Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Why we can't see your picture? Okay, recording. Now you can call the meeting to order. Okay. Um, calling the meeting to order. Um, first up is the update agenda. Anything? Hi Joel. Um, nothing for update agenda, right? Uh, the the only thing that I want to update on the agenda is uh what the planning board gets paid for these. Oh, yes. I'm seeking an increase and we can discuss that. Okay. Does everybody agree that we want an increase in our pay? Nice.

That's a good answer. Ne, what do you think? Uh, I think we've been at this rate for too many too many. How many years? So, you're in favor? Yep. Ozone, what about you, Daddy? Yes. He was going like this. I don't think he was uh Well, if if we raise ours, won't Select Board have to raise theirs? No, they make a lot of money. They make a lot more money than we do.

No, I I I just think it's time be the beginning of this year, it's 2026. I think it's time that the planning board gets more than $300 for attending two meetings a month. We're the lowest paid board. We're the lowest paid board of the all the boards and I think it's time that we ask for an increase. So, there's something that I want to bring up at the meeting tonight and while the new year is starting 2026 and uh it's uh something that we can talk about now or on the agenda or down the road. Well, we kind of want to do it now. Now, I guess I guess now we're going to talk about they're going to do it. No, because

you could do you could do it towards the end of the meeting if you wanted. Annie, let Alison do her. Let's do that. Definitely. Okay, perfect. Um, I don't think anybody's here for public comment. Nobody there. And now the town plan, Allison.

Okay. Um, [laughter] first thing I before the before the um holidays, I sent out a written up summary of the survey and I wanted any comments or questions. Um, I did get a a request from Joel to do an age breakout on recreation recreation usage and people who come to the downtown. Um, and I can do that. I just wanted to know if there were any other questions or other you crosstabulation needs that you would all have.

No, I I think what you sent us at the last uh email that you sent with which was the breakdown that was really informative, but this added stuff that you're asking about, I think that would be helpful also. Okay. So, I'll break it down by age group. uh according to how people answered the questions and the breakout will be um you know how often they come to downtown you know what they come for and what their recreation usages are y other than that I think you've done a terrific job great

I mean it's a it's really uh very informative what you've done and uh but this added stuff that you're asking about I I think that'll add that that'll put the uh the the whipped cream on the pie. Okay. So, um we'll do the cross tab for the next meeting and then if you all like the results then I guess you all can post it on your website and disseminate it. Yeah. All right. So, the other thing I wanted to do today um and I think I need to be able to share something. Um, do I have permission to share? Yep, it's letting you.

Yay. Um, I was wondering now because I didn't let me add you as a co-host. So, I was wondering. Yeah. So, how Oh, yeah. There we go. Do you see this?

Okay. So rather than just write up an update of the housing element, I wanted to integrate the findings from the survey and also share with you some of the key points um and some I'm suggesting a few additional strategies based on the visit that we did the walk around in late October as well as the community survey. And so um then I'll send you this PowerPoint, but if there are no objections or if there are additions, we'll use this as a basis. Um and then use that to update the narrative. Okay. So um this is what you what your housing situ is based on the 2020 census. Um you have a similar um uh data table in your existing plan. I just updated it using the 2020 census wherever 2020 census um information was available. Um you know more than more than half of your housing units are in Island Pond um which is not a surprise. Um you also have a higher rate of um seasonal vacancy um in outlying uh in well it's pretty much through through Island Pond but um and and Brighton but the bulk of your vacant units are actually reserved for seasonal use.

Okay. When you take the housing units 519 and 943, what what years are those? 2020. That those are counted in in the in the 2020 census. Island is and the 943 is also the 2020 census.

Yep. They're both from the 2020 census. um you know, you you've um mostly um you know, you've you've got kind of a vibrant mix of um owner occupied and renter occupied. Um you know, one of the things I didn't do, but I probably could do is units and structure. Um you do have um a heavy emphasis on single family units and so I could add that information to the plan as well. So, where it says Island Pawn 519, that's just that's just the town downtown.

Um, it's it's probably a slightly different area. It's called a census designated place and the boundaries follow um established centers of development. So, it for the most part it it probably does um align and and a 943 would include all the outlying areas. It would include everything. Okay. Okay. I I just wanted to see I guess I should have made that clear. Yeah.

In Island Pond are a subset of the units in Brighton in general. You have 943 units in the entire town, but more than half of them are concentrated in Island Pond. Okay, good question. Well, it was just a little confusing. No, and I will make a point of as a matter of fact, I'm going to make a note here right here on the um this will be a subset I'll remember to that way I'll remember to clarify it in the draft.

