Finance Committee - Regular Meeting

call the Boxboro Finance Committee meeting to order. Um we are partially remote so we'll need to do a roll call attendance. So um I'll start with Michelle. Can you state your name and present? Michelle. Michelle, can you hear me? No, she can't. We can't hear her. I can hear you. We can hear you. Okay. Can you state your name and present? Michelle, just for for Yeah. Ryan present. Okay. Uh, Grevin present. Stalin present. Neiland present. Connor present.

And Newton present. Okay. And we also have here Gary Kushner um and Susan Back from Boxboro News. I believe that Hongwa and Rajan Rajan's online as well. Yeah. And we have and we have John Marowitz as well. And I think Hongwa is gonna be calling in as well. Um for any questions we have. Um okay. So and John Markitz is on. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um so first topic is minutes of December the 16th. Um do have a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Any discussion, comments, edits?

Okay. Roll call vote to approve the minutes. Michelle Ryan I. Uh Grebin I. Sen I. Yand I. Connor I. Newton I. Okay. Um citizens concerns. I have received a citizen's concern about tax bills. I was hoping Oh, Hong Le on Hong was on on online on online on online on online on online on online on online on online on online on online on online now. Yep. She just gone on.

Yeah. So I so I heard that um some residents have received um notices of unpaid taxes um and I've been to the town uh with their cancelled checks um and um apparently there's some sort of issue with the vendor is what I what I heard. Um Hongwa, are you uh can you hear us? Okay. Perhaps you can let us know what's going on with the taxes situation. I can almost hear her.

We We can't hear you right now. Can you uh Do we need to unmute or something? Um, no, she's not muted. Okay. Can you hear me? Oh, yeah. Can now? Yeah. Yeah. Oh, sorry. Um so um I just found out today um from Emily um she's working on all these uh tax payments I guess uh she gave me one example one of the vendor did paid in July and previous treasur collector didn't post it didn't record it so she's she's trying to work at cleaning that up right now

so what happened Hongwa exactly um that um the charitable collector told me today that um some of the vendors that they did pay their tax payment like um in July or so. Yeah. And I the previous treasur collector did not record it. Okay. So, so it's an internal issue for the treasurer collector. It's not a vendor issue. That's that's what I heard today from um the treasur collector. Okay. So, is this Can I ask a question? Yeah, go ahead. Yeah.

So, is this um So, I checked my tax bill. It was paid. Um I know other people who pay their taxes, they it was paid because a couple of people I reached out to a couple people just to ask them to check their bills that just came out. So, do we know is this like a specific group of people? And how is it if their checks have been cashed? Wouldn't that I mean, this goes back to my banking days. If you have a check that cashes and the vendor says they paid you, but you don't record it, there should be an outstanding balance on one side. Yeah.

And and so how do we not I guess if this goes back to July, because I understood that there was one from October, not July. If this goes back that far, wouldn't they have wouldn't she have been off every month? Um, well, this is one that she gave me an example today. Um, that one in July that vendor had paid, but I guess like she didn't post it to the correct like um year. I guess it's something like that. She didn't go in much detail. Um, she was just giving that one example of the vendor. That's That's what she said. Vendor or resident? Vendor.

Wait, when when you say when you say vendor, Hongwa, do you mean a resident? No, a business. A business. So, is it the lockbox vendor? Um, I think so. I think it's the lockbox. And there was other places that electronic pack like city hall. There's other electronic payment that goes to different banks. And I guess there's certain banks in that electronic that previous treasur is not pulling down the the the payment. So then she needs to post that into vadar and that's the part that she was not doing. But that doesn't So So do you understand what it's the third party vendor being?

Well, yeah. Because when I pay my taxes, I pay through city hall, right? And some people put it in the envelope that goes to a lock box in Reading, North Reading, somewhere, right? So that's that vendor. And then for those of us who pay escrow into our mortgages, there's another vendor that does an interface. So there's a couple of different ways to get, but I guess I'm still not fully understanding

and and maybe this isn't something you can answer tonight, but I do think it's really important. There's checks and balances whenever a department is receiving checks. Like I used when I was in banking, we receive a check, we would apply the payment. At the end of the day, if all of those things did not balance because I misapplied a payment, I needed to go back and find that. If we're talking back to July and I know there was one from October, I mean, how much more are we looking at? How big of a problem is this? And it sounds like this is all coming out today that we need to follow up because I I I just there should be a check and balance and I don't understand how we've gone this long without recognizing that there's a problem.

Mr. to throw out all of our cash calculations, right? It should it should be thrown off our our revenue projections and a quarterly. Yeah. You know, because if it's July, then September, we would have had a quarterly and then we would have had a second quarterly. Yeah. And so, um I guess I don't understand that. So, Hongwa, what are you going to do now about trying to track down what's happened here exactly?

I know it's only today that happened, but I mean, what's your what's your plan going forward? Um Emily um said that she's going to work with Masha and they're going to say come up with a plan like what they're going to do. Um right now they just people have been calling and emailing and so she they just try to tackle that right now. Um I mean I can try to um talk to her again to see what their plan but right now they just so overwhelmed with phone calls and people walking in all these questions. That's what she's trying to tackle right now. I could try to talk to her and see what's their plan. There should be an addition. So, do we know how many people are affected by this? No, she didn't tell me.

It's day one. So, a hung in addition to kind of like firefighting the initial thing. Um, let's do make sure we resolve kind of why we didn't catch this sooner aspect of it. You know, there like to Maria's point, there should be a check and balance on this in terms of um if somebody's depositing something through the system, you should see that replicated all the way through and we shouldn't be blindsided by it. Make sense? Yep. Okay. Well, also we need to There people out there still who have paid their taxes and may get a bill for unpaid taxes. So, we need to figure out Yeah. I think that's because the process broke down. Someone's not running that payment all the way through the system. Yeah.

So then the other part of this is what is being done to let the taxpayers know that this may be an issue and we're aware of it and um yeah whether it's posted on the website. I mean obviously we can't contact people because we don't know. Yeah. Until we figure it out and it's day one, but there there needs to be something that allows taxpayers to understand that if you're paying your taxes not through a bank um through whatever means you need to, you know, check your bills. Obviously, because if their check's cash, they probably haven't checked their bills. And when you get the bill in, your next tax bill, I never check my path to see if because it's paid by my bank, I always assumed it's paid, right? Just have people put another check in the mail. Yeah. So,

now what happens if we cash a second check, right? So, somehow we need to I think reach out. I I actually to me this is a bigger issue. This is an issue that has been happening and and this is nothing on Emily because she started a week ago. [laughter] So, I want to be really clear when I say this. She's walked into it. Yeah.

Yes. Exactly. She's walked into it. But that department since Mary Pat left years ago has had tax collecting issues and and and through multiple tax collectors starting back with Carter, we have had issues. When people leave, we find a million dollars worth of checks and we have people who bills aren't being paid. And at some point when do we say we need to look at thinking about a full detailed audit of the te treasur tax collector's office just to get to a point where we are starting at you know ground zero. Well minimally I think we need to get Emily get get into the problem. I think let's give Emily an audit. I know I know I know it's

but we need but yeah this is this is going to be an ongoing topic right until we resolve it to our satisfaction. I mean, we have to we have to have have to, you know, at some point Emily in here and explain what happened and and what went wrong and how we're going to fix it for the future. Yeah. Emily and and Hongwa because uh this is clearly not not acceptable. Um I'm wondering about my taxes because you I told you I I looked at mine. I've got an $8,000 tax bill today having not paid last quart last quarter and I thought I paid it and I checked off everything in my my system and it didn't go through. I mean it hadn't it hadn't been paid. I I assume it's my fault, but I'm I'm not so sure now. It may stuck in the system somewhere. I didn't uh didn't get there. Yeah. Yeah.

So, yeah, we'll check in with Emily. Uh but I think the biggest thing is kind of her coming into the position. We've really tried to work and get her to a point where she can kind of focus on specific things and and not try to pile on too much. But I know Hungwa is trying to slowly let her get acclimated before she starts tackling some of the big bigger projects. But we'll touch base with her tomorrow and and figure out a time that um she can come in and talk through what's been happening um in the Treasury Collector's office.

Yeah, pretty high priority reg. We can't we can't just sort of push in the back in the back burner and say it can wait. I mean, we need to know what's going on with this. The other thing is there's consultant money. I mean, there's money in her budget and consultants. So, if she needs a hand going through and figuring this out, um, you know, if it goes back to July, you know, I can't imagine having to go back and reconcile back to July. Can't imagine how we didn't pick that up before, but you know, if if she needs a hand, there is consultant money and this is what it should be used for if we end up in this position, but then there needs to be definite followup. Yeah. You know, so, okay. So to to be continued. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks for John.

Yeah.

Okay. Reserve fund transfers. Nothing in that line. FY26 budget. Nothing there for me. Um FY27 budget. So budget Saturday. Um I sort of kept a um a note of the things that I had I got from Saturday. Um, and I'm going to I'll share on my screen what I've got. Uh, it might be good if we just, you know, can all chip in and and uh add to this this list. So, I got the things I got and this a bit bigger things we're going to ask more questions about. So, the training consultancy line for the accountant. Mhm.

Um I may know about we're going to introduce cards for the by the assessor, but that's just a cost increase. I um it was the the assessor looking at no finding out what happened to the property cards and if it if we're paying if that's still part of the service or did we drop that service or what happened because the cards dropped off. Um I think it dropped off in July. Kristen thought it was earlier than that. So those are property cards. Yeah. So it's a question with the tax assessor basically. Okay. Um, there's a question on the treasurer line on training.

There's Yep. Uh, in the tax title of $10,000, have we used that? Is that enough money or is that too much money? Because we we budgeted 10,000 for tax title. Um, and how much? It didn't look like we had used a lot, but that could be, you know, that could have been, you know, this perhaps Emily's going to be able to get on top of that. Yeah. I this was and then the piece is not really um a financial question but we wanted to find out what the overnight coverage actually was.

Well, it could be because um if we're doing overtime is flat but we're only covering you know 40% of the shifts then then we might need more overtime. I thought he was budgeting it full coverage. He said that, right? But we just need to confirm that when we, you know, so so we're going to be overbudgeted. We should be, but we were overbudget if you look at the numbers pretty significantly on the police line last year. So Okay. Yeah. Um there's a question about vehicle fire vehicle maintenance [snorts] whether that is the correct number based on the fact of DPW doing some of the maintenance now I think. Right. But

by the higher spare spare part costs, right? Right. But so all of that is but for specifically for the police I mean for the fire vehicle maintenance the DPW cannot do the apparatus and our vendor for the apparatus told us we should go up 2 to 3% on that budget budget an additional 2 to 3% for maintenance on the apparatus right and we went flat so when we talked to the chief the other day I think when he comes in he either needs to explain going flat or you know we need to decide whether we want to go up Yeah. I mean, if we know that it's going to be higher than that. Yeah. Okay. Um, DBW, we want more detail on the tipping fees,

the decrease and whether and also hazardous waste strategy, whether we're going to go for an annual hazardous waste or or go to this Devon's option, right? And that's going to be working that's with the with the select board. They'll make that decision. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Bulk recycling was another item on that too. It was kind of the tipping all of those. The transfer station in general. Yeah. Where it's getting more expensive, but we've come down on that budget. Yeah. Yeah. Um mosquito control. Um I can't remember what the question was there. That was we we paid twi I think we had two two treatments last year. We paid [clears throat] twice from two different um

I think it was just kind of confirming that we were in the no because we were kind of confused and then Mike John's we think we corrected it where we were budgeting it twice half of it was getting paid from elsewhere we didn't spend half of it right we went down we want to just make sure that we're covering because one comes [clears throat] through the cherry sheet and then one because the state does that through the cherry sheet and then we contract a second one right so and and last year we budgeted for the two plus we had it coming out from from the cherry sheet, right? So, we only used half of what we budgeted, but it was all covered. Yeah. Yeah. Um question on community services training budget. Yes. Conference training.

