Okay, let's do it. Good evening. It is seven o'clock and the select board meeting is begun. The first thing on our agenda is the minutes. We have two sets of minutes, November 13th and November 7th. So taking November 7th first, is there a motion? I'd move to approve the minutes with November 7th. Will be to any corrections? Is there a second? Second. Two. Eight ones. Page three. Okay. Okay. Okay. Page three. Subject to the modification recommended on the Glazer parcel. Section all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Approved. The next November 13th. Is there a motion? I'd move approval of the minutes of November 13th to be 20 corrections. Is there a second? Second. Page one. Hearing nothing and having only one page. All those in favor improving the minutes say aye. Aye. Next is public comment. This would be a moment for anybody in attendance or anybody attending online to make any comment that they wish. It can be about what is on the schedule, but you may want to wait until we cover that issue, but you don't have to. Is there anybody here? Eric, is there anybody online? On the agenda errors and omissions to the 2023 grand list bill. Come on down. I had to think it's something funny to say that I got it here and I was like, where's Jeff. Annually the sester's office and listeners office. Continues to correct anything that may have been found through the cracks with respect to the grand list for 2023. We have until December 31 of 2023 to make those changes, but they have to be approved by the select board. This year we have just 1 that involves any monetary value. And this, I think the best way to explain it was Dix explanation. We were trying to get the groundless to the town clerk because we have such an early tax bill go out and. These people had come in May to ask for taxes and status and done the forms that they're required to do. And then we did not present to the listeners in time to put it on the grant list for an error and mission to give them taxes and status. The listeners met last month and approved tax status for the, the parcel. No 0310208. 0000 the Vietnamese American Buddhist Association of Massachusetts. Other, all others if you have questions, they're just name changes property transfer returns corrections. Nothing really too complex for other questions for bill. I hope it's just a typo, but the third one down, 15900, correcting Holmberg and spelled Joseph wrong. Yep. So it should be H-O-L-M-B-E-R-G, not H-O-L-M-B-E-R. And is Joseph J-O-E-S-P-H? Yep. Really? Yep. Interesting. I'll double check on that, but I believe that's correct. Well, technically we're only changing Holmberg, so. Right? No. Any other questions for Bill? Hearing none, a proposed motion is recommended. Move to approve the corrections to the 2023 grand list proposed by the listeners. Is there a second? Second. Further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill, you're up again. Eric asked me to speak to y'all a little bit on what's going on in Lister's office. We haven't had a chance to speak live for quite some time. First thing I would like to approach is, and I don't know if any of you have read too much on it, but the House and Senate passed H-480 this past spring, and that is going to entail major changes to how grand lists are filed, how reappraisals are completed, how funding is provided to towns, along with many other potential changes that might be coming down the pike. The Director of Property Evaluation and Review, Jill Renwick, is required to submit a report to the House on December 15th of 2023 outlining how they plan on streamlining reappraisals so that towns will no longer be doing the reappraisals. They will be done statewide and funded statewide, and what that will also mean is a reduction in the per-partial monies that we get from the state annually, and that will go from $9 to $2. What's not clear is areas such as budget funding. We currently have a very large sum of money in the bank that is put in there year to year to cover a reappraisal. The state legislature hasn't said anything about it. I don't believe that they can ask for it back, simply because a lot of towns build that into their municipal budgets year to year, and when they have to reappraise, they bond. So to make Williston, just because we've been properly budgeting for the future, payback monies that we have in the bank, I don't think it will happen. But again, just a warning. So the other part of the H-480 has to do with education to try and make sure that listeners and assessors are qualified to be doing the job because it's become much more complex than it was in the past. And then there were a lot of other things to homestead, classifications, how we determine commercial properties. And I think that the long and the short of what's gonna come out of 480 is there's gonna be a lot of it that is gonna be included in it, but there's gonna a lot of it that's gonna be repealed. So they just made a big, huge, broad circle to encompass everything they could think of. And now they're asking Jill to give them a report and they're gonna go back and re-study it. The other big point of contention that is affecting so many towns in the state of Vermont is the common level assessment. We all know what real estate prices have done since COVID hit and it's still going on. We see numbers that we just shake our heads at on a daily basis, but instead of the towns requiring to do a reappraisal based upon a common level of assessment, which is a measurement of taking sale prices divided by assessments to come up with a percentage of assessment versus sale price. That number used to be 85%. And this year, if the legislature hadn't done anything about it, we would have had 220 towns that would have been on reappraisal requirement lists at a 250 and next year that number would have been 240 or would be 240. So the legislature got rid of the CLA and they're relying on what I've been proposing or advocating for many years. And that's the coefficient of dispersion that measures equity within our community. It tells us how close everybody is to that center line, whether it be a hundred percent, 80% or even 60%. We wanna make sure everybody's as close to that percentage mark as we can. So that when somebody's paying their taxes, they can be assured that they're not paying unfairly based upon an inequitable assessment compared to their neighbors. And that's what the legislature chose to pass. And that number is 20. Right now the town of Williston, COD is roughly 12.5. So we're in really good shape. So I don't think the requirement, I think the state is gonna be dictating us when we're appraising. They'll probably be doing the reappraisal because we're probably gonna be five or six years out considering a lot of small towns aren't a lot worse shape because right now there's roughly 110 towns to have a COD that's above 100, above 20%. So those are the first towns that are gonna be kind of looked at and try to bring them on track. And then the more larger suburban homogenous communities such as what we have in Jitton County are probably gonna be latter than earlier simply because we're equitably assessing because we have much better databases to work from. So many questions on that before I get into my last little spiel. So coefficient of dispersion measures town to town is that was the point of CLA was town to town? The coefficient of dispersion and the CLA are town to town. Okay. Yep, there's actually three different ones. I won't get too deep into the weeds but there's also a thing called the price related differential or the PRD and that measures equity within upper price properties medium price properties and low price properties. So you can have a COD that's pretty good but you can have a lot of inequities within the lower priced population or priced homes and the higher priced homes. And that's the PRD measurement. PRD is generally want to be 1.02 to 2.98. Anything above that will show that you're kind of being discriminatory on one side of the corner of the other. Yeah, but the COD is a really, really important one. That gives us our best glance at what we're doing in town as far as equitably assessing properties. No. All right. That's the best thing. I've been here 23 years. I'm not going anywhere. I don't blame on it, at least at this point but this coming fiscal year, my grand list probably is not going to increase. It's the first time in 23 years I've been here that has not, we typically see anywhere from 15 to 25 million an increase in our grand list. We have two factors that are working against us. Number one, the slowdown in the construction industry but more importantly, Vermont gas systems got a new comptroller this year. They filed their gas inventory, equipment inventory incorrectly and we had an increase of 31 million to 41 million which was a $10 million increase. After I filed the grand list and after you all set the tax rate, we get a phone call from Vermont gas says, oops, we made a booboo. That 41 million does not include the adjustment to the common level of assessment which utilities do do, Green Mountain Power, they'll call, they all do. And that involves $10 million. So unless Vermont gas puts in a lot of infrastructure this year, we're looking at $10 million hit out of the gate. The other one is we had a BCA hearing here earlier this year and one of the appellants was Maple Tree Place and in that hearing, I testified to the board that I didn't want the board to put the cart before the horse. They were complaining and get concerned about the vacancy of Christmas Replace and not being able to replace it. And I said, that's kind of put the cart before the horse because we don't know who's in line to potentially come in there. And if you adjust based upon that vacancy which is a big store, it's 40,000 square feet. Actually, maybe 60, but then even it's big. If we don't know what's gonna go on in six months, nine months from now, when we get a better picture of what's happening there then I testified I will adjust for it. So if you come here again and grievance and that thing is vacant, I'm gonna have to take it up. And it could potentially be about a $5 million hit. So if we were to get $15 million and increase this next year, that's 15 and we're gonna lose, unfortunately. But good news is it's never happened before, which is surprising because we've been through pretty significant recessions. It's the other bed bath beyond in the toy store. We've had big retailers go out before when we tested then. This is the biggest. Yeah, I mean, Circuit City, those guys are about 20,000. You know, Christmas tree places, that was a driver. That created a lot of traffic and made the tree place. Now, from my observation, I don't know what their sales were, a number of vehicle business was, but from what I observed, it's a pretty popular place. Yeah, so, yeah, but you know, maybe we'll end up with a real dealer from Rollington, who knows? You know, you just don't know, we don't have that crystal wall, but by June, we will know. It's kind of a tricky position for you to be in if you're gonna be starting to assess based on whether or not you think a retailer is gonna be able to replace a tenant, right? So, Maple Tree Place is kind of its own little animal, right? So, generally speaking, the state of Vermont recognizes valuation by assessment purposes in what's called fee simple, which is, you know, total ownership. But Maple Tree Place, and a lot of these other very large models are evaluated based on leased fee, which means a buyer of that property, when Maple Tree bought that property back in 16, 17, was it? It was a reappraisal year. When they bought that, they paid like $7, $8, $9 million more for the property