Next up is public comment. This is public comment for the liquor control board. For anything that's not on the agenda. Not seeing any will go on to approval of the agenda. Move to approve the agenda. I'll second that. Those in favor. Hi. Hi. Post motion carries recording in progress. We have a motion to approve the agenda. We have a motion to approve the agenda. Hello on that. New business. We have license applications for the forge and wit and grit. Any reason not to do these together. Let's do them together. Was that a motion? Yes. You're so intuitive. I know. Second. Sounded familiar. Motion and a second. All those in favor. Anybody opposed. Motion carries. And retain a motion to adjourn the liquor control. I move that we adjourn the liquor control. Meeting. Second. All those in favor. Anybody opposed. We'll cut all the, uh, like board meeting to order. First step is public comment. This is anything not on the agenda. For the select board. Not seeing any. So we'll move to approval of the agenda. Is there any adjustments to it, Trevor? None that we have for you. All right. Motion to approve the agenda. Second. For those in favor. Hi. Hi. Opposed. Motion carries. First up is consent calendar. This has a meeting minutes and warrants. Motion to approve the cassette calendar. Second. All those in favor. Hi. Opposed. Motion carries. New business. First up is the energy advisory committee. Climate action request. Okay. I don't see, um, he should be here. I spoke with him earlier today and he indicated that he was going to be calling. Yes. Yes. I've spoken with him also. And he indicated that he would be here. Right. So, um, So, what he sent in and. And see if anybody has any questions before we even decide if it's ready to be moved. I read through all of this stuff. And my concern is that it doesn't look like. I think it goes outside of the scope of the energy committee with some of what's in here that we're being asked to approve. But I'm really concerned that we don't see what this would mean to the town of Randolph, the residents, the businesses. If this was approved. So, you know, what I see is just a. You know, we did these actions during town meeting. Oh, here, let's push somebody's somebody else's version of the people's climate action plan. But it doesn't look like it's. Randolph specific. And I'm not sure all of this is really Randolph specific here. I'm not clear exactly what it is that. But I'm not sure. Gary. And presumably the energy committee are expecting us to. It looks like they're asking us to endorse. The nine points of the people's climate action plan. I just don't. I don't know how that's relevant. Yeah. Tom, did you read the hang on Susan. It's for discussion. I can hear. Did you read the links to the bills? Environmental justice. It's getting into wealth redistribution. In my opinion, aren't. Climate change and are not. The energy. No, I would. I would agree with you. Of the nine points, it looks like. Four of them are directly tied to. To climate issues, but they're much more expansive. I agree with you. So what I, I took the time to reach out to some other towns that have taken this up and they have not passed it as. The group that's promoting this people's. Plan. They've kind of looked at it specific to their municipality and said. You know, these are the things we think that. Of this plan, the municipality should get behind. In promoting. Here's what we want to see come out of that. We want to see. You know, if we said. You know, we want a weatherization program. What does that look like? Is it for individual homes? Are we reaching out to commercial users? Are we looking at. You know, public buildings. But it's kind of getting a little bit more instead of making a broad statement actually coming in with. Here's what we want to see happen. We want to see what happens. We want to see what happens. We want to see what happens. But there's really no action. Oh, let's have people do weatherization. Well, that's great. Like, what does that look like? I feel like we've covered. We covered a lot of this brown. Broadly speaking in the town meeting last year. Earlier this year, I should say. So. I'm not quite. I agree with you. What the intent of this. Is other than to add our way behind. The nine points and you're right, none of the nine, not all of the nine points directly relate to. Climate issues and. There are no action steps. It's just words. Susan, did you want to make. Kind of address that some. Sure. Well, yeah, I'm on the energy committee and. And at our last meeting, we looked at this because we have a lot of projects that we're working on. And. We, we look at this as a guide that there's it's not binding in any way. But it looks, we look at it as a guide as we. Do our projects in the future and right now too. And there's a lot of very direct correlation between these, these nine points and the projects they're working on. Like you said, there's there's no at particular action steps. But we look at it as a guide. And there are a number of other energy committees who have endorsed this as well. And there is one other select board that has endorsed it. And that for so. And yeah, like you say to the town of Randolph. Endorsed many of these, not these points as, as written, but there's a lot of correlation between what was passed. Last year at town meeting. And these nine points. And I think John Pimentel can speak to that. Yeah. I think he can speak to that. Really well. Cause he was very involved in getting that. Helping to get that passed. So. Yeah. Oh, there's Susan is the committee opposed to going back and developing. More of a plan that addresses Randolph. Versus buying into. My concern is that there, I read the language. You're asking us to support. The state of New York. And I, I did not go and look and see what the status are. They stuck to the wall and not moving. Or are they. Ones that, you know, I don't know what their status is. In the biennium, but. Like. Environmental justice, wealth redistribution, those things to me are not energy. And they're not climate change. So when I, but when I look at some of these other, I would, you know, you know, some type of plan that talks about. A weatherization program. And some of the, the basic energy pieces that are in there and trying to get, you know, the state behind. Some initiatives that, that we could directly tie to benefits. To the town of Randolph. Remember, we're doing, this is a municipality, we're doing this, this goal in their life of supporting some of this stuff. But as a municipality. What does that look like for us? You know, on some of these topics. And I don't see that here. You know, should the town of Randolph be. Aggressively having. Energy audits of our buildings, for example. And that's what we're going to do. And prioritizing some level of funding or. What not towards meeting a certain goal. Those types of things I can get behind. I really have a hard time getting behind broad statements. And you've probably seen that if you followed anything. That I do. I like to see. If we're going to pass a plan, I want it to show what we're going to do. But I don't see that. I don't see that. It doesn't have any beef to it or action item. Associated with it. And I just don't see that here yet. I want to wait in here for a minute. So. The planning commission, you know, there is, there is a town plan. We've talked about energy and off a lot in the town plan. We've had numerous conversations for better than two and a half to three years about the needs for that. Two rivers has weighed in on what we need here as a, as a community to. You know, I think we need specific plans that are related to the community and not just broad based paint the brush type stuff. So in this particular case, I know that, you know, these conversations, you know, that we were having, we needed something like 180 acres of solar to offset, you know, what the towns or what the community's energy demands were. And so, you know, I think we currently have less than 18 acres is what I'd last when we're hearing from Torrey. So we've got a long way to go here, you know, and I don't think painting a brush here with some of these things that I read in that, that proposal are going to get you there. That's, it just, it's, it's not going to make it. So if we're going to get serious about this. And I think we need a specific, the energy committee needs to come up with a specific way to figure out how we're going to get that done. And, and yes, we need the legislature's help. But you know, if they're going to do this and they want this done, then they're going to have to figure out how you're going to fund all this. Because I for one, you know, run into obstacles when I'm trying to put and put solar on my building, because I'm not getting any help from the banks on this, the banks, you know, look at this as a, you know, it's like another piece of equipment. It's really doesn't get anything tied to your real estate. So it's very difficult to finance solar. So if you're going to finance all, if you're going to get all the solar in place, you're going to have to figure out how it's going to get financed for businesses. So those are the kind of things I'd like to see coming out of the energy committee. Well, the other thing I've heard Perry and I've, we've experienced it is if it's not big enough, the companies that'll come in and do it are not interested. So you're back on your own a hundred percent, having to finance it. So there's the incentive for these companies to participate. Or, you know, not there. It should be in this plan. This plan should say the legislature should be continuing incentives for these businesses to do all of this. You know, it's just, to me, it's just missing those details. I'll share one more little piece of that. So I was going to put solar on my roof at 14 hell street. So by the time I was able to figure out how it was going to finance that. Okay. I had my, my CP, my, uh, my certificate of public good had expired. So I went back into renew it and they wouldn't renew it at that point in time. So it's like, what's the point? So, so there's an obstacle here. And that's where I think that the energy committee is surely serious about this. And that's the kind of stuff that you need to be talking to the, to your legislative representatives about, about how we're going to fund that stuff for small businesses. Well, in the global solutions act, there is. It does address the, uh, the, uh, the cost issues and ways of paying for these. But I think we have an opportunity with Norwich solar. We will put. Whatever solar you want on. For free. Your electricity costs by 30%. That's not going to work on somebody who's got a building Gary. I'm sorry to tell you, but you have to. So, so here I go put solar on my building. I need to own it. Okay. Because if I want to sell that building in five years. Okay. It's a detriment for me to have somebody else going in the solar panels on my roof. I'm sorry, but that's not how it happens. Well, I, I stand corrected. I'm only really talking. About such things as the school system. Uh, the municipal building. The town waste facility down there. And that it would be my proposed way to start putting the solar on. We don't see any of that in this plan, Gary. That's what I want to see in this plan. And then I think you also got to look at. You know, there's only, there's very limited amounts of property that are held by the municipality in the school. So, and I'm right there with Perry. We looked at putting solar on top of the storage buildings down on Beanville and Norwich solar told us. Put up a couple more buildings and then we'll come talk to you. There's four big buildings