Come here and sit down, we're going to start joining us this evening on the piano for the star-spangled banners, Mr. Greeley. All rise please. Thank you, Mr. Greeley. Are there any town meeting members who have not yet been sworn in? Any new members not yet sworn in? If so, please rise. Seeing none, Mr. Byrne. Thank you, Mr. Moderator, Stephen Byrne, Chairman, Board of Selectment. It is moved that if all the business of the meeting, as said forth in the warrant, for the annual town meeting, is not disposed of at this session when the meeting adjourns. It adjourns to Monday, May 18th, 2014, at 8 p.m. May 19th? All in favor? All opposed? No. Good, let's finish tonight. In that regard, are the last two meetings. Thank you. The last two meetings, we've not commenced our actual business until 8.45. The minutes before that, it was 8.30 one night and 8.35 the other. That's better than two and a half hours of time we've spent on resolutions, committee reports. Please, I'm speaking committee reports and what else did we do? Committee reports, resolutions, and just general announcements. Well, these are all important information. Most of it could be imparted on writing and handed to us. We could read it and then they could be summarized for the committee reports and announcements. While I commend the committees for their hard work, we all know how to read. We don't need long resolution. So in order to gauge the feeling of the meetings for a limiting time tonight on our test vote, we're going to take a yes, no vote to see if we want to limit the time to a shorter amount than the seven minutes. Then it's currently we've been going with. So if you're in favor of a shorter time period for announcements, resolutions, and committee reports, please press one when Mr. Flynn gives us the okay. Okay, all right, so one, if you want to limit the time to a shorter amount. Two, if you want to keep it at seven and three, if you want to abstain. Yes, sir. These are not binding. These are just engaged in the feeling of, no, non-binding. Just to gauge the feeling of the meeting. All right, go ahead and vote. One, if you want to limit the time shorter, two, if you want to keep it at seven minutes. Well, you've got to vote now during the 22nd window, otherwise it doesn't count. All righty, so 126 want to limit the time, 21 want to keep it. And two, abstained. Now that being said, it looks like people want to limit it. Mr. Flynn, one more test vote. This time we're not going to run through the names, though. Press one, if you think five minutes is fair, two, if you think four minutes is fair, and three, if you think three minutes is fair. No, these aren't questions. These are just non-binding that I want to find out what the meeting wants. I'm not taking questions. No. Well, that's, I get to decide. Moderator gets to set the rules of the meeting, or we can have a bylaw change. So one, if you want five, two for four, three for three. Mr. Flynn? Wait, a clock. Don't vote. You'll get a blank. Yeah, you're not ready, Steve? Sorry. You didn't give me a green card, so I should get a red card for that, right? One, five minutes, two, four minutes, three, three minutes. Okay, now we can vote. Okay, one, five minutes, two, four minutes, three, three minutes. 58, one, five minutes, 31, one, four, and 51, one, three. All right, so that's basically seeing what the meeting wants to do. No changes would happen this year till next year, anyways. Does anybody have any announcements or resolutions? Madam.  If anybody's lost glasses, come on up and see if they're yours. Go ahead, Angela. Angela Ozuski, precinct 17, and chair of ATED. I just wanted to let everybody know, because we voted last year, that the booth is up. We're working on furnishing the insides right now, the visitor information booth. And we're also looking for volunteers to staff it. So if anyone is interested, please come see me or Ted Paluso at break. Thank you. Mr. Berkowitz. Bill Berkowitz, precinct 8, just a reminder that residents who are concerned about posed tar sands oil project, that was our article number 20, will be in the lobby during the break for you to express your support, should you care to do so, or engage with them in dialogue. Thank you. Any other announcements or resolutions? Mr. Tremboli. Well, by the way, we had a blackout the other night, and it was dark. The town building facilities has put in new emergency lighting. You'll see four of them down here, and there's four upstairs. These are permanent. The building is going to get an electrical upgrade, but in case we lose power, we can be able to see our way out now. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Tremboli. Mr. Tremboli, precinct 19, this moderator, I have a report from the tree committee to deliver, but it's nothing written down. It's impromptu, just vote. So is that a red, do that now, or do we do that? You want to do it now? Well, go ahead and do it quickly. I have nothing to, okay. If we don't have to give a report if you don't want to, that's the whole point here. I'll be less than three minutes. The tree committee, I did get asked for a tree committee report. So the tree committee would like to report that we have planted a couple of memorial trees, one of them is up on Robin's farm to remember Brian Murray. And so he said, yeah, and so I forget what else I was going to say, so I'll sit down. Mr. Livergood, do you have an announcement? Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Brian Livergood, director of libraries. Quickly, I just want to point out that this is your get out of jail for a free card if you have overdue library materials. We're trying to get some materials back, so if you have some overdue materials, please return them until May 31st. And I also have some highlights from 2013 for the library, thank you. Thank you. Any other announcements or resolutions? Seeing none, are there any reports or committees that have official reports that have to come off the table? If not, that's going to bring us right to article 30, capital budgets. To Tosti. No, excuse me, Mr. Foskett. Thank you, Mr. Moderator, Charles Foskett, the precinct date and chairman of the Capital Planning Committee. Next slide, please. First, I'd like to just introduce to you the members of the committee, Steve Andrew, citizen of point. Hear me? First, let me introduce the members of the committee, Steve Andrew, who is a citizen of point T. Andrew Flatigan, our deputy town manager. Paul Olson, the treasurer's designee. Diane Johnson, school department designee. Ruth Lewis, our comptroller. Tony Landetta. Brian Rarig, I think he was here tonight. And Ruth is also here tonight. And Barbara Thornton, a citizen of point T. All of these people work very hard on this plan. They start in towards the end of August and work through about February meeting two to three times, sometimes four times a month. And I'd like to express my thanks to them. And also to Mike Bhutan, who, you know, Andrew Flatigan and Mike Bhutan are sort of the brains behind the operation. So thank them for their efforts. Next slide, please. This slide behind me shows some of the reasons and motivations for capital planning. And I just want to draw your attention to the second to last bullet, which suggests that successful capital planning facilitates postponing some capital expenditures in favor of others. It's a part of the planning process. I sometimes refer to this as delayed gratification. And, you know, some psychologists like Abraham Maslow and others have described this as the development of personal maturity. In this case, organizational maturity. And I think the town of Arlington has done exceedingly well in amongst the various departments being able to go through the give and take that allows one project to get priority over another and then eventually the turn comes around where their projects get funded. This is a system that works quite well. Next slide, please. Just to worry about our practice, we have a five year plan. I should mention this purple book is your capital planning guide for the night and the budget is in there. Although the official budget is in the orange book because it's a budgetary article on the finance committee, but the budgets in both books are the same. The articles in both books are the same. But we for years have planned to capital budget to stay within 5% of the non-exempt town budget. That means exempt debt, water and sewer, things that are not directly taxed that year within the limits of proposition two and a half. Are the budget that we live within. We've had 28 years of successful capital budgeting that is getting projects voted and approved by town meeting within that 5% limit. And we strongly recommend that we stick with that 5% limit as we move forward. Next slide, please. This slide lists projects that have been completed from past capital budgets as well as projects that are in progress mostly from last year. These are also mentioned in the report. You know, success has a lot of fathers, so I wanted to call your attention to the completed reconstruction of Thompson School. And I have a couple of words to say about that in a few minutes. Next slide, please. This is a summary of the capital budgeting plan. There are three categories in the budgeting and planning. We call them bond, cash and other. This year we're asking for your approval of a total of $17,803,005. And that's spread out amongst $12,568,705 that we're asking you to authorize the town to borrow. A million, roughly $554,300 that the town will spend in cash out of this year's tax