Um maybe a decrease in that because it seemed high and it hadn't been used in the past. Yeah. Um and the veterans agent, the fact that we had 15,000 budgeted and had used hardly anything last 25 anyway, right? and that was in services. So the question there was is there a good reason? Is there a good reason? Is he using state funds? Because that's additional funds. State also provides veterans funding. But we need to have a better understanding like if we're going to it just it had gone from zero up to something like $91 something like 900. But it went to 77500 back down to zero and then up to 15 right,000.

Yeah. Doubled from a number that he never got to before. So it's like unless there's some reason why. And he's new, right? So, we've had him for the last two or two years, maybe three years. And before that, that department wasn't really functioning particularly well and and certainly the benefits weren't being used, but this is additional benefits based on what the veterans agent said we needed last year. Yeah. Because he expended a lot because we get state benefits for the vets. So, um that's the question. Are we going to use this and do we still need it? Um right. And then out of town meeting, we I've forgotten now where we said we put that we said we put into into one certain line item. We're going to put all the town meetings under the select board.

Select board. Okay. And so they're going to go through and pull out the town meetings from the other budgets plus they're going to add this 10,000. Anyone know what that number is off hand? So it should be um I think Ran 30. How much it's the number department is 122. 122 is Oh, that number. I thought you meant the dollar amount. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so 10, we said 10,000. I think we can add 10,000 is the additional. Yeah. And they've already budgeted for the other three, the other portions of it. Yeah. So, property cards. So, what have I missed? What have I missed some? So, um,

oh, actually, go back to the mosquitoes for a second. It's not just that. It may be we budgeted flat. There's no increase, and every year that increases. So I have notes that we may want to think about budgeting 5% higher until we get an actual cost. So that's that of health uh veterans agent. Uh for the select no executive offices, we're decreasing the events budget by $1,000. Okay. 10 a thousand.

Um so that's that's under town administrative I think. Um yes or executive offices or whatever he calls it's exe 123 I think. Um see that now. Oh, we're gonna RECCom's overall budget is very confusing and we need a better understanding of that. So, do we want to have RECCOM come in and talk to us? Yes, I think that's what we said. Down here down here, I've got people who we you want to talk to and when. Okay.

Okay. And was RECCOM behind that change that Mike was talking about? I don't know because I think that might be one of the reasons we we may need Mike here for that one. Mhm. So that they can talk. I didn't get the feeling that and sorry when you say which change John are you talking just the mics you know how this budget for recon has been in oh for like the revolving fund and what's actually budgeted and all that. Yeah we need some clarity on that. So I think Mike can because the revolving fund I think was paying for everything but it shouldn't have been because not everything reccom does makes money. [clears throat] So yeah, I think they were trying to straighten that out. Okay. Anything else?

Fin. [clears throat] We have to discuss whether or not we're willing to cut our own budget by $500 or not necessarily 500 but some number. Yeah. So, we spent some money last year, but not we didn't spend 500 on conferences. Yeah. Um, yeah, we could cut we could cut by half maybe. I I mean, I think so. You We're asking everyone else to cut and we're not using the money. So, you did a conference though, remember? Right. But it was I went to a conference. Yeah. It was a It was valuable. It was You had Yeah. Yeah. Maybe we don't cut it. We just look at it and then say, "Okay, if we're going to be committed to go to conferences, that's fine. That conference that day was a Saturday, right?" Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, wasn't I think I don't remember. I had to be somewhere. But there they are.

You know, select board goes to the uh MMA conferences and I went to one of those. They have a bunch of different seminars there. Was very helpful. Yeah. So, but that said, we have to make sure we're going to be committed to using the money. Tony, that was that something that is like an annual conference? I think it was the annual Yeah, it's the Association of Town Finance Committees. I think it's annual conference. Um it was um a bunch of talks for different people about different topics about budgeting and the issues with the state and and state aid and

you know and and there are different tracks you could go on. You could choose a track to go on. So in fact it' be worth more than one person going like you know tracks both both tracks. Kind of what I was going to like it's an annual thing. It helps us stay up to speed on what's going on. Yeah. You know, so let's see what that costs and see what date it is and if we can commit to it, then we don't cut. I just don't want it to be there and just constantly not use it. Yeah. And then [clears throat] it it's probably not included with our because we are a member of the We're a member of it. Yeah. Right. So it's not included. At least should be some kind of discounted rate. I don't remember it being very expensive. I feel like you sent that out to us. You did. And I don't remember thinking it was crazy money. Yeah. No, it was like a few hundred bucks. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. So, we can look at that. Um, but I think that's all I I have. Okay. Okay. So, then I was thinking about what dates we we talked a little bit about having people in at certain dates. So, we said library 13, which is next week. I mean, it's too short notice for the library. I mean, I could reach out to Pan and see if she can do that. I think they've been pretty settled on their budget for a while because the only big thing they had was the director's salary which they negotiated in like October. Do we need do we need to have them in? I suppose as a question do we do we have any questions for the library that that are meaningful. I don't want people drag people in here for no for no reason. I don't I think last year they had the big request with the renovation

year with the renovation last year. The year before was the 250,000. Last year it was 50,000 at at this year. They just got a grant for their the generator there. They're pretty good. And I don't know what's on the capital plan for them if anything. I think we I think we should just leave them then because I mean I don't think it's nothing pops the top of my head. Yeah, I can reach out and just ask if they have anything that we not aware of and see if they propose coming in. But unless we're going to object to some element of their budget or have some questions we we they want panic buttons which they what that's fine. Don't even bring it up. [laughter] It's low and they're going to get them. It's low cost though, right? It's low cost. Well, they're not cheap but they're going to get them.

Trust me. That's a fair ask. Oh, okay. Like that's real. That's right. For real. I I honestly just would like to know why. I'm not saying it's not fair. I don't understand why a library needs a panic button. So if something really if there's a threat they can press a button. We had this meeting about 48 hours after that. Okay. I'm sorry. I guess I wasn't really thinking that. Obviously. I wasn't thinking that. If you said school, I I would understand. I wasn't thinking library. Okay, whatever. My bad. I'm sorry. It's just a question. And they've had some bad actors in there, you know. Yeah, they've had a few folks.

They Well, you know, there's there's nothing you can do. You You hit the panic button, but then you because it's the the fifth the first amendment people. Yeah. So, people that walk in and they want Yeah. blah blah blah. Okay. So, live then unless everyone's really got a burning need to speak. So, is that all they have is panic buttons for real? Unless Yeah. I'm trying to open the budget now to see, but I think unless it's we we had them after Capital Saturday last year. Yeah. [clears throat] Yeah. So, well, again, we can wait till capital Saturday anything on the if see if there's warrant article comes up or something. Yeah.

And leave it. Um, police fire we said early February. So, we I have more questions for them based on what's up here. So maybe I'll leave that leave them both together then. Yeah. Uh planning board we said um I mean that's well yeah what's in their budget? I mean in the planning board budget the only consoly we got we talked about the consulting fees for them and then the only other reason we would want the planning board in is depending on what their articles are. So, a lot the planning board we um usually with the town planner, we should do those together. Okay. Because then we don't have to have Alec in twice. Yeah. Um and sometimes we don't want Alec, we don't need Alec for his budget.

Yeah. Um so they can figure out what their articles are going to be and we will know that more on um Okay. You know, Saturday, February. Um okay. The school we said end of February when they after Yeah. You go just to make sure Adam's good with that. And that's after they that's is that after they do their budget. That's what we that's what he said when I thought their budget meeting was the first weekend in February. Was it? It's going to be Monday. So it was not Saturday because we do budget Saturday. So it's going to be Mon Monday night that they're scheduled their capital Saturday which is when which is February? February 7th. Yeah.

Okay. All right. So yeah. And then so it would be February 9th is the actual date of their budget meeting. That's way beyond. Um and then so they'll take a preliminary vote at that point and it can't go higher than that. Yeah. Um but I thought they were a little later in that they were going to do a final vote. So if that works for Adam because at that point they should know about their you know their plan their reorganization and all of that. I mean, we're we're making a working assumption that that the school budget is is what we have in our model. There's no reason to think it's not. The only thing is it could go down from there if for some reason. I mean, I I don't think they they can Yeah. You know, but um because Axton can't go any higher than that.

Yeah. Um which is a whole different conversation, but Yeah. Um but then they can also would can come in and talk about the reorganization. Yeah. So, yeah. Yeah. And then redcom do they have stuff on the capital plan CPC. So that should be so after capital Saturday. So after capital Saturday yeah so um right I think they have stuff on yeah for the playground for for the C um CPC funds. So should we say well was it? So

there aren't many there aren't many but that's that's that's the three meetings we've got in Feb in um February the third and we don't have I don't think we have the schedule yet for annual town meeting um for the when the warrant closes and all of that. We do not have that scheduled. Did you want DPW to talk about like tipping and all that? We want DPW. So, we should do a other than the school, we should do a planning board and reccom one night. Okay. Um I know we're not here on I'm not here on the 17th. That's school vacation week. We won't be here. Okay. Okay, we can't do ReCom that night because um

Yeah, cuz Hillary would like to come along with Mike to talk about the budget for Recon [laughter] or maybe go on vacation with you. One of the Oh, no. But I mean, like when when Recon comes when you're on the like I'm not sure. What about do on the on the 10th? Yeah. So, do it on the 10th and then we put DPW on the 17th. Yeah. Because Hillary doesn't need to be here for DPW. Yeah.

Okay. Um, and then DPW on the 17th. Okay. Anybody else you want to talk to? Live question mark right now. Yeah. I mean, I think that we have some questions on the town budget. So, Mike, Rajan, but I mean, they're here anyway. Yeah. Right. So, we can just ask throughout the process. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Um, you may No, I guess you don't fire. You don't because we're going to be talking about that this week and voting it next week. So,

for the tax collector to talk about debt that part of the budget, you mean the treasurer? The treasur? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. She just got here. I know. That's why I'm wondering if it's too soon. And she kind of walked into a [laughter] a dumpster fire. So, we might want to give her a hot second. Yeah. So, it's too early. I But the assessor, we talked about wanting to talk to the assessor, but do we want to do that in relation to the budget because you said, you know, Well, we did, didn't we? We did this um cards. The question is, is it a cost issue for the cards? It could be. Yeah. I mean, it could be a slight increase in the software. The question is, why did the property cards go away?