there that could all have solar. They're engineered for solar and they were like, yep, put up the other three and we'll come chat with you. Well, they'll get in contact with the. Substantially in the last two months. Cause they have a on the, on the, uh, Gifford property. Uh, so, uh, some available solar that they were going to originally sell to the school system. And the school system couldn't have it now. So they're looking for. People who can use this. And I know at least one. Company. Who could probably take all that. Use. And, uh, that would. Reduce the number of acreage or the megawatts. That are, that are asked. Of the town. So if we have to find 180 some odd acres for solar. And we're way below that level now, and we can't find somebody to use the solar. We're generating. What's that going to do to us when we get to maximum. These are things that you've got to look at. And we should be seeing in here. You know, here's our plan. We're going to try to do this with. This type of entity to get them to install solar. To get X number of acres. And here's how we're going to help them connect to. People who can use it. Well, this is not our plan. This is, this is something. That came from 350. That's where the problem is, Gary. That plan does not work for Randolph. Okay. Can I jump in for a minute? This is Jeff. And thank you for the time. And I didn't realize you started so quickly. You jumped right in on this. I apologize. I'm late. But yeah, just to reiterate, this is not a plan. We have all kinds of actions that we're ready to look into. And give you some specific items to look at this. These are just guidelines that we were going to use. As. Principles when we, when we did develop the energy plan, and we thought it would be good to work with other towns. To show the state that we're very much in support of this. And I'm a hundred percent with you. We need to be working directly on what's going to influence Randolph. But as I read these nine points, there's nothing in here that I disagree with. I mean, I think everything that's on these nine points lines up with what's in our. Plan. And what's already been approved in article 32. And yeah, I just don't want to make sure. This is not our plan. We've got lists of all kinds of projects we're going to look at, but these were just guiding principles. As we look at the projects that we would use to develop the plan. And we want to work. I'm sorry. Yeah. I would love to see those principles be specific to energy. Not the other arena that's entertained here. And then show where those principles become action. You know, so if you have a list of things you want to do, you know, if you have a list of things that you want to do, you know, you know, you know, you know, if you have a list of things you want to do and where you want to go, then it would be great to see an actual action plan. That the energy committee is looking for the select board to endorse for them to go and implement. Well, other towns have done similar things like Hartford. And another town. Or two. And we, I know people who are on those. Committees or councils. And we will look to better understand how they went about it. And generate our own plan. Really. To, to meet the needs of the select board and, and the manager and, and you three. Yeah. And I don't think we need to take too much more time on this. I do think we need to, you know, we'll get some direction from what you'd like to see as a select board. I think we need to work with that plan because again, there's, you know, we don't need more studies. We know what we need to do. And we know where the low hanging fruit is. We just have to see how it fits in with Randolph with the assets we have and the money we have, which. Both are limited. So it's got to be realistic plan.  And I think we do need to, you know, we probably need an hour or two of your, you know, I think we need to, you know, I think we need to, you know, I think we need to work with the select board just to get a little bit of guidance on exactly how you would like to see that formatted because we've got the material. I think we're struggling with, you know, just how to format it and, and what actions are really priority for the town. I wouldn't be opposed to us scheduling a special meeting. That is warned. So the more than two select board members can participate as a work session. Between the select board and the energy committee. I think we need to, you know, I would like to reiterate what Jeff was saying a little while ago, that at this people's climate action plan, it's, it's not a local plan at all. I just want to make sure that that's really clear. I know that Jeff just said that, but I just want to make sure that we realize this is not supposed to be something that we're going to be doing here in Randolph per se. This is, these are statewide policy ideas. And we're being asked to get behind them to help generate climate policy. And we're going to be able to implement it at the statewide level. It's really about. You know, putting together the political will from the grassroots level to the select board level to. Legislature and getting people on board. So that as we have this opportunity, you know, over the next generation to implement all these climate policies, which are going to change our landscape. They're going to change our transportation. They're going to change our economy in lots of ways. And that when we're doing that, we're going to be able to implement all these policies. We're going to be able to implement all these policies that have been affected for generations that have not been. Recognized. And we have an opportunity to consciously go ahead. And make sure that these folks are included. Very specifically as we move forward. And. And we have not done that in the past. And that's what we're being asked really to do tonight is to lend our little tiny voice. To the other voices in Vermont calling for. To speak to. And to historically marginalized in our communities for many, many years. This particular thrust really came out of the. The council. The climate council. There's like 23 members on the climate. Council. And they are charged. With having a action plan. For the state. were kind of pushed into action as a result of this. But we totally get it that we really got to localize it to Randolph. Randolph Towns. I think you do. And I think I understand there's a statewide initiative there, Larry, too, but it would be nice to understand what that means. Like, I read the two bills that were being asked in as part of this to push through and say we support. And I really struggle to support a couple of those, to some of the language on those. And I really struggle to connect it to Energy Committee. But I think Pat had a comment. I did. Could the Energy Committee, if they want to, send that letter on their own behalf to the committee that's working on this, and then the Energy Committee and the select board get together and work on local priorities. But the Energy Committee send it just as their thoughts. I think that is possible. But what do the rest of the Energy Committee think? Sure. We can do that. We voted unanimously to support it. I guess just the one other thing is that we really, certainly it has to be specific to Randolph, but we really need to collaborate with other towns. We've been collaborating with Bethel on some projects recently. And we'd like to do more of that. And it's a bigger issue than just Randolph, too. It's a state issue for the funding, too. Just one example. We did a very successful community solar project a number of years ago. And we'd like to do another one. But some of the rules have changed. And it's much more difficult now to do community solar. I have community solar on my house because it doesn't face the right direction. And it's wonderful that would be great to do more of this. So these kinds of guidelines that apply to everybody are really helpful for lots of towns. Yeah, I think let me just go back to Pat's question. And maybe Trevor can help us with this. The Energy Committee is advisory to the select board. Does that give them authority to send letters up on state policy? I mean, usually you see the flow of, if there's a policy statement to be made, it really is up to the legislative body to make it. There have been instances where advisory committees might weigh in on particular issues. But it's certainly, I think, a better practice if there's one policy statement that flows consistently throughout the organization after plenty of conversation. That'll have the most impact, most accurately represent the broadest array of people. So is it possible? Yes, is it a best practice? That's where there's some debate, I think, to be had. I would rather see the Energy Committee directing its energies at practical, achievable action steps with timelines and goals. And I don't have, broadly speaking, I don't have a problem with this resolution that's been put before us. But I question how much impact it's going to have on state decision making beyond our own legislators in the House and Senate advocating for it on their own regard. I don't know how much impact the select board of Randall stepping up and weighing behind these nine points is going to have. I would rather see the Energy Committee pick four or five of those points and sit down with us in a working session and come up with a concrete plan for we're going to do this in this timeframe. And here's what we're going to do to ease the transition to a sustainable energy economy in Randall, rather than passing up, in a lot of respects, a kind of field-good resolution that says these ideas are, we like these guidelines. Let's act on some of the guidelines that we can constantly act on here. Who's speaking? Is that you, Tom? Yes. Oh, okay. I'm the only, I'm the only select board member that's actually physically in the room. Great soul. Actually, as Susan said, we're working closely with the Bethel Energy Committee. They've only been in existence for maybe three years, but they've really leaped to the forefront. They have what you're asking for, like 10 things that we're going to do. And it's embraced by the select board. So that's, that's, that's my point. Okay. We have, that's exactly what I want to see. Yeah. I mean, I know, for example, okay, your largest energy consumer in this town is Vermont Castings. Okay. So there's, there was a proposal thrown out there one point by a company, okay, who wanted to come here and build solar that was willing to talk to them about how to totally offset that facility's, that facility's usage. All right, but it never went anywhere. So I mean, this was three to four years ago, when, you know, we were having these conversations about how solar penalties. So now you're limited to how big a solar field could be.  So this is my problem. And this whole thing is we did what the townspeople wanted when we developed the policies, okay, about how big a solar field could be. And consequently, what we did was we eliminated what the largest user in the community, okay, by not allowing them to do that deal. So those are some kind of things that we need to figure out how you're going to overcome those. So this is where I have this problem was we want one thing, but we don't want it, we don't want it because a lot of the residents don't want to see it. We went, we've hassled this over for four or five years now. You know, I've been involved in this since two rivers came to the planning commission right in the beginning and said, okay, this is what we're going to do by 2050. Well, here we are, and we're not getting much further. And we have a major energy consumer here. We're a little unique in that respect, because, you know, being in a rural community, having them here, you know, has created the need for us to offset our energy usage. We're probably one third more than what we need to have, because I think they're using a third of the energy down there. So that's a struggle. Yeah, we're not taking it down. That's a great point, Perry. We will definitely do that.  