it talks about 10 years where the total tax raised by the two cents has exceeded expectations excess has been accumulated and estimated $626,000 that's an estimate we don't know what the year is going to bring Aaron how much are some of those stormwater unexpected stormwater repairs last year small ones usually around 10 15 upwards of $150,000, $200,000 it all depends on what happens and where it's located and what are the utilities that affects that's part of what that money is for is for those unexpected surprises part of it is if we have a great grant opportunity to complete a sidewalk or finish a project but we don't have the full amount in that capital line we can dip into the undesignated fund to support that to answer Andy's questions about fully funding on the projects that are in here we did it a number of ways we're proposing to do it a number of ways some of them like the parks garage and some efficiency lighting we had some money set aside for efficiency purposes so we're going to apply that towards the garage as opposed to a separate $4,000 a bunch of recreation impact fees money so rather than putting money towards park assets we can do recreation impact fees this year some of the stuff like gravel roads and our highways we're proposing to dip into this undesignated fund again that's not something that we recommend doing in the long term for the long run it's going to become unsustainable pretty quickly but to get us through a year yeah we can kind of take from different sources to get out of Kazakhstan to keep a pace for a year or so right yeah I mean that's I hear everything that you guys are saying that was my main concern you know somebody that gives the most flexibility if you put it in undesignated then it can go I just saw it as we were underfunding highways in stormwater by $81,000 unless there's revenue that's going to those two things that's the way it reads on the graph here two cents yeah we looked at using undesignated funds for some of those stormwater and highway in particular we're proposing use of undesignated funds why don't we designate funds we have them to designate we have $200,000 extra we're proposing to designate I mean I just I get it I know that if something comes up you guys have the ability to use the money for an emergency or something like that but I should say a piece of equipment like what the dollar amount is but you don't spend a certain amount of money over that but you can tell the people that you're going to spend $160,000 on highways and $150,000 on stormwater unless you're playing this year then it's like awesome we need that if you say we're going to put it in the balance we might do that but we might use it for something else even though we have $626,000 in there it just I don't know it gets a bit of transparency where I see where I'd like to see where the money goes but that's not that I'm thinking you guys are trying whatever with it it's just a presentation of here's what we have for money we've elected to give another dollar so we can fund our current capital plan that we put forth at the beginning of our slack burden so we can just try to check and see if we have it shown in here but if not we certainly can if you look at starting on page 38 we show one of those columns is the fiscal year 23 the estimated balance next column to the right is our proposed additions from the capital tax next column next set of columns after that shows where additional money might be coming from I'm trying to check and see if we have shown some of the undesignated coming out and going into those accounts to make up the difference if it's not shown I think that's something we can do Dan and he's nodding I don't know what that brings up thank you our speaker I'll be quiet thank you guys that was exactly what I was thinking capital is huge don't put a roof on your house you lose if you rock your insulation so yeah it says right on there on that page 42 that there's 81,550 transferring out of undesignated times that's actually the number you're talking about so what projects are those going to you have to find them it says stormwater 26,000 the total cost is 124 it says budgeted budgeted total cost that's what I mean it's just to me I mean I'm a person that loves to read through these things but I guess the point I was trying to make was to present this especially in the packet if you're going to have it broken down in that original graph we said this is what we wanted for last year this is what we've asked about what we're funding we're going to actually fund it with fund balance capital balance and just say we're funding it don't say we're only going to fund it the $300,000 when we're proposing to give $200,000 I mean it just doesn't make sense to put $200,000 into the overall pot yeah so part of what we have to do with the capital when we present it to the public is we need to show that the capital tax is expected to raise $322,000 our total capital project list is X number of dollars we expect to spend Y number of dollars and end up with Z number of dollars so we you're right in that you should show it and we can show it and we do show it but it's not all shown in that we're also focusing on where those two cents are going plus it's open to change in the event of an emergency right yeah can you do me a favor for like two seconds and just walk me through on on 41 page 41 where it says stormwater construction projects because I've been scrolling back and forth trying to keep the head titles with the numbers because they're only at the very top they're not on each page but I guess I don't understand how those numbers what I'm looking at you know what I mean is the total of the 1.1 million 1.1 million is the balance at the end of the year allotted for stormwater well this is this is a little tricky because I think the money goes in there and it transfers over to other projects right we have 124,000 of that two cents going towards stormwater projects um ready to scroll up to those headers yeah that was driving me crazy last night but I was like I don't say that it just makes it easier to you know then we've got additions between projects that are budgeted we've got non-capital additions that's your grants those types of things and then kind of that third column from the right additions that includes everything into capital tax transfers, grants, stuff like that and then the second from the right column is how much we're going to expect them to spend and how much we expect to have in the account at the end of the year so Ethan are you looking for so you're planning on spending the I guess there's no number that you're planning on spending right expecting to have the way I read it spend at 424 yeah so I think that 26,000 I hope Dan and Aaron can confirm this but that 26,000 would make up coming from undesignated would make up that 124 bring it to 150,000 that's our fully funding that's our fully funding of our stormwater and do we have estimated what we're going to spend that's what was assigned to stormwater more than that we currently at the end of this current fiscal year we expect to have a balance of 975,000 adding in that 150 is what would bring us to the 1.1 million and Ethan we do have a couple projects that are still in the queues one of them mostly being the LDS church storm pond conversions we did change the total estimate of the total construction and engineering for that project total project costs over 2.1 million at this point there's a significant amount of money that we are tied up granted some of that's going to be offset with some grant funding that we have received from a couple sources through VTRANS but moving forward we are going to be spending a lot of that money and spending a lot of our time at one particular project and there's a couple other ones some of the UPWP projects we have through Regional Planning Commission we're probably not going to apply for many grants this year just to kind of keep costs at a minimum or have any of that extra money that we would need for our matching funds for those projects down to a minimum this year to kind of do as well but we are concentrating on cleaning up all the remaining large projects that we do have in the queue and that's kind of our direction on where we're going that's where we're focusing on all our energy at this point it makes a little more sense now when I was reading it originally I was like they're listing all the this year's budget and money revenue but there's no estimated expense I understand now that you're going to do the other projects but when you look at stormwater construction projects where the money comes in from this year there's no estimated expense until you scroll all the way down and see that the total estimated expense this year is $2