Yeah. Why were they dropped? Yeah. And then is there a cost associated with that? When we were talking to the assessor on her way out, she was saying like, "No, we're still doing those. We still it's all contracted. We have Patriot and Catalis doing it. There's no reason. I don't know why you're not seeing them." So like I don't know if we really have I'll do research and assess and find out and get back to the Yeah. Now are we for assessor do we we do we're not doing the $30,000 warrant article, right? and the overlay is all set. Like we're not he says he says we got no taking overlay. So then we don't need to talk to him if you want to just get an answer on the you know property cards and that and even if it increases the budget Mike can do that when we talk to Mike or Rajan.

Yeah. If you want to send um Jim an email and just copy me and Mike on it in that might be a little bit easier to do that especially about the property record card. Okay. The sound is atrocious. I was just going to say it's terrible because when when I'm on there are no speakers when I'm on Zoom meetings at home you can hear the Zoom participants perfectly but if you're in this room you can't hear them at all. It's gotten worse in the last like month or so you know it's like muffled EQed weird. It's the you know

I'm not saying okay um do you want to talk about models at all? I mean there's I mean I shared the models on a Saturday and you know John's got his model as well. I had one more note for capital Saturday just I want to make sure I get it on record just um budget Saturday or capital

uh sorry budget budget Saturday um when we were when I was looking in clear gov for notes um there was a note that I had read out and then Hongwa corrected that that was a note from 2024. I think some people when they're putting notes into clear gov are putting the date first and you can even see in your spreadsheet that you've copied there's plenty with dates. I think that might be Mike John's doing those. Uh the majority of notes have no date and there's no time stamp when you enter it into clear gov. So, I think we need to try to get uh, you know, policy established that when people put notes in, they put the date because you go over one,

you just like you're looking at the fiscal year 27 budget and you click on notes and it just has a description of what explaining what that line's about and then it's from two years ago for fiscal 24 because that line stays and the note just exists there forever and the thing is will be there from 2024 15 years from now. And some of them don't make sense. You read the note and you're like, "Well, I don't know how that helps you with this budget." Like, it did not in fact go up $7,000. So, [laughter] it just causes chaos.

There's three places where you can put notes, too. So, when you look at the line item, it's notes. That's the primary note that I copied here. Then there's a tab for justifications. That also has no timestamp. That's where I read the 2024 thing. It's just a a snippet of text. If the halfway decent program in the time stabatically there's a third established there's a third tab comments that has a time stamp. Okay. There's a third tab for comments. So you have notes justifications comments that will time stamp that doesn't and that's the one that no one's using. [laughter] Yeah cuz I remember we asked and maybe they added it three feet to the right. [laughter] So, I think that's a pretty important thing to just track when those

talk to Mike about trying to um set a policy around this. Can we ask the clear go folks? Is that still on the table? You know, I mean, I know we've asked them a lot of stuff. I don't know the answer to that question, but I just I wonder if they did it, but they just did it for comments only, and we're like, there's two other tabs like you guys. And why why do we have two other tabs? Like, can we just, you know, consolidate the tabs? When you enter that, their database has a time stamp on it. So why they don't expose that to the user? I think we're still using the beta version actually. Okay, go. Yeah, probably. [laughter] Yeah, Joe, that makes sense. I'm sure it's on their side and they just need to go click. Yeah, make this, you know, it's a cell.

But either way, yes. Sorry to not distract from your point, Joe. Yeah, if we could, that would be helpful for I think some sort of policy. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Um, yeah. Do we want to talk about the budget at all from what we talked about on Saturday? the model or I mean I think we're confident that we don't need a an override. Um yeah, and I think the numbers lined up pretty well like overall right when we were Yeah. looking at the high level there weren't any major discrepancies that we weren't able to hash out. I I just I think we do need to get back to Mike because it would be nice if we were all kind of trying to solve the problem the same way. Yeah.

Yeah. And that's my concern too is that you guys have got one model showing things one way and and Mike and Rajan had a different model and it kind of all fits together but but the public it needs to be basic for the public. They need to understand it and it needs to be we all need to make sure we're on the same page and honestly [snorts] and I'm not saying I'm doing it right or I'm assuming we're doing it right but we are taking away again Mike Rajan no offense um that I think the public could understand it's it's the basic accounting you've got your revenues and you've got your expenses and those should essentially match over a year roughly

right and with what they do I don't I I mean, I've only looked at you've looked at it more than I have. It just seems I still can't get my my mind around the way to look at it because they they look at they they they have a number for levy and then they say then we've got this 2.5% we can increase. The levy is income because you can tax it if you want. So that's on an income. It's a weird way to and then there's new growth. That's that's a revenue. It's not really right. It's like it's it's mixing together a lot of apples and oranges in one basket. Sort of like in is it coming in or going out and that's all that they're caring about at that level which I mean it's [snorts] a different way of looking at it and I think it they explained it makes sense for the

municipal municipal finance way of looking at it which which I still don't get it. So this maybe it's just me anecdotal I have a similar problem at my company. I'm in sales and we don't have a finance team. So our sales team does the finance and then when our, you know, higher management people are talking about revenues, you know, it gets all confusing because sales thinks of revenue once we ship it, right? Finance only cares once the check's cashed. So because you have one department is trying to talk both languages, it becomes impossible. We we're totally unaligned all the time. I think it's a similar thing here where there's there's two fundamentally different ways of thinking about the same numbers and they both math properly to each other's way of doing it, but they're hard to it's like speaking different language when you try to talk to each other about it.

So I don't know how we resolve that because I mean in a way I'm reluctant for us to take on the responsibility of publishing all financial data for the town. Yeah. It's not our job, right? Yeah. It really isn't. It's our job to check the numbers that are published by the administration and right now so we don't understand their methodology. Yeah. And that's the problem. So we can't we can't confirm that for right for the citizens and that's the problem. Yeah. Um and we don't want to I mean I I think that you have taken on more I know you've taken on more than any other FIN chair ever. Yeah.

And you know you shouldn't be doing this. You should, you know, this should be coming out of the administration in a way that's digestible for us in a way we understand it so that we can confirm the numbers. We're not really tasked to be the public facing voice of the financial direction of the town though, right? We're we're tasked to we're vetting it. We're we're vetting it. We're recommending to the town manager and the select board what we and and recommending, right? But I mean ultimately that's our job. We don't have to justify you know the way that it's the the town does their numbers or I mean but we have to understand the way they do their numbers right so if we say okay the budget looks fine it's kind of implied that we understand how they their budget works and then it's logical

like their revenue numbers are fine but if we the way we you know you look at it and if they say they have $100,000 in revenues but we can't substantiate that that that's our job right we're the keeper of the budget and we bring that budget forward and we present it at town meeting but our but we understand our budget which the same right I mean it should be the same yeah so we're just having trouble reconciling that it is the same I I would say I am I mean it's it's very easy when you're coming at it from two different angles it's it takes it it's very easy to get lost

because it's not the budget the budget numbers might all be the same these are easy well okay aside from clear gum that's easy to understand it's the the models And it's the levies and all of that. And that's the important part because we can we have to make sure we're not going into an override situation where we're not asking for an override, but here we are now all of a sudden we're short on tax revenue.

I just I just feel like I mean I feel like that's taking it's going above and beyond which I'm happy that we do because I think our our committee does go above and beyond. Um I just feel like we're tasked to take the numbers that are reported to us from the town and accept them and and vote based on them. I mean, we don't have the auto power to go down and go into innovate ourselves and you know what I mean? So, I feel like there's some level of trust we're supposed to have that we're not we're not tasked to accept them. We're tasked to admit them. Yeah. Right. I don't know. I feel like I feel Can you guys hear me?

Okay, cool. Hi. Um I feel like part of our job is also kind of like explaining the rationale if people have concerns, right? Because if we're saying we're recommending something, we understand the rationale. We're explaining it in like layman's terms, right? Like the amount of times like I've explained Prop 2 and a half and like an override in the past couple of weeks is increasing ever since uh you know the box be picked it up, right? So I feel like it actually is part of our job to understand and be able to justify the numbers we're putting our committee behind. Right. Is this worth like another se a separate session of just like breaking down what maybe 27 28 could look like from bottoms up from the town perspective so we're all reconciled

or are things kind of set I missed that last part of the question you're asking about the sort of future years um Michelle yeah I mean obviously like the way the town does things and way we do things are are different right like is it worth a separate session kind of reconciling those were able to explain. Maybe that's the answer. Maybe maybe we need to have Mike and Hongwa here

and and try to come up with a model that we can all agree on that we that makes sense. Uh because clearly the way that they present it doesn't make sense to us. Um, and I think I think it will be confusing to people in the town if they're seeing different numbers published in different situations that don't seem to line up. I mean I mean Kristen is that issue on Saturday. She was saying I can't see where that number is in is in the other model. So you know she

she couldn't she couldn't walk across and I I couldn't really walk across either really for some of those numbers. And and frankly, we should have our model, but they should be the town in the past has always had a financial model that it presents to Fincom. Yeah. Right. And so we had that model and then your model should just be a double check. Well, that and that's that's when I started this like three years ago. But you're doing the model like I'm not seeing a model coming out of Yeah. town hall. Well, I mean it was that there was one page that But that's the output from their model. They have to have some spreadsheet somewhere that doesn't that gives that. Right. Right. Right. But that didn't match our stuff.

Shouldn't we just have one model that we both start from the same template and we then we can audit against we're using the same spreadsheets. Exactly. I would rather uh discuss and you know get into the detail of what goes into the model than the actual model structure itself which is what we're doing. Yeah. Because I mean, if we have to use the way that they do it to to align, maybe that makes sense. I mean, I don't think I don't think that's going to happen. [laughter] I mean, I I I think it's less likely that they'll adjust based on what we do because it sounds like they're doing it based on the way municipal finance is, you know. Well, we don't know that. We don't we don't Yeah. I mean, that's what we were told. I think it's worth a meeting. No question about it.

Yeah. Yeah. Especially for projecting out into the future. It should be an extension of this model. It shouldn't be a whole new model. So maybe the topic for next week's meeting I'll get Mike and we'll look at the whole budget modeling process. Okay. Um can I just add on the budget from Saturday? Yeah. Um the levy is based on what's in the clear gov. That includes 186,000 in the reserve fund. Right. So if we take that out, we're to to the good for 186,000 more. Yeah. So actually that puts us in a better position, which you don't you don't have. That's right. We So we discussed that, didn't we, before

we didn't discuss on budget Saturday, but the idea was we didn't want to make that part of achieving the target. Right. Right. We want to say on top of getting to the target, we want to go and beyond that by another $16,000. So that's sort of still in our back pocket in a way. Right. as a number that can come out of that. So that's good because as we come up a little bit on these other things that we're discussing if we have to come up a little bit and it's not a lot of money there but come up a little bit here even if come down but we we do have another 186,000 which we do need to remember as we go through this process. Let me let me put that in here as well as a as [clears throat] a thing to um to to track because

and then we need to set that policy and do a warrant article for that. we need to do a warrant article and we need to think about that policy because the issue is going to be it's a warrant article it'll come out of free cash if it's a warrant article that money will stay on the books even past the end of the year we don't spend it right so I actually think it's more of a fund it's a fun it's literally a fund it's a reserve fund right fund but then how much do you how much do you know how how do you know how much to top it up with the following year because you don't know until late in the year. What? What? What? How much? Well, we should know. So, we should know when we close the books. What's in that fund? But but that's too late for one article.