because they had long-term leases in place. And so, they were confident that their leases would stay in place and therefore they're paying more than they would have paid had it been a black store mall, which means hadn't been vacant. And so, that comes into play. There's questions nationally whether or not these fees should be recognized methodology for these type of establishments and should be looking at them from what's called the dark store theory, meaning as if they were vacant. And there's a couple of state Supreme Courts that's ruled on it. Pennsylvania, I believe, is one. But there's never been anything that's been brought to the state on this. So, we go with the lease fee. It seems to work. Everybody seems to be happy and we haven't, again, had a legislation or any Supreme Court decisions that would have to overturn that and start looking at it under fee. Now, you mentioned a potential $15 million hit, total hit. What percentage of that total grant list is? That's about, I believe it'd be about three quarters of a percent. So, our total grant list is a little bit over $2 billion. Yeah, so I think it would be a little over .75, .075. Thank you. Other questions for Bill? You had to pick my first budget year to do this to me. I'm sorry. Trust me, it's not what I like either. I love coming in and saying to Eric, you know, I'm gonna get a 1% for you and I come in with 1.5 or 1.75. I'd rather do that. That makes me look a lot better. Yeah, I'll try to do it. Yeah, I always ask, Bill, you know what's your conservative prediction? And then as I'm drafting the revenue side of the budget, which surely we'll use that growth prediction to try to figure out what a cent's gonna raise next year. So, when Bill told me this year, keep it flat, so that's the arrow. Maybe we'll get a surprise in the spring. Hopefully, yeah. And the one you never know about is the utilities. You just don't know what Veronikats or Belco, or Transco, or Green Mountain Power is doing. They might replace a large substation that we don't know about. And all of a sudden we get an inventory from them and it's 20 million more than it was a year before. And that's, we cannot count on that because we don't know what's going on. They're not getting permits, that kind of thing. Yeah, so we just can't count on it. Keep it posted. All right. My allowance at home is $20 a week, so I'm happy. Yeah. No. Great. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Nice to see you in person. You're right, Bill. So we're actually going to go back to an agenda item, public comment. Ma'am, I understand you wanted to make a public comment. Please come on up. Hello, everyone. My name is Ramona Guadalupe. I'm a minister. I've been living in Vermont for 33 years and I'm a well-established for almost 30 years. I have a concern about the budget. And I'm going to refer to our first responders in our police department that I have a great concern. I come from a family of police officers. And my concern is I have seen great change since I've moved here almost 30 years ago here to Vermont to Williston. I from Williston have changed immensely. Some of you already know that. My concern is the budget of the police officers and the first responders, the firefighters, is getting to the point that every about every hour I hear our first responders pulling out of their bay. Then I see our local Williston Police Department babysitting our local businesses. They out there constantly. The police department are short in staff. I don't know what's going on, but I believe it has to do with the budget and not having enough staff to oversee the public well-being of Williston. I was talking to one of your Select the Board members last week, and I was invited because I was concerned that you have in this budget for 2024, am I correct? And I believe that most after the pandemic, a lot of new businesses have moved into our area, let alone Vermont has increased in population. New stores, new residents, the foot traffic have increased. I'm not talking about the traffic foot traffic going to the store, but the foot traffic out there. And our police officers coming from a family of law enforcement, that's a lot of work for them. Mining all these businesses, new businesses that they moved to Williston because they found it safe. They came from other areas. They moved here to Williston, banks, hotels, restaurants, because they felt safe. The crime in Williston is increasing. When a criminal decides and observe our law enforcement and the structure of the government that we have here in Williston, most people leave their car doors open. They brag about it. Oh, I leave my car door open here in Williston, over the month. That invites crime. Second, a lot of the women's shopping in our local supermarket, they leave their purse open in their car. I have to tell them, please, you're inviting crime. Please close your purse. Because I have these awareness and it's a big concern, the tapestry of Williston have changed since I moved here almost 30 years ago. I came up here as a minister and for work. This is where I was called to in Vermont. I come from upstate New York, but I'm a native from Brooklyn, just like Bernie Sanders. So I'm aware of the changes. And I believe that these new businesses that have moved in our area because they felt safe, I think that should contribute to the budget. I'm not a CPA. I do not know how these things work. But I'm pretty sure that we have attorneys that will help the town figure that out. How could we implement these new businesses that have moved to our town? Because our police force, now they have to patrol those stores in that area. So that is a great concern. We have new residents, more apartments are being built in our area. More people, just like I would say in my church, more people, more problem. But it's the truth. Criminals, they observe. They see how weak and the weak link in each town. We see what has happened to all the town nearby that the residents don't feel safe. Even when they go out for dinner, if they have to work late, they don't feel safe. I don't want to mention the town, but I'm pretty sure you know what town that is. And I believe that these businesses should partake in the budget. I don't know how that works, but I am putting this out there to you. Our police department needs help. Increase in salary, it will help to entice newcomer with the Academy Police Department here in the state of Vermont. We only have one. And even to bring in more diversity, because again, well, this didn't have change. And it's continued to change. And when I say diversity, someone can speak Spanish. You can learn. In other words, I speak Spanish. I'm bilingual. That is able to help the public if any situation do all right. Our first responders, the firefighters, they are a great team of firefighters that I have met that have even helped me out. But I believe that each hour that they go out that's wearing tear on the fire equipment that brings stress to them. The same thing with the law enforcement too. Shorten staff, patrolling the area now that it's getting bigger. I believe that these businesses, including hotels, banks, and other newcomers should participate in this budget and increase for firefighters and police officers. This is why I'm here. It is a great concern, not only for me, but for the rest of you, well, it's the night. Thank you. Thank you for hearing me. Yeah, thank you. You made good points, we agree with you. Well, I know we don't just get back in the conversations, but businesses do contribute in our town. I mean, because at tax points, I can't explain the 1% tax very well, but all sales, we get 1% of everything it's sold into. It's also, I think, for rooms and meals. So we get something from the hotels. And of course, when it's a building, it increases our grand list and the property tax like anybody else. So they do. I'm looking forward to getting more into the budget so I can understand sort of the balance, like how much they're contributing versus how much our services are going to support them. But there is a mechanism for all of this growth to contribute to the town supports that they need. It'll be interesting for me to, I'm looking forward to figuring out if that's in balance or not. I'm a homeowner. I definitely am not advocating for homeowner's taxes to be, you know, talented taxes, but I strongly believe that because they aren't enjoying the peaceful and tranquility, this is why they moved to a lot of these businesses. I believe that they should contribute after. So that is my proposal to select the board. And I leave it into your hands now. I do not want to take a petition and get 400 signatures. They could be in the ballot. I don't want to go through that. So this is why I'm bringing this up to you. Thank you so much again. Thank you for your thoughts. Yeah. So next on the schedule is the Found Human Resources Audit Report presentation. And we're gonna be hearing from Katrina, is that? Yep. Katrina from Pickcock and Boardman, HR Intelligence. I'm getting her connected right now just to tee this up for the board. I engage Chicago and Boardman this fall to take a look at our human resources task processes by, good way to do this is kind of auditing our operation, looking at what tasks need to be complete, who's doing them, how the work efficiency and the workflow is going. We share these tasks among four different staff members right now. We find this a good process for an organization to go through. It kind of takes a look under the hood and assess kind of where you are and where you could look to improve your processes and your capacity. So Katrina's gonna, I provided the report to the board on Friday. Katrina's gonna give a general overview and really open up for questions that the board has on from their findings and recommendations here. So I think I'll turn it over to Katrina. Let's do that. Perfect. Thank you. Nice to see you, Eric. I'm going to virtually meet all of you. I'm Eric Menden. I'm Katrina Mendes, and I work with Pickcock and Boardman, HR Intelligence. And so I'm going to, are you, Eric, and are you supposed to disabled or just been screening? Is that something you can give me permission to do? Oh, sure. I think I know how to do this. Okay, try it now. I think it should work. Perfect. Okay. So I have a little bit of confusion. I'm not really respectful to your time and as we go through this, but as the, you know, I can get my, there I go. You know, I want to talk a little bit about the background of Eric just briefly. You know, on the purpose of pulling it in to conduct the audit. But I want to get just a little bit of what we were looking for, what we found, what our recommendations are. But then I would love to give time at the end for more of our conversation. If there are specific questions or if there's something that I mentioned during that presentation. With that said, I'm open to questions as I'm presenting.  