Okay. Thank you. you made a reference to affordable um definitions of affordable in your plan and I just wanted to make sure that you know that the definition of affordable the statutory definition of affordable has changed since your plan was adopted for owner occupied housing um your total cost of homeownership um doesn't exceed 30% % of the gross annual income of a household that is earning up to 120% of the county median. And it ex uh expanded that definition because um workforce housing often was falling outside of the owner occupied definition at 80%. So like teachers and firefighters or healthc care providers might be making at you know the county median or just above but they were still struggling to find affordable housing. So that was the reason for the statutory change.

So can I ask another question? Yep. I hate to be a pain. No, that's why we're here. get this medium that you're bringing up. Can you break that down into dollars amounts instead of this percentage because that would tell people better information as to what's going on? We could we could provide an example in the plan. Um but we want to make sure that you know it changes every year plan. So we could provide an example. Yeah. the caveat that is at this time I think it would be more clearer for people to read that. Okay.

So in other words based on a uh I [clears throat] don't know what the um the medium is right now for this area for basic income which is might be 40 or $50,000 versus $120,000. I just want to see where this comes into into play. Yep. Yep. uh as long as we provide a caveat that is you know this is you know it it gets updated. Does that make sense to you Jean? No. Yeah. But yeah like you said but it's got to like she said this for eight years so it changes.

You should probably put down for 2026 or whatever because that'll change subject to change that but it does make it clearer. It gives you that context. Yeah. this percentage this percentage doesn't mean anything to the average person. Okay. So, um looking at some of the affordability stats and these are actually here we go

derived from um American Community Survey the five-year averages um but they're they're all um populated onto the housingdata.org org website. And so your median household income for Brighton is 55,000. Um whereas statewide it's 78,000. I should probably include the county in here as well. And I can do that.

Yeah, because the county is going to be a lot different than that. It's going to be it's I I'm thinking it's going to be in between statewide and it's going to be it's going to still be slightly higher than Brighton. Yeah. Because 10 years ago the the the average median income was 25,000. So that's changed a lot. Yeah. Yeah. However, um if you're looking at the difference on like gross rents and monthly gross rents and um there's less of a difference here between statewide and townwide. So, there's still a struggle if you're renting and

Well, I can I can I can see the struggle. Yeah. Um, how there's a a bigger difference be if you're purchasing a home, but overall your percentage of people who are considered extremely costburdened, that would be people who spend more than half of their income on housing is at about 14%. And that's pretty significant. That that is that that's high. Yeah. So why don't we um add um county to this data? That that's higher than the average state average.

No, no, statewide is 14%. You know, you should note that there's a difference between median and average. [clears throat] Median is half the people above are above that number and half the people are below. It can be a different it can be a different figure than average. average is a different figure. Yeah. And statistically, if your average is higher than the median, it usually means that there's some significant outlier. It's like somebody is making an obscene amount of money.

See how see how a play of words changes everything. So, um, if you we included the county data here, that would also help to provide context for the definition of affordability. Um, can I can I make there again? I [laughter] that's that's why we're here. There there's a play of words here. When you say average, medium, and you know the difference between the two.

Yeah. I mean, I I would rather see a a truer statistic number than a play of words. Do you know what I'm getting at? Both of those terms have use as what they are. They're just a different thing. Yeah. But it's but the average person doesn't look at it that way, Joel. Well, the average person wants to read this and they want to say, "Well, gee, I'm in that I'm in that income bracket, so define I've seen sometimes they you know somebody could take maybe we could just add a statement saying you know this is what median is half the people are above and half the people are below I don't know why I think that should be explained

maybe it just doesn't make a difference maybe that just won't well we could include like a little callout box that explains the difference between median and average and the fact that they're not used interchangeably we could also I think that's a good idea include in the table the average household income. I mean, I don't have median uh rents and home prices, but um what we could include um the average household incomes. I think I could track that down and that would be interesting to see if there's a significant variation from the median

because basically that I agree that means that there are outliers, right? I I would like to be the the population to be more informed of what actually is what's going on. I think both those measures are good to have included. They but they both tell you different things. That's correct.

Yeah. So, we're to this uh to this data table, we're going to add county, we're going to add average household income, and we're going to explain what the difference is. And we will also in a little call out box if there's a significant um deviation between um median and average. Generally speaking, average trends higher and that's because there are some, you know, like a a a small number of people who make significantly more. So, thank you.