And this is my opinion. This is a feel good deal. And, you know, maybe it's a little piece. And I think we as a community support this kind of stuff, but that's not a concrete plan to get us moving forward. And the clock is ticking. Okay, it's 2022 here coming along. All right. And we're supposed to be at some point by 2025 and 2035 and 2050. I don't think we're getting there very quickly. Well, I have a kind of a little guideline of what we wanted to talk. And I'm going to jump to one of the last point. We want to do what you're asking us to do. And we are proposing that the energy committee comes to select board meetings and gives a report on how much we have accomplished towards meeting the 2025 and 2030 requirements. They're not goals. The global solution plan took those goals and made them requirements. So I just, I'd like to jump in and say that I definitely agree that the energy committee should be doing the things that you're talking about. I think that's a great idea. But I don't know if that's really, that's not what this agenda item is really about. And I'd be happy to talk about this more tonight if we want to or some definitely some other time. But we're really about, you know, focusing on this people's climate action plan, which the energy committee has endorsed and they're asking the select board to endorse. Is it going to go any place the statewide level? Well, it's not. If none of the select boards statewide will endorse it and enough people don't come behind it. Yeah, then it's not going to go anywhere. But imagine the, and if we do it and no one else does it or just us in Bedford does it, then yeah, it's not going to be a big voice. It's not going to carry a lot of weight, but we are a voice. And if a lot of other select boards were to join us and endorse this kind of thing, then it will get the attention of statewide leaders. And it will make a difference. That's how those things happen. Is it guaranteed to happen? No. But if we all think that the ideas in here are basically sound ideas and there are things that we'd like to see, even if they're not necessarily likely, then we should just stop talking about it and say that we're going to be behind this and we can then talk about something else. Larry, help me understand how environmental justice and wealth redistribution is part of a climate action plan? Well, I looked at the bills and I didn't see anything in there about wealth redistribution. I saw lots of measures that would make sure that historically marginalized communities are given the opportunity to do well in the climate economy that we are going to be in the coming years. That as we transition to more solar power, that as we transition our transportation economy, as we transition to more weatherization, that we are making a conscious effort to make sure that people who have in the past been left behind that they're included. That's really all that I see in here. I don't see anybody taking the money from one pocket and putting it into someone else's because of anything like that. I see it more about its opportunity for people to catch up. So who do you think is being missed here? Because we've had weatherization programs in this community for 15 years and community was a community action has been involved in those things. So I'm not figuring out how I just can't wrap my head around what this is supposed to do because those kind of programs have been in existence. We have fuel assistance. We've had weatherization programs. In 2014 this stuff I think is when this started showing up and I'm not sure what we're asking the legislature to do. What's the changes that need to happen to make this happen? The problem is Perry and I can proudly say that the Energy Committee and the Energy Task Force has really zeroed in on all those things. We work with vital communities. We work with CCRD and I'm just proud of what we've done but the scale of the problem is so large and the requirements to get to the 25 and 30 plants are so huge. We just kind of figure out what the right starting point is so we do our fair share. So maybe you're telling me the goals were set too high to start with? Yes they were and what the state did not do is fund these things so that they could actually happen. Exactly. That's my problem. So if you want to fix this, I'm not sure that those points that you guys have shown us are the ways to fix it. I don't think that gets it there. What needs to happen is you need to take down the barriers to get these kind of projects financed because not everybody's going to work with a Norwich solar. I was already to put it on my roof but then when I went to the bank it's like they're not really interested in that because it has an effect on the real estate and I could have offset my uses plus I could have offset some other people's uses but I can't do it if I can't get a finance. I'm not going to roll $400,000 out of my pocket here to make it happen. Can I make a comment? Just a second John. So I just went back and I read these bills Larry and I'm getting it out of H273 under legislative intent and my concern about this is it's been rolled into the people climate action plan which is not Randolph specific and nobody has looked at if the legislative board of Randolph gets behind this and pushes it what is the impact to the people, the businesses, the economy of Randolph. It's all good to get behind it and all those statements and feel warm and fuzzy but what does it mean? What's it going to do? There are statements in here and they are about wealth redistribution. They're talking about people having access to have purchased land and property and whatnot. First off has nothing to do with energy, has nothing to do with climate change. One of the four subcommittees. We've got some of the buzz words in there but my concern is hang on Gary. My concern is we don't know if these bills are past what the impact is to the people that we've been elected to help represent that and that's where my concern is. The council formed four subcommittees and one is all about equity for people of all incomes level and every race possible and they are charged with working with the other subcommittees to make it equitable. That's where that comes from but we've got to figure out how to personalize this to the Randolph towns and I agree. So what is that for energy? What does that mean equity to what in energy? Energy weatherization programs to access to banks that will finance solar. You know it's action like we talk about these things but there's nothing in there that's going to like how does that all interpret down to the low-income homeowner and Randolph. Well that's that's the action item for us the energy committee you know but how do you expect me to make a proposal? Okay so how do I get behind it if I don't know what that is? You know you charge us with getting you the documents you want. And that's exactly where I'm at Gary. Thank you John. No problem no problem we get it. I may be speaking out of turn but I imagine the energy committee would be willing to drop from the resolution they're proposing things that members of the select would find offensive and are not able to support so I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater here. I wouldn't say they're offensive I just don't see how they're related. That's my that's my point okay I'm not saying these things are offensive and I'm just figuring that they're not connected. So I think you're going to develop a resolution here the resolution to ask the legislators to figure out my opinion how to figure out how to find more funding for these projects if you've created these goals that you want us to obtain. If I could finish speaking please. Yes. So if there are issues that that that aren't acceptable then I think the energy committee may be open to removing those with regards to you know state funding one way to push the need for state funding is to in fact endorse resolutions such as this which go to the legislature and also go to the Vermont climate council which is in the process of drafting the plan through which the state will address the climate issues. So you know I hear you Perry that that that money is not available but money will never become available if the state's residences and towns do not make their voice heard with what they desire. You know so one one other point is is is you know we we addressed Act 32 a little over a year ago and there hasn't been any real discussion pointed communications from the town to the legislature or the Vermont climate council you know moving forward on solving this problem is is kind of like having a garden you you don't just throw seeds in the ground and walk away and come back in six months and harvest something or expect to harvest something you have to nurture it throughout its life and this is one of those nurturing steps where where we're again making our voice heard where we're again making sure that the people in the legislature in the Vermont climate council are in fact addressing all of the issues that people in the state find important so you know these nine points correlate to you know most of the things we passed in Act 32 that's that's that's true but you know again in order to make things move forward we have to from time to time readdress and resubmit what the position of of the town is and and and what the people are looking for and this is one of those moments where we have you know an opportunity to nurture that because the Vermont climate council plan is in its infancy it's in the draft state and it's still changing we have an opportunity to make sure you know they're addressing things that do result in a just transition and a just transition means essentially that it's not the little guy that gets hurt you know it's not the little guy that bears the burden it's shared but you know equitably across the entire business world and residential world of the state so you know this this this isn't a feel-good resolution this this is a resolution that is important to continue to move the whole conversation forward and we don't have just till December 1st because the plan that's when it's due but I went to their little energy Vermont conference a couple days ago which I've gone to for 15 years and they said there that it will be worked until it's modified and acceptable to some time in March so there's plenty of time to get our act together and so let me just help put this in perspective a little bit what I'm thinking if I apply for a grant and I said I'd love to plant flowers in town give me a hundred give me a thousand dollars probably not gonna get awarded right right but if I can if I can give you know Larry and Jay a plan that says look the town of Randolph would like to take on these initiatives and here's what we need here's our action items and here's what we're gonna need for funding for this they're much better armed to go into the legislature to say gee I need these language changes and I need this level of funding if just in my town I'm going to be able to make this change to meet what you know because I've seen two rivers has said you need you know this breakdown of solar and this breakdown of whatever like what does that translate to you know Larry could go in and say need 20 million dollars his peers are going to be like for what and we have an arm blary with