If you've got a question and I don't see you, please feel free to speak up. So as Eric mentioned, you know, we were able to meet with the town who look at HR processes, practices. It's sort of a rural lens of, you know, there are places where we can make recommendation for improvement. The main focus was around compliance, you know, particularly in federal regulations that tends to be sort of a big hidden component that HR tends to be responsible for. Also, as Eric mentioned, we worked with not only Eric, but the finance director, the HR coordinator, to the town manager and some of the other finance and employees to be able to get to this information. We looked at it for two lenses. One was around strategic HR and one was around compliance. When I talk about strategic HR, I'm talking about the employee life cycle, right? We sort of talk from average face-to-face or recruiting all the way through to termination or retirement and everything that falls in between. And we, you know, met with all the partners that I had mentioned before to sort of clean who does what, where could these responsibilities lie? Is it a fluid process? Does one person have an understanding of a whole process or are they finished? We looked at gaps, areas of weakness and then sort of tried to determine are there places where we can make recommendations and we'll get into some of those as we go forward. I do want to mention that we do have recommendations but there was nothing in the audit that we found that we felt needed immediate action, that it was, you know, bridging on the line of non-compliance or something along the line. So our recommendations are really from that HR lens of this would serve the contest when we get to those recommendations. The other lens that we looked at this through was HR compliance and that is one of the big hot spots in my opinion when we talk about human resources and all of the pieces that fall. So we looked at the handbook, we looked at policies, we looked at procedures, practices around that. And then, you know, you'll hear more of our recommendations when it comes to template policies, improvement when it comes into that compliance lens. So when we jump into recruiting, you know, we went through the whole life cycle and we have a couple of recommendations that I think will help, not only give a better applicant experience but it will make the process for onboarding new employees a lot easier. So we're encouraging the town to look at centralized employment process, a standard application that all applicants fill it out and the use of templates for offer vendors. So then there's some consistency across all departments. And so I hope in this when HR functions are sort of spidered out in departments full of different responsibilities where each department does their own, there isn't consistency. So the application experience where somebody say in the public works department is gonna be very different than the application process. Where somebody needs to be in the financial department or just within the audience. So from a HR perspective, we really wanted the consistency across that entire process. We're also recommending that there's training for people who serve on an interview committee and that there is some consistency in the questions that are asked. This is happening in pockets, but again, not sort of the entire town as a unit. So we'd really like to see that anybody who serves on an interview committee has almost a handbook that says here are the questions we can ask, there are the questions we can ask. These are some things we wanna look at. Trying to draw, excuse me, attention to any of our on-conflict bias, are we allowing every applicant the same opportunity to make it through the process? And we'll touch on that inclusivity, a little further along in the presentation. And then to establish a background check process to ensure that all employees working with my members have that background check. And again, it's happening in pieces, it's just not a consistent process across the town. So when we look at that, you know, including my client though, we sort of look at the new hire, what happens and they become over-appointed to that new hire. And so we're recommending that the town create a centralized bias system for all the employee files. And to make sure that they're redeemed in one location, that one person is responsible for all of the employee files. And I now get their head in some work to make these electronic, which is absolutely fantastic to be able to eliminate a burden of access really quickly to those pieces. But to be able to get that to a centralized system is gonna make everything so much more efficient from a human resources standpoint. We're also referring to the town to centralized monitoring procedures to make sure that all employees sort of have that same experience, right? I think what's happening right now because each department is responsible for the onboarding is that different departments may do it different hands. So depending what department you come into as the new hire, your experience is gonna be a little different.  It may not be identical, but then there's some similar feeling that you can understand what the culture is within the town and sort of what are some of those rules and regulations and those things that everybody gets to experience. And then again, just encouraging review of the handbook for updates of that practice some of those label compliant pieces as well as the organizational culture. I think we all know after the last three years the world changed very quickly and things have happened. And so it requires a lot of new diligence in making sure that what you put in your handbook is current and is up to date. So we encourage that review. With that, I think we're gonna actually use your broker. So that would be a little easier for us to further delve into. But we are encouraging you to explore with your broker the use of a firm party administrator for Cobra. And for those of you who don't know what Cobra is, Cobra and then you're gonna watch what the acronym is for, but basically it's the insurance that is extended after the employee leaves the employment relationship with you. And so basically it's an extension of the insurance that you're currently offering that person for up to 18 months. It changed a little bit during COVID, it's been having extended longer. And it's those sort of pieces that this TPA would administer, make sure that the timeliness of the documentation gets to the person who's left the employment relationship. It's a really low cost piece and a TPA is able to do it, make sure that everything is compliant with it. And so for the cost and how infrequent people will use, Cobra, we really think that it's a great efficiency benefit for the town to restore. So when we talk about compensation, we didn't look at the town's specific compensation, but we looked at policies and procedures around it. And one of the biggest pieces that we always look at, when we look at compensation from a compliant standpoint is are you adhering to the fair labor standard act? And that fall into sort of the definition of exempt and non-exempt employees, as well as the gentrification of independent contractors. So we just are encouraging a scheduled review in the annual volume, you will review a job description. I think right now it's happening and reposition gets posted and a job description gets updated, but just to make sure that that doesn't fall below the radar, you know, one of the other pieces that we've always made sure that our clients are aware of is the Vermont law, when you have to pay in every way when they have an involuntary termination. And then our final recommendation when it comes to compensation is, so to explore the possibility of a compensation philosophy that helps compliment your paid wages and describe maintenance for paid wages in time frames for your non-reversed employees. And it's very clear and we'd like to bargain in your agreements what happens for those folks, for the folks that fall out of it, this may be a bet. So when we look at performance evaluations, you know, we're just encouraging the town to establish a process that outlines when and how employees are going to get their performance evaluation feedback, whether it's informal or formal, so that employees have an idea of how compensation is looked at, where their performance is looked at. And I know that within the collective bargaining unit, it brings back sell-down a little bit more, but we first attempt to explore the sort of opportunities around the form of evaluation. Along those same lines, you know, to provide training to your supervisors and your managers on how to conduct those performance evaluations, it's always everybody, every year, really benefits from that type of training. And then, you know, to connect those goals with the department of individual goals, department goals, the overall town strategic plan and help develop metrics so that the employees really can see how they're contributing to the overall success of the town. You know, there's a lot of research that shows that we as humans have a desire to have a connection to something larger than ourselves when it comes to work. And so that naturally, those goals are really great ways to be able to connect and engage that employee. And then a lot of the money for training and development, you know, specifically established in the annual, you know, for admin and discrimination prevention training that you require for all employees. This isn't a law, but it certainly is a best practice to do on an annual basis. And also I think that there are some ways to establish some training and development program around the professional development for some of the employees. And that's gonna, again, allow for engagement with those employees, that connection to work, what they're doing, how they're doing, maybe you might be able to tap into some of their patterns and look down the line and see if they're interested in different positions, succession of planning. All of those pieces can come out of those pieces about professional development. And then we're at the end of the sort of employee life cycle. And, you know, we want to make sure that Eric and or, you know, whoever is on the HR team is involved or consulted when they're at the progress with discipline or discrimination. And I think the more we talk about centralized and all of these processes, the more moved that point will be. But I think it's really important that they're involved in the process and not just sort of finding out at the timeline that something is happening, particularly when you're on the HR standpoint. You know, I think the checklists are great. I think any time we can have a checklist that helps us on board or for employees, it gives whoever is doing it that sort of list and they know exactly what they need to do and when they need to do it. And then SC interviews can provide really valuable information to an organization when an employee is leaving. Obviously, we don't win it in the voluntary term, but if people aren't leaving, there's sometimes places where we can leave information that we can then take back and look at specifics. If there was a reason that somebody left other than, you know, their spouse was relocated, that's one thing we can't affect that. But, you know, if there's some underlying cultural thing or misunderstanding, sometimes it gives us the ability to dive a little deeper and understand that. So these are all the general, you know, recommendations that we have before we go to the bed next by and why not if there are any questions. And I'm going to lean on you, Eric, to see if I can understand any one of the other person. Questions right now? Apparently not. Nope. Nope, keep going Katrina. Perfect. So, you know, as we move to our overall recommendations, you know, I think it's really in Williston's best interest to consider adding a dedicated HR professional. And I think that person should be at a recommended level to be able to help admit for a lot of these policies and practices. You know, right now, as Eric mentioned, there were several people that we had to interview because HR is really the worst spider out and there's a lot of different people touching it and holding various responsibilities. While it's working, I'm not here to tell you what not working. It's putting strife on all of those people and putting resources away from finance functions or support to the town