appropriation. And then other means projects that are funded by grants, by CDBG, by enterprise funds, et cetera, that don't directly hit the tax rolls. And you can see in the funding sources 2015 diagram there that 70% is bonded, 21% is other and about 9% is cash. Next slide, please. I want to draw your attention to a couple of big projects that are in a capital plan. We're not going to go into a lot of detail on them unless you ask questions about it later, which I'm not, you know, you can, but if we're going to get home tonight. The first, John Cole of the Permanent Town Building Committee described the community safety building project. We originally planned this in five phases. The first two phases have been extremely painful to the police department because of just the general disruption in the long time that contractors have been there. So we're bundling the last three phases into one phase. We're asking for $373,000 to complete the planning of the final phase and $600,000 to finish it. The central fire station, $6,500,000, you also heard about that from John Cole. I'd like to mention that on the Parks and Recreation slide, we're spending this year $602,000 on Parks and Recreation and in the past five years, actually past dozen years we spent about just under $6 million on Parks and Recreation facilities and have a total of $3 million in the five-year plan. Finally, not finally, but I'd like to draw your attention to a $452,000 expenditure for school computers. This funds new resources for teachers as well as for students. The teacher resources are being driven by the need for teachers to be able to meet the new assessment guidelines that are being enforced by the state and federal government. I just wanted to mention the Thompson School in Tank Town Meeting. The fact that the Thompson School project was funded and completed on time, completed without increasing taxes of the citizens was largely because of the town meeting's ability to vote the appropriate resources to fund that effort. I'd like to also, on the next slide, mention to you that while we have the high school head of us as a big project, the Stratton School Initiative shouldn't be forgotten. It's part of the rebuild campaign from 2000 and we're going to be coming back to you next year with some more requests for that. If I can ask you to go two slides ahead to the slide with a chart on it that says funding Arlington High School. The Arlington High School project is going to be fairly substantial, probably in excess of $100 million. It's going to have to be funded through some sort of a debt exclusion, which is the way we have funded the past $80 million that have been spent on the elementary schools. The slide behind me, those two arrows point to inflection points where the previous debt has been retired. And we will be coming back to you, I hope, as a town to ask the town to consider to do additional debt exclusion funding to help meet this significant project. And I respectfully ask that you support Article 30, the capital budget as recommended by the finance committee and the capital planning committee. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Leonard. Thank you, Mr. Moderator John Leonard, precinct 17. Mr. Moderator on page five of the capital planning budget. Excuse me, page six. Top of the page is $30,000 set aside for Arlington High School exterior doors. I wonder if somebody could briefly explain that to me please. Mr. Fossey will address that question. The school department has requested, you know, spending to increase the security of the building. I think there are 13 or 15 doors in the building and more than that. Sorry, 52 doors. But, you know, in today's environment, having security in the schools is a critical issue. Mr. Moderator, in an article in the town newspaper dated March 13th of this year, there is an interview with an architect, Laurie Cole, on the condition of the high school. And in one of the paragraphs in the article, it states, the school's 50 or so doors leading outside are not attached to an alarm system so they can be propped open without school administrators knowing. My problem is this, Mr. Moderator, with all the tragedies that have happened across the country between Columbine, Virginia Tech, and et cetera. With all the expertise and all the skilled people that we have in this town. No reflection on any of them. But why is it necessary that we have an outsider come in to tell us that Arlington High School is not safe for our kids? Is that a rhetorical question, or do you want any answer? That's basically a question, Mr. Moderator. Mr. Hayner? Oh, Adam wants to address it. Mr. Chapter Lane is going to address it. Adam Chapter Lane, town manager. The report that you're citing by the architect, Laurie Cole, is part of the much larger report that was put together as sort of a needs report on the overall building needs of Arlington High School. So we wanted that outside expertise to come in, take a look at the programmatic needs of the high school, and tell us what could be or would be part of a potential rebuild. And one part she did look at was the security of the building in the exterior doors. So this isn't a situation of hiring someone to tell us that our building's not safe, but rather hiring somebody to come assess the school, look at what the programmatic needs would be in any kind of renovation project. And this was one element that was addressed. I have to tell you, Mr. Moderator, that when I read this, and even now, I'm quite uncomfortable to the fact that it doesn't sound like a condition that just happened overnight. I just really can't understand how such a condition has gone on. And somebody really not acquainted that much with the town finds out about it that this condition has existed for a while. I guess in closing, Mr. Moderator, I'm just looking for one thing. I don't know if I'm not going to get it or not. We just finished completing, I think, the seventh school in the town of Arlington. Can anybody in this hall right now, without question, guarantee that all schools in the town of Arlington are safe? And could they go on record with such a statement? Mr. Hainer's raises again. Bill Hainer, Chairman of the Arlington School Committee. I cannot guarantee 100% anyone is safe anywhere. What I can tell you, I as the Chairman of the School Committee cannot get into any school building without being checked in and signed in every single day at every single one of them. I hope that gives you some... Every time you try to secure something and somebody tells you it's 100%, you'll find somebody that'll break that security. We're doing the best we can with what we've got. I'd like to quickly reflect back to the last question. The committee and the administration have well aware of the security in the high school. We have constantly been looking for things. This study provided specific information to go forward for the expense for it. Lastly, Mr. Moderator, I don't know how it's done, but a suggestion only that maybe all the security tours are all doers in all schools should be randomly checked just to be in the safe side. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Thank you, sir. Mr. Stephen Harrington. Stephen Harrington, Precinct 13. I have three things on the capital budget. The first one is going to be an observation. The second one is going to be a motion. And the third one is going to be a question. So I'll do it right very quickly. If you look at your budget book, the Orange Book from FinCon, page 14, you'll notice the... And the manager had alluded to this during the warrant articles earlier in the meeting. And you'll see on item number 17, $230,000 roadway improvements cemetery division of the Public Works. So let me tell you, the rule of thumb is it's about a million bucks to rebuild a road. You all saw the pictures. The roads in there are trashed. There's huge ruts on every road throughout it. There's two to three miles of road inside the cemetery. This $230,000 is a Band-Aid at best. And because we all know that it's used for a lot of other purposes other than visiting the cemetery, this, while I will not urge you to vote against this or to remove this, it's merely a Band-Aid. There's millions of dollars worth of road work in there to be done. The second thing is a motion. I also want to draw your attention to page 13. And you can see on item three, there's a $225,000 column barium. I don't know if I pronounced that right. It sounds painful. Construction for the cemetery. Now that's coming, it's under the other category. So there's no appropriation, but there is. It's coming out of the revolving fund that you'll vote on article 52 or 53. It's coming out of the graves and burial plots revolving fund. And that revolving fund, you can use the money for that. And, you know, earlier in this meeting, I heard over and over again, up here and with conversations with people, that, you know, I've raised the attention of town meeting. I've raised the attention of the condition of the cemetery. Something's going to be done right away, certainly before the next town meeting. But there's no money. And if you look through this report, there's no money to fix the damage that's been done. There's a band aid to skin coat the road. But there's no other money. This money shouldn't be in here to build a column barium. Now, you'll hear that it pays for itself. You'll hear, if the cemetery commission was here to speak to this, that it would pay for itself. There was no discussion of this at the Fincom meeting. There was no discussion