Um, according to the survey, um, people were c, you know, overall they were voicing in their open-ended comments. They were talking about the increasing cost of living. they were worried about property taxes. Sometimes people specifically called out like the education tax. Um but it looked like most of the survey respondents kind of blended them all together and just um there were a couple of people who called out, you know, like water and sewer. Um there was I think um like one person um um yeah one person who called out water and sewer. There were a couple of people who wrote about the cost of water and sewer in open-ended comments but they didn't um they didn't um choose it as a as a major co as the biggest cost driver. The way we asked this question is we asked people to identify the single biggest cost driver. [clears throat]

So that's that's why it skews the way it does. Any questions? I can't see it from here. Read it. What's the red one? What's What was that for? Taxes. Taxes is taxes. Taxes. And um some people like there was like a handful of people who said um that it was you know like the education tax but then most people didn't make that distinction. So I lumped them together into a single category that just said taxes.

And over the next two years this may even change with the with consolidation and everything else that's going on with act uh uh 73 or whatever that it is. I mean thing things could change on this graph significantly. Well, this is what happens because it's only every eight years though. I mean, you look at the one eight years ago. What's what's coming here could could change this whole graph. Of course. Yeah. Yeah. Also, probably the reason why so many people were complaining about the taxes is because we just went through reappraisal notices. So many people got notices that their valuation and the tax bill went up. So yeah. [clears throat]

Yeah. And and I think that was you saw that it was significant, you know, it was the first thing on their minds when they were responding to this surve increases and then education again. Um

what's that going to do to that graph? Um, you know, it was interesting to note that even though they didn't like um, heating and energy cost and maintenance and repairs were accounted for a smaller share, if you go on to the next data point, you know, you've got like 38% more than a third of your homes are built 1939 or earlier. That's a um, according to the ACS estimates. And 37% of your survey respondents either we're definitely going to make repairs uh you know we're planning to make repairs major repairs or renovations in the next three years. So that's a lot of people I think 53 respondents

and to me it feels like it might be reflecting the age of the housing stock.

Yep. um some indicators about household size um versus the housing unit size. Um if you if you look at the tenure by housing size and this is according to the 2020 census um near townwide nearly 70% of your owner occupied houses have two or fewer people and rent for renter occupied townwide and this is you know pretty consistent between townwide and and island pond 80% have 20 have have two or fewer people so that's that's a pretty small housing unit um or household size and you do have a large number of older buildings um and larger buildings that you know were built to accommodate larger families in a different era. So

yeah, that's what I was just going to say. I mean this this housing unit size, how do you base that compared to square footage of a home? Um, I think what we would have to do is try to look at it from maybe the listister data because you certainly can't get the square footage unless you go to that

square square footage estimates from the census are not very reliable. Um however um every time I look at information about household size and housing units, we do have a have a um a pretty consistent mismatch. Be we have shrinking household units um because you know our demographic is aging, fewer people with children. Um yet the housing stock that is available to them is is generally bigger.

Yeah. I just read an an article where the average housing unit was 1500 square feet. It's now dropping down to a,000 square feet which is a significant difference. Where was this that you read it? Oh, it it was on a it was on a site for the state of Vermont. I wish I could I wish I could tell you which one it was. I I I read it on on uh YouTube.

There's a YouTube site. Well, if there's a way that I can access the um listister data, I don't know how easy that is to do, but um if we had I think like an average square footage for R1's and R2s, that might be helpful. Yeah. Well, it's it's public information. And how we'd actually get it to you, I'm not sure. I know that the statewide grid list doesn't have square footage.

It has acres. I think we have it for most properties. I can't guarantee we have it for all, but we're supposed to. I believe we [clears throat] I'm not sure how to get it out of the the system, but I bet we could figure it out. Okay. Are tax aren't taxes based on square footage? No. No, it's based on acreage and value of the taxes are based on the value of the property. That's that's I'm surprised. Yeah, me too. That that's a surprise to me. Acreage. No, it's the land and

it's the value of the property is what taxes are based on. But on on the grand list, what you see is also the number of acres associated with the property. More acres, the more value. Yeah. Yeah. Generally, I mean, and it depends if it's like an R1 or an R2. Yeah. I learned something.