manager from the district town manager. So it's sort of pulling those pieces away. You know, I think our recommendation really aligns with the increasing trend that we're seeing with organizations, you know, all who grab ahold of the benefits of having an HR professional within their organization. And I think one of the biggest places that we're seeing it is within the recruiting and their retention, right? I think you could probably ask anyone in any department what's your way of struggle? And it's gonna come to, you know, recruiting people, lining people, hiring people, going through that process. And so I think when we look at that, that's where that dedicated HR person can help achieve some of those recommendations that we said, they can help streamline and centralize that process and take that task that everybody is doing in various departments and own it in one place that's opposed to, you know, each department had been responsible for a portion of that recruitment. You know, I think your town is of a really big size right now and not a big size, but it's big enough that when we look at statistics for who had an HR professional within their organization, we typically see anything over 50 with a starting to look at a dedicated HR professional. And certainly when you hit the 100th mark, you're looking at one or more HR professionals. So I think that you definitely are questioning how against that. And I also would like to say when we work with women's and the qualities of the complexity of the work that you do in this, just like it would be if you were working in one manufacturing plant where your goal was, do that, you know, you're in the public works, you've got your safety departments, you've got your parks and rec that are all functioning and doing very different things. And so that HR person, the person responsible for that recruiting needs to know each of those components. The other piece that I had done a little bit of research on is just the growth that Williston has gone through over the last 20 years. You know, we're looking at 16, you know, percent in the last 10 years, 14 in the 10 before that.  Well, that's going to put a burden on somebody to have to go through and recruit and find them and hire all those people. Again, we're recording that having a dedicated person who can help, you know, assist with not only the practical pieces of it, but the policy around it and how it's laid out. I think that, you know, we're really seeing a big focus on recruitment and retention. And so that was sort of that focus there, but there certainly are other benefits that a dedicated HR professional can look at more. And again, you know, we're looking at this through what are the policies, what are the procedures, what are the practices that the town can put in place for life, right? We really want to make sure that your recruitment process is fair and transparent, right? I think the town of you have just started talking about some DEI work and you want to make sure that everything that you're doing is through that lens. And this HR professional wasn't able to provide that lens for you. Everything that they do is looking at it through that lens when your financial person is looking at it through the finance lens and so on and so on. So I think that when you are able to sort of streamline that practice, make sure it's fair, make sure it's equitable, you're really able to show applicants eternal cares. You know, we really are committed to inclusivity and respect for every candidate. And I think sometimes when pieces are handled in different places, the experience may not be the same, right? You know, we talk a little bit about moments for these. If this is something that the town wants to think about and with merit-based compensation, this is, again, a function that your HR professional could handle. I think it plays a huge role in engagement. So again, we go back to that recruitment and retention. Engagement is why people stay, right? That's what keeps people out in organizations. They feel the connection. They feel like they're being valued. They feel like they're being heard. And so you really want to make sure that you marry all that together, that you're not just able to recruit people, but that once you have them, you're able to retain them. You know, I mentioned a few minutes ago that the DEI thinks that the position would be able to champion your DEI initiatives and could be a resource for your leadership. It's a change, right? Adopting a DEI policy and a practice and changing your culture doesn't happen all right. It requires really intentional work and focus to be able to change that culture. And I think given what everybody is doing, you know, you would be able to have a dedicated person to sort of help a champion that along. So, you know, again, you're doing a good job. You know, the folks that are handling non-HR cases are doing a good job at what cost.  So, questions. I just generalize a lot of information to all of you and a lot of you try language. So I'm happy to take any questions, comments, feedback. Anybody? A lot. I have to be Jeff, I have to ask. Sure. I need one. Thank you for this. Is it Katrina? Yes. Yeah, thanks, Katrina. So I do see, I liked how you divided the concepts into sort of compliance and making sure we're doing everything the way it has to be done and done correctly. I appreciate that I'm sure that that's something our staff is good at. It's, except for something like Cobra, which is one often difficult, I can see, you know, I'm sure we're not double paying somebody or given, you know, the wrong contract. I'm sure some of that stuff is right. I do, I can also see that. I think what you call strategic HR, like making sure everybody has the same on-boarding experience or is getting the same training on a regular basis. All that can be in the best interest. We're definitely gonna do it this year and then something else happens and it doesn't happen. So I appreciate sort of the centralizing of the compliance and then having the capacity for a professional to move the town forward on these other things. So that's sort of my reaction to that. I guess my question is, I'm a little interested in what you say about recruiting. Do you see in towns, you know, HR directors in towns are they really involved in recruiting or are they just placing me ads and stuff because it seems like to your point that there's a lot of different things going on in a town. Like I'm sure the police staff are probably better recruiters than an HR director might be. So I'm just wondering, I just don't have experience in that. Yeah, absolutely. That's a fantastic question. I apologize if I can't see your name. But I think it's a great question because absolutely this person is not gonna be able to do everything and the, you know, who lose both leads as an example, they definitely know, you know, the places where the face ads, they are even that network, right? They're able to say, hey, we have an opening, can we, you know, does anybody have anything? I think the piece that your HR professional can bring is that consistency around the process, they also can help with the influx of applications, right? So that you don't have a police officer or a police chief that's filtering through applicants to say, oh, this person should follow by this woman and then, you know, certainly helping with the scheduling and being able to do that. The one piece that I didn't mention was that I think that the more you can rely on technology to be able to help do those transactional pieces and allow people to do the people pieces and we're going with that so it's the, you know, not scheduling, you know, interviews that they're able to help schedule the interviews and make sure that the committee is all together and the committee has the questions that they're gonna have. So I think that it can offer some support in those ways, but, you know, depending what the work group that looks like, there is a possibility that they're not gonna be involved in every single interview or that piece. But the support that they can offer and the ability to help me streamline some things, so they don't have the police chief doing, you know, all the background work for scheduling and interviews. Does that make sense? Yeah, that's one of the lines more with my experience in the schools. Yeah, thanks. Yeah. Thank you. Other questions? Just one thing I'd add briefly. It's, you know, staff does a great job around this and it's, you know, for years since I've been here with the town, it's spent a lot of pieces in to make the HR function work and we're continuing to get more complex and add more staff here. And one thing I think about, they address well in the report is this concept of the continued employee development, helping, you know, coach our department heads but also our staff with ongoing training and development to help them. We wanna keep people around here and having just some systems focus on that, I think is a real value added potentially to more capacity building in town here. Just try to keep up with the compliance and everything day to day then you want that value added to grow your workforce and develop your workforce. So I can see, you know, building capacity for that is something for us to think about. I think if it's done correctly too, it might give employees another ear if they just need to talk to somebody and they don't want to go to the town manager to have a conversation or, you know, they might. Absolutely, absolutely. And I think that that's one of those pieces that's important when we talk about culture. You know, there is that, you know, he's the town manager. Some people may have a little angst with going to the town manager if they have an issue, but it definitely allows organizations to have another layer where you might be able to be aware of something before it becomes an issue. Yeah, that's just, you know, Shirley's title as director of finance and HR, it's a big title to hold. It's historically the finance department and the town has covered that, but certainly Shirley can attest to the needs of the town's finances and trying to balance all these things that are on her plate as well. Absolutely. What is that? What is the director of HR being involved in collective bargaining processes? Or would that, I don't know why. I think that's a great question, mom, and I'm going to defer to Eric in a specific subject, but we certainly see people within management paladins within supervisory unions in HR role that are part of collective bargaining. He's again, I think one more person at the table is going through the process with media different lands for a little bit of a different take on what's happening. There are the person that knows your benefits. There are the ones that understand your PTOs. When you start getting into negotiations around those pieces, you've got that other party at the table. If that's, you know, Eric and I have not had a conversation of what he would think that this position would be involved, but we certainly see it in other towns and in other places that they're very involved in the negotiation piece. Yep, that would be my intent, you know, for the head of the involved collective bargaining and also be that point person for questions on the contract on a day-to-day basis. Those are, those would be quite common for contract interpretations. So, that's part of the work. To that as well, Katrina, do you have anything to add? I could say that, Shirley. How are you? Yeah, just listening, to me personally, that is a really valid concern that Greta brought up because if the HR person isn't sitting at that collective bargaining table, you need someone to understand what your systems can do before you agree with something in the contract. So, it's vital that the HR person is in that discussion. Anything else? There is no formal action taken tonight. This is for our much needed education. So, Katrina, thank you very much. She's still there. Yep. I'm still here. Okay, all right. Well, thank you for your presentation. I'm sure we'll be coming, we're definitely gonna be coming back to this issue and we'll probably have a follow-up questions or something. Absolutely, if there's anything else that you know that we can do, if there are other questions, please feel free to, even after this, Eric has my contact information and happy to address any questions about our thoughts, explorations, and other ways. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Well, thank you. Kind of happy holiday, everyone. Thank you. Okay, so next, Glazer-Parsall's specific plan, Transmittal Overview, Part Two. So... Yeah, so this was a, Part One was on the seventh couple of weeks ago, so Emily Heyman, our senior planner, is back tonight to go through more aspects of this Transmittal from the Planning Commission for the specific plan on the Glazer-Parsall. It's an opportunity for the board to ask any questions from Part One that you still have. The action item for the board, you could consider it tonight, is considered to warn a public hearing on this. Warning of public hearing is not an approval, it's a next step in the process. So the board has that option, should it want to consider any action tonight, depending where your discussion leads? Well, I'll turn it over to Emily. Thank you, Eric. So on the seventh, I gave an overview of what the specific plan process is, what those proposed town plan and bylaw amendments say that you would be holding a public hearing on if you choose to move forward, as well as an overview of the proposed substantial benefit. Based on your questions from last week, my proposal for tonight is to go over some of the unofficial transmittal components. So you might have a hearing on town plan bylaw amendments, but there's a lot of other nuance and things to understand about this project, like the future land use pattern in this part of town, growth management utilization, as well as conventional subdivision versus this process. As a reminder, this is a proposal for a 109 unit residential subdivision that would offer a substantial benefit to the town of open space land donation to the town. So the future development pattern in the residential zoning district, or RZD, that suburban pattern is coming to an end. It began in the 1960s, with a lot of neighborhoods up off Route 2A. It reached its peak in the 1990s and early 2000s with Southridge and Brennan Woods. The map included in your packet shows parcels in the residential zoning district primarily, but part of that growth allocation area in yellow. The parcels in red are larger than five acres and theoretically have development potential. This does include the Glazer property as well as Catamount Golf, where summer field subdivision is proposed, and the Martell property. Trinity Baptist Church as well. However, they had an application going through the GRB. They withdrew. And some of these other properties that are highlighted in maroon have an existing land use. The very north end of Route 2A is Velcro Transmission. There's also the Willison Golf Club, some church properties. And a lot of these parcels have wetlands or watershed buffer constraints that would make maximum residential build-out or even any development very challenging. Would you just tell me when you say they have land use, maybe they have restrictions because of the land use or they just happen to be in orchard or a golf course right now? Yeah, what it happens to be right now. Yep. Growth management utilization. So this was what I called last week as proof of the poof. Chapter 11 sets that growth target of 80 dwelling unit equivalents per year.  An allocation goes poof for two reasons. It goes unutilized and falls off that 10-year cycle or a project is abandoned before construction begins like Trinity Baptist Church. I can't quote you exactly. Maybe they got 20 or 30 units allocation and they went poof. During the advisory committee process, I analyzed the growth management system across fiscal years 2016 to 2023. And I determined that there are 142 DUE that were available in the growth target but were not utilized. 131 went poof and 11 were voided because that project went away. Some of the allocation that went poof in the growth center was I believe cottonwood crossing where their allocation expired and they had come back to get new allocation even though their total unit count remained the same. This 142 DUE is more allocation than what the Glazer specific plan proposes. And as a point of analysis that the committee looked at was even by creating an allocation schedule for Glazer that's separate from the growth target, it's still less than what's been unutilized and can be viewed as recapturing that growth target that recently eclipsed. Also included is some build out both what's been experienced from 2013 to 2022 and what's projected into the future. Primarily that most of the new homes are within the growth center. And very few homes in the agro part of town. This area in the middle in the yellow has medium growth. We predict about 200 new homes by 2030 and we counted 124 new homes from 2013 to 2022. Any questions there before I move on to... Yeah, you've thrown a lot of numbers. You've slowed down for me. Yeah, there's a lot of numbers. The 142 homes were in the growth center or in the outside the growth center but in the residential area? What about town? Yeah, so there were 103 in the growth center, 13 in the sewer service area outside the growth center and 26 outside sewer service in that green area on the map. Okay. And then what was the 200 number you just threw The 200 number is the number of new homes we predict by 2030 in the yellow area on the map. The map says 124 because that's how many we counted from 2013 to 2022. Okay. So does that include the glacier property? Yes, that does. So it'd be the glacier martel, summer field. Yeah, and I think that even included the trinity before they fell off. So realistically, it might be less than 200. Yeah, but there are still some of those other red ones will get developed, right? Is that what fellas are going for? Yep, yep. The fellas submitted an application. So some of those lots are eligible. Like one lot's been a great big sign on it. It says 15 units, fully permitted. Yeah, at the end of that one view. Yep, that's the me showed one right by the McCullis. Yep. So next I have a comparison of conventional subdivision versus specific plan. And I also wanna remind you in the part one memo from November 7th on page six, I compare the projected buildouts for this property. So the Glaser specific plan layout must comply with all dimensional and design standards of the bylaw, including density, setbacks, road utilities, landscaping, outdoor lighting. The only substantive bylaw amendment is that they meet that 50 point growth management score and have their own allocation schedule. And a landowner may pursue permits for different development proposals at the same time. That comparison chart shows DP2406. So this is a project that had concept review with the DRB last week. It includes that Glaser specific plan, but it also proposes other development potentials with 130 or 180 units. So the landowner has a right to pursue multiple options. And their options narrow as they invest time and effort in going through permitting processes and beginning construction. I provide two tables that compare the impact of specific plan and conventional subdivisions on working landscape. So these are concepts that the advisory committee and the conservation commission were discussing when thinking about the proposed substantial benefit. Currently that land, and I'm on table number one, windswept farm is using the land. So they hay the fields, they have pasture for their horses. Specific plan creates more certainty for them. Whereas conventional subdivision, there would be less certainty. They would be seeking a lease agreement with a private HOA. Some of those larger unit development potentials might cut back on some of the pasture land that's available to them. And also other agricultural users. So if it's not windswept farm, if there's something different in the future, there's still more certainty because the town would be able to lease its agricultural land versus a private HOA might not be as generous. Table number two compares the key differences between specific plan and conventional subdivision. So it complies with density. They are providing some affordable units per growth management. They comply with the number of units on a dead end road. And then they go above and beyond on open space requirements. So in the RZD, there's no quantitative minimum. They're providing over 50%. People should expect to have views of neighborhoods. In the RZD, they're proposing 15 acres of use shed under public ownership. Protecting farmland is not a goal in the RZD. And the specific plan is a means for windswept to remain viable or another ag use to remain operable. And lastly, ownership type. The bylaw through growth management incentivizes open space protection with a third party easement. They're proposing the strongest level of protection by donating land to the town. Going over to that other memo from November 7th, page six, where I compare the permitting timelines that all those timelines begin in 2023 because that application, that concept level review has been through the DRB. For the most part, I project construction to begin around 2026. And that's talking with the engineer about the time it takes to get through their state permits, get construction and materials and equipment and staff all lined up. At the end of the day, I project that by middle of the 2030s to closer to 2040, we're seeing complete build out that whether it's specific plan or whether it's another development proposal, this land will be built out. I'll pause there for any questions. So this goes to my question about, is this, is it 18 on top of 20? Or within, or is there some overlap of that, right? This would be adding 18 on top of the 20, right? So correct. Questions, would you really use all the 20s, what you said to be questioning here? So if they went the traditional way, which is 130 units on that table, is that what this is meant to be? Or is it just, I'm sorry, on the table on page six, the page six table with the different unit counts. Does this all assume? It sounds like they're starting at the same time whether we, they go with the specific plan or not. Right, yeah. So because they submitted that application to the BRB for all three concepts, specific plan and then two other development proposals, the motion is set for this land to be developed in some fashion. But would they be construct, they wouldn't start construction sooner at the same time schedule, wouldn't they? Probably not. I think because even if the specific plan gets approved, they'll have to go through the development review board for discretionary permit. We'll have to go through state permitting as well. What the build out projected was intended to show is specific plan or not, this land will probably be fully developed in some fashion before 2040. Your other question about that 18 dwelling units a year, yes, that is separate and in addition to that 20 units a year, but when you look at that past build out of growth management, we didn't even meet that growth target of 80 dwelling units a year. So on the net, it's not adding more than what the town was anticipating because we