on television. There was no discussion. I couldn't make it myself and argue against it there. But you'll hear that this is a money maker. Well, if it is bonded, put it in a bond, let it pay itself off. That's the right way to do a capital expense. Don't take it out of a revolving fund when you really need to have that money for maintenance. So I'd like to make a motion to strike that $225,000 column barium construction from the capital budget. And I urge you to support this. The last thing is just an observation. And I talked to Mr. Foskin about this. And it's on the same page, 13. There's item number one. And it's design and renovate new food pantry space. I love the food pantry. I mean, my family has donated consistently. I think it's a great idea. And my understanding is it's located in the basement of a church. And I don't understand what time meeting is doing, appropriating or raising money or what. I don't know what we're doing. I don't understand this. So Mr. Moderator, that's a question. Is this actually monies that we're going to raise or somehow get and use to renovate a private property? Mr. Chapter Lane. Adam Chapter Lane, town manager. So you can see under section two on page 13 of the finance committee report. It speaks to various capital projects and equipment purchases that shall be undertaken in finance by grants or other funds. So this is not a direct appropriation out of any tax dollars. So this $150,000 expense would be solely raised by private donations to the food pantry. And currently the food pantry is looking for a new site that would be more accessible and friendly to those who use the food pantry. So this is not necessarily money that will be spent on a private site. But either way, it is solely from the donations to the food pantry and not raised by any tax dollars. So we heard that this section is money, it's federal money. We know it's out of revolving funds. It's not clear to me where it's coming from. And so I'm not going to be the bad guy against the food pantry at all. But I think that it's something that certainly should have a lot more explanation than being hidden inside of the capital budget. And that's a point I forgot to make on the Columbarium. We have a five-year plan for the capital budget. You saw it, right? This expense was not on the five-year plan last year. It came out of nowhere. Twice in the past ten years, this project has been in front of town meeting on a separate stand alone warrant article. And both times it's failed to bury it inside of the capital budget and to put it in a place where you think you're not appropriating money when it's coming out of revolving fund. I don't like it. Thank you. Hold on. Was this motion distributed to the members earlier this week? No, yes or no, sir. Stephen Harrington precinct 13. No, it's an amendment. So striking one item. You could reject this. Stephen, please. That's all I needed is the yes and no. I'll allow this because it's very simple. But these are things that should be. Does anyone want to second his motion? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. But these are kind of things that should be distributed. Mr. Fuller. Peter Fuller, precinct 20. I have questions on three items in part three of the recommended vote. First line for $500,000 replace phone system. Seems like a lot of money. Can someone explain how comprehensive this replacement will be? Mr. Greeley. Oh, I thought you wanted to talk about the phone. Either Mr. Foskett or Mr. Good, one or the other. I think Mr. Good can explain in a little more detail the need to replace the 15-year-old phone system. David Good, chief technology officer. The half a million dollars for the phone system will replace the existing switch that resides in the basement of the high school that services all town and all school buildings. Except for the artisan school. The artisan school has a separate system that is approximately 17 years old. The system that supports the rest of the town located in the basement of the high school is creeping up on 15 years old. You'll see a second line item in the capital budget for rebuilding the town network. The project will include us going to voice over IP which requires the infrastructure to be rebuilt which is the switching and routing gear along with then the phone infrastructure on top of that and all the phones in the town and school. Thank you. Next, line 14 in part 3, 126,000 radio frequency ID system for the library. Can someone explain what that is and what we get? Mr. Livigut, can you? Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Ryan Livigut, director of libraries. So the idea behind the RFID system, it's radio frequency identification. It's these little chips that we put on our physical items. And what that does is it's an inventory system and helps us improve the efficiency of circulation activities. Check in, check out. Just throwing out some numbers and I don't want to get too involved but our total circulation is up 26% since 2002. We're in the top 10 in the state in total circulation and our staffing levels are down since then. We struggle to keep up with the volume of all the materials that we deal with every day. So that's the real quick answer. I can get into more details if you'd like. Hopefully that answers the question. So that'll improve efficiency. I think it's money well spent. Next question, line 33, $250,000 for Hardy School Windows. I think we renovated that whole building in 2001, so why is it necessary to replace windows now? Mr. Foster is going to address that. There have been problems with the lentils around those windows almost in the building near the windows almost since the beginning of, since the time when it was renovated. There's been a lot of work done to mitigate the problem since then but it hasn't been satisfactory. If we don't replace these windows, then the envelope of the building is going to be threatened. So we've had some outside people come in and look at it and they have a solution and the town should go ahead and do it. Okay, sounds like it'll save a bigger headache later. And one further comment on line number 39, $53,000 to replace four digital payment parking meters. Hooray, it's about time. Thank you. Ms. Costa? Barbara Costa, precinct 10, just another question. I don't, on line 30 of the same item. Spy-Pon-Tennis Courts purely for my edification, $467,500. And why is it so high? Again, Mr. Foster. Sorry, I didn't hear your question, Barbara. It was about the Spy-Pon-Tennis Courts on line 30. Why is it so high? $467,500. It's competitive bidding and that Tennis Court has been in pretty difficult disrepair for the last 15 years. It's been requested by the Parks and Recreation Commission. It's been part of their five, seven year plan for renovation. I haven't put a Tennis Court in my personal property lately, so I can't tell you that you can find one less expensive, but it's been, you know, well-evaluated. And I happen to have a Tennis player in the family who would shoot me if that doesn't get passed. I thought of that when I asked the question. Thank you. Mr. McCabe? Mark McCabe, Precision 2, I stand to terminate debate on Article 30 and all matters before it. Second. Okay, we have motion to debate Article 30 and all matters before it. Mr. Flynn, whenever you're ready. We're going to vote one to terminate debate, two to not terminate debate. Okay, go ahead and vote. Whoops, nope, not that. That's doing... Okay, there we go. So go ahead and vote one to terminate debate and two not two. 131 to terminate, 46 to not two. Is it two-thirds vote? Debate on Article 30 and all matters before it is terminated. So first, we're going to vote on Mr. Harrington's substitute motion, which he wishes to strike out Item 3 under Section 2, the $225,000 for column barium construction. He wants to eliminate that column barium. All in favor of his motion, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. Thank you very much. It is declined. We have five people rising. We have to do a electronic vote. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Flynn. Yes, Madam. No, it's five people, just like the old rules, the five people doubted the vote. They can call for an electronic or accounted vote. We have an electronic vote. Not on this, ma'am. We just did a voice vote and it was three... It lost overwhelmingly, but we're going to go ahead and do the exercise. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Flynn. Yes, sir. The amendment. This is on the amendment. Yeah, if you wish to his amendment vote yes, if you want to vote against his amendment vote two. Yes. You ready? So one, if you wish to eliminate the column barriums, two, if you do not want to eliminate them. One yes, two no. Okay, time's up. We have 40 in the affirmative and 127 in the negative. The amendment loses. Now we're going to go on to the main vote as recommended by the capital planning committee and the finance committee. Yes. Yep, we're going to use our clickers to get a two third vote because this involves bonding. So whenever you're ready, Mr. Flynn. Yeah. So because this is bonding, we need a two third vote. So one is in favor of the recommended vote of the finance committee. Yeah. Eric Hill with Pushing 12, Ms. Monterey. The book had six different votes. So are we just doing them all for... All at once. All at once? Yeah. For two thirds. Okay. That's how we've done it in the past. So continue with that. Yeah. Okay. So one yes, two no. And go ahead and vote. And time's up. 172 in the affirmative. Seven in the negative. So it does pass by two thirds. Thank you very much. That closes article 30. And brings us to article 32. Did we vote on 32? 