No, we close the books July June 30th is the last day of the fiscal year. The book should be closed by September 1st. So, it's not too late because we're doing that. It's during the budget session that we're going to do a warrant article. So, so the first year, so this year we will take for the sake of argument $180,000 from free cash and put it into the reserve fund. FY20 FY27 is $160,000. We use an FY27 $20,000. So now the reserve fund is $160,000 on June 30th, right?

Going into FY28, we should be putting $20,000 out of free cash to bring or whatever that number is, the 5%. What I'm saying is you can't do that in in town meeting 26 because that's before June the June the end of June but we're doing this May we're doing it for this year we we get the data from last year this year which is enough time to do it for next year. So you're skipping a year basically. Well what we have budget is 186. Yeah, right. We skip a year. We we do we do alternate years. That's that's the way you do it.

There's a lag. There is a lag. Yeah, it's 12 months of lag. You find out what what happens at the end of the year. You find out in September. Over the winter, you you strategize. You do the budget thing in the spring and you add what you need to add. You get it starting the next fiscal year. So, there's a 12-month delay on where that number should be. Yeah. Correct. Right. But that number if the budget moves 5% is going to go up 5%. Yeah. Right. Because that's a percentage of our budget, right? So 5% it's I mean that's fairly short money.

Yeah. It's not that. It's a question of how much is left over at the end of each year, right? Which you don't know until the end of in the till the end of the year because you may be doing reserve fund transfers. We should be able to project. We but by by definition you can't because they're for unexpected unanticipated costs. Yes, this is true. So the only other thing you can do is we can say that we will fund it at the fall town meeting. That gives us a chance to know what it is and then just that that would be our one finance thing at the fall town meeting. Tightens it up. Yeah. Yeah. And then it does tighten it up because then we would know exactly how much goes in and it's coming out of free cash. We just as a finance committee need to remember

and you need to make sure there's enough in there to cover you through those three three or four months, right? Which is probably early in the year you use less of reserve fund anyway. So probably probably okay, right? Something like that. I think that's you know so that's something to kind of put in paper and see how that works. So we got write that language quite carefully. Another thing is of course if there's no free cash we have to revert back to operating budget, right? Then we should never be in a position where we have no free cash because we're never going to get below a certain percentage anyway on our free cash. Well, yeah. If if there's no free cash above our above our limit. Yeah. And then so that just is a big hit to the budget that following year. Yeah.

So, right. So, that's the other thing is you all of a sudden if if our reserve funds 190,000 and we don't have enough free cash now, we have to put it back. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, again, something to think about as we're talking about all this. or we just leave it in the budget or we leave in the budget, right? Because we're we it's in the budget and we're within the levy enough that we're all comfortable with it. We leave it in and you know, maybe next and then next year, maybe next year we do it. We just have a conversation about it. I don't know. We keep talking about it. But right now, it's in there. So, we just need to think about that. And if we think we want a warrant, we need to tell Mike to hold a spot for us on that.

Yeah. So, that's a question mark. Yeah. I think. Okay. Um, right. Next topic. Special town meeting. Oh, special town meeting. That's me. Yeah. So, we all got a warrant, right? Yes. Um, actually, um, hey, Rean. Yeah. Um, so I took a quick look at this warrant.

Yeah. And this is not I don't see this. Um All right, let me let me I'm sorry I'm stuttering and I don't mean to. Um yeah, I'm about to pull it up here just to say again. So I'm pulling the warrant up on my end here.

Okay, so in the warrant I'm just Please make note of this and I will make sure I reach out to Mike tomorrow. There needs to be an article for the vote at the ballot for the override for the property and for the design money. There's two questions that are going to be ballot questions that needs to be part of the warrant and article one needs to be that. And I've sent I sent that an example of that to Tony and Mike once. I'll send it to Mike again. I just don't want this to get forgotten otherwise we're not going to be able to bring this to the ballot. All right. That's not a FinCom thing. That's a I have too much stuff in my head thing. Okay.

Yeah, I'll talk I'll talk to Mike and Kelly about it tomorrow. Okay. Thanks. Um All right. So, the first article So, let me tell you what we did last night at our meeting and then that will eliminate a couple of these articles. Last night we talked about the three sites that we had remaining. We've gotten all the um all the environmental reports back, all the geological reports, everything that we needed to start making some decisions. And um we decided to take 1,300 NASA off the table because the purchase price of that property was at least 5 $4.5 million plus it was $700,000 to take that building down. And that didn't include us having 1300

1300

I'm sorry 1300 massf um the 750 to take the building down did not include if there needed to be any kind of mitigation for asbestous or any of that and this is like a pretty old building. So looking at that um we took that off which leaves us with 72 Stow Road and um 984 Massav. Um both properties we did extensive testing. We've done testing in the past at 72. We did extensive testing recently at 984. Both properties are clean. There's no concerns with them. both have um there's nothing to indicate that we would need any kind of elaborate foundation or anything like that. Both properties can hold the building. Both and we did a matrix and we went through the matrix. Um uh both have a butters clearly. 72 has far more abuts. Um 72 is the purchase price on that for the for us for the town would be $1.2 million. the purchase price at 9.84 would be we've got it at $2.4 million right now. Um we're in the process of trying to finalize that number, but that would be the high side of that number. Um the design money is just about equal, $2.7 million and change for each property. Um we did get numbers on the completed project, very high level numbers. So with the increased purchase price and some of the design money and like the actual design itself and site work, mostly site work, 984 would cost approximately 2 million $2.8 million more to build on than 72 Stow Road on paper from purchase to design to construction. Um,

oh, so that's overall. Overall, okay, that's everything. Thank you. Right. From beginning to end, it's about two 2.4 2.8 2.8. Did I say 2.4? I'm sorry. 2.8 2.4 the purchase price property. 2.8 more total to build. Yep. So, it's 1.2 million more than Stow Road to purchase, but then there's other, you know, there's site work and that. And this is preliminary. This is site work based on these guys walking the property and doing some borings, right? So yeah,

the goal is um the goal is to we're going to go with this very high level estimate of 31 to $32 million to [clears throat] build on these sites. Our goal is to bring that number down through value engineering. These are really high-end numbers and we just don't know what they're going to where they're going to land. They're not going to land at $20 million. So that should not be a thought, right? They're going to land it somewhere. If we can get it down below 30 million, that's great. But we don't know that yet. In any event, we need to make a decision and we have another meeting on Thursday night between 72 Stow Road and 984. And what I'm going to ask you guys to do is hear all of this and then talk about how I mean I'm representing the finance committee on this board and I want to make sure that our vote or at least even if we don't all agree, I can go in and say the finance committee isn't in agreement, but this is um so we know that 984 is has got a 2.8 8 million difference higher, but that's just for design. On October 16th, we had an ab butter come to our fire station building committee meeting. Um this was after special town meeting and we got the the zoning regulations in and it was in a butter to 72 Stow road and that a butter stood at that microphone and told us that if we go forward with purchasing 72 Stow road and um try to build on it they will sue the town immediately um in state court and if that doesn't work then they will take us they so I don't know who she spoke for spoke for herself at that public meeting they will take us to court to meet to federal court and tie us up for as long as they can. So tying us up for, you know, every day we get tied up in legal action on 72 road is $4,000 a day in escalation costs plus legal fees. So

go ahead. No, I don't want to interrupt you yet. No, no, no. I just

I mean, so I mean, does your legal counsel say they have any grounds to do this? So the problem with whether or not they have standing is there will be a delay because anybody can sue anybody. So you so what so the example I can tell you is the same of not this woman who spoke I don't I don't know if she's new to the program the same group of abutters from that neighborhood the day after enclave was approved by the planning board immediately followed suit with their own attorney and it went to court and it took six months and they were told you have no the judge said to them threw it out but there was still a three to six month delay and caused the whole project to go into settlement and everything else. So 6 months at $4,000 a day ultimately and legal fees. Um the concern I think at least that I'm going to convey to you guys is I know that ultimately $2.8 million is significant difference in the p overall price. But I really do think that every step of the way at 72 Stow Road is going to be a butters at planning board meetings trying to delay the project in court trying to delay the project. Um they don't want it there.

Well, 6 months is only 3/4 million. That's a lot less than 2.8. [laughter] I'm going to tell you killing me, dude. Well played. You're killing me. Well played. I was not expecting that one. I was not. Good job. Um, I just I I just, you know, how much of delay it would be? I don't know. And and it's and it's a guessing game. I mean, was this woman talking for everybody? Maybe. Yeah. This is just bluffing. Maria was just bluffing. Cover one thing as well again though in terms of cost that I think you brought up before. Yeah. The 1.2 million that purchase price, doesn't that refund the what was it? The housing housing.

So, it essentially comes back to us. it does come back to the town and then the housing board will then turn around and use it to fund their programs. They are selling that property. Whether it's to the town or to somebody else. Okay. Perhaps they sell it for more than 1.2 outside of the town. I think, you know, I don't know if that's a family rate or not, I can't say. But they are selling that property. There's they're not keeping it because they need the money to fund their programs. And they have said that in town meetings and over and over again. So if we get that 1.2 2 million y or like we buy that back like yeah [snorts] it doesn't go into the general fund so we can't use it for anything. Okay. And we can't use it towards building it. It literally goes into the housing board. Okay.

And the housing board only has so much money. We don't fund the housing board. They have a housing um the housing. Yeah. The affordable housing trust and it's separate and that's money. So they got about $200,000 in that fund. Okay. It's something like that. So they would like to add this back into it. Okay. Yeah, because what I was going to ask is because does that make 984 $4 million? No, it does not. It doesn't because I could see people jumping there. Yeah. No, it does not. Okay. So, so that's the problem we have is So, what's the idea here then? Both things both of these problems are under warrant, right? Both.

Yes. Well, we're going to decide on we're going to make a decision on Mon on Thursday night. We're either bringing both to town or we're going to pick one. I think the committee feels like we want to go forward with one property. Okay. because [clears throat] you know you're going to get people who might vote for 72 road because it's the least expensive but it we need a twothirds vote and we need to get this done and we cannot go back in another. Ideally, you'd like them both be voted for and then you then you choose which one's best. I think we'd like to ideally go in with one piece of property. You want to go you want to pre- choose and say this is on but if we be able to vote for both say again that the meaning you could vote for I could get up and be like go for both. Is that what you're

you Well, the way we would do it is we would put it on this when we talked about this last night. We put the two different properties on. The order of the properties is something we would put forward. You know, we could put 72 still road first. If for the sake of argument, so not to stress out, but if we put 984 as the first article and that gets voted and approved by twothirds, we would skip over the second piece of property because they're both there and then we go on to design money. Okay? We do not [clears throat] want two votes. The problem we have is at the October town meeting, we had a sense of the meeting.