that information and that level of detail to be able to say well let me show you what I need I need the subcommittees have made into into their proposals or plans funding for fund funding for them I promise I have seen them those plans in there and we know we have from federal and via the state money probably for a year but there are no there's no certainty about year two and and and beyond and I think item number three in what 350 VT says fund a 10-year weatherization plan but the battle I think really comes down to where do we get all this money excellent question so I'll give you an example how much money did we how much money did the legislature last year allocate to we need more brought we're going to expand broadband across the state right how much how much was Larry 150 million 200 million COVID money you're on mute yeah I believe it was a hundred million dollars yeah okay so here I am on root 66 and I just dropped off and I can't just have video and audio at the same time because I'm still stuck on a telephone line okay and I'm on root 66 and I've been on ec5er's case now for almost 14 months tell me oh you've got to have some conduit in the ground you've got to have a string in it it's been done and I have had this conversation now going on three years when the government the governor told me three I don't know three or four years ago oh we're going to have broadband everywhere you know that that's a high traffic area well I don't think I'm wearing more high traffic between Randolph and BTC okay but I still cannot get broadband and we just spent another hundred million dollars okay and there's more money in the queue okay and I still can't get on broadband so hold on so all these energy programs you're talking about are going to require substantial amounts of cash or regulations or banks to get behind them before or tax credits or something before you're going to get them on the table so that's the kind of thing that I think this resolution should be looking for that's my point well we're all asked to give input to the the council and my input was where is the money come from it's my biggest worry the other big item I brought up do we have a infrastructure process so we can do these things quickly and the answer that is no either so infrastructure and money is what it's all about oh hold on a minute it's not about all that it's also about regulation okay so so you're going to find so you're going to find you're going to run into obstacles okay you can get the funding all right so what if you get the funding and then you know you're all set to go but now you've got to go deal with the regulations you've got to go through act 248 okay to get these processes to happen so you're going to run into struggles and in my case where I wanted to put solar on the roof if my cpg's expired why wouldn't they renew it you know at that point I had the funding and I was ready to do it that was all pre-pandemic and you know what now I'm glad I didn't because I needed that cash to keep my business afloat however I'm just sharing with you that when you can't get an extension on a cpg what's the point senator bray is considering putting forth a new bill to deal with these exact points we're making perry well then why don't we get a resolution that supports that I don't think we need a break you know this is like a blanket resolution that somebody's handed to you guys okay well why don't we draft our own and if you want to sit down with some members of the select board and put that together I'm happy to have a working meeting to do that well yes I can confidently say that the energy committee is is look would look forward to that opportunity but we're also considering something like what bessel did with their 10 action plans but yes we got to work this together sorry I don't want to hear it again yeah go ahead okay up to what john to john's point of a few moments ago about perhaps looking at a resolution or a resolution to this issue you will that that looks at addressing selected points in the nine point plan I think that's a good way to go and what I think is a good way for us to go is to actually say I'm looking at an example point here there's a point that says provides access point five is provides access and resources to farmers who want to practice regenerative agriculture prioritizing bipop farmers first well just above that it talks about providing resurrect weatherization programs to vermont's housing stock and prioritize the needs of low income and bipop it is I would argue that most farmers in this state fit into the low income model so but my point is why don't we have the energy committee look at let's work with our farmers here in randall what can we do to help you achieve regenerative agriculture practices right here in randall and then go to the legislature and say here's an idea we have from randall to to make regenerative agriculture a center of our rural energy action plan and do something concrete rather than just passing a feel-good resolution give people some concrete examples of what we can do and then say here's what we need the money to do here's what we want to do we need your support and make it happen and there is money up for grabs and I and uh and that and that works because it comes in buckets so we should get as much as we can out of the right bucket for our community and to tom's point that's an excellent idea because when you think about who has the available land to create that solar field on if you can figure out how the agriculture and the solar blend together I know that's happening but those are the fellas you should be working with to help them but they all need to be educated in the process there was a there was an incentive for reclaimed property to get a bonus bonus on the price for power generated from solar at one point got expired you know so I think you could sit down together and we could give you quite a list of things and help arm Larry and Jay when they go into the legislature with here's some concrete things that we've seen that have worked here's some things we need this is what Randolph needs in particular like I get it that there's these statewide initiatives and all that I've been around the block long enough in state government to know the politics and all that but I'm not really as concerned about the statewide stuff as I am about Randolph and we need to look at what works for the low income family who can just barely keep ownership of their home as it is in Randolph and how did they get some help with weatherization and energy improvements to lower those costs all the way up through to the businesses that want to make that as a choice to change their energy force and how they get what they need to keep functioning we have a broad spectrum in Randolph and we need I would like to see us come up with a plan that says this is what we need this is what we think it's going to cost here are the different programs that are out there that if we could get funding from them help us reach some of these goals and then let that be information that Larry and Jay have to say look you know this program only has a million dollars in it but Randolph alone needs two million to make this happen that's unrealistic you know you can't we can't expect our legislators to go in and fight the battle for us if we haven't armed them with the data they need and the specifics they need on what it's going to take for us to make that a success I don't think we've done that I think we agree with everything that that you're saying about Randolph and being specific to Randolph absolutely we agree I think we can do both I guess that's that's what we're saying that this will be the broad picture and then in addition we'll definitely we are working on projects for Randolph specifically I would love to see us set the example and I think we can you got it so what I'm hearing is it's time for a joint meeting between the energy committee and the select board and we should advertise that as a special meeting so everybody from the select board that wants to can participate and we're not limited to the two before we trigger a meeting to advertise I think that's completely realistic for us to to do that and then see if we can't come out of that meeting with some real um pointed goals and deliverables that result in a an item that we can support am I picking all that up right so are you are you asking for someone to move that we table this current resolution uh or or or I'm not quite sure how you want to proceed so sometimes you don't take action on some items right we it's up for discussion and I think what I'm hearing now is there's enough turmoil there that we're not ready to take action I think our action item is to have uh Trevor help us with a doodle poll or something that gets the select board and the energy committee together into one date and time that the majority of us can meet and talk about this and figure out what does that action plan look like for randa well I can do it in a week but if I we can't arrange it in a week I couldn't do it for three or four weeks face to face we can always zoom you in fine I'm tied up until it's the 15th of November so I'm just not taking on any more workload at that till that point so love to be involved in this and I think I should be but not until after that I'd be very eager to participate in such a meeting I think it's really important as so many people have said and Trini you've made that point really clear and I think you're absolutely right at the same time we've been asked to do something I think which is pretty straightforward here which is to either endorse or or not endorse as people's climate action plan or a portion of it or a portion of it and and well maybe but we've been asked to to to take action and unless people really feel like they need more we need more discussion at some later date or that people need more time to think about where they stand on this I think we should do what we've been we've been asked to do and I'm I'd be prepared to to vote on this tonight if other folks feel like they would like to wait and do this next month because you're not comfortable you don't know enough or you'd like to give it some more consideration I would be okay with that but I don't think we should just ignore this I think we should you know do what we were just asked to do that's that's the agenda item I think that if you want to move it your new pen and we'll take it up if there's a second to it okay I'll move that we approve the people's climate action plan that we endorse this this document that our energy committee endorsed five zero I'm not hearing a second hearing no second the motion dies um I think our next step is to schedule the joint meeting with the select board and the energy committee and see if we can come out with a plan and potentially some version that we could support that require a motion I don't think so the motion died um so at this point I think it's an action item for trevor to schedule a joint meeting and see if we can work on some type of plan or you know clear guidance for the energy committee um to help them draft either uh you know both something that the select board can support as well as a plan going forward that will in my opinion I'd love to see something that's very action item oriented has dollar values associated with it and results that we would expect to get out of it because I think that's the level of detail we need to get to to give to our legislators and decision makers to try to get this funding and get these action items that we need to be successful and I think that would be an awesome outcome out of a joint meeting so I would agree with that and I'm going to give