33. 33. We did 32. I didn't move it down. Article 33. We have the recommended vote of the finance committee. $750,000 for appropriation. Recommended vote of the finance committee on article 33. $750,000 for appropriation of water mains. Anyone wish to address this? Seeing none. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Flynn. Okay. So yes in favor. Two to oppose. So go ahead and vote. Eight times up. We have 178 in the affirmative. Three in the zero in the negative. It's a unanimous electronic vote. That's funny. 178. Zero unanimous. That closes article 33. Brings us to article 35. 35. Recommended vote of $37,535. For all these different commissions. The majority vote. Anyone wish to discuss this? Peter fuller precinct 20. I think this is the first time transportation advisory committee has been in this vote. $15,000. What are they planning to do with the money? Mr. Tosti. Mr. Smith wanted to tell us. The transportation advisory committee. It takes on certain jobs is distributed by the board of selectmen. In regards to any issues involving transportation. Streets, intersections, et cetera. They last had an appropriation of $25,000 back in 2001. And over a period of time they have gradually used that up. Sometimes they have to hire consultants to do particular work on study in a particular area. Whether it's traffic counts or things like that.  Well they still have 5,000 left. And they came in looking for another. I think it was $35,000. They asked for the finance committee decided that we should do a shorter time period. So $15,000 plus the balance they have should take them through the next couple of years. Thank you. They do good work. They could pay them further time. Thank you. Anyone else wish to address this article? Seeing none. This is just a majority vote. All in favour please say yes. Yes. Opposed say no. It's a unanimous vote and I so declare it. That closes article 35. Brings us to article 36. Recommended vote of the finance committee for town celebration is $10,167. Anyone wish to discuss this article? Seeing none. All in favour please say yes. Yes. Opposed say no. The unanimous vote and I so declare it. That closes article 36. Brings us to article 37. Recommended vote of the finance committee, $8,014 for legal defense and indemnification costs. Anyone wish to discuss legal defense and indemnification? Seeing none. All in favour please say yes. Yes. Opposed? The unanimous vote and I so declare it. That closes article 37. Brings us to article 38. Recommended vote of the finance committee of no action. All in favour of no action please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. It's a no action vote and I so declare it. Brings us to close article 38. Brings us to article 39. Appropriation water bodies $40,000. Sir? One quarter. Yes. Who had that substitute? Uh oh. All right. Wait a second. Did I have enough? Did you vote on the prevailing side? Yes. You did. You wish to reconsider article 38? Yes. Yes. All in favour of reconsideration of article 38 please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. It is a two thirds vote. Article 38 is now open for reconsideration. Sir come forward and give me your substitute motion. Go ahead. You have some. Somewhere I do. I'll find it. I have a copy. Yeah, I'll take a copy. But go ahead and address it first. Go ahead. You're on. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. I'm Bill Downing, precinct 15. My motion is to request $205,000 to reduce fees for elementary and instrumental music and high school athletics. Thank you. This appropriation would cut these fees in half. Extracurricular activities keep our children in school with the incentive to do well. I see this as an affordable way to lengthen the school day. And how is it not just that? Our children are learning new skills in an organized atmosphere being instructed by adults, most of whom are professional teachers. At most of the best prep schools in the area, extracurricular activities are required, not options. The importance of these activities has been well chronicled. The cognitive benefits of elementary school music and the lessons learned in team building pride and hard work that athletics provides are invaluable. Many children are trying to find themselves in high school and many do so through sports. However, when a family has to pay $200 to $500 just to try a sport, it puts undue pressure on that child. I'm sure that many don't even try. This is the atmosphere that we have created and I believe that needs to change. $205,000 sounds like a lot of money, but in the larger picture, it is less than a half percent of the school budget and less than 0.2% of the town budget. The school department was given an additional $885,000 this year beyond their three and a half for general education and 7% for special ed. On this windfall, they chose not to put one dime towards reducing these fees, which are some of the highest in the state. I appeared before the budget subcommittee on two occasions and asked for funding Point Blank and was told very nicely, no, Point Blank. I understand the school department has many concerns including the high school and classroom sizes at the Audison. However, we have years to resolve these problems. Some relief should be given now to the families that have been straining to pay fees that keep their children off the streets, out of trouble, in a healthy learning environment. The cost of this program is significantly cheaper than the cost of truancy and intervention programs. A child's family has to pay $435 to play an instrument. I feel this fee is prohibitively high for one child. Never mind if the family has two or more children who would like to learn an instrument. If the price were halved, it would still be difficult for most families to afford. As for high school athletics, Arlington's fees are some of the highest in the state. On the board is a spreadsheet of high school athletic fees. With line one displaying Arlington's fees, the second line, the league average for the sport, and the third line, the percentage difference between them. If you read across the football, Arlington is 183% higher. Golf, 81%, soccer, 45%, basketball, 74%, gymnastics, 249%, hockey, 222%, baseball and softball, 74% higher than league average. Cheerleading looks like a bargain, but when you add in the choreography fee, we're about 35% higher than league average. And that is not the end of it. Parents are still expected to fundraise, work the concession stands, and all the other details associated with games and meets. I think the very least we can do is lower our fees to be more in line with league averages. I, for one, believe there is a price point that should be met so that extracurricular activities can be enjoyed by all. And I believe the fees currently charged by Feralington families is far too high today. If the school department decides not to use the appropriation or the money to sustain these fee cuts, as town meeting wishes, then perhaps next year they should receive no additional funding beyond their 3.5% and 7% increases. I am asking for the money for one year only. To sustain lower fees, we should use the $200,000 that has been put aside each year in the school budget to settle a lawsuit that has now been settled. In closing, the parents and children in Arlington are asking for your support. Please don't let them down. Thank you for listening. Thank you, sir. Mr. Tosti. Ladies and gentlemen, if you could go to the back of the Finance Committee report of the spreadsheet on D1. Now this is the spreadsheet we do all the time, five, six year plan to showing you what's happening. And the first thing I want to point out is if you go down, you have revenue on the top, then you go down to appropriations, and then you go to school, and you see an increase under general education of almost a million won, an increase under special education costs of a million seven. And then for some reason the growth factor didn't carry over there, but that's 885,000. So we have increased the school budget by 3,054,000 this year. That is very generous. It's perhaps more than we can afford in future years. If the school committee, which is entirely within their discretion, decides to reduce the athletic fees, it should come out of that 3 million dollars. And so we feel that's the case. If we simply can't afford more money. So if you take 200,000, and then if you do it each year, that'll raise that deficit. If you look over at that 12.8 million dollar deficit in 2020, that'll add another million two to that deficit. And what we're going to be trying to do over the next several years is get that deficit down. This will expand it by a million two. Secondly, the town meeting can't force the school committee to do this. Whether the setting of fees is entirely within the school department's discretion. Finally, no one likes to have to pay more for services. The taxpayers are certainly paying more for services. The rate payers in water and sewer are certainly paying more for services. Virtually all the recreation services, rink services. Everybody is paying more for the services in order to maintain the services and the financial health of our community. I don't think it's unfair that parents contribute to the support of some of the extracurricular activities that their children take advantage of. And finally, I'd like to mention that the school department has methods in place to ensure that no one is denied a service or the ability to play a sport or music because of inability to pay. That is in place now. I urge you to vote no action on the substitute motion. Thank you. Mr. Harrington. Stephen. Stephen Harrington, precinct 13.  