Is it worth the money not to be in basically in a residential neighborhood and to be on Massav? And it was a 50-50 vote. I mean, I literally think there was 10 votes that did divide. So, we got to throw that out, right?

It didn't help. It basically doesn't help. So, aside from the finances, which I've laid out for you guys, I think the only other thing there's other considerations that that we're that we've talked about. One of them is having a massive location. It is slightly faster on response time. And by slightly, I mean ever so slightly. But it is also a presence on Massav. You get off the highway, you need a fire station, it's right there. If it's on Stow Road, we need a sign at the corner. It It's not quite so front and center. I think that's a a big issue um for the fire chief. I mean, that is definitely an issue for him. Um for me, the issue is we've got to get this fire station built and we cannot afford any more delays financially.

Yeah. I mean, the issue with 72 is is there's risk with it, right? Yeah. There's still a grounds of opinion that people who don't want it. You still could have one motivated uh a butter on the other 984 as well. So, I will tell you 984 has got three of Butters. Um, well, they've got the lawn barbers, which is now Montgo landscaping on one side. They have three of Butters that are basically on a hill above. Um, they are all very excited about having the fire station there. Not one of them is going to put up a fight. They're all they've all the the town has been out there and they've come out and spoken to town officials. So, the butters there are not an issue. So

what about the what about the flexibility of the lot for design?

So we have taken um they've taken the engineers have taken the building that we've done basically the most efficient building that we wanted at 72 Stow Road and are able to easily put it on the 984. Plus it is it's 4 and a half acres. It's flat. We can pretty much we know that we can put a septic in a certain area. We know that you know we can put a well there. Um, while there is no well there currently, they're they're not concerned about that. There is flexibility on the site. I won't lie, the best, least expensive, most flexible site is 72 Road. But that said, the butters have been extremely difficult.

Okay. So, aside from the butters though, how about how would you compare the properties? Um, I think with I I mean I think they're Oh, like all things being equal. Yeah. All things being equal. Yeah. Putting the butters aside. Um

I think for a fire station they're both pretty equal. I will say that there's 13 acres. You can help me Gary because you were on this committee and this is all part of like you were part of this too. Um you know is it slightly easier on 72 road? Perhaps. But we, you know, with the site work, there is still that there is the property comes in and then goes up on a ledge. So there's going to have to be some earth moved and all that kind of stuff. 72. At 72. So if you were to walk 72. Yeah. If you were to walk, if you look at the back side. Oh, like the very back of it.

Yeah. On the very back part of the property, it kind of goes up. But so there would be some land that would need to be cleaned out and you know that kind of thing. Right. Gary's nodding his head. Yes. the elevation is so it is not perfect but you could we were talking about building in the front um when we looked at the land originally 13 acres it goes back and then it goes up to the up to the right the thinking was put the wells up on the upper right area with a softball field also and then because that site was big enough for both a uh sorry [laughter] let's not complicate this I'm glad we're I'm still hoping by the way factors come to our but we were talking public safety and council on aging facility on the same site. It was big enough for all that. Oh,

but then but then the town then we then we took away the council on aging building the senior center I mean and then we you know shortened it down to just a fire station. Uh but that site was big enough for multiple Well that's what I'm trying to get at is either lot have potential for other buildings.

Um I think that oh definitely 984 is definitely just the fire station. I I don't think you could do another building there. I'm pretty confident you cannot. There's certainly 13 acres at Stow Road. I don't know. I can't I'm not an engineer. I think you could probably put a building, but you'd have to design this building because the the biggest thing with the building is trying to design it so that the apparatus is going in one driveway and cars are in another. And one of the concerns was having to secure the police when the police were there. Police aren't going to be there anymore. So, you know, you could maybe do something in and around back. It depends on where the septic goes. It depends on you can't build where the wells are, right? There's wellhead protections. So, it really you would have to kind of put that into the design. We did not design for more buildings on that property. The current design that we have, very high level design, is just for the fire station. Um, so all things being equal, I think they're they're I think they're equal properties. I do think the Massav presence makes 984 a little more attractive. Um, and the chief will tell you that even though um because people are like, "Well, you're not in the center of town." Basically, Stow Road is the center of town is what I've been told. But he, as he says, you're closer to the highways, which is a lot of their calls, and we're closer to the biggest population center that we have, which is all the condos on that side of town.

Um, so there is that. So there's a lot I do have a comment and a question. Yeah. The comment is when you drive by 984, it's a huge embankment essentially. Yeah. Is are we going to have to take the land down or are we going to work around the side of it off Sarah? The thought is you'd come out onto Sarah's lane, Sarah's way. The driveway would come out on Sarah's way and then just turn out. Okay. That would be the driveway. It would be a shared driveway. Yeah. And then the comment was back on uh 72 Stole Road, we did have a lot of discussions on the previous building committee about moving land right in the front well the middle area where the building would go. There was a lot of question about raising lowering

and how much you could move and go down by because there is there is that you can't just go in and move a mountain and just leave it. Right. Right. You so so there is a little bit of concern around that site work but I mean I think that's all doable. The engineers have said that's all doable. But I will comment the previous fire chief was always preferred being on Massav. That was always a preference from the previous fire chief, right? And the idea was when you're driving down 111 visibility. It seems a more logical place for actually Massav. Massav. So I'm going to make a motion that as a Fincom, we support the purchase of 984 Mass Avenue. [clears throat]

I'll second it if I can, but I don't want to. I want to be careful because I don't want to like Okay. Well, I'm making a motion because does someone want to second that motion that 984 is the logical choice? I mean, I'm on affordable housing trust, too. So, it's kind of Well, you're selling you're getting the money anyway. Do we have to do more money? That's true. That's true. So, only in that I need some I need guidance because I know how I'm going to vote and I'm not going to tell you guys how I would vote if I were not representing Vincome because

I really want to make sure you guys talk it through and think about it, right? I know how I think it's income. I I see a lot of risk in in in Stonewall Road. I I see more cost and more risk which means more cost. So I think although it seems more expensive the 2.1 of a million for the land purchase different differential I think it's much more straightforward and it's even more desirable site and I think in in the scope of the whole project that's not so material consider considering what we could how much still fapping about in a year's time trying to get it working. How much more is what did you say 2.8 total 2.8 total. That's really back of the napkin rough. Okay.

How much more is that for taxpayers? So, I will I can tell you that. So, hold on a second. Call it $3 million on top of the $30 million project. Michelle had her hand raised. We do not have a second yet. Unless Michelle Oh, Michelle. Yeah. Yeah. It was just it was just the same question. I was wondering if we could break it down by like taxpayer difference so it's a little bit more digestible for everyone in town who's not in [snorts] a butter.

Okay. So, hold on a second. So half a million million and a half. So 91 18 27 37. Okay. At 2 and a half million dollars, right? So it's one Hold on a second. We have a chart, but I've got to kind of do some calculations. Half one million and a half two million. So, it is about an additional $50 a household per [snorts] year. Per year. For how long? 30 years. 30 years. 30 years. Okay.

About that's like really really rough at $600,000 evaluation. Um, and more at a it's going to be more at a million dollar evaluation. So, let's call it $50. And that's kind of average for the middle that it would cost per household, right? to do to if we obviously pending house valuation rate obviously but yeah yeah I gota y so um the I guess the other question I would have the property itself 984 how does it and I don't want to get too in the weeds or off track but 502 right it had all the wetlands it really just wasn't a great option all that kind of stuff

we have some abutters on 984 it's smaller property if I understand you said it's about 984 is about It's about 4.2 acres or something. Any concerns that I don't want to say the property is too small, but like you know the like that was one of the big concerns about 502. We just it's not going to fit. Like is it big enough that I know it's 30 years from now. We need a new fire station. Can we still reuse that? Are we going to have to buy another piece of property? I would like to just forward think like if we're going to spend an extra three million now, are we buying the right piece of property for the town? Something period.

So this building as presented right now, the programming we have has an extra bay in it, not a full bay. Um and is a building that we anticipate to be, we keep saying a 50-year building, a 30 to 50 year building. Okay. So, um, it there's there's an extra space in the bay, maybe two. Um, but there's a lot of space in the bays in between apparatus and that that type of stuff. Everything's built to this standard and we anticipate that that we're not going to need to add to it. Okay. Right. So, we're not going to get five new fire trucks in the next 20 years because additional five additional fire trucks,

right? We would need like harbor. So, you know what I mean? Um, and that property is big enough to support the program as we have it. Exactly. We took the entire project from 72 and we plopped it onto 984 and we brought it forward a little bit and we moved it a little bit and there's still flexibility. And we could do a one floor. Could we do a two? You know, one floor has its advantages. There's no elevator. It's a little cheaper to build, but you have a little more foundation. Um, and you have room for that with We would have room at both locations for that. Yep. Yep. We did not have room at um you know at 502. So we do have room there. Um

if they need a light on Massav, is that a state thing or do we share the cost? We've already had um it would be our cost but we've already had that checked by the state. Um not by the state, I'm sorry, by the engineers and the traffic engineers and they are not requiring us to have a light even as a because the sight lines particularly at night light. Nope. The chief actually the the problem with the lights, which is interesting, is you put the lights in and it's a blinking light and then turns to a red. The chief says sometimes those are worse because people stop noticing them. So it's like he's like people just blow through them because basically they get a call, they hit the button. Oh, once it's finally red, they just

and they just it's there and it just becomes part of the scenery. So, but we don't need it there. We did need it if we were going to do the Lions property. We do not need it in any of the other the sight lines are fine at 98. Yeah, the sight lines, the engineers, the traffic engineers um have said that. Okay. So, I made a motion. Anyone want to second it? If no one else can second it, I'm going to second it and we can have further discussion and we can vote on it however we want. But so to to your [snorts] vote, your motion is to support the purchase of 984. Yeah. Okay. So, are there more questions? I'm happy to answer whatever questions you

I'm just really torn because it's the whole like fincom versus, you know, citizen for in me. Like if I was looking at these two properties for the first time on a map, I would pick 984 in a heartbeat. It's on Massav. It's in the center of town. I also believe in, you know, Alex's vision of the gateway into the town. And I think putting a uh, you know, all your municipal stuff right in that thoroughare through the town is a great way to do that. Um, but [snorts] financially, we're on the fin. It's a lot more expensive. There's the other implications for the affordable housing trust. I know they get the money anyway. Um, so really, you probably get more money. Yeah. Yeah. It's true.