Gary a little homework okay so before you do that I would like you to reach out to two rivers and probably Tori has this information and I'd like to know what our current energy energy needs are and what we're currently generating here in house so to speak to accomplish those goals and I think she can probably provide you with that because she was able to give that to me a year ago she had those numbers okay so that would be a good place to start because then you've got then you then you've got a you know the what road you've got to go down and how you're going to get there now I don't know if anybody's got any forecasting as to how much more demand is going to come online but it would be nice to know that hopefully that would be offset by conservation and weather rising well she she should be able to give you some of that stuff again I went to that renewable energy Vermont meeting a couple days ago and green mountain power and the others are are looking to find ways that where they can double or triple their electricity outputs because they're determined that we got to run everything off of electricity and we don't have the lines to support it so that's oh yeah you'll find that interesting I just read an article about that where if if 10 people on the same street were to get a car charger and buy electric cars their section the little their little portion of the grid fails so those are some other things that need to be addressed here it's a it's a big big problem yeah that's a big problem so those are some things that are those are the obstacles that I see here and you know if you go look in the east valley I don't remember when the last time that some of those lines were upgraded but I'm pretty sure that you know they're all in works I know that because as they look at this but it's just like my broadband if you notice I dropped out again here so you know there's still going to be people left out in the dark well I guarantee you it's it will be in the December one action plans of the council somewhere it's very comprehensive okay well let's start Victoria and have her give you some basics okay right but but but that's the end point and I totally agree we start with Randolph towns and go for there correct so I think we've hammered this enough tonight and given that we have a full agenda I'd like to move to the next item on the agenda unless somebody has something massive they gotta share well I want to talk to when we would have this a joint meeting I could be a little Paul coming out from Trevor and everybody can respond and then we'll find a date it works for everybody okay okay yeah thank you right so moving to the next item we have the maple street scoping study is I think we had last touch base on this in August and then with the cancellation of the September meeting we've got the proposal back from the consultant this would amend the this is a 2018 era scoping study designed to look at road surface traffic patterns improvement replacement of water wastewater storm water infrastructure and to come up with the cost estimates the two missing pieces from what pieces needed to finish based on that original scope where the traffic impact assessment so this would measure what happens if we remain at a two-way as we are now versus switching to a one-way in some direction for some length later on that's more involved than than originally anticipated when we try to use some traffic count data from two rivers so this would combine counts and some some modeling that happens in in the company with the software program try to measure that impact so then you've got that data set to try to make a decision on when the time comes and then it'll update the cost estimates because those are now a couple of years old the total proposed value of the amendment is $11,700 but should finalize this study and put us at a spot where we can make the decision before and see that that money gets into capital programs and budgets and and needs the project for at some point from there so it's really the remaining piece of the puzzle to do some of the decision-making. Any questions, comments, thoughts, motions? When would we have this back? We probably have it back a there's a good chance for the December meeting if everything could fall into place. It takes a couple of weeks there's a couple of weeks for the traffic counts which is linking those up and getting the counters in this case people at it at key points and then running it through the system most of the time involved is in the traffic impact assessment but from remembering the conversation four to six weeks was doable once we've authorized so I would say by by that December meeting would be our targeted possible. Okay can you hear me Trevor? I can, Pat. Trevor? Yes. I'm having all sorts I'm having all sorts of trouble with the audio. I was trying to second Larry's motion and I nobody could hear me apparently. No. I was trying to second Larry's motion plus I didn't hear two-thirds of what was going on. You can hear us okay right now though. I can hear you. I can right now. Okay. I can right at this minute. So Pat in prior meetings you've tried calling in also that might be an amendment option for you. What's up? So video reduces your amount of data and what not you can receive so shutting off your video will help you get better but you might want to try calling in also. I tried that earlier. Not good. Can you hear me now? Can hear you now Pat? Can you hear us? Half of the time or two-thirds of the time I can but I would move to approve the amendment if I don't know if you heard that or no. We heard that one Pat. Thank you. So we have a motion to approve the amendment for the Maple Street scoping. Motion in a second. All those in favor? Opposed? Abstained? Motion carries. Consider adopting the Vermont Community Development Program Municipal Policies and Codes. So this is one of the grant requirements tied to I believe the Orange County Parent Child Center. I can't, I have glasses coming but I can't see if Josh is here with us. He might be able to answer more of the questions but these Municipal Policies and Codes these forms often probably look familiar to folks that are often one of the grant requirements. They're fairly standard in terms of equal employment opportunity policies, fair housing policies, a few of the others may tie into the generally to the source of the funding which comes through HUD more often than not for the BCDP programs, the Vermont Community Development Program Funding Program. So this is this is one of those requirements that comes with it. I don't know Josh if I missed anything or there's no more to throw in there. Yeah I would just say it's it's generally a form that covers state and federal regulations so they're just ensuring that we're adhering to them. We have a lot of the documents actually posted in the hallway as required by law but this was a change from the state of Vermont to have municipalities sign on to this as a BCDP requirement. In order to receive BCDP funding municipalities have to adopt this resolution. So we've adopted this in the past. Does it have to be adopted with each grant? Not not to my knowledge. I think this was a I think this was a different form that they have adopted because I don't remember seeing this in previous BCDP grants with the town. They made it sound like it was something that was fairly new. It indicates on the bottom it was revised last February so that could be when and why. If there's a revised version we'd have to re-adop and I don't think we've acted on them since February. Right yeah the last time we would have acted on it would have been with LED Dynamics in 2018. So do we have any questions on the policies and codes hearing none any motions to approve accepting them? I'll second. Second. Motion second all those in favor? I oppose. Pat were you approving? Yes can you hear me?  Just wanted to make sure of your vote. Yeah. Motion carries. Yes. We got it. ARPA funding committee still for work. Because just a standing item we've had it on an earlier version that still needs to develop that formal scope of work. All of the money is in hand and that's our direct payments in our county funds so they're a little less than 1.4 million. We just didn't want to have it get lost in the in-between but with some of our recent staffing related challenges this is one of those projects that hasn't advanced as far as we had hoped by this point but we still have time to keep it moving. So just wanted to leave it on there make sure as much as anything I think we shared it with the board that the county money had come to us already but to share more broadly and with public that the first payment is in for both of those pieces so the $685,685,000 shown there and then another $685,000 will appear at some point in 2022 for thinking in the May-June timeframe. Haven't heard for sure on that so we'll develop that scope get that group together and start to really dig into what what can or can't happen. There have been an increasing number of ARPA funding related programming opportunities from folks like VLCP in the state and a few others so we'll be able to glean some information to help us along now that that has really ramped up that's one of the things that's changed a little bit from when we first talked about this in July or August or whatever it was but there's more more opportunity to learn and so we'll look to take advantage of those as well but just didn't want to lose it it's really just a quick check in that's where we're at. We have until 2024 to obligate the money in 2026 to spend it so there's some there's some time still. Trevor I have two questions can you hear me Pat? Yeah I guess yeah my first question is when do we hope to have the committee working up and working? I think if we had a scope of work for November you could have the committee up and working at some point in December for example and then you have recommendations and it would depend on how we shape the scope but I don't think it'll be a long timeline and I think by then we'll have a good sense of the baseline from what's allowed and what's not and a little bit of data on how folks have spent money already and whether or not that is truly permissible. And I know the capital planning and budget committee would like to be involved some way in that. I think that makes sense if anything falls within their career but if it if it tends into operational or other programmatic elements that may not make as much sense. So maybe in November we'll have a proposal of what that committee looks like and what a draft charge for it is? Yeah yeah we'd outlined a couple of things to include in a scope of work and have copied them here in terms of what the general task will be but we'll try to draw those out so there's a better list of what we're asking folks to do. So any other questions on on that or comments? Next up is formalizing the assessor hire. You got the letter and provided a tentative thumbs up back in September around we were canceling that meeting for the lead needs of the agenda and we're looking just to formalize that initial blessing. You've got the letter from Dennis Brown which explains the process, what they had to do and how they have to do it and how do you fit in there. So that's a recommendation of the Board of Listers that the Board select board then will essentially approve and when you do that we'll fully formalize needs hire retroactive. It doesn't save in the motion but it should probably go retroactive to it was your first meeting September 1st. Yeah so adding that to the motion may not be a bad idea just to make sure it's fully clear. Mimi's been in the chair doing the work, attending the