Bill's actually cringing because, you know, I'm like terminating debate on the guy who everyone's going to vote against, right? And I support this and I'll tell you why I support it. I've had a lot of history with the use of fees. I worked with the school department four years ago to cut the fees in half and they cut them in half for all of the fees except for three biggest sports, football, hockey and gymnastics. And those sports far and away, it's 85% boys that are paying not the highest fees in the state, the highest fees in the nation. Arlington made the Wall Street Journal. So the fees for those sports are way too high. And the reason that they cut them was because they were charging $400 for a sport like Cross Country where the kids ran around inside the building and they brought their own shorts. And, you know, you can't do that. There's actually this case law that says you can only charge up to the cost of it. And so, you know, they're charging up to the cost of it right now. And I want you to think of it this way. There's a family cap on sports fees of $1,250. And we heard earlier in this time meeting about how the CPA was $86 a year. This sports fees is a $1,250 tax on families that a couple hundred families that are supporting this. It's not, and this isn't just sports, also instrumental music. This is a tax that far exceeds, and it's not for a single year either. Generally, these families that are paying this that have, you know, they hit the, they're in there for three years, I mean for 10 years. They're paying $1,250 extra for 10 years. Now I can go into the cognitive benefits of instrumental music. I paid up a lot of money for my children to make sure they had lessons, it's really good to encourage young children to have instrumental music. The same thing with athletics. I'm not an athletics guy, okay? But I have learned of the value to so many students that athletics does follow. And so, some things we socialize. Education is something that we socialize. And it's important that we socialize the cost amongst the largest group of people that we can. And that's why in Massachusetts we have the concept of a free and appropriate public education. And we subsidize that across as many people as possible. And make no doubt about it. Athletics in high school is part of the legislators foundation budget. It is not a choice to have it. It is something that is part of a free and appropriate public education. And we should subsidize those costs across all tax payers in Arlington and not just a small subset of them. And then finally I'd like to just mention that the previous speaker said that this is going to be going on for five years and it'll add $1.2 million to our deficit in 2020. But Mr. Downing clearly said that this was for a single year. So I'm not sure where he got that. And as well, there's a fundamental misunderstanding here.  They have a budget subcommittee in December. They bounce you to the finance department who says, well, this is a school department. We can't do anything for you. And this is sort of like gray area. And I finally figured out what the real problem is. See, this money is not for the school department. This money is for those 200 or 300 families or the 600 families that do instrumental music and high school athletics. And the only way we can get it back to them is by putting it through the school department budget. The school department doesn't want this. They don't care. It's not going to be for them. It's actually for the residents of Islington. And I urge you to send a message to the people of Islington, because you're looking for a 1.5% church charge on property taxes. And I don't think you want to have 400, 500 families in town paying 10 times or 15 times that amount on a tax on a free and appropriate public education. Gentlemen in the red shirt. Right next. Yep. You. Next to the exit sign. Yeah, you. I'm sorry. I don't remember your name. Nathan Spilling, poosing four and move to terminate debate on all matters. We have a motion to terminate debate. Okay. Mr. Flynn, when you're ready. Okay. We have a motion to terminate debate. One to terminate debate. Two. No. Negative. Do not. And go ahead and vote. Okay. Voting is closed. 125 to terminate 56. To not terminate it. Debate is terminated. Excuse me. Yeah, I can do it. When you're ready. We have first Mr. Downing substitute motion. Whoops. Here we go. All in favor of Mr. Downing substitute motion. Motion to press one. And all opposed. Press two. And go ahead and vote. Okay. Voting is closed. We have 77. The affirmative. 105. And the negative. The substitute motion fails. We go back to the recommended vote of the finance committee of all. Of no action in article 38. All in favor of no action in article 38. Can you say yes. Yes. All opposed. No. No action to vote. Now go on to article 39. You have to get 30 people to see the screen. Okay. 30 people is not a reason. We are now on article 39. $40,000 recommended vote for water bodies. Anyone wish to discuss water bodies? Water bodies. Article 39. Water bodies. Water bodies. $40,000. Anyone wish to discuss it? Seeing none. All in favor of the recommended vote of the finance committee, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? A unanimous vote and I so declare it. That closes article 39 and brings us to article 40. We have the recommended vote of the finance committee for $7,500 for the Harry Barber community service program. Anyone wish to discuss the program? Seeing none. All in favor please say yes. Yes. Opposed? It's unanimous vote and I so declare it. That closes article 40 and brings us to article 41. We have the recommended vote of the finance committee of no action. Mr. McKinney, what purpose do you raise your hand? Well, get up and do it. Mr. McKinney has a substitute motion. Okay. Let me start fresh here. Andy O'Brien. Go ahead. Lawrence, go ahead whenever you're ready. Okay. I think so to the back. Did you go back there? I'm sticking. I got you. You're first. Okay. Well, anyway, I'm here for perhaps an opportunity to be good old Johnny one note again. And I promised everybody I'll get through this in less than seven minutes. And since I'm not quite sure, I'll also try to get through this as fast as possible by even skipping a few. The reason I'm here today is because back in 212 we passed an article which suggested that we were going to have four special signs for four special historic areas. And this is very important because we don't have very many historic areas. We have a free standing statute with no site. We attended a lot of meetings to be able to assess the fact that Uncle Sam was in fact an important part of our, you know, our, oh, we have a problem here. What's happening is that we're looking at a previous one. It's going back and forth. Is there any way I can just go forward to it? Okay. So we had the first proposal for the signs. And the problem was the first proposal for the signs, the Uncle Sam sign disappeared. And did he miss it? Well, he would have had to be. I'm going to have to ask the, to put this on the table of proposals. This is the wrong slideshow. Is there anything I can do to do, can I ask the moderator? Right. You got the wrong slideshow. Yeah. How many slideshows you have? It's the only one I have, but it was, it was all edited. And then I'm not getting the one, but now we've got a new one. Dude. That's the one that's supposed to be there. Well, hurry up. You have four minutes and 41 seconds left. Okay. Well, here's the person. You see, the voter is under, we're supposed to get four historic sites. And the Uncle Sam Memorial Statue was one of them. Okay. And the thing is, is that it's not simply, they took it away, but they took it away completely. There's Old Schwann Mill, Jason Russell House, Syrosdale, and visitors information. Now, the fact is Uncle Sam is our tourism hook. We were going to, in February, to put up a sign board that would effectively say something, but we didn't put it through because at the same time, we, this was put before a proposal for some signs. Now the sign for Uncle Sam just did not appear. It disappeared. None of the participating groups had been notified. And we were wondering whether this was a mistake, did Mr. Barisi simply miss the Uncle Sam Memorial Statue, but he says he was looking at the minute man on a bike, and if he was looking at the minute man on the bike, he was looking right at the statue. So it appears that ATED originally intended no sign for Uncle Sam. By the time it got to the warrant, they had been in enough complaints that the Uncle Sam Memorial Statue was stuck in there. But town meeting was concerned. Who's making the decisions? You have to include the sites. And so ATED language should make sure the sites would be included in any process. They would have to let us participate. Things got, and then in consultation with the four organizations related to the sites, but things got wobbly from the start. The statue disappears. The new plaza replaces it. But why mention the statue? The visitor asks, why in Arlington is it something special to see? We know Uncle Sam, so what's the connection? Let's check it out. I'm looking for the Uncle Sam Memorial Statue. Is that the statue? Battle Rose says there's a statue. But it's worse. Last summer with no notice to anyone, even Uncle Sam Plaza got dropped out of