We can um if I I I can try to delve deeper into the grand list and if there's a way that we can get additional information, we'll have at it. Um you talk about density in in your existing plan. You talk about allowing densities in some zoning districts. Um especially permitting accessory dwelling units. Um um I think it's important to note that um the um laws around statute around accessory dwelling units has changed um and they are more permissive since your last plan was written. There are also additional changes that allow for infill. Um, but I also thought it was important to point out that um, while your plan um, focuses on um, concentrating development and established centers of of development. um when we did that map of um areas that had vacant land or undeveloped land or um land that that could possibly be developed and this is not including houses that have just fallen into extreme disrepair. Um but we came up with a total of 1300 acres. Um that doesn't mean that everybody wants to develop every one of those acres, but there's there's room for infill is what that is. So, um just from that that map um and the accompanying and the tour that we did, the little drive around tour, there

is only one acre um a parcel that's less than an eighth of an acre. It isn't an area that's served by water and sewer. And so you can no longer prohibit development of that. Um it would be awful hard to develop something like that, but you could put like a tiny house or an accessory unit dwelling on it. Um but then you have um a um some 32 parcels that are um between an eighth or a half an acre. And again, those might be areas that could accommodate like a freestanding ADU or a tiny house. Then you have 26 parcels that are up to one acre. And then you've got 110 parcels that have an acre or more of vacant land. And again, this doesn't mean that everybody will want to develop there, but there's room for development is what we're saying. And um you know, we saw some of those examples in the drive around tour on in late October. So, um, the part that everybody has been waiting for, and this is, um, this is like a soft release of our housing targets. I just want to provide a little bit of, um, background here. Act 181 required local plans to address housing targets that are set by the regional planning commission. We actually got those targets that were developed by the Department of Housing and Community Development and they worked with the Vermont Housing Finance Authority to um come up with those and um in statute the um units, the majority of the housing units and those targets really

need to be on focused on areas that are already developed. um focused in centers, plan growth areas, village areas. Um you know, more more than half of them. Um they're really not talking about going to sensitive rural areas or rural general lands. So that's just this is a new requirement. We're dealing with it, too. I'm going to walk you through the next couple of slides just to show this matrix that we came up with this rather complex way of trying to distribute these targets in an equitable fashion. But we're also going to be doing a webinar on this throughout the region. And um you know I'm sure that there will be more questions. So this is just the beginning of a dialogue. I do have an important caveat that the reasons that these targets exist is to communicate the scope and scale of investment that needs to be made in order to alleviate the housing crisis. We know that there's a housing crisis. The targets help to provide a statisticalbased background context to them. What happens if you don't achieve them? You know, you know, the regional planning commission doesn't step in and set up a provisional government. it just they need to be reflected in your plan to show why we need to be planning for more housing. Um they're not quotas.

So I I just want to want to communicate that I have a problem with that. Okay.

They're not quotas. You have a problem with that. They're not quotas. I did I just you know the the more information that we give the government and the more more stuff that we tell the government what what's going on in our town. I I I have a problem where who is to say 10 20 years down the road the government's going to say you have this much land available and we're taking it from you and you're going to build these houses. [snorts] I mean, and you know, sometimes too much information is bad and and and maybe I'm some I'm I'm talking out of my rear end here, but I I just think that, you know, this is a possibility. I mean, it's the things have happened before where the the the the government or the the state or the cities have come in and said, "We're taking over your block of apartments, and you're going to have fixed uh fixed uh uh uh rental properties and and you're going to do this and you're going to do that and and I I I have a problem with this and and I just maybe I'm looking too far in the future here, but this This is what I All this information is sometimes not good what we're giving.

There's nothing in statute that I realize that nothing says that these statutes won't come down the pike

and somebody says that we're going to do this and we're going to do that and you're going to lose some of your land because you're going to put in low co we're going to put in lowcost housing on your property. And don't tell me that this can't happen because it can. So, I I I'm just a little leerary about all this all this information that we're we're digging up here for for somebody else to use down the pike. And and maybe I shouldn't think this, but that's how I feel. And I mean, sometimes a lot of a lot of information is bad information. And that I I just have a problem with this. I I you have 180 acres that we can take over and we're going to put lowcost housing on your property and you're going to lose your property. And don't tell me this can't happen because it happens everywhere else. So don't tell me that this can't happen. I I have a problem with this. Well, I think um one of the major points that we heard from survey respondents is that Brighton is Island Pond is not affordable. Um it's harder and harder for people to live here. Um there were lots of complaints about the cost of the water and sewer upgrades. Um we know that there's a housing crisis. I think what we're really trying to communicate here is that we could make the community more affordable if we removed some of the barriers to infill development. And so if you wait until the end to see what some of these recommendations are for um for alle you know like making sure that if somebody wants to create new housing units on their property that your zoning bylaws

aren't getting in the way. Um I think that's that's not that's not a top- down mandate. That's more of an organic response. And if you're able to add more users to your water and sewer, you also have a greater chance of stabilizing costs of utilities in the future. So, um,

I I understand what you're saying, but if I have a thousand acres of prime land and and the government comes in and says, "We're going to take 500 acres of that and we're going to make low cost housing and you have to give it up because we've passed this act 1,000." I'm just throwing out numbers here and and we're going to do this. I mean, don't tell me this can't happen because it can and this and this is and this is the problem. This is the problem that I have because the more information we give to AI and the more information we give the government and the state and the locals and everybody else, they all take this all this information. And they're going to say, "Well, gee, we can get housing for 500 or 800 more people here because if we take this and this and this on an eminent domain and don't tell me it can't happen because it can."