Um, but it is a it's a big extra cost. So, as a fincom primarily in this seat, um, it's just it's hard to to leave there just because of citizens concerns, which has nothing to do with finances except the implications of potentially going to litigation or holding us up costing us more money, but it, you know, people being mad at us doesn't cost us money. So, it's it's just tough. Um, people being mad at us. I mean, just their their feelings don't affect our budget. You know what I mean? I understand. their feelings will could turn into legal action then it does affect so I'm sorry if you I'm sorry go ahead no I'm done um so uh half of this 28 oh let's call it 3 million so half of that is land acquisition y changed yeah what's the other half where's that

um site work some of the different site work in the different location between the two locations and again this is very preliminary it's a very preliminary budget okay so when they look at it they say um you know I need to we need to do this here but not Okay. So, this requires more sight work and prep. Different sight work for both for both of them maybe. Right. Yeah. And I mean I mean Yeah. You hit a ledge or something. You don't know, right?

Um and now so they've done the borings. We do know there's a little ledge at the front of 984, but we're not we can build on, you know what I mean? You can build around that ledge. It's not and the borings that they did in the back portion, but again, you put a boring in here, that doesn't mean there's not ledge right next to it. We ran into that problem. And that's the same thing for um 72. We ran into that problem at the boardwalk campus where we did all these borings and then all of a sudden they hit ledge, right, Gary? And then we had to do blasting. A lot of blasting. A lot of blasting. It's like digging in your backyard. But we did it we did it within budget because then we value engineered the budget. So, but it's like digging in your backyard. It's perfect till you hit a giant rock.

Yeah. Exactly. I mean Yeah. So, um I think Michelle has her hand up. Oh, Michelle. Yeah. Maria, when do we get higher fidelity on on geo studies? Do we have to progress to the next step to get more information? You keep saying this is like back of that back of the napkin. Michelle, can you repeat that, please? Yeah, you Hold on. Let me see if I can It's not you. It's It's the sound of the room. Yeah, it's the sound. Sorry. Um, when are we getting higher fidelity on these numbers? Not back of the Not back of the napkin numbers. We are we need to go into design. So the back of the napkin is we cannot until we get a design on the property.

We pick a property and then we get design. We will not know what the actual budget is for construction. We will the design money is design and bid money. So we will have once we finish the design it will go out to bid. We will have exact numbers when we come back to the town. But we can't know that until we pick a property and we start designing it. Okay. So, we can't do any more geo on either site. They we've done extensive testing on both sides. There's no more testing on the sites that gets us more information. So, but your cost estimation level on both sides is of equivalent level of confidence. Correct. Yes.

Yes. And the design funds or the the value of the design is going to be similar because exactly it will be the same. It's the same request for funding no matter which for the design. It's not it's a one um I think 72 might have been a little higher design funding and I don't really but because it's part of it is bidding. I don't really understand the difference but it's it's like Yes. Okay. And that's part of it not calculated in the $50 per person, right? Because like maybe to the town we should let them know the design plus the building equals you know oh and that's going to be all presented by the finance uh by the fire station building committee to the public a fraction they will know that $5. Yeah. Yeah. They'll know exactly. So

the the 72 Stow road if we buy that property is that all 13 acres or whatever it is. Yeah. Okay. Would we ever be able to do anything else there? So again, it depends because you have to remember um well soft field aside from that. You can't we can't build where there's wells protection. Yep. Um you can't really do anything on top of septic. Okay. So you know you'd have to have and we would need a sistern you know because you understand we're building in the country. So we we need a sistern as well because you need fire protection.

Um so you really it depends on how we design it. We're not designing to be able to use a different part of that property. We're designing a fire station because the town said to us, "That's what you need to design." Okay. For the property. Thank you. So, even though it's a property that's three times the size, it doesn't really matter. It there's no master plan for it to right. Okay. You know, and it is a little tight there. I mean, there is there are there's a you know, a couple wells from um the apartment building that kind of that protection goes into the property. You do have houses on the, you know, going down Stow Road. I mean, I'm not, you know, so but

Yeah. Yeah. Of course. Yeah. Less of those concerns in 94. Okay. So, there's a motion on the table. So, John has another question. Yeah. Well, [laughter] I mean, but I mean, I'm kind of between a rock and a hard place here. Honestly, I and I feel your pain, Maria, but at the same time, we have to put our house, you know, the hat story. Um, so it's too I have my pain is just, you know, I'm conflicted as well. I just I think it is Go ahead. Are there people in town that would So, you have I think we have less finish line pain than you do.

I guess I would ask this. You said when they went in to do um Oh my god, why am I blanking on the name? Um, the Enclave Yeah. and they sued right away. Next day, two days later, and it got thrown out right away. It did not get thrown out or whatever it did, six months later, but basically six months later. Yeah. Um, is is this in that same ballpark? Like, do we know what the grounds were for throwing that out? Like, are we in that? [clears throat] They had no standing. Okay, that's kind of what I'm getting at here. Like, if we go with 72, I can't imagine residents stopping a fire station being built because they don't want to hear sirens. That said, that point exactly was made though, I believe.

Well, and that that's why I'm bringing it up like from a Fincom perspective, like Jo already did the math. Even if it's a year, right? That's a year delay. That's like a million and a half dollars, right? Fine, whatever. Um, that's a lot of money. Okay, and I get it. But from a perspective of like and I don't think we have this answer right now, but I would what I think is holding up my decision partly is like do we think there's going to be dragged on litigation for years or is this just going to be like all right this will be six months they'll go to court it just gets thrown out because they have no grounds and we just take the million dollar hit and I'm thinking more about what happens if it fails if it fails at special town meeting

right so what happens if that's what I'm thinking fails, then it's you add six months to it. Then you have six months, then then you have mitigation, then you got another six months. So, there's other costs, right? There's other costs. We are losing firefighters. We've lost firefighters because of the conditions that they're living in and they're working in. And a lot of them have been sticking around because we've been talking 13 years about building a fire station. Y

and you know there's a little bit of a light at the end of this tunnel but if the butters get together which I have no doubt that we need 2/3 on both these votes 2/3 to purchase and if the purchase fails we're going to pull the article we're not going for design money because you can't go for design money if we don't know what we're designing to right so we're pulling the article on that so um that is the concern that that we're you know there are other hidden costs to delaying the project and I honestly I'm telling telling you between the planning board and and the planning board and what the holdup it could do because at least one of those members is adamantly opposed to a fire station on 72 stove road that should not play into the planning board's decision.

Yeah, but and there's a strong constituency against 72 stove. Yeah, that was pretty. Let's face it. I mean, it's it's a very strong it's a vocal minority of the town. They just all go to town. It's a very vocal minority. They all get a town meeting. It may it still may pass, but it's going to be you'll be fighting all the way. Basically, that's the concern. So, I said I wouldn't tell you guys where I'm voting, but my concern is every single thing I am all about 72 Road. I think it makes sense financially.

I think it's a property we've been looking at for a lot of years. It makes sense. The town gets the money back. All of that. But, and I don't like to back down from a fight. So part of me was like having to wrap my head around maybe you need to give up the ghost on this because they're going to fight us all the way. It's going to be everything from the mitigation. You know, we're going to have to mitigate construction and all of that and that's going to be the that's going to be the cost that's going to overwhelm that $2 million over time. Yeah, that's just like what I'm trying to understand the steps of the money with all these people. So from a finance position, we also it's not just this budget. It is all the other costs that have been, you know, look, I mean, in May, if we were able to pass the if in May

when they all organized and showed up at town meeting and failed the zoning bylaw change, Yeah. that delayed us to March, so almost a year. Yeah. So, think about that $4,000 a day delay, right? If we had gotten that in May, we would have been back in March, we would be back with design fund request. Yep. That's That's so And you're looking at a continuation of that, right? Norm basically. That's how it feels. Yeah. Yeah. All right. So, I mean I mean I would We can change our minds later, right? [laughter] Well, I have to vote Thursday night. So, all right. So, Oh, so you Okay. I was the only one coming to vote. I'd be voting yes, but there's two you want to go.

I would like some direction. You do want guidance to fair, right? Because because like if if if it's a split decision, I want to say Thursday night, just so you know, I'm going to vote for this. Yeah. But it's a split decision on Finn Pom. Yeah. If it's a, you know, six to1 decision, I'm going to say I'm going to vote for this, but six people are voting against it. [laughter] Right. Right. just, you know, the other aside from the vocal people that are really upset about 72 still road, another thing I hear at this town is people not wanting taxes to go up and the other, you know, it's $50 a year, but I've seen people in this town, you know, stand up about a lot less. So,

are we sure that there's more people that are going to be more mad about 72 road than the 72 road is cheaper? Once you get into all the de potential delays and risks and issues, I just don't think it's cheap to be cheaper. And I'm going to say one thing, and this is going to this needs to be the changing conversation. People don't want their taxes go up. People in this town have been extremely lucky for years. The last major infrastructure construction we did was a library. Then we funded the school. All right. But that wasn't in our town. The select board that I was on managed to get a DPW building for $2 million

millions of dollars less than would have been. We needed to build a new DPW. We do [clears throat] not need a new police station. We need to expand it, fix it, renovate it at some point. So, the only major So, I'm I understand people don't want their taxes to go up, but it's not like we've been hitting them with $20 million projects every 5 years, which a lot of towns are. And I just think the people who don't live in 72 road area that are are not raising their voice about that. I think there's a lot of people in town are going to say, "Why are you going to spend $2.8 $8 million just so that the small group of people doesn't, you know, it's not just that though. It is the mass ad. There's a lot of other, you know, factors as well. But that is a big part of it. Not going to lie. All things being equal, that is a big part of it. Cheryl,

I have I have one question. I'm ready to vote. Um, Maria, what is the cost of delay? You mentioned it. $4,000 a day. How is that calculated? Was it $30 million? $,000 a day for litigation fees or $4,000 a day day overday where we don't have a fire station. That that one the latter. Got it. Yeah. Um that's calculated based on a five I think it's it's the escalation percentage which is somewhere around a 5% escalation in a year. And then you just basically take okay if it delays us a year you take it. This is going to be the delay. a $30 million project is now 30 million * 5% divide by 365.

So when we started this project, we were uh um Mary Brolan has the numbers. So I'm just going to say we were at somewhere less than $20 million and now it's a $30 million project. So you know, and so I think that $4,000 a day was calculated before the whole tariff thing came down. Well, the tariffs aren't even playing a part in this, right? because we can't bet on quite frankly someone who can't make his mind up on tariffs. I'm just saying you know those numbers are hit and then we pull them because you know we decide to invade a country. So we can't we can't base budgets on insanity. So terrorists are not part of this. So okay should we vote?

And the delay we had from what fall town meeting to now is already another what? Five months, six months. So that's Yep. already another Yep. The delay from last May $4,000 a day. Yeah. Yep. Yep. Okay, then we'll do a roll call vote. I guess we're partly remote. Yep. Um Michelle, the vote is an I vote will be to support the purchase of what is it 989 984 984 Mass Avenue. Before we start voting, sorry to interrupt. [laughter] Um are we going to vote on 72 Road right after this or is are we taking one vote?