the bottom. We found out no mistake. Now you know why our Uncle Sam Memorial Statue doesn't have its sign. The sign's been hidden in storage, so town meeting wouldn't know that Uncle Sam Memorial Statue had been eliminated. We don't know if Uncle Sam has been left out of any of the other placements or the gateway. A-Ted has done no sharing. The whole $5,000 worth of historic Arlington theme branding for a summer's visitor facility. Do we have any signs? Excuse us, you might hear. It's already done. We don't have the money to make another one. We got wind of this last September. We were told it hadn't been finished, and it could be changed. A-Ted could have kept that agreement before paying Boston's sign to go ahead. With the account, and there is plenty left from last year's to do it. Or you just got a big, beautiful sign. Can't have two. We went over that. We can't read anything in the bottom. We need something to say something. And this is for a historic site, not a tourist building. What's next? A historic Arlington parking area. Jason Russell needs two as well. The A-Ted sign doesn't say enough. For a while, Jason Russell had three signs. The double sign is really more about not asking first. I never did a study before. They asked for the sign proposal. Those were not advertised, and few were solicited, resulting in high prices, mixed messages, two signs next to each other's too many. No. The Uncle Sam Plaza sign is only there temporarily, until construction is finished. It moves to the rear. But we need a sign for the visitor's building. Have one made. The visitor town meeting gave A-Ted 40,000 for those signs, and one was for us. Please put up the Uncle Sam Memorial Statue sign. Okay, let's have a drum roll. Could I ask the town moderator to ask the town manager a question? Ask me the question. Is this a Uncle Sam Memorial Statue sign, or is this a visitor's information sign? Mr. Chaplain, do you have any answer to that specific question? You know what this sign is? Does this sign exist somewhere in the town's premises? Adam Chaplain, town manager. I believe that's a sign that points out to visitor information center located at the Uncle Sam Plaza. Thank you. Do you have any indication that A-Ted ever communicated with us at any time about these changes? Adam Chaplain, town manager. My understanding is that both A-Ted communicated with you, and I know that me and you both sat down for about an hour and discussed this change as well. Did they communicate with us and say they were going to change it before they changed it? He answered your question. Time's up. I'm sorry, but the fact was we didn't find out until it's changed, and it was specifically that we were supposed to be consulted and there was supposed to be a chapter. We're supposed to have our sign. Do we have a second for Mr. McKinney's motion? Time's up, Lawrence. Second. Seconded. Okay, seconded. Thank you very much for your intelligence. I did it within seven minutes. Mr. Tosti's next on the list. I was speaking to the mic. Sorry. Ladies and gentlemen, as they say in my comment, this is a dispute over the wording of a sign. The town manager, after consultation with all parties, decided that the sign would say the Visitor Center Uncle Sam Plaza. Now, a few feet away is a whole sign that we set up. I think it was unveiled at the last town day with a whole sign about Uncle Sam and wording and everything else. So there's an Uncle Sam sign right there, and then there's going to be another sign at the Visitor Center maybe 10 or 15 feet away. The manager decided that it didn't make any sense to have two signs that said the same thing 15 feet apart. The article last year put this under the jurisdiction of the town manager to decide the wording of the signs. I think this is a decision for the town manager to make in consultation with the others, which has already been, you know, which he said he did. This is not really an issue for town meeting to decide on the wording of a sign. I urge you to vote no action on the article. Thank you. Thank you very much. What's your point of order, sir? Dean Karman, precinct 20. Is the motion in scope because it's directing the town manager to spend money? He says eight head, but the original article said that the money is to be spent under direction of the town manager. So we are effectively saying no, we're going to tell the town manager how to spend the money. No. So is it in scope? Let me take a look at it. It's sort of is. It's kind of he's asking us to produce and install or restore in a place a sign that seems to already be there. Maybe we want to just talk about it real quickly. Mr. Deist. John Deist, precinct 13. I move to move the question on this article and all issues related there, too. Okay. We have a motion to terminate the debate on the article. Oh, substitutes related there, too. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Flynn. Yep. Thank you. This is a motion to terminate the debate. One for yes to terminate, two for no. Go ahead and vote. Okay. Times up. 157 people wish to terminate the debate. 20 do not. It's more than a two-third vote. It passes. The vote is terminated on article 41. We have before us Mr. McKinney's substitute motion, which we'll vote on first. All in favor of Mr. McKinney's substitute motion, please say yes. Opposed? No. My opinion is a majority vote. No action. That ends article 41. It brings us to article 42. We have a recommended vote of no action on article 42. Mr. McKinney, do you have a substitute again? Do you have a substitute motion? No. Mr. McKinney, do you have a substitute again? Do you have a substitute motion? No. Do you have a substitute motion? No substitute and no one speaks on it. We only speak on things we have something to talk about. Right now the only thing to talk about is we recommend a vote of no action on article 42. All in favor, please say yes. Opposed? No. In my opinion, this majority vote of no action. That brings us to article 43. Holiday lights. All in favor, please say yes. Yes. All opposed? It's unanimous vote of no action. That closes article 43. It brings us to article 44. Recommend a vote of, again, no action by the finance committee. Number 44. All in favor, recommend a vote of finance committee on article 44 in no action, please say yes. Opposed? It's unanimous vote of no action. That's a recommended vote of no action. It's a unanimous vote. It brings us to article 45. Recommended vote of no action. Anyone wish to discuss article 45 or have a substitute motion? I don't know. I'm not in control of that. Dave, can you show 45? There you go, Sean. Recommended vote of no action on article 45. All in favor, please say yes. Opposed? It's a vote of no action. That closes 45. It brings us to article 46. Recommend a vote of $5,000 for the battle road scenic byway. Anyone wish to discuss the battle road scenic byway in $5,000? Seeing none. All in favor, please say yes. Opposed? It is in a affirmative vote. That closes article 46. It brings us to article 47. Finance committee is recommending zero dollars. Anyone wish to discuss zero dollars? All in favor, please say yes. Opposed? It's a majority vote. And unanimous majority vote. Spend no money. And I so declare it. That closes article 47. Brings us to article 48. Sir? Article 44. Because we had no substitute motions on 44. Because no action votes. Recommend a vote of no action. We don't discuss it. Like the one we just did there, the recommended vote is zero, so we could discuss it. Now we have article 48. Appropriation. OPEB. Trust benefits. No. $650,000. $950,000, $960,000. Do you want to discuss it? No. All in favor of the recommended vote of the finance committee, please say yes. Opposed? It's unanimous vote. And I so declare it. That closes article 48. And brings us to article 49. Acceptance of legislation. Increase minimum allowance. We have recommended a vote of the finance committee, increased the recommended from 250 to 500 a month, and you will wish to discuss that. Seeing none, all in favor? It's unanimous vote, and I so declare it. It brings us to article 49. Brings us to article 50. Appropriation, long-term stabilization fund. Finance committee wants to put $100,000 into the stabilization fund. This requires a two-thirds vote, and you will wish to discuss putting it into the stabilization fund. All in favor, please say yes. Opposed? It's unanimous vote, and I so declare it. Certified. Voting. Thank you. Article 50 is now closed. Brings us to article 51. Appropriation overlay reserves. They want to put $350,000 into the overlay reserve surplus account. All in favor, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? It is a majority vote, and I so declare it. Article 51 is closed. Article 51 is closed. Brings us to article 52. Transfer cemetery funds. The town transfers $150,000 to the cemetery commissioners. Anyone wish to discuss it? First they get first crack. If not, Mr. Harrington. Yes, sir. I told you last week there were cemeteries until the end. So this will be the last time I stand up. So if you look at this, $150,000 transferred to the cemetery commissioners, that's coming out of a thing called a perpetual care fund. And then there's a 225 from the Watson Graves fund into the capital budget. We already discussed that. I'm going to urge you to vote no for this whole thing, and I'll tell you why. So first I want to start a little bit and tell you, I've talked with the manager. I've talked with the Fincom chief. And we all agree that from 2009 through 2012, the perpetual care fund had $400,000 of interest and