trainings, sharing cookies so she's jumped right in and has been at the helm since then so. So this is ratifying the vote to hire for Mimi effective 9-1. How will this affect, I'm familiar with this situation in other communities in fact like Chad when you earlier this week about um bridge water just hired an assessor that assessor just placed in there. What's happened here? No this this is perpetuating the model we've had we've had a hired assessor who provides most of the staffing does a lot of the technical pieces but they work with the Board of Listers. The challenge we're going to have that we even saw a little bit in the hiring process is that people aren't lining up to to serve as volunteer members of the Board of Listers and so with Mimi's move over to the assessor's office it leaves just Dennis but if we needed this would you still I'm still a listener we still count yeah so we're trying to figure out how to work that but ideally we're going to have a Board of Listers and an assessor and there'd be four people but currently we have two per four spaces so that way the Board of Listers can take any action it needs to meet the requirement it's more easily and avoid any kind of conflicts so it's really it's that this thing we've had opposed to one where you take one piece out and go just with an assessor you know as a model some places I've got to imagine why it's the past six years ago I've moved to that yeah bridge water did it out of necessity because of the great thing you decided which is that they couldn't find people to step up to do it. I think that'll be more and more common just because it's it's a hard thing to build there's an increasing level of complexity I think when you get into talking through some of the state payments and Homestead declaration panel views and some of the different updates and that's a fairly mild example of some of the stuff you encounter so I I wonder if sometime we find that we feel that kind of pressure as well just add an excessive year or circumstance but for now we'll keep going. I just wanted to get some clarity on that. Yeah that's a good question. I missed that one. No um just to make clear the assessor would still work for and under the board of listeners as in the past. So we have uh we've already approved the electronic ways to email hiring Mimi looking for a motion to ratify that vote. So can you hear me? I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Next up is the North Reservoir tank and well project. Yeah another one we just wanted to provide a quick check in and done a little bit I think we're still on schedule for construction in the spring this will replace the the tank up at the Ellis lot and there's some additional well components to that that'll allow us to take the Pearl Street well which is the one plagued a bit by the high levels of manganese offline as a primary water source it's still there as an emergency capacity source whether it be for fire protection or some kind of low water situation sort of remains online but we're at the phase of that 90 percent of the design plans are complete we meet on Friday with the engineer and one of the key folks from the agency of natural resources to review those plans there's nothing really in the project scope itself that is all that different than what you've seen in the past the one big change which is noted here is that the cost systems we've been using are from 2018 so pre-pandemic and and then also covering you know that's three years hence so it's things changing costs so what we've actually gotten to now is an estimate at this point from September government September of two million four hundred and thirty nine thousand dollars for the project is we've had about available in terms of our funding sources that we've lined up to date it's two point two five million dollars and we had actually had a little bit of cushion in that earlier estimate in that funding model and that's a mix of we've got about a million and a half and loan funds from the state revolving fund program and there are two other grants that fall in there there's a three hundred thousand dollar CDBG grant and a four hundred and fifty thousand dollar grant from the northern borders folks so that swing in price should it hold up leaves us about a hundred and eighty nine thousand dollars I think it works out to be shy of being able to fund the the full ask at this point we've reached out to the SRF folks through the engineer for options hopefully we will cover some of those tomorrow or sooner than later we do know that this would be ARPA eligible if we really got into a pickle we could fill the hole that way there's also going back to voters say in March at Tom meeting and asking to increase the prior authorization so we'll sort through what those are there's also some hope that as we get into project refinement from here and we get into some of the bidding process that maybe there are either ways we can find to value engineer and bring that cost down a little bit or that some of these material and supply the issues that we're seeing show up in price now that either resolve or start to come you know rest of the mean basically you've seen this across material categories and supply categories from everyday products to the ones that you need for that's typing condo with those types of things in particular how big lead times and how carry increased prices so I just wanted to provide a little bit of an update here at the 90% piece we'll go through that that'll link into formalizing that prior authorization of SRF funding we still have that step to take and we're well in the space we need to be in with regards to the northern boards grant some of the timelines there and it's just really shoring up that final funding piece but at a minimum we could always say because we've got the 685 and ARPA funds now and 1.4 almost total that if we had to there's a way to plug that hole that doesn't fall squarely on on any one group but it certainly has that benefit for anybody in the district so we're bringing back some options as we we start to develop them more but wanted to provide an update as we go as to where we're at so at what point do you think we're going to take this out to bed all right now the plan would be to go out today I want to say February or an April May construction start and I will I think that might be a little too do you think that might be a little too late given the fact that some of these contractors are probably experiencing labor shortages they might want to be yeah I'm a little worried and I think uh we might be able to go out earlier especially if the um you know the way that the funding hole so to speak is fixed is through the state applying some other source of funds and precluding any need to go to go back to the voters that that would certainly accelerate our ability to say for sure we've got the funds in hand and maybe go out a little bit earlier from that from a design standpoint you know we're at 90 percent complete so we're closer than farther to my feeling given the experiences and the things I'm seeing here going on in all these different sectors that we need to get that out to bed sooner because just in my own personal experiences from what I'm working within my own level I'm not you know our company can't take on the work levels we used to take on because we're not getting the labor and I have a feeling that you're going to run it in the same problem the construction industry going forward so it seems to me like it might be a good position for us to see if we can move this process and find a better fit sooner than later because as everybody else's calendar fills up we may find ourselves having to delay this no different than I'm having to delay some other projects I'm and bigger than that even carry is the availability of materials and some of the pipe you're going to need to do this and whatnot could be six to eight months out before you can get it but another thing to think about is you brought up ARPA as balancing that and it is eligible but the committee needs to be formed to look at this because ARPA funds are coming to the town and not to just the sewer and water district that needs to be looked at is you know kind of how we how we use those funds and where they where they go is a is a much bigger question right it's our right I think of it as the in case of emergency brake glass option if we've got nor where else to go or we some sort of short term we do have that capability there I think I think you're right that those funds are probably a different process Trevor can you hear me now this is back I got you back I have one can you hear yeah um about the revolving loan fund could they make up the difference yeah that that was the the first set of conversations was to see what funding would be available through that that mechanism and we'll look when we meet with the folks from do-frame group tomorrow and a and our folks hopefully we've got some kind of update on as to where they're at with that conversation yeah I know in the past they've done that so on other projects other projects that we've seen this before it's usually SRF funds are the way you make up whatever difference any other questions on this one that will move on to the north rand off-road slope stabilization we sent it out the email to those of you remotely were able to get it it was closer to the showtime we've got paper copies here in the room but the the bid reviewed shifts are available we went through we had two bidders at the end of the day they're within about a thousand dollars a little less of each other um the hours are pretty similar when you add up all the sub consultants and others who work for it about a 10 hour difference between the two and uh they've all met they both met all of the standards including this one has a requirement to make sure that the stabilization study includes a no-build room closure option and they both made sure to hit that in the responses as as as one of the responses to be considered through the through the study effort um on the very final page we went through and scored it using um a scoring template that we've got from the Beatrice Municipal Assistance Bureau from its bid document so there's a a base score and a weighted score basically and by um yeah this is what we're going to be by about a half of yeah about a half a point um the the bid from Dubate Boy and King scores better and what it really broke down to they were really the same when you look at qualifications project understanding um creativity thoughtfulness of the RFP completeness um the one little difference in there was in the work sample that we required and that one provided us a work sample that was of a similar stabilization study and the other one um sent us something of a that was an intersection improvement that was a really well done document so you could see the the quality of work it was just sort of the applicability of that product and that's essentially what what broke in that that weighted scoring system that's there so the recommendation after going through that from our level I still have to get the endorsement of the Municipal Assistance Bureau folks on the way but um just to write that down to uh the motion to award the flow stabilization bid to D and K for an amount not to exceed 62,067 the other wrinkle is that we'll have to um hopefully we'll be able to find some more money for the project from the some to the trans grant programs if not we are prepared and able to to make the additional match through some of our particular the stormwater reserve and some other capital reserves um this was originally thought to cost $40,000 that's what the grant anticipates so there's 