We're taking one vote. But the motion is that preferred option is 984 Stow Mass Avenue. That is a that is that is the the fin believes that's the best option. We're voting for Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Should I start? You vote. Yeah. Ryan, no. Uh Grab and I Stalpin. No. Neil and I. I. Connor. No. Holy [laughter] You guys are killing me. No. No. I'm sorry. No. No.

Okay. Finoms 33. One of you needs to write a If that truly is going to be a recommendation next week if we decide on 984. Somebody and I will let you know. I will send you an email and you're going to vote that way. Somebody needs to vote a descending opinion um for the warrant. I can start it. Wow. I did not expect that. I'm going to be honest. But that's fine. You trained us well. I apparently [laughter] that's what we're here for to not just blanket agree.

Yeah, that's fine. That works. So, all right. So, that's on the property. Um, are we going to split the vote on design funds or is it just the property once the propertyy's voted? We're all in favor of design funds. Whatever we're designing, I'm in, you know, but So, should we do a formal vote on on design funds? I I just drop pole is fine. I just So whatever the design funds are, they are. So that's okay. We got to design a fire station no matter where it is. Okay. Vine is great. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Do you have what you need for this? Do we have what we need? [laughter] I guess so. So I guess the question would be would the vote be the same if it was 72 Stow Road? That would be a question I would ask. Question.

Because we have a no no. Would that conceivably mean you'd be Yes. Yes. Yes. I would be a no at Stow Road. I'd be a no. And so that's I'd be a yes today based on Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And so Kevin, it's up to you. [laughter] No, it's not. It's just I'd like to understand. Yeah. Um [sighs] Yeah. I mean, I guess I would say no on that money. [laughter] You would say no. So it would be the same vote. Yeah. Okay. So we're split on the properties. Yeah. Well, that'll be an interesting conversation. Okay. Wait, wait, wait. Yeah. I mean, okay. That's okay. No, this is good. This is a good thing. I mean, I mean, besides making your life much more difficult.

You're taking this vote because you need to take it back. Yeah. For this week, I don't think that's fair. No offense. That's a strong statement. I would like to see the present ta the You've got it down to two and now you're asking us to choose, right? Okay. So, tell me what you want to see. I want to see the dimensions that we've been trying to get from you all laid out next to each other. The rubric that you guys are going through to establish this process that I think is a is it not a fair request? I don't want to make work for people. Well, it has this has to go in, right? This warrant has to go in. Yeah, we're we're voting it on Thursday night and then this committee is going to revote the final vote and then it's due the next day to town.

Right. So, we haven't got you can't be vote. We can't. Well, we're not a recommendation can change at town meeting, I suppose, can't it? We're not. Our recommendation. Yes. I I think the preference would be to try to get it in there the way we want it to be in there. Um yeah, this is primarily my recommendation to you to bring back the fire st fire station building committee. Once that comes down, if they change it, I might, you know, maybe I would support 984 if that's what you all decided and change my vote on the floor as a FINCOM member to recommend to you to bring back the fire station building committee. I think it's that's where I'm Thursday night. The fire station building committee recommends that we go with 984 next Tuesday. You think you'll be still no?

I I Yeah, I'd like to hear their I'd like to hear the entire fire committee. That would be an open book again at that point based on So, can I ask you guys to like watch the meeting on Thursday? It is really hard. We have hundreds of thousands of pages of documents that we've been looking at that are all on the website. I mean, I'm happy to send you the matrix we did, but that's But did you do them did you do it for these two exclusively or

We did the matrix matrix for the we have one that has 50272, the Lion's property 984 and 1300 that shows all the properties. We can show you that which um weighs it out. Um, and I again I will tell you the truth, the matrix has 72 and 984 within a few points of each other, but it's not just all of the basic zoning butters that kind there's all these other things that go into it and mostly does the matrix have complaints from neighbors, you know. Yeah, that's on there. Yeah. So, so even with that, the fire station building committee still puts them right up against each other. Yeah. Yeah. I mean,

it is. And I think, you know, if you guys I would tell you to watch the October 16th meeting where the woman stands up at that microphone and like threatens to sue us. And you know, you've got to understand a lot of us have been doing this for we've been doing this for a year and we have been literally being bullied by a butters and I understand they don't want a fire station. So I'm not trying to be unsympathetic to their concerns about their neighborhood, but it is just constant. So when you take that on top of everything else and all the hidden costs that that that are there that we've we're hearing about, that's where that's how I got to Stow Road's not worth the effort. It's not worth the money to save. Um because it won't save us money. I think it'll be just as expensive.

Well, that's a different statement, though. I mean, that's that makes, you know, but we don't have any proof of that. That's the problem. Yeah. I mean, on paper, we're getting $2.8 $8 million more, but then we think it won't cost anymore because of the litig or whatever else. So like based on this number on paper, I'm 100% Well, it's too it's a two million more. It sounds like a more certain number than Stow Road 2. But I asked Maria that exact question. Are her estimates on these confident? And she said yes.

Well, it's all it's you can't it's all the unknowns. So my numbers are I'm confident in the numbers that are on paper, it's all of the other stuff. And I think when you look at the risk assessment for me, that's I hear you. So I I think to Joe's point, I mean, I think one more week of us, you guys seeing us seeing you discuss this at the committee, then having us vote next week would be a fair ask. If you guys can get on this, when's the when's the warrant go in for printing? Uh, it goes in Hold on. I have it. So, we meet um the final FINCOM vote.

Oh, well, so we're meeting on the 26th. Uh FINCOM our final vote. It says we don't need to have it until the 20th. Okay. But we're we're hopefully So, tonight you wanted something to take back to the fire station. I need something to say to the fire station. I want them the sense of the fin meeting. So, yeah. So, the sense of the meeting is we're a little bit split right now. We're a little overcle. What I would ask more feedback on the legal aspect of it. What I would ask is that you guys watch our meeting on Thursday night and we could post a quorum for that. Just you can even ask questions if you want but to watch our meeting on Thursday night because we will have the discussions. Post a quorum now. I think

no you can. I still it's just a quorum. Um I think you can post a post a quorum now can't you Susan? Do you think I'm sorry for Thursday night? A quorum for Thursday night. It's not a meeting. I just would say you're not gonna call us to order. I think so. It's a quorum notice. I think you um and it's possible. We just we can just listen in. I mean, you're just listening. And it's possible. People don't say anything. It's on BHBTV, right? So, I don't have to zoom in. What time are you listening? Uh 7 o'clock. 7 o'clock. We have an executive session at 7 o'clock. So, it will be after the executive session. Did you say recorded? Uh it is recorded. So, last night's meeting was recorded. Um, it is on TV. Okay. Yeah.

High sustainability. So, it's not this. It's not It is hybrid, but is also on demand and it is um it's recorded and it's probably on TV. So, so it says actually here it says warrant a printer is on February 6th. Okay. Um, so we got time. If we if we do want to change a vote, we can change a vote. Yeah. So, if you can listen and if you feel that you want Mary to come, I could see if Mary can come next Tuesday night. Um, I will go in tomorrow night with or Thursday night with we are divided. Um, but you know, and then like I said, I'd love to be able to I'm going to do my recommendation. We're not diametrically opposed. were kind of all just

the problem is like right there in the middle just it's difficult because um from a FinCom perspective I don't disagree with you guys it should be a bottom line numbers but I do believe my experience is telling me there's it's just not going to go away y and so there's all these other hidden costs so okay great okay um that was fire station what's next [laughter] going home and having a drink is that next school committee Um, so John, you have anything from school committee? If you any updates for us from school committee?

Um, well, so they've decided to eliminate all but two of our original nine options, 13 options. And the two options that remain are the same projected cost savings of roughly 1.9 roughly call it 1.9 million for both. Even though I don't really understand how that is. Which option numbers are there?

Uh let me have that. So the last phase was uh there was four options total was 3 v2 and option I'm going to call it four. Those were kind of the old school versions and then the the new uh kind of the the reorg versions were the option six and option 5v2. So the last meeting 3v2 and I have the details on what those exactly are and option six were eliminated leaving us option four which is I'm not going to say status quo but it's kind of the more the original methodology that we have for schools and 5e2 which would be kind of a restating of the school district if you will approach. Um so both of those options are roughly 1.8 to 1.9 million in annual savings. They're meeting this week. Today's the 6th, right? Yes. So on the 8th and the probably the 20th uh 22nd to vote and final. I think this meeting will be a further discussion. A lot of public comment. Uh there was a lot of public comment the last meeting. Um what else? I I mean I just have a few questions on just for Blanchard in terms of if and and from a management perspective, from the team perspective, from the senior leadership team, option 52 seems to be solidly their first choice. Quite frankly, they seem to [laughter]

you can you it let me u I'm going have to go to my notes, but I I will. Um so option six if you remember was the three eliminating all not eliminating but combining going from five six schools down to three buildings and three schools. So basically completely restructuring the whole program. The problem with that is it left Blanchard with a excuse me left the two Actton schools with very large um schools that populations basically a thousand in each of the Actton schools. So the the twist of that or the 5v2 version of that basically changed that to

um banding in the two actton schools. So there will be four three buildings one two three five schools. So one building one school being box Blanchard um and the two other buildings the new buildings and then the two hybrids within each of those act buildings. So the hybrids being one through three and four, five and six. Yeah. Right. So that's the five V2. Yeah. Um and that's one that you think is favored by that is most definitely not. I think it is. Yeah. Yeah. Overwhelmingly so. Yeah.

I know the least about about the school stuff having the I think Michelle and I I guess now I have a cohort of not having kids in the school. Um choices out. Um, so I think that's kind of, you know, that's gonna depend on how they implement it. I think that's still going. I mean, I that's the biggest sticking point right now. I do think right now that might be the biggest about because they're going to close [clears throat] Con and it's how do they redistribute to kids as someone who is very uninvolved in the schools. That's the one thing I've heard the most that is sticking point. I mean geography just stick them all in one school. How do they redistribute all those kids? I don't see how it's not geography if you're trying to say that we're going to,

you know, this is a new school, you know, we're we're we're level setting or we're going to So, yeah, the culture's gone, right? There's no Yeah, that's a harsh way of putting it, but it's like if this is an opportunity for, you know, the culture. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. You know, kind of let's let's try something new across the board. There might be those who prefer to be in a smaller school like Blanchard. And all those acting kids that are already at Blanchard. Yeah. out or do you just redistribute only acting kids? It's Yeah, I just think if you're not doing it geograph from a geographic perspective and you're trying to set up, you know, well, this school is going to be like this and this school's going to be like this, we're kind of going back to where we where we came from, right?