dividends. We also agree that in 2012, this body or body similar to this, our meetings appropriated until $600,000 out of the perpetual care fund. So the perpetual care fund is a trust fund in some sense other than it doesn't have a death date, but it does have trustees. And who in here is a investment manager? Who's here subject to the prudent man rule? So what I mean by that, who here is regulated by the securities division of the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office? Well, who here is regulated by the SEC? No one. I am. And I'll tell you, there's a thing called the prudent man rule. Earlier we heard from the manager say how he talked to the department of revenue, he talked to powers and they agreed that he could do something and take an accounting practice. But he's never talked to the one agency that actually regulates these funds, which is the secretary of state's office securities division. And the people who are entrusted with this, the cemetery commission are actually under this prudent man rule, which means that they're supposed to act in the best interest only of the beneficiaries of that perpetual care trust fund. Not in the best interest of the town, not in the best interest of the manager, only in the best interest of those beneficiaries. And that's why I wanted to change them earlier. But the real problem here is that the manager believes that capital gains are income. And that's where he says we agree to disagree. And from someone who's been involved in this industry 30 years, I built trust funds accounting systems when I was in my young 20s that handles a trillion dollars of assets. I know the trust fund accounting. This principle is capital gains of principle, not income. And it's very clear for anyone who's in this industry to know that. And the reason is it's very important if you don't understand why. But before I get into that, I want to just tell you that in August of 2005 the Secretary of State's office did an enforcement action against St. Paul's Cemetery against the Archdiocese of Boston because they were not handling their perpetual care funds properly. And it's very similar to this. And you saw the pictures of St. Paul's. It's beautiful compared to our cemetery. Also, in 1998 New York State Securities Division wrote in a bulletin to the Cemetery Division of New York State. As you know, capital gains resulting from a sale of stock held in the Cemetery's trust fund must be added to the principle of the trust fund. They go on to talk about mutual funds. That capital gains from mutual funds must be added to the principle. We took $200,000 of principle and used it as income to support salaries. Even if we used it to support expenses, they're not supposed to. Now, this is a technical thing. You say, well, what do we care, right? You care because the finance committee chair is going to come up here and say, well, over a 10-year period we didn't, you know, it averages it out to zero. But for the five years prior to this one that money, $200,000, did not gain as it should have. And so it's really, now we owe the perpetual care fund $275,000.  And that goes into a perpetual care fund. Now, if I went to you and said would you mow my lawn for $500? Well, you'd say, well, how big is it? And I say, well, it's only four feet wide and six feet long. Would you mow my lawn for $500? Would you do it forever? Of course not, right? Because $500 a hundred years from now is going to be the equivalent of about $5. And a hundred years after that it's going to be the equivalent of nothing. And so unless you allow that money to grow and the only way that money grows is that the capital gains are not used. You have set yourself up for a situation where you have no money in the perpetual care fund. So, this is in front of the Secretary of State's office now I urge you to vote no on this article. You're the last backstop to do what is right and not take money out of the perpetual care fund that we owe over $250,000 to already. Thank you very much. Mr. Tosti and then Mr. O'Brien. Mr. Harrington and I had a conversation about this issue and so I decided to do some more research. Now you've got two issues here. One is a legal issue and the other is a financial issue. Now the legal issue is that the I believe the controller and the manager both approached our auditors, Powers and Sullivan who have been doing our audits for many years and well known throughout the state and they told us that it's not a problem to spend capital gains. They also went to the Department of Revenue Division of Local Services which is the chief regulatory body for municipalities in the state. They have a legal division with five or six or seven attorneys there and they told us this was not an issue. So from a legal point of view the manager and the controller have approached the two entities are responsible for giving us this type of advice. Now from a financial issue we'll hear what the Secretary of State is. I don't believe they'll say anything different than the other two but that's who we're supposed to go to and that's who we did go to. So from a financial issue I said okay it was concerned is that if you spend all your money eventually you have nothing left to support the cemeteries. So I went to the Treasurer Mr. Gilligan and I asked for the last 10 years actually 11 years of end of year reports account statements from the perpetual care fund and I went through all of those all of the dividends and interest that were accumulated over those 10 years and then I went through and I added up all of the amounts of money that were withdrawn from the perpetual care fund and over those 10 years and actually it will even go into the 11th year the dividends and interest alone were greater than the total amount that we've withdrawn from the perpetual care fund for cemeteries. So it's not a problem that their money is going down actually the problem the benefit of this is going up. So in 2004 the market amount of the perpetual care fund was approximately $4 million. As of March 30th on the last 2014 the perpetual care fund was $5,553,171 and we've already withdrawn the money but we haven't gotten all of the interest and dividends and capital gains from that. So my guess is that's probably going to be another $100,000 higher than that. So in the face of the worst recession that the country has had since 1932 our perpetual care fund has grown by over a million and a half dollars. So I think from both a legal point of view and from a financial point of view the manager's recommendations and the votes of the finance committee and the town meeting have been good votes and made sense both from a legal point of view and a financial point of view. Therefore I urge you to recommend favorable to vote favorable action on article 52. Thank you. Mr. O'Brien. Andy O'Brien precinct 16. The opinion of town council on the legality of the transfer of money to the cemetery. Mr. Heim. Doug Heim town council. It's my opinion that it's also valid. I similarly conducted some conversations with the Department of Revenue's League of Staff who vetted the issue with me as well and it's my opinion that it's also a legal transfer of the money. Thank you. Thank you sir. Mr. Heiner. Bill Heiner precinct 2, my other hat. Mr. Moderator I'd like to know did we lose interest on that $200,000? Which $200,000? My understanding from the original speaker there was $400,000 that was used that was actually interest there was an additional $200,000 taken out of the principal so I guess I'm asking how much interest did we lose? One word answer not a speech. Go ahead. Stephen Harrington precinct 13 $60,000. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Moderator. Thank you. Mr. Wagner. Thank you Mr. Moderator. Carl Wagner precinct 11 motion to terminate debate. We have a motion to terminate debate. I'm sure the last speaker on the list I guess we can go through it anyways. All in favor of terminated debate please say yes. Yes. It is a two-thirds vote and I so declare it. We now have the force to recommend the vote of the finance committee to transfer money to the cemetery commissioners on article 52. All in favor please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. It is the majority vote and I so declare it. That closes article 52 brings us to article 50. I need a record. All right, Stephen Flynn are you ready for an electronic vote? Yes, he's ready. So one voting in favor of transfer to opposing. Go ahead and vote now. Okay, time's up. We have 129 in the affirmative, 46 in the negative and the motion passes. That closes article 52 brings us to article 53. Use of free cash. Anyone want to discuss free cash? You want to take a break? All right. Let's take a vote on a break. All in favor of a break please say yes. Opposed? No. No break. Article 53 use of free cash. $3,042,925 dollars to be taken from the available funds in the treasury. Anyone wish to discuss free cash? Seeing none, all in favor please say yes. Opposed? It's unanimous vote and I so declare it. That brings us to article 54. We have a recommended vote of the electronic voting subcommittee to discuss the clickers. We're going to discuss this and article 55 at the same time and then we'll take a vote on both because the articles are really interrelated. First we're going to have Mr. Helmuth give us an introduction and then we'll go to Mr. Tosti. Go ahead. Thank you Mr. moderator Eric Helmuth precinct 12 and chair of the electronic voting study committee. I have a substitute motion that will be taken before the meeting and I believe they have taken a vote and may express an opinion about that in a subsequent comment. The purpose of this resolution is simply to provide this body and opportunity to discuss your reaction to the comment.  