32,000 in grant funds 8,000 in local match as you can see the bids are closer to 62 and 63,000 and so we'll we'll look to to fill that hole hopefully with grant funds but we are we are able to do that so uh this project is a water quality project given what it where it is and what the challenge is um so it's eligible for water quality funds both at the state level and specialized programs but as well as ARPA that's right yeah the water quality piece from ARPA would that would be another potential source as well so if nobody is seeing this project they ought to take a ride down through there this is not going to be a cheap project when it comes to construction no that's that's quite a quite a slow both in terms of its steepness and its length no for those of us that were part of the Irene disaster this washed out during Irene too and so the repair that was approved by everybody and was going to make it bullet proof clearly did not stand up so we're back out of there how many times is this washed out how many times is this washed out two or three times I think you're right Pat there's two I mean we were able to drive right down into the hole and back up the other side with or before Irene but I do believe it washed out one time before Irene and I washed out in the 80s that whole section was already built so you need a motion okay I'll make a motion that we authorized your voice in king to proceed second all those in favor I opposed motion carries assembly permits for halloween got an assembly permit application and a banner permit application earlier today we sent you the fire department for me they were requesting let's see if I can find that real quick so I can read them out to folks they had proper notice to be Jason businesses regarding the fire troop which is I described it as Heidi sent me a picture and I think Heidi might still be on too they look like they're spinning flaming hula hoops in the picture they you know twirl different objects that are on fire as part of a performance so so when chief Hildenbrand's talking about those pieces um proper notice provided to Jason businesses regarding that performance same thing proper notice to the red line regarding that performance I believe that part's already been done uh based on the response from Heidi various to an emergency rail can be moved manually we'll not our equipment if there's an incident and that any tents don't block access to the entrances to businesses of the red line so those are the feedback pieces from the village fire department when it looks at the permit applications there's also the banner permit piece that's in there as well I think you suggested in you know you may have been in that email that aqua cat cantina had some concerns but it looks like they were addressed directly with I know there was some dialogue I don't know if anybody's on to speak to those but it seemed like it was about making sure there was access to the business and and our notice was provided and blended those types of people were part of that conversation and we heard from a another entity individual not a name not a business identifier and we don't have it as of right now would express a similar concern about um access to a business in that stretch but it's because the events on a Sunday I believe we've got the time right here um a couple of businesses wouldn't be open that day right so the impacts would be mitigated just just by the day away so we've notified all the businesses there that the events taking place Heidi are you there signed in under as I understand it the the business notification in my part was handled through there were some some communication from the chamber of commerce as well as members of the recreation committee I think I've done some of the outreach and there was a delivery of some flyers so there was certainly an attempt to notify everybody I think RACDC may have played a role in some of that notification when it came to the deadline and pick through the pieces of what I've heard so if anybody knows this you can verify but that would probably be good yeah so I'm here from Heidi and I a month ago we put out flyers notifying all the businesses of reminding them of the event and deliver them by hand so Heidi have we notified them about the flyer we just got that um in today so um in today so oh once it just passes I will I'm on her phone so there's a bad echo so Heidi if I followed your comments you're you're you're going to reach out to those businesses now that you secured them as a performer correct most of them all know that that would have been a possibility and so now that it is confirmed then we will address the area and make sure that they have the area cleared out for the performer and it will be away from the away from the restaurant so if I understood correctly they're at the end of the street you're muted Heidi you're muted Heidi you're correct the performance is going to be on the other side so the other side meaning what the main street side I mean the main street side main street side main street side trying to figure out also while we talk about that echo down a little bit too sorry if anybody's picking that up we are trying to figure out how to make sure we don't catch that as well as we work through our new technology bugs fun fun anybody else have any questions about the halloween event not any motion to approve the approval of the permit and the banner for the halloween event second all those in favor hi hi hi hi opposed staying motion carries next there's a grant for kimble for historic preservation she's on yet they had a library trustees meeting the same night but this is one that would have been on that september docket this is um there's a 20 000 dollar grant through the department Vermont division for historic preservation um the library has sought permission to apply for that grant as part of the funding package to repair the cupola primarily there's some water and other related damage and this has been an ongoing problem or challenges I understand it the wrinkle with this one is you guys provided the tentative electronic approval for the grant application it's a one-to-one match and the challenge that's embedded in this one is that this is about a 200 000 project in total so you've got 20 000 potentially grant funds there's another 40 000 that the library trustees have pledged from something called the mac mayor funds and then the remainder that is in this request if the grant were to be awarded um and the project were to proceed would come from the the town most likely unless there were other grants um foundation other sources sought and obtained and I don't know if that's part of the plan that's if anybody does um who's jumped on um certainly steer me in the right direction um so that would leave us with about 140 000 or so to come up with at a local level um in our facilities reserve this project would most likely occur if the funds were awarded um in fiscal 23 and so when you look through capital reserves as they are for this year where they're anticipated to be and what the draft budgets include um for transfers we do have a sufficient amount of funds currently projected um that if we did want to do that it's envisioned in the capital plan I think for fiscal 22 there's a 200 000 um expenditure that's in there so we we just went through today and identified that in that facility reserve where this product has been listed for fiscal 23 there could be about 350 in funding um specifically your mark to this or would how much would it deplete the reserve in this reserve so if we did it fiscal 23 and we said that our baseline goes up to 350 and that presumes that the reserve transfer that's proposed in that trap in the draft budget everything goes as we're looking at right now if it um is at the same level as last year it was $75,000 that was approved transfer in for 22 so even if you you took it level we're talking there'd be 325 to 350 total in that facilities reserve that's for every eligible category project in there um so town buildings generally they take the 140 off that um and we're talking there's like 200 and 180 5 to 210 000 left so it's there's still enough in there to to meet anticipated needs but it would frame if the grants awarded this frame how we budget for fiscal 23 particularly with any expenditures in that facilities coming out of that fill it facilities reserve Trevor where does the uh capital budget committee put this expenditure in a priority order because I'm really not in favor of hey I got a small grant towards a major purchase uh let me jump the pecking order in capital improvements that are needed so when they look at the capital budget which is we have a committee that does that where do they rank this specific project with all the rest of them I honestly don't know I don't know where they're at this or with much else frankly how much are they allocating from the fund of their own there'd be 40 000 from the trustees and I the name of that funding in uh McNair okay I I know what that is um Chandler and the library and the food shell and maybe one other organization were left $250 000 requests each about 18 months ago from Mr. McNair so I don't know how they decide how much of that in case the trustees to expand on why but there there was a pretty significant pool of money here so just share that with me and this is one of those that I unless there's a grant award you could you could approve or authorize the application for the smaller grant and unless there's a grant award there isn't necessarily any need to come back and commit any funds until such time as you want to accept said award is one other way to think about it so that we can explore it but when you do think of it just as a mathematical problem that a grant for 10 percent of the total grabbing the response plan and and some of the other funding you know most of the time that's that's not the the ratio or the setup that we go forward when we enter into seeking the grant for a project of some kind doesn't mean that you couldn't just it flips that uh that ratio that usually you're looking for an 80 20 kind of split um the 90 kind of whatever you get hopefully 100 zero but mostly the 80 20 this would be 10 90 10 right right is there any time frame on when this had to be spent by that would depend on the grant award yeah I was just curious if there was some discussion about funds had to be used by what date yeah let's see if I can pull that real quick while you're considering or security they've sent me a new link so I can do it twice I may not be able to open that file just based on the security link that goes back to the library rather than to me directly but that would be where the timeline would be laid out or if we accepted the grant sign the grant agreement what's the timeline for project completion when when when does the grant have to be submitted by this one was due October 15th the grant for the $20,000 grant and you had informally blessed that earlier the right right $20,000 piece right Trevor can you hear me yep yep Pat I got you will this be put out to bid or is this so specialized you can't I would imagine there'd be a grant agreement requirement for bidding but I I don't know the particular nature of the project and with historic preservation grants if that alters that equation at all the reason I asked is in the explanation it talks about 166 or so to do the cupola but then there's a window that needs replacing and it went up to 200,000 that seemed excessive unless until I knew more about it right so it sounds like there's more information needed on this including away from the capital budget committee we've already submitted the grant all right yeah the the $20,000 