So, I I that's going to be a big decision and they haven't I don't think they've got their I don't think they're anywhere near that yet. So, anybody else? I'm sure you're I think that's a bigger sticking point than which option they're trying to still, you know, I think the 5v2 is just that's they're going there. Yeah. How do how do they execute it? So, when do they vote on this finally? I believe it's going to be the 22nd. Yes. Of this month. That that dates, right? Um I I do think the for years there's been this question of do we get rid of choice? But there's it's going to be difficult because the people who go to Mariam and McCarthy town

have a definite view of how they want their education which is different their structure is different than a Blanchard. Mhm. So before the question of choice, it's going to be how are you going to distribute the educational philosophy across the three schools because if you have the same philosophy, choice is irrelevant, right? And but that's the question and that's where they're going to get a lot of push back from the Miam and McCarthy. I picked that school for this reason. I just think the way you phrase choicing is is is a little bit strange. It's almost like it I just want to go to the closer school. It's I want to choose a school because it's

that's what the their school that's what the school choice is, it want to go because I want that phil philosophy and it's different and every school is different, you know. Um, so I think but there's not enough Mariam McKe McI kids or people who want that kind of teaching to fill a building of 900 kids. That that I don't know. Is that is that Yeah, Miriam, they have the lowest enrollment. Miam has the lowest enrollment. MCT is the second lowest. So I mean if you think about those kids in those schools, what there's like 3 400 kids, 300 kids in each school. That's not enough to make an entire to make the Parker Damian that

you know teaching model. So I think that's where so there's that's where I think some of it is and the rest of and I do think that so they're trying to decide does choice make sense and and that's conversation that Boxware is not used to. No. Right. because we didn't have choice up until we reg. And the other thing they've said too is the junior high teachers have said since we regionalized and all the kids are going everywhere and the whole school choice, it is much less distinct to them which kids went where. Whereas before Yeah, I there's I know which is what makes it even more confusing. But I heard before they could always tell and now they can't tell as much.

I could always tell with my kids when they went to the junior high and they made acting friends. I always knew who went to marry him because they would say hey Maria and they were in seventh grade. Hey Maria, could I have a [laughter] lemonade? And then all the kids that went to the traditional schools were like this is kn. [laughter] And so I would like and I love these girls. They're still my daughter's best friends. They were in her wedding. And I literally looked at one of them and I'm like so you go to Mariam and she goes [laughter] yes I loved Mary yada yada yada yada. Right. Because so it's it's one of those things. It's different. So what is your opinion on school choice for [laughter]

you know I actually it's hard for me because we didn't we regionalized my kids were in an elementary school. I love Blanchard. I love the traditional. So even if I lived in Actton at the time I would be in a more traditional setting. I my children still refer to my very close friends as misses. They don't call them by their first names because I say to them you're not they're my friends not yours. Exactly. And they say I'm 30. I don't care. They're my friends, not yours. So, they still use Mr. and Mrs. to everybody.

So, actually, what was going to So, here's a question, though. So, is let's say they come up with they're going to hopefully I think they should start from scratch. I'm just like, look, you've got three different models. And also, I would think that'd be again the financial person speaking here. to have three different styles, you have to have three different programs. And you have to have three different um when you get the math lesson, you're only buying you're buying a different math lesson three times over. They say they don't, but I think they have to. I mean, it's different. That's not as cheap as buying the same math lesson and the same writing lesson in the same foreign language lesson. Right. Right.

And there's no ways it's going to be as efficient if you again have three different teaching styles going on through three schools. Right. Three buildings. That's a question to ask, I think, isn't it? I'm not sure. I'm not sure whether it's true or not really. I think it's true now. I I because I know they have they had different math programs because like I know Jack or Grace was on a I think an experimental one in Blanchard for a while and so I know they have different math program. Math has been experimental since my kids. Exactly. My kids are there for what? Six years. three different math courses within the six years we're getting is two different things because they're always trying a new curriculum.

So my question is if they let's just say the actton side says uh we're going to start from scratch is back is Boxboro included in that equation I hope it is. Yeah. Yeah. Cooper. Yeah. But isn't there some type of meaning agreement? So if it's g if it's geographic if it's geographic then um it will be all the Blanchard kids come back to Blanchard all the Boxboro kids come back to Blanchard. There was something in the regional agreement when we first started for the first five years of the hometown right

the hometown guarantee but we put when we wrote that we said for five years there's no flexibility at the end of five years we would allow the school committee some flexibility but the the spirit of it is that there would be a hometown guarantee. Okay. I hope it goes geographic. That just seems to be the most logical way of doing it. But my my question is, is there anything in the agreement that would say that ACT that Boxboro gets to maintain its own teaching philosophy independent of what act?

No, there's nothing about curriculum in the agreement. It is strictly we would have a school and we made the mistake of not saying elementary school. So if we ever reopen the agreement that will be clarified but a school in Boxboro and for the first five years it was a guar guarantee ironclad guarantee of a hometown guarantee and then after that it was a the box kids would get preference to Blanchard. Okay. So so if they did geographic they would need to pull all the box kids and then this doesn't include anyone um that has any special needs. Those kids go where the programs are right so that that is kind of outside of this. They would pull all the Boxboro kids back. That's how I understood it at when I watched the meeting and all the acting kids would go. Would geographic mean distance or town by town? Because No.

Aren't there like some people in Boxboro that might live closer to an act? It would have to be. I don't know how they would do it. So, definitely some sort of zone, right? Because both the schools in Actton are extremes of Actton, right? Because like if you go to North Actton, there's not a school. So, I don't know where those draw somewhere. You could be 10 feet from this school, but the rest of town is like 100 feet from. So they got they all got to go there. I I hope that's done. Yeah, I saw that growing up too by physical distance to my parents house because having three different schools the rest of the town had to go. Okay, that's that. That's where we are.

And then the budget update. So there's a budget meet the budget meeting for the school is going to be the Monday after budget Saturday. Capital Saturday. Capital Saturday. Yeah. So, we are all invited to that. We are all invited to that. Um, and I think that at least a few of us need to go because they changed the date. So, um, because what? They changed the date for us because it was going to be Saturday and they changed it to be Monday. So, so it'll be February the 9th. So, but I'll go differently. And I'm sorry, what is that? The That's their budget workshop. Be shorter than normally. You It's usually a whole day on a Saturday, right?

Oh, God. It's a whole day on a Saturday and it makes our budget it actually is hours longer than our budget Saturday. Cannot tell you it must be now one evening so it's got to be it's got to be compressed, right? Yeah. I would think it's going to be like two to three hours tops. It is Monday evening like Monday night. Yeah. Yeah. Like 7 o'clock or something. Yep. Uh yeah. I don't know exactly but we'll get the agenda. Yeah. But we should all put you put in our canvas so we know and you should um Yeah. post a quorum notes for that too. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Um Okay. Next thing is Canada 25 annual report. I'm still working on the numbers. I'm working with getting the numbers straightened out. There's some discrepancies in the numbers for budget numbers and stuff, but I'm figuring it [snorts] out. But uh that's due in on the 15th, I think. So, but it's pretty close. I'll I'll get around to everybody when when it's finalized for last checks. um I did do a calendar for um for the uh upcoming meetings which I'll I will I'll [clears throat] actually update um the one you sent out to Rajan to put on the That's right. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. So you you've all got that. So basically meetings every week um until some point in when the budget is put together in March pretty much. Yeah. So meetings every week. Yeah. Yeah. Um Michelle tells me she'll be away for some of the meetings. Does anyone Is anyone else think away for any meetings? Because we be there be business travel and stuff. We probably to just [clears throat] be aware of that because we may have a quorum at some points given how the April meeting I will be missing I'm sure one week it's after we've put everything to bed and we're just so good. Yeah,

that I'm out for the that that 17th that I mentioned 217. I won't I won't be It's the 17th of February. February. Yep. I should be good for it all. I'm definitely out for that. Yeah. Okay. I'm so far good for everything because I don't plan anything on Tuesdays from January until March. If I can help it. Maria Maria knows better. [laughter] So, if I can help it, don't climb around. Well, I just don't um allowed to control my calendar. You don't control your calendar. Neither do Yeah. Neither do I. Oh my god. Listen to you complain. [laughter] No, no, no. I know the people who control your calendar. You're lucky. I married a planner on purpose. Okay, [laughter] good. That one's on purpose. All right. As long as you're good. Oh, I am glad I don't control my own.

Okay. Commit committee reports. Michelle, do you have any committee reports?

Yeah, we're voting um CPC on all of the Hold on, I'm just pulling up some notes from John. All of the draft warrant articles on Thursday this week. And I just wanted to note that John uh after some chatting with the select board and a member of the fincom who is who is not named um the open space and recreation plan may be funded as a separate warrant article from free cash rather than the conservation trust fund. So there's two versions of article one, one for 10k and one for the original 25k up for discussion um on Thursday. So TBD on how that turns out.

That makes sense. Yeah. John,

um just a real brief for the water resources committee. They just sent along their annual report, you know, talking about how they did the um the waterline extension and the Weston and Samson report. They talked about how, you know, we have enough water for the foreseeable future. Um let me see, is there anything else in there? Um and just said we're talking to neighboring towns about um we joined them in a joint uh joint application for a grant to fund a study for um drought resiliency in the future. Um so hopefully that can inform future plans for for water planning for the area. Um but otherwise nothing really else from the water resources committee right now. I think I mentioned before a lot of times their meetings conflict directly with ours and um so I always have to kind of backtrack and catch up on those. Uh nothing else from RECCOM uh at the moment and sustainability is Thursday so I'll have a report on them next week. J.

Um, nothing new. Um, all quiet except what Michelle mentioned which I had emailed you about. Um, the open spaces plan um that Mike John's had uh actually at the capital committee meeting discussed um and just I'll read my note from him so I don't paraphrase it wrong, but he had said just so everyone else is on the same page um that they discussed this at the capital committee. There was 20,000 in the conservation capital request for the open spaces recreational plan and 30,000 in the planning department for the same. So he discussed with Alec who is going to apply for $30,000 matching grant from regional partners and then leaving $30,000 in planning which will cover the whole request. So basically the extra that the conservation committee was asking for at CPC shouldn't be needed. So it sounds like they've now adjusted and they have two two versions of that. Um the lower number I think is what makes sense because it's covered elsewhere. The one thing that's not clear to me is is that grant a guarantee he's applying for a grant that doesn't necessarily mean we have it. So

that's the only space the only part that's not clear. I did email Liz uh the chair of the conservation committee just to make sure she was looped in on that and and get her take on it. But as far as I can see it seems like there's no need for that request at the higher level and it should just be reduced back down to the 10k. So the 30,000 in planning is actually a warrant. Is that right? Yes. C. Okay. So it's a warrant. So So if if there's also a grant and there's extra money, normally we do those warrants for the full amount

and say um you know 30,000 you know $60,000 30,000 of which we're hoping to fund through a grant. If we do we won't take the money because it's coming up free cash. So that's usually how you do it. Yeah. That might be guarantee the the Yeah. So, but you know, from our end, if if they come to us with the higher level, we know they don't need it. We can vote accordingly, but it sounds like it's covered. So, I'm happy either way. I have nothing. You guys heard me talk about fire station. Anything else? Yes. Click. Okay. I'll take a motion to adjurnn. So, move. Second. Um, roll called to adjurnn. Michelle Ryan I. Grab an eye.

Stop. I Neil and I. You and I Conor. Thank you all.