Yeah, it is. I'm just telling you what can come down the pike. And I just Nobody is designating these 1300 acres as prime developable land. But what we're saying is typically when somebody goes into a downtown, they think more room for development and that's really not the case here. No, no, I understand that. You can add more. But don't tell me that what my scenario is that this can't happen

because it can. and and it's it's not to be I you know we certainly I didn't present this as an opportunity for eminent domain which is um a much more difficult path to follow. So I'd just like to say I mean this is the planning commission. I realize that your job is to plan the for the future of the town and you have a housing element and we know that there's a housing shortage. Are we are we forbidden from developing information that will help us resolve the problem because you're afraid

it it depends how it depends how the information is used and that's what I'm getting at. Well, we need to we need to have the information to use. Do you think that are we aren't we much more likely to use that information? I I don't doubt that it it can happen, Mark. I think the chances of your scenario happening are pretty slim. Oh, don't say that. I own I don't think they're going to put 500. The government's going to come in and the next in the next 50 years things could change drastically here. Well, I'll be gone then.

I'll be gone then. I don't care. But I'm just saying down the road this this can't all this information that we're combining and compiling and giving everybody this information because it doesn't cost them anything. We're doing all the footwork for them. We're doing all the work for them to have all this information and then down the road. But they would have they had this information anyways. We're just putting it in our, you know, forget it. And and the other thing I can tell you, Mark, is a lot of our grant funding for all of our projects coming up is going to be tied to this kind of information. I know. And if I have it to point at, it certainly makes it a whole lot easier

to to to be able to get those grants that you want to pay the bills. So, um, the last thing I would add about density, there there is a cost of all this information, and that's what I'm getting at. Well, I don't know that we we can go back. Let's let's keep going.

Let's keep going. We'll drop it now. Just let's just let's keep going. M so regionwide um for 2030 um we've got on the low end we've got 2826 on the high end 4193 on for 2050 you see a much bigger scale anywhere between 9,14 units and up to 17,768 units. Um the difference is that when you do um when you do you know supposed projections of need you uh what has has come before isn't necessarily what's coming ahead and you've got two different eras of growth in demand. You've got your preandemic growth rates which were significantly slower. So those are what are sending setting the low-end numbers versus the high end. For Brighton, you've got um on for 2050 anywhere between 233 to 460 housing units. Those are not necessarily the what has been touted as the predominant form of housing, which are, you know, freestanding single family homes. Those are just units.

That would be like eight units a year between 2030 and 2050. Yeah. Yeah. We're lucky if we get two. [laughter]

So, um, we couldn't just base this on a share of the population because not every community is set up the same way to handle density. So, we looked at it at a couple of different ways. First of all, we looked at it overall capacity and we had different rankings for capacity and I'll take you through those in the next slide, but that accounted for 50% of the score. Then, um, we looked at if you had any, um, eligibility for tier 1A or B, which you currently don't. So you didn't receive any any additional waiting there. And also um we looked at lands like you know lands that are basically zoned to receive higher density and that would receive a 30% score. So starting with capacity and this was a big determining factor. We had four different rankings. um you know starting from zero which you have you know basically you know very little out there like the UTGS or Victory or Brunswick um to um most of our communities or I'd say the biggest share of our communities where they have no water wastewater some limited service um I have 19 communities that fall under that um rank capacity rating of two is water that I don't think we have any communities that have just wastewater but no water. Um and then three, this is where you kind of fall into um with um Burke, Kanan, Danville, and Troy. Um you have water and wastewater um but you don't have like all of the