grant if we're awarded it and the funding isn't worked out then the action is not to accept the grant at that time it's not a great look but better than committing to something here we can't fund or have a prioritize so we need to affirm the electronic yeah I think for tonight the only action that's required is to to essentially ratify the vote to apply for the $20,000 grant and to stay silent for now on the funding proposal there's more info and then you want the capital advisory committee to change we can we can link that together so we're looking for a motion to ratify the electronic vote to apply for the grant I'll make right I'll make that motion you can hear me I will second all right all those in favor hi opposed stained motion carries now we have an ARPA department of libraries grant yeah this is a previous application this is money for outdoor furniture technology collection purchases and I believe there is no match requirement I was trying to machine here so this would be to accept your 8,680 dollars and 39 cents I'll move to accept the grant second all those in favor hi hi opposed stained motion carries I would like to comment that's a very interesting amount for a grant 8,680 39 cents it's a bit precise for sure it sounds like they had a certain amount of money it sounds like they had a certain amount of money yeah we have the multi-town bylaw modernization grant with two rivers Josh did you hang in there with us yep I'm still here Josh might be the the best one to get you into this conversation here having been the closest to it and you were on that call earlier today I believe too so yeah and I don't know if the select board had enough time to get the revised copy Tori from two rivers sent it out to us after our call this afternoon there wasn't a lot that had changed from the original draft that was given to you yesterday I think because that was the first time we got the draft but a little bit of the budget had changed on their line items but the the the basic goal is to submit as Randolph being the lead applicant for this consortium application to do a seven-town project where two rivers will come in and review bylaws and go through a process where they engage the planning commission select board several meetings and get some revised bylaws to propose to each municipality where then the recommendation that they're offering is to adopt the recommendations as an interim bylaw adoption process and then after that go through the traditional bylaw adoption process with the full public hearings with the public or with the planning commission and then the select board most importantly for Randolph if if you look on the the the draft application it has a list of the Randolph zoning districts that they're going to be focusing on after looking at that you know I sent a question to them as to you know why they didn't include the residential district but I think I already know that answer which is they were most focused on those districts closest to the downtown and those that are already on the public system to get that concentrated density around the village so Josh what what does the what's the reason for the interim process as opposed to just going directly to a permanent adoption in other words would this enable us to do things on an interim basis that might not be approved in the end around do you see what I'm asking no I I totally understand that that's a valid question and it was it was one that was asked it you know during our meeting this afternoon so the explanation that Two Rivers gave was it was the most efficient way for all of the municipalities to get the recommendations adopted because Two Rivers is putting up the match for this it also allows them to recover that because ACCD said that if municipalities adopted them in through the interim process they could then recover that match component I don't want to say that it's all financial you know driven but you know certainly that's not what they said during the meeting they said it was more because of the efficiency of the process so I mean we we've done this you know most recently with our planning commission and select board so we know what that process is like and and it can take several months for sure Josh this is Pat I have a question can you hear me I can hear you okay thanks do we have the staff at this point to be the lead town on this so the so Two Rivers has committed to obviously you know preparing the application with input from the rest of the municipalities so you know it's done we're trying to collect all of the resolutions from the various municipalities to do this that's not that much work and and so if we are awarded the funds what we would end up having responsibility for is the sort of writing the checks as you will because Two Rivers has also dedicated themselves to writing the grant reports for the process so it's my understanding yeah my understanding is like yes there's not going to be a lot of work for the town of Randolph all of the paperwork reporting will be done by Two Rivers that'll be given to us and we will be submitting through the state of Vermont's system and when there are checks to be dispersed we will be acting on those invoices so the finance department will have to cut the checks but I think that's a pretty insignificant piece of their work just what was once in a check just wondering what was I was just wondering what was required on our part thank you yep yeah and if I'm reading this correctly it looks like it's it's a maximum of $60,000 plus a 6,010 percent match and that's split seven ways right so so like I said 60,000 will be from the state the 6,000 is being covered by Two Rivers so they're gonna cover they're gonna cover the match and they only get the match back to them if all of the municipalities adopt the recommendations right but is each municipality getting one seventh of that five um it's so um each municipality will get it's not it's not so much money going to the municipality it's money going to Two Rivers to to do the work right so so all of the municipalities planning commission and select boards will get all equal time in updating and meetings and so forth so I think what they plan in the budget is three meetings for each of the planning commissions there's going to be a sort of a consortium meeting you know like a virtual kickoff meeting a consortium meeting there will be two of those it'll be virtual of course and then let's see and then the select boards will all have several meetings too so they they are allocating six hours for each select board for this process any other questions for josh if not any motions I'll move to the head pack I'll move to it proposal I'll second all those in favor hi i'm staying motion carries uh next up is old business no we've got for you uh other business seeing done the managers report just the three pieces there we have ended two of them since we sent this out one is the meeting technology um you're in the room you can see that we've got multiple screens the owl setup we'll work to eliminate the echoes or try to figure out what that is um those calling in but this will better enable us to do hybrid meetings there's a similar setup upstairs in the conference room it's just a one monitor and the owl is very very portable um it provides the camera speaker and microphone is that the owl there functions yep yeah if you can I don't know if you can see little eyes on it on this oh yeah yeah it doesn't look it looks like the wise relationship I think the other one was just that we did connect with um Greg Ross at the East River partnership on the East Rock Randolph dam which he said has been known as the um the Gulf Road dam I guess um is that the intersection of 66 and 14 and they've got the both the money and the capability to do a feasibility study and some initial design work and so it can do all of the heavy lifting whether or not it's feasible and proven to remove that dam it's the final dam remaining on the second branch so there's both a water quality and aquatic organism movement components to to allow that that may be worth exploring in addition to how it would impact anybody who's currently in a in a flood hazard area or flood zone so they're able to do that if there are any objections we'll do such and then tomorrow to to say go ahead they're queued up this process isn't a quick one he said three to five years and they'll be you know different levels of stakeholder meeting historic preservation there's certainly the natural resources and environmental components of it but they're the same group um that was involved in the it's the high dam down at East Bethel about five miles down the road from this one um and and helped with all the pieces not what I think he said took I don't know if that was a five year one but there was some stakeholder neighbor landowner stuff embedded in that that stretched off the timeline but it's a three to five army corps of engineers is involved so it's it's got quite a few steps the first one is is it feasible and part of that ties into what that bridge sits on right there um if it's on ledge or if it's somehow I input some other way that could impact that um and then what is initial design and then if we did ever get to the spot where we wanted to go forward they've also got access to or funding available for the rest of the of the project so it's possible that we have a limited um financial state in this so we're the owners of the dam and but you'll get more information from step one then we pass you know what's what's feasible and what would it look like so if everybody's okay with that we'll we'll move forward with that piece and then that could be six months through a year before they're checking back in having completed that piece so it's it's none of this moves real quick but I just had a quick question on the technology if you were sitting here looking at it is this interfacing with the work though yeah they're pulling our video feed in addition to the one in the room cool good that's great I knew there was some uncertainty about that the last time we talked about it yeah Trevor this pad I have a question yeah are my problems night with audio are those anything to do with the technology or are they I suspect it's um yeah I suspect it's the problem Harry has in the trainings probably happened too in terms of the broadband capability of it on that end and whether or not it can capability do both pieces we've been able to hear um you know anybody who's got the the capacity for video and audio has come through clear without much stuff we haven't seen any error messages on this and we'll look into it and make sure it's nothing here but my guess might be that it's on on the output end at the user end as opposed to the owl and zoom combination here but we'll make sure that it's not yeah I'm pretty I'm pretty sure yeah well I'm having more problems tonight than I normally have to so okay yeah so maybe it is something here then I don't I don't think it's the problem with the system I think it's problem with my my internet connection here because like I said I'm still on two telephone wires do we have anything else in the managers report Trevor that was it we hope to be open to the public tomorrow if not Monday um tax collections underway that's been the bulk of our business lately and those are the big pieces great next up we have executive session you know that's still needed Trevor yeah just a few things to update John entertain a motion from folks to go into a new uh I'm going to be going to executive session for the purpose of purpose to save your contract negotiations personnel real estate and legal updates second it all those in favor hi hi hi motion carries