We also have an a vote on article 55 on appropriation that would fund that decision if the answer is yes. Last year just as a quick electronic voting. It also approved a budget that funded this year's trial. The study committee recommended doing so because we thought that electronic voting would increase accountability to voters by allowing our votes to be individually published to the town website and to allow for more efficient voting. This year, it's been our perception that the trial has gone smoothly and I want to thank the committee volunteers and the students for their significant help in doing so. And I want to thank this body for your patience as we have learned how to use the system. For your feedback to myself, to the moderator, to members of the committee, to your questions, it's been a good experience just to hear from you. And that's what we want to do with the debate, to continue that debate tonight. I will let each of you speak to the pros and the cons of using electronic voting. I do, however, want to provide you some important information that you need to weigh in your minds. And that is the price tag. If we purchase a system, we would go through the town, we'd go through a system with the assistance of the committee as the town manager so requests. We'd go through a formal investigation in quotes and bids and proposals. But based on the research that the committee has done over the last two years. It would cost about $35,000 if we purchased a system, including costs to set it up and to staff it with IT staff. And maybe a little bit for potential equipment upgrades, but that would be at the very most. We'd hope to spend a little less than that. And that would be for the first year. So that would be buying it, sending it up, and running it in the first year in town meeting. There is in successive years a smaller cost for software licensing and staffing in successive years that would be less than $5,000 a year in operating, ongoing operating costs. A purchase system would last at least five years, is the projection we have in consultation with this vendor. And if we purchase the system, other town bodies such as, for example, the planning department could use the equipment in other public meetings to solicit audience feedback and response or for other purposes. And in fact, I've had a conversation with the director of planning inquiring about that possibility. It is also possible that the town could decide to continue renting a system, which comes with an operator from the vendor and a backup for the operator. The cost of that really depends on a number of factors. One of the biggest ones is how many nights of town meeting we have and how much we want to use the system. So we'd have to investigate that. Based on the information that we have now, it appears that generally speaking, if you annualize a purchase or if you look at the annual cost of an average rental, we're looking at an average annual cost of about $10,000 a year to be able to use this system. And to me, that's the most useful figure to think about what the cost is from year to year. If we move forward with this tonight, if we say that we want to use the system and we want to fund it with the appropriation that's been voted by the finance committee, which I think you will hear about, then we would study this carefully over the coming year. And I believe in coordination with the capital planning committee, the town manager, and whatever bodies were deemed appropriate. Whether that price tag is worth it, whether electronic voting is worth money, is up to you. And that's what we're here to discuss. I look forward to your questions and comments. Thank you, sir. Mr. Tosti? In your motion, in the finance committee motion under article 55, on page 26 it has a blank. So I'd like to amend that motion just to add $35,000. Now the finance committee voted 11-1 to recommend this to you. But it's really your decision. It affects how you think this one this year and will go into the future. We're going to spend between $8,000 and $12,000 a year. Whether we, probably a little cheaper if we buy it, more expensive if we decide to lease it each year. We've left that decision up to the town manager in consultation with the capital planning committee because he's got to go out and bid this on that. So I think it's up to you to decide whether $38,000 to $12,000 is worth all the, I think certainly, I think it's speeded it up a little bit. That's just my own personal opinion. And of course everybody's going to know how you vote, which is a transparency that people were thinking. Now if the finance committee, sorry, if the town meeting does vote to go ahead with the $35,000, I will subtract that from article 56. So that's where the cost will be made up. And look forward to a good discussion. Thank you. Okay, is there a second on Mr. Tosti's amendment? Okay, we can make that administratively because we have all the language there. We just needed a number, so he wants one for $35,000 into the blank. Next on the list was Mr. Greeley. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Kevin Greeley, precinct 11. I rise statue to support this. I don't think there's any question that this has been a significant improvement. And I think without even having one roll call vote, those of us who have been here before and have gone through the reading of 252 names, that alone is part of the reason I think that we're going to be ending this evening, God willing. I'd like to add, I've already been asked why I did not vote on CPA because I wasn't here that particular evening. So people certainly are noticing it and using it in terms of the transparency issue. I would like to add a wish which I raised with Eric and the committee the first time they brought this before the Board of Selectsmen. We now have the technology. Every one of us, as you know, mine's number 125, every one of us has an identified clicker to the town meeting member. I think with the technology that exists, it now would be easy for us when Mr. Moderator calls for a warrant article upon which we know there'll be a lot of debate. To list the speakers on the screen as we click in to put those speakers on the screen. And there are some, if I saw they were about to speak, I would move to close debate. There are others I would not speak myself because they certainly would do a better job. But the technology exists. It's crazy to have just the moderator spend all this time trying to read whose hands are up here in the audience. He can't, how can he listen to the debate on these bigger issues when 252 of us, 30, 40 hands are going up at one time. So I would add that wish, but whatever we do, please support this. I think it's been an excellent improvement. Thank you, sir. Just a comment on that. We asked OTI if we could do that, and they said no. They said it wasn't recommended. Something with the software, we can explore that if we go ahead and buy the system. We'll ask them if they can investigate that. Get rid of them. No. Mr. Jamison. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Gordon Jamison, Precinct 12, I'd like to move both questions and I'll manage before us. Thank you. Motion to terminate the debate, and all matters before us. Well, let's use the clicker. All right, motion to terminate the debate, press one for yes, two for no. Go ahead and vote. Hand times up, 125 want to terminate the debate, 53 do not. The debate is terminated. We have now a force of recommended vote of the electronic voting stub committee. I'm intentionally not going to use the clickers because that way you can vote your mind without having to tell no about it. All in favor of the recommended vote of the electronic subcommittee, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. In my opinion, it is a majority vote. Do we now have before us a recommended vote of the finance committee for $35,000? All in favor, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? No. It is a majority vote, in my opinion. That closes article 55. Thank you for giving us clickers next year and into the future. Article 56 of the recommended vote of the finance committee for $4,300,000 for stabilization funds. Mr. Toskey. We just have to subtract the $35,000. So please add in the number 4,275,363. 4,275,363. Okay, we can make that change administratively. Do we have a second? Okay, we have a recommended vote of the finance committee. To appropriate $4,275,000, all in favor, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? It's a majority vote, and I so declare it. Ms. Luka-Reilly, did you certify that there are 85 Tom meeting members present voting in the affirmative? I certify that it is actually a two-thirds vote. And that closes article 56. That brings us back to article 2, Mr. Toskey. I move that article 3 be taken from the table. All in favor of taking article 3 from the table, please say yes. Yes. All opposed? Article 3 is on the table. I move that the 19, or sorry, 19. 19. I move that the 2014 annual town meeting be dissolved. All in favor of dissolving the annual 2014 town meeting, please say yes. Yes. Opposed? I move that the 2019 annual town meeting be dissolved, and I so declare it. Thank you very much. We did it in five and a half nights. Please be sure to return your clickers tonight. It is very, very important that you return your clickers tonight. Thank you.