other planning and infrastructure capacity that you would find in like Newport city or St. Johnsbury, Hardwick, Barton or Derby. Um the high overall capacity communities, those one, two, three, four, five communities actually are accounting ended up accounting for 50% of all of the targets. So you're kind of up there, but not quite. for land use. Um the areas that we had um any any centers of development like a designated downtown um or transition areas which you which you have the downtowns or village centers areas would account for like 50% of the waiting. rural general lands. Those are those rural lands that they're neither um agricultural forestry or conservation lands. They only accounted for 20%. So, um the numbers feel like really um intimidating and yeah, I mean it is a daunting number. Um, I think that when when we talk about housing, we need to remember that we're talking about a variety of housing types. Um, we're talking about adaptive reuse in multi-units as well. We're talking about the accessory dwelling units, um, even tiny homes or cottage courts. Uh it's important to note that um Vermont is no longer exclusively single family zoning. It's it's illegal for you to ban

duplexes or multi-units from your community. So um you would look to the variety of housing types and the greatest opportunity to accommodate um a variety of housing types is to have a vibrant downtown. So, some of the examples and I'm just repeating some of these visuals from the examples that we looked at on the walking tour, but um such as like addition to existing existing buildings, like if you have a have a deep lot, sometimes you can add an extension an an additional home or turn it into a duplex or a triplex. Um, and that can be done so that it it it blends in well with rural character. Here are just a couple of examples. Um, here's just another example of of a duplex. And this also works in shallow lots because it only has like, you know, 25 to 40 foot footprint. These illustrations come from the um tools for all homek kit and there are actually floor plans that are um available to people who are may be interested in developing um or adding housing units to their lots. Here's a a forplex and again it's it works well in a narrow lot because it's only 20 feet wide. Um, and if you look at it, that's it does it does speak to the Vermont vernacular. Here's an example of a garage that or you know, like a carriage barn that was turned into a one-bedroom single family structure.

Here's another example of a one-bedroom unit. Um it very again it like only 14 ft wide could fit into a narrow lot somewhere. Um here's a you know what it could work well on an existing larger single family home that could be made into like a a a triplex. In this case, you've you've got a one onebedroom and two three uh two threebedrooms. So, those are just some examples. I pulled some of your existing goals and priorities from the ex um from your current plan and they still I think they they make a lot of sense. You want to focus on Island Pond as the focal point um for the provision of services and economic development. And uh you want to maintain the town's primarily rural character. Uh you want to promote and use existing public lands and facilities in a manner that benefits the community without jeopardizing the rural unspoiled character. Um and you want to um allow development that maintains that historic settlement pattern. So basically maintaining that compact dense development urban center that and and maintain the open lands around it that keeps your that is you know a trademark of of your community's rural character and the in your investments in your infrastructure and services would reinforce that general character and growth patterns such as you know the improvements that you made to the uh wastewater system. Your existing strategies were um supporting state and local efforts to improve and provide affordable and safe

housing and encourage developers to provide a range of options for all Brighton residents um particularly for residents of low and moderate income. And I I feel like by uh talking about a range of options like those illustrations speak to that um provide for multi-unit and multif multifamily housing units that are near or or um in the existing village center where you have the services that could accommodate them. Um and also encourage and support energy efficiency programs. I mean again your homes you have more than you know about 38% that are built before 1939 um probably not energy efficient could use some weatherization um improvement of the thermal envelope um you know you would even do that perhaps before um promoting fuel switching. Some of the additional goals and strategies that you might want to think about is um again adding users to your water and sewer systems are going to help to stabilize your rates in the future. And I think we've talked about actually providing some examples of you know how you know what that would look like. um you know what would happen to your rates if you know if you added x number of units. Um and making sure like updating your zoning to make sure that your zoning isn't getting in the way of encouraging more dense development in areas that you want it. So, um I would revisit um I know that you've you're talking about making sure that your densities are in alignment

with with statute. Um that's, you know, five a minimum density of five units an acre in areas that are served by water and sewer. Um, you may also want to um revisit some of your um frontage requirements like I think you've been talking about doing that in the neighborhood residential district. Um, and looking at some of your additional setback requirements and see if if they if they still make sense. Um you also um it seems like you've got a restriction of one single unit dwelling per lot in residential um areas um that are served by water and sewer. If you were to do away with that, you could add additional units to lots without without straining your services.

That's in the revision. Yeah, that's I I saw it was redlined. Um so um this would, you know, help to make sure that you're allowing to um for greater densities in areas that where it's it's going to work. The other thing to think about is um partial Act 250 exemption in the village and surrounding residential areas. I know we've we've talked about this. Um it doesn't alleviate other state permits uh like wetlands and storm water, but it does alleviate um permitting for housing up to 50 units of housing on 10 acres of land or less. So, um I think that that would be very helpful. um it would require um subdivision regulations. And if you qualified for that exemption, basically all of these areas that are in the pink, um the dark pink would be your village, what is now like your village center. Um your medium pink would be um considered a plan growth area and the lighter pink would be considered village areas. All of those areas could be exempt from Act 250 for housing development.