actually received less within the recent past. So given the development, and I know I'm putting you on the spot, it's just that honestly, most question I get asked a lot is about, aren't we just accelerating development? And I feel like I don't know the answer to that question because they're sort of next in line of as far as processes are going, if the specific plan was not approved, they would let's say that they chose to go with the 130 unit plan two years later, I mean, wouldn't be 10 years later that they would get an allocation under growth management, right, might be a couple. It would be a grind, but they would get through it. And at the end of the day, and by 2040, there'll be more units. When the advisory committee was grappling with that question around, isn't this just accelerating growth? The key thing that they're not proposing is they're not requesting a change to the density rules. The density is three dwelling unit equivalents per acre and they're below that. So our Williston's growth management rules aside they're not changing anything about density. They'll actually be coming in below the maximum allowed densities. Yeah, I mean, I think that that's, I mean, to me, that's one of the huge benefits along with making the Moss Farm viable and keeping the houses from being built right up against Mountain View Road. Those are all really important things to me. The thing I'm struggling with is what am I giving up for that? And what, I think that I'm giving up in order to get all those great things that I would like to have for the town is accelerating growth. And I'm just, I just, I'm having trouble struggling with what's the most likely scenario of how, when would they start construction under growth management? Right, I think specific plan or growth management track or our new inclusionary track, we'd probably see construction beginning around the same time in that 2026 range. A benefit to the, or something unique about the specific plan proposal is they're limited to the number of administrative permits per fiscal year. The way our growth management system is currently set up is you receive your allocation, you receive your first round of allocation before you've gone through discretionary permit and gone through your state permitting. And that's like the exponential curve, the hardest part of all your permitting. That's why we do see some of those projects get abandoned. So my magic ball of saying a project that has allocation, when is the foundation gonna be in the ground and when is that unit gonna be occupied? Is much cloudier for the growth management track than Glazer specific plan? Once they've pulled that administrative permit, I can see more clearly that within a year they'll be under construction and within one to two years that home will be occupied. So the Glazer specific plan route is much more predictable for town services knowing when units are gonna be coming online, then that traditional growth management track where they have their whole range of allocation on this table, but when those units actually construct really fluctuates and fluctuates for reasons beyond the town control with the construction market, housing market economy, all of those things. I would say that I am not an expert in this anyway means, but if I was trying to build 130 units, it would be nice to know I've approved for, nice to know approved for 109 units. Now go make your units 18 at a time as opposed to, well, I had got nine this year and I got seven the next year and I got 15 the next year. As soon as I get 45, I'll start construction. So I can see that being a benefit. I just, I also just think at 20 a year, if most of the big developments are pretty well allocated, summer field is allocated pretty close, right? Yeah, I think I said, did I say in here summer field is maybe that's the other growth program working on for you guys. I think that summer fields like 80% allocated. I think this upcoming growth management year in 2024 will be there last time. I think they need like 24 or 25 units and then summer field will have all of its allocation. This McCullough project's gonna come on. It's gonna need a couple. And then the other question marks in this part of town, does Trinity try to revive something on their property? Does Martel revive that 1990s Coyote run concept approval? There could be a lull for a moment, but it's really hard to predict. But it just feels to me just with the numbers and timing and everything that I'm not accelerating a hundred units by five years. I might be, well, I'm certainly not accelerating it by 10 years, I might be accelerating it by three to five. Without better information, I just kind of have to sit with that. So if you have an epiphany between now and whenever we have to make a decision, that's a reasonable thing for me to have in my head that would be helpful for me. So, did you have a comment? Can I make a comment, please? Come up to the microphone. Can you just briefly, yes. So for the record, Campbell, I've been working with the Glazers on the application. You know, your question's a good one, Jean. And what I would say from where I sit to amplify one of the things that Emily said is, what does the developer get out of it? They get a lot more certainty. The going through growth management is you're rolling the dice. I mean, the amount of allocation that could be available, because it only happens once a year, once each calendar year in March, what's gonna be available this year, what would be available two years from now, three years from now, I don't know. The crystal ball just is not that clear. So clearly from an applicant perspective, there is a lot more certainty. Would it accelerate the build out of the project? I don't know that it would accelerate the end of the project, but it would probably give it some momentum early on. I think it's reasonable to say that. And I think that's where your question is going to. Related to the aspect of certainty though, and again, one of the points that Emily was making is you're gonna know what you're gonna get. You're gonna know how you're, there were some concern in the meetings about the amount of development in this area. So we're taking some units off the table. So there will be fewer units for somebody that's concerned about what might take place here.  But if it goes through the traditional growth management process, there would be more development in the view shed. Things would be different. Exactly how it would work out. I couldn't tell you exactly today, but it would be different. So there is more certainty. I think there's more certainty for the town with this process. There's more certainty for the neighborhood. And yes, there is more certainty for the applicant. Otherwise, why would an applicant wanna go through this unless there was gonna be some benefit that they would also receive? So anyway. It's like hanging out with town every night for the whole year with town committees and slick work. It has been an adventure. That's it. Thank you. All right, thank you. Thanks, Ken. Yeah, brief aside, if you told me years ago that I'd be working on a group project with my former boss, I would have not have believed you. I think the complexity and uniqueness of Williston's growth management system having someone who administered it for many years, you know, we're trying to walk a citizen advisory committee through this process and both of us being able to understand it and explain it differently has been an asset to the process and bringing volunteer boards along with our complex bylaws sometimes. Can I ask you a really simple question before you get back on a roll? Yeah. I was struck by the $35,000 for the 35 acres or whatever. Is there no building lot on that whole? Even the pasture land is not a buildable lot. I would think a building lot in the village, practically in the village would be worth more than 35,000 even if it came with 30 acres. Right, so that number came from the appraisal that 38 acres, roughly $35,000. So that appraisal number is low because of the potential for wetlands. So a lot of that land is pasture and is currently used as pasture. If that goes away, the geologic characteristics of that land would probably trend back towards wetland and then a vast majority of it is that forested. I think about 25 acres is forested and a lot of that forest is not used agriculturally and presumed to be wetland as well. Because I guess where I'm going is if the moss farm couldn't continue, it wasn't viable because we lost the pasture land and the grazing land. I assumed that could be redeveloped, that property if they just to sell out and I didn't know if the pasture land would also, it was just, I was surprised there was no, that it was a little bit more valuable. Well, this is a... We can also add that to the net. Yeah, kind of Jack. Here's a $4 million lot, but you've got to take the 30 acres of wetlands with it. So the value of the land as done by the assessor indicated that there was a significant amount of wetland. When we were having the wetlands delineated, we didn't really want to push that part of the land that probably could have some additional houses. We didn't, I didn't want to take away any additional land from the moss as possible agricultural operation. But most likely there are other properties so if the land was going to be developed by someone else, they would probably do a much more accurate assessment of the wetlands. And likely there would be additional buildable lots, which would drive the cost by multiple times higher. Yeah, thank you. I like the working landscape. I'm not a horse person, but I love going by the farm. And I think it's got value for that, but I would hate to see it build out to be another subdivision. So what about in place of calling it potential wetland? Is there any way that could be part of the town's conserved land? Call that conserved land? You know, that it can never be developed upon no matter what. Yeah. Can they do that? Yeah, and I'm going to jump ahead on my memo to middle way on page five. We can talk about the plus or minus in a moment. So even under town ownership, the open space land will forever be a creature of specific plan. Therefore any user activity of the land must forever uphold the substantial benefits of Ushed working landscapes and conservation areas. So that agricultural land, working landscapes, I don't think the town would be able to, and the Ushed as well do anything that's counter to those goals. So further subdivide it, put more houses on it or commercial use, any use of that land that's counter to the substantial benefit would be not permissible because this land came out of substantial benefit, came out of specific plan. Those wetland constraints, we don't know, the full extent of them in the pasture land, it's probably going to be pasture land medium and long term. That Ushed land is fully delineated and we know it's highly developable. And so in my staff report here, I wrote that, the town could not sell that for subdivision or develop it for something like a community center. In my original presentation on the seventh, I talked about what the town plan defines open space as and it talks about working landscapes and country parks and outdoor developed parks, but it doesn't talk about those like indoor recreation uses or commercial uses. But yeah, I think that's a fair thought. Thank you. Yeah, so jumping up to the top of page five, plus or minus in the boundary adjustment. So the proposed town plan and bylaw amendments and all accompanying documents refer to units and acres with plus or minus. This is very intentional because specific plan is concept sketch level of design and that detailed engineering, including updated survey boundary with exact acreage is not required until discretionary permit. So it wouldn't be until, you know, town plan and bylaw amendments are approved and they file discretionary permit application when we would know the exact acreages of things as well as an exact unit count. Plus or minus acknowledges that some elements of the subdivision may change to comply with the bylaws or public work specifications, which are road and water and sewer design. Plus or minus also means the amount of donated land may change. And it's expected to decrease a couple of acres from 53 to 49 or 50 acres. There is a manmade pond adjacent to 195 Windridge Road. This was built about 10 years ago. And through the advisory committee process, it was determined that the town should not own this pond because it's a liability and maintenance responsibility. The advisory committee and the applicant, we drew that rectangle, that black rectangle around it. It's about one and a half acres. Might not be the best property line arrangement. That red line just to pick something that's slightly larger, you know, 4.8 to 5.5 acres. This land would still essentially be open space, but it would be boundary line adjustment to the property owner next door, and it would not be donated to the town. On the map it says Glazer. It used to be Jack's house. It's now owned by the McElroy. So it's possible that if you choose to warn things for a public hearing, that town plan and bylaw language might reflect that adjustment to get the pond off of the town land and create a more user friendly boundary between town and private land. Lastly, the specific plan approval would be the select board adopting town plan and bylaw amendments. Then it would go through the development review board as well as any necessary state permits. The town may participate with the applicant through the Act 250 process. And during that permitting process, legal counsel would assist the town manager and Jack the property owner with the necessary steps and documents to transfer the land and town ownership. For example, in conventional development review, it's not uncommon for a developer to have a purchase and sale agreement all by this land for you once all the permits are in place. And the town council may want a similar mechanism that spells out at what level of permitting and plotting review does that land become transferred to the town. The bylaw amendment references and irrevocable offer as part of discretionary permit. But these might be some other mechanisms because a land transfer to the town is intended here. With that, I think that concludes everything I had for you this evening. Questions? Well, additional questions? For the record, the Jensen property owner here is not me. Thank you, Emily. Good job. Thank you. So there are additional people in the room. Does anybody else have questions for Emily or comments, sir? I wonder if I can make a comment. Sure, come up to the microphone if you could. You want me to stay here? Do whatever you want. My name is Mike Moss. My wife Tina and I are the owners and operators of Winswept County. I have attended the majority of the meetings regarding this Glazer parcel and have found a specific plan procedure to be a well-designed and arduous route which affords the community a process and a route which allows the supplement to the existing regulations without supplanting them. As the proposal has worked its way through the various committees, each of those bodies saw fit to vote in the positive regarding this parcel. It is now up to you, the members of the select board, to render the final decision and hopefully to follow in the footsteps of your predecessors. Winswept Farm has been in operation for over 50 years. And we hope to remain in business benefiting the children of Williston. We have been both humbled and gratified to see the number of people, students, and parents who have either written letters or participated in person and expressed their support for the farm and their appreciation of the time that they've spent with us. If the Glazer proposal is approved, we will continue to provide programs which benefit the young people of Williston. Unfortunately, the two other proposals before you would probably put Winswept out of business. In conclusion, I would also like to touch upon the question of aesthetics. The Glazer's vision, as embodied in the specific plan, leaves a large proportion of the property untouched and important views intact. I think this is crucial. We in Vermont need to be careful to preserve that which makes our state so special. If the parcel is developed by a major player whose goal is maximizing profit, Vermont could look like New Jersey with a multitude of poorly sighted houses which sacrifice that which makes our state so special. The Glazer's are proposing to donate a large portion of the parcel in excess of a million dollars to the town to bring their vision of the land to fruition. I urge this board to accept this gift, which will benefit all of us as residents of Williston. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Are there any other questions or comments from people viewing? Anybody signaling online? No, just staff is one. OK. In grant. In grant. So the next step is up to us, the next step that we could take legally is, well, a bunch of things. We could do nothing. That is a viable, legally viable option. We could also warn a public hearing get feedback from more people in town. If the plan is to go forward, we'd have to warn a public hearing next. I can't vote on something like this without having a public hearing and going through the proper proceedings. Is there any discussion or thought about those options or what we should do? Well, the staff is putting an extraordinary amount of time on this, as well as the all of the committees in town. So I think if we have a public hearing, there'll be lots of comments, I hope, on both sides of the issue, which I think we need to hear. So I would, at this point, I'd move to warn a public hearing to receive feedback on the proposed amendments to the unified development by-law and comprehensive plan as presented in the transmitted specific plan proposal to the laser property from the Planning Commission. Is there a second? Is there a second? Discussion on the motion? I think I feel similarly to Terry. I think that we've tasked a couple of different groups now to look at it very carefully, and they spent a lot of time, and the plan has changed quite a bit. I think it will be interesting to hear new comments now that the plan is more solidified to see if there are other things we haven't thought of or that two major committees have not thought of with their own public comments. But yeah, I think, at least if nothing more out of respect for those committees, I would like to move it to a public comment. Any other discussion? I agree. I think the staff is well prepared now. Hearing no other discussion, we'll call the vote. All those in favor of the motion to warn a public hearing say aye. Aye. All those opposed, nay? The ayes have it. Eric, we'll get that scheduled. Yep, we'll coordinate. It'll likely be by the January timeframe after the chat with the board on the schedule here with the holidays coming. I'll keep everyone posted. Emily, thank you. Thank you, guys. Happy Thanksgiving. Thank you, everybody. Yeah, definitely after the holidays. Happy Thanksgiving. Yeah, round our heads around this again, yeah. Next on the agenda, 2024 health insurance plan renewal. Something completely different. Yeah. So every year, the select board passes by motion the health plan that staff that we'll offer to our staff members for the next calendar plan year. In 2023, we made a switch of our carrier from Blue Cross Blue Shield from MVP. We saved some money doing that. We've worked with our broker to analyze our current plan, the gold plan of Blue Cross Blue Shield, recommending a change to the silver level plan. It's the same network, same coverage for staff. But what we find with this plan is the premium is 20% lower. We were looking at a 12% premium increase with our current plan if we stayed with it. I'm in excess of $200,000 for next year in the budget. So this would, we think it would yield us about $120,000 savings there, which is potentially helpful as we're trying to balance the budget the last couple of days. And it's coming in higher than we wanted to. So the way this would work is our health plans are set up. We do a cost share based on union contract and for non-represented staff. And then towards the deductible, we do towards the first dollar. So currently we do the first 84% in a health reimbursement arrangement or an HRA that we give to employees. If they exceed that amount in any more care, they pick up the last 16%. So what we're proposing to do is to shift that share because the deductible is going up a bit next year to the town would pay the first 89% and the employee would pick up the last 11%. The town is going to save money on the premium. The employee is going to save money on the premium up front. As we looked at the numbers, at the end of the day, if the employee needs to meet their full deductible, they may need to pay an extra $5,200. And we felt that was fair in looking at this. So our recommendation for the boards consider a shift in our plan to the silver plan for next year. And that would be how it would all line up here. And we have to do our open enrollment here in the next couple of weeks. So we typically bring us to the board in November as we work through the budget and prepare for that other fund process that we do every year. Have you taken any questions? Questions for Eric? Just a point of clarification with that, Mary-Anne, over Zoom, what would you do? You said $52,100, $52,100, right? Correct, yes, yes. Important detail, yes. Yeah, that's our estimate here. What we tried to do with increasing the HRA share was to recognize that staff is going to save a little bit on the premium. But one thing we have been offering as a public sector organization is robust health care. We don't want to lose that, but at the same time, we recognize that the cost is increasing year by year. So there has to be some type of move for that the employees pick up a little bit. And I think this is fair to ask, going to pick it up on the back end. They'll save some money on the front end. We do a pre-tax, some flexible spending as well so employees could sock that away if they know they're going to exceed their deductible. They could sock it away pre-tax, save a little money that they'd have it there at the end of the day. Do you have any feedback from, run this by anybody on staff or they? Nope, I've just switched Shirley and our broker. And we would plan to roll it out in the next couple of days. I'd alert the unions. Our contracts allow us to substitute a comparable plan. Further questions? Just in the call-in to our previous discussion, would this potentially be another role that an HR director or does a process that HR would participate in? Like planning a new role in land consideration? Yep, that would likely be something I'd task them to do as well. We have a great broker, Sally, Hickok and Borman, she's great. But it's kind of facilitating that relationship, running the open enrollment and just overseeing all aspects. Questions on the health plan? I know Shirley can attest, we get staff questions. We really try to refer them to Blue Cross Blue Shield, but it's nice to have someone at least to talk to if there's an issue. So I know Shirley, especially when we switch carriers, we'll get in in flux of questions. So we like to try to limit changing carriers unless there's a really compelling reason to do so and not to do that any more frequently than every four or five years we can help with. If there are no further questions, there is a proposed motion. Move to approve the Blue Cross and Blue Shield of a select silver CDHP reflective plan as the 2024 health insurance plan to offer employees. Is there a second? Second. Further discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed nay. Greta, I think we talked over you. Did you say aye or nay? I said aye. Okay, thank you. Okay, manager. I'll touch on a couple of brief things here. So we are wrapping up the budget proposal. So we will have that ready. Our goal is next Tuesday. Typically what we'll do is it will be in a PDF version and a binder version. We make change this year, we're gonna do one binder instead of a capital binder and operating binder. If anyone on the board would prefer not to have a binder, just let me know. It's one last set we have to print, but we're happy to make binders for everyone. So we will have those out next Tuesday. That'll be in preparation for your meeting on the fifth. The meeting on the fifth is really just a general overview. I typically provide just a walk through the transmittal all provided in the front of your packet, kind of some of the key issues and themes. And then on the ninth will be our review by the departments going through that on that Saturday session. And then we have a public hearing. We always hold the first meeting in January. That'll be January the second to receive initial public comment on the budget. And then next two to three meetings, fourth, if we need it in January in the warning window will be for the board to finalize the budget that will go on the warning. We have to post the warning 30 to 40 days before town meeting. So we typically, the board will work to wrap that up the third week or so in January, but as much time as the board needs. Yeah, that'll be the process before you here. And as we discussed, the board won't meet after the ninth until January to have a break, try to move more of all that budget review to one day to see how try that. So I spent three weeks to study the budget. So I will, I think I produced through the board. We're continuing to see a lot of increase on the expense side, it's wages and benefits. It's the bottom line is gonna come in higher. And I've been doing something a little bit different this year, I'm gonna present it as a budget that shows current level of services we provide. And then we'll break out to other categories with other potential positions and service enhancements that the board, for the board's discussion, just where we're landing on the expense side of the budget. I just don't wanna bake any additional service enhancements proposals into a bottom line. That's higher that I wanted to see, but we're, wages and benefits are driving a lot of that that you'll see as we wrap up the numbers through the next couple of days. So just to like transmit a little outline that and kind of the key things on the revenue side always comes down to taxes, fund balance. Those are the big two local option tax projections potential use of our budget towards the capital budget. That will be coming up here. So that's always a big process. Is there somewhere in that process that we see the FY23 final numbers? Yep, Shirley's got the draft. You just about have those wrapped up, Shirley, the 23. Yes, sir. Yes. Yes. Doesn't have to be perfect. We have the draft numbers in the transmittal. The auditors are here the week after next. So our goals that we like to have the audit done if we can before the budget process wraps up, but. Before, oh yeah, definitely. Yeah. When you see there's a budget, yeah, we can go to the 21, 22, 21, we do actual pre-added draft. But I'm probably able to have a couple more countries to vote a meeting or something from 10-6 for a while or so without the general fund. So probably a couple of general funds and pre-posts and language. Yeah, we tried to do that three year look back. And then did you mention in there, I'm so foggy today about the ARPA decision-making. Yeah, so my plan is for your next meeting as well as a fall up to your retreat to transmit that. Adding some extra, the extra columns as kind of a worksheet to try to do some draft allocation work for the board over that rate when you come back in January because this will still tail into ARPA decision-making in the capital budget as well with a few items that we've mentioned along with how you want to allocate that remaining 2 million. I've tasked public works with following up on your questions from the retreat. So Bruce is working on a priority summary memo and I asked them to kind of do a report card on our infrastructure overall to give a board a report on that and kind of thinking about the value added in moving an infrastructure project up versus waiting for it in the queue. So I asked them to look at that and also look at our sidewalk and path network. I know that was some recommendations from your policy advisory boards and committees and public works as recommendations for gaps that are existing where they would prioritize some of that work to go. So I've asked them, I think he'll hopefully have that done so I can transmit that to you on the fifth as well. If not, we should get that to you on the ninth and likely if there's time for Bruce to touch on that on the Saturday session, he could chat about that too. Then I just wanted to share, we've hired another certified police officer, Armin Hamabasek who was sworn in last week. He'll be doing some just field work with our staff here and we started shift over the weekend so if it was great news, good to have him aboard. We have another new officer, Sabrina Dubois who is all cleared and ready to go for the February police academy. So she'll be enrolling in that. So it's like two open positions and we'll get these filled. So we're moving in a good direction there. No, I'll stop there. I think that's all we have here. Just two quick liquor license things for other businesses. Okay, well, let's get to the business then. Okay. So the board might recall when there's a new business in town with a liquor license it's not renewed on the cycle of April 30th. So Railroad in Maine was a new restaurant in town last year that in King of town December so their liquor license is up for renewal. So the town clerk forwarded that to me. It's a second and third class license and outdoor consumption permit. It's approved last November at restaurant open in December. We haven't had any issues or reports with their service there. So the question would be for the board to consider approving a first and third class liquor license and outdoor consumption permit for Railroad in Maine through November 21st, 2024. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Aye. The ayes have it. And the second and I don't know if the board this is a new one for me. So the board, so we have a business that's changing its location. It's this unboxed enterprises on Boyle Circle. They do kind of mail order wine and I believe they're too they don't and you can they have a small retail operation there as well. They are moving locations within the building. So the state DLC says they need a new liquor license approval. I just bring to the board's attention if you want to consider a motion for that or I feel they they've been approved so we can handle this administratively as well. But as liquor control board, I'll leave that to do the suppression. So do we have to make a motion for the liquor control board to be able to approve it? Sarah will hit approve in the portal on the town's end. And that's what we need to do. The question is, do you want to make a motion for her to do that or just direct me to tell her? Well, you know what I only got and this is like really up top of my head is that if we said well, we don't care it's within the building but they were moving from a second floor backspace to a front window space in the same building. I think we might care. So I don't know why we wouldn't just approve it if we rather than they could say we don't it's in a building. Is that what you're asking? We just not sure. Just not just come up for me before. So if you want to take action here, I think, yeah, I think it's just moving down a little bit. So warehousing space off Boyer Circle. Yeah, and in this case, it probably doesn't matter at all. But if we start saying, well, we don't do it within a building and then send they may matter if they're going some more interesting places that are being built. You know, we don't have to be consistent or logical as we go forward. Yes, we do. No, we don't. So the motion, if you want to consider it is to approve a change in location for unbox enterprises LLC for a second class license. So moved. Is there a second? Oh, sorry. Further discussion on the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. Anything else? That's it. Okay. Final thoughts on agenda items from tonight's meeting. Are there any? I guess only for me to be a public hearing, you know, people get back from the holidays. I don't want anybody in town to think that we snuck it in when they weren't paying attention. So if we could just do it like later in January, so people have time to have seen it and respond to it and get it on the calendars or whatever.  Then we use the ninth, most likely as a budget workshop and then the 23rd as a potential extra meeting. So the board were to have it in January, the 16th would probably be the potential date for that. That's not sure. If not, February 6th would be the next. The planning commission opened there. Their public hearing like had two people at it. So I think that was not unheard of here. Yeah. I'm talking about the laser one. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. So all in for January 16th then. Okay. For scheduling that. Great. Any other thoughts? Yeah. My new thing is related to the HR decision that we're considering the budget. And I know you just said, you know, that we have this budget expense and not, you know, this budget increase. And that's currently factored in with the possibility of not having any hard work or decision of those like extra extended group and we should take it sooner or later because as we're thinking or, you know, long term planning for the town of things like the Chicago Police Officer or whatnot, you know, you become more and more, you know, the need for this position. And so I think we should take it as soon as possible for discussion. Yep. I built it in as a potential budget enhancement. I've included that in a couple of police positions and elevating of buildings and grounds position that's currently part time of full time. Those are, that's my short list for. Sounds like we'll be addressing this again during budget season. So, yeah. Can I have a final thought? Sure. So just regards to the HR position, I'll just tell you one of my other concerns that's been a concern since I arrived at the town. We are very short staffed and currently right now Lynn is extremely sick here during payroll because I don't have the time or the capacity having learned how to do it via payroll backup for Lynn. So with additional help with some of my functions now, of course, we'll move to HR with the addition of the part-time permanent person downstairs. Mary will be able to help me more. Maggie, our part-time person is actually a backup as learning as training to be a backup for Lynn for AP as well. So with the addition of both these positions we will actually have backup for two very important functions in the town that we don't right now. So just wanted to add. Okay, thank you. My little stuff. So if there's nothing else, I will declare us adjourned. All right, thank you. And have a.