Do you think over the next 10 years that the states going to lessen their restrictions on Act 250, make things a little bit more easier? Um I know I know that uh Governor Scott didn't get everything that he wanted. Uh some of the restrictions were made worse when they did the act 260 uh uh when they went through the whole scenario of act 260 and some of the things got worse instead of better. Do you think that some of these restrictions are down the road are going to get better?

I I don't I don't know what you mean by better. I know that for example he wanted to make um the act the tier 1B exemptions automatic and he was overruled and that communities have to opt in. So the objection was that communities would would still have to um choose for it just like they choose to become um a a oneacre town versus a 10acre town versus a oneacre town. Right. Right.

Um so I I it's still to me I don't see that as a huge setback. It just means that you have to conscientiously choose it. Um, and again, you know, I you can remove barriers to housing. It's it's not going to change the cost of development. Um, and it's not going to drive market preferences, but you can do your best to make sure that your regulations aren't getting in the way. Right. Yeah.

And that's that's what we're trying to do here. Um, also there are a couple of other um programs and incentives um like the gentleman that we met with this summer who didn't know about um village center tax credits. Um those are are still available and if our future land use map is approved by the land use review board more people will be able to at least compete for those tax credits. Um, you do have that potential for reduced act 250 permitting expense if you were to adopt subdivision ranks. Um, you've got the community housing investment program and that's a program that could um provide a a significant amount of funding for projects that meet the um a case like the but for funding case. So, in other words, if somebody can't get a housing project to cash flow, they could apply for this to to make it cash flow. Um, you've also got the Vermont Housing Investment Program that provides funds to private property owners to create additional um units of um like apartments in on their own property. And you've also got um some people could also use planning grants to develop schematics or deal with some of the precon pre-construction [clears throat] costs. You can also use municipal planning grants to maybe even come up with um some scenario planning um sometimes. So is that so some of these things that you've brought up is that up to the planning board to present to the select board or can the select board approve some of these changes and

approve them? Well, you would have to like first of all the property owner would have to be willing to do these. So I think the main thing is to make sure that they're aware that these services are available to them. If the community were to pursue like a municipal planning grant or a community development program grant, those do have to come from the municipality. Um, and it would have to be approved by uh the select board, but um in some cases it could be really helpful to come up with schematics that the public can really get behind.

Right. So, is that something that the planning board should bring to the select board and have them consider doing this? These are what I'm suggesting here is that these are strategies that the planning commission would include in the housing element of the plan. Okay. Yeah. Then we would present that to the select board and see if they would be in favor of going forward with this.

Yeah. So, finally, um, we talked about like some of those pre-approved accessory dwelling units, and I know that like you guys pretty much hated the mid-century modern examples that were that came from the Pacific Northwest. However, um, the Department of Housing and Community Development is developing like their own Vermont vernacular. So, um you'd be likely to see some pre um some prepackaged accessory dwelling unit designs that really could fit in more with um What the hell is that? It's his phone

with a Vermont downtown. Okay. No, I did I was just curious as to how we could move forward with some of this stuff and do we have to do we have to as a select board approach the the the select board and and and see if they would to go and get on board with us and doing some of this stuff. Well, the adoption process the town plan adoption process pretty much involves the select board. Okay. So you're going to draft if you're going to draft a plan if if the planning commission puts these recommendations in the plan then they would have their hearing and then you know from there um it would go to the select board and so

maybe that's something we should consider. Well I think it's it's there we just have to adopt it. Right. Right. It's it's there. So that the planning board just I mean the select board just has to adopt it. Right. the plan the whole plan, right? Because when we adopt the plan, so when we when we get this plan written up, then we then if they adopt it, then it'll it'll move forward. That's right. Yeah. I I'm just asking questions. [laughter] I noticed, right? Don't know unless you ask.

Yeah. But that's it's there's a when you adopt a plan, it's a two-tiered process. So, um the planning commission has their hearing first. They take comment on it and then they forward it to the select board and then the select board has a hearing and if there are no objections then the select board adopts it. Okay. No, I just want it clarified. Y thank you. So um that's all I have but this can I ask a quick question Allison?

Yeah. So, you know, it I know that the state's looking at developing these these accessory dwelling unit models and everything. Are they doing anything as far as investigating whether multi- multi-unit housing will will work in these rural areas? Will people actually buy it, rent it, you know, and what what is the appetite for that? Because I do remember a few years ago, Rural Edge was dumping all of their properties in town because nobody would rent them. Yeah.

And so, I mean, that to me is a concern if we set everything up so heavily favoring and so so forward and, you know, multi-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings, if nobody wants a multi-unit dwelling when they come to Island Pond. Yeah. We're were kind of not I mean, this came up when I went to the town managers thing. That was that was a a concern that some of the other rural town managers had was it's great if you're in in Newport or you're in St. Johnsbury. Multi-unit dwellings make lots of sense. Yeah.

Rural areas, people aren't really accustomed to that. And is that really going to be something people are going to have a a a drive to to rent or buy? Or are we going to build stuff and nobody's going to come and then we're gonna have developers going broke because they they took a gamble and then we get the we stand there holding the bag that well we talked you into coming here and then nobody b wanted nobody wanted your product. Well when I've worked with developers they generally

they've done they've done their homework so they're not just like okay well I'll I'll do this in good faith. But um the other classic um conflict that we have right now is that developers will only build what they can pencil out and right now the only thing that they can pencil out are multi-units in some form or another. So, um, if if for making it marketable in Brighton, it might just be an issue of scale and scale that continues to communicate a sense of privacy. Like maybe it's more duplexes rather than triplexes or forplexes. Maybe it's something more of like a cottage court so that you have all single family detached homes, but they're just smaller. Um, but

yeah, I mean I would be thinking I would be really shocked to see a developer who just stumbles into your town without having done his homework. [laughter] I mean, right. If we if we're focused so so heavily into multi-unit dwellings. I mean, if that's what our town I mean, it's a little like what I had a problem with our town plan, the one we're getting rid of. Yeah.

It was so heavy on preventing wind turbines that it completely negated everything else. And I don't want to go down that same path with this that we're so heavily focused on creating multi-unit dwellings that we ignore the fact that that is not the majority of our housing stock. and may not be in the future. I mean, it may multi-unit buildings may not work in Island Pond. I don't want us to completely negate that that is an option,

right? No, I I hear I hear what you're saying. It's just that when we introduce the idea of housing targets, I think that the in most people's minds, they think of, you know, 17,000 freestanding detached single family homes being added to our region. And it doesn't have to be that way. So, it it's not necessarily that um I I don't think we're painting ourselves into a corner. I think where where we can get into into trouble is if if we're not allowing for creative development to take place if a developer is able to show that it works. And

I'm fine with I just I just want to make sure that we're not so heavily I mean like I down here where I'm at, we have lots of developments now that are a combination of all of those kinds of things population that's different. There's there's duplexes, there are apartments there. They're all built into the same little subdivision. And yeah,

and so I, you know, I to me that's when I look at Brighton, if we're looking at a, you know, a subdivision that, you know, we could get somebody to come in and put in a hundred housing units of some at some point, it's going to have to be something like that. It's going to have to kind of accommodate all those. And I just don't want us to be so focused on apartments and and duplexes that we ignore the fact that there is a market for single family homes, too.

Oh, yeah. Abs. Absolutely. Um, but I think it's more about like gentle what they call gentle infill. Um, and the other thing is that there is what I'm seeing is a is a greater demand for single family homes, but much smaller than what's been built in the past, particularly as you get closer to centers of development. And those seem to be sought after by people who want to age in place but don't want to have to maintain a five- bedroomedroom home. Well, that's what I was just going to say. You you you you've got a population of people now from the big cities that are looking to maybe come here, have a summer place, fall place, two-bedroom apartment, and then go snowbirds and go down south to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida for the winter. Uh, I mean, I I see that type of expansion coming here to enjoy our summers that we have here and the rural feeling that they have here. A lot of people come here because of that. And I think down the road then they go down to down to the, you know, in the winter time, spend an area down there. I I I I I I see more of a of a bedroom community type scenario coming here. I mean, that's that's what I call a bedroom community where they're here in the summer,

early a late spring, summer, and early fall, and then they leave to go someplace else for the winter. Um, that's that's what I I think that's going to happen here. Is that is that the wrong feeling to have? No, I I um I think maybe to address both of your points, maybe it makes sense to talk about in this in this housing element to talk about the concept of G gentle infill and that it's not going to be one turbocharged major development that's going to bridge the gap for everybody because you know you you do have a variety of housing demands, but um you also still want people who are coming for a rural setting. They just want it to be a little easier to be in. I mean, in the past 10 years that I've noticed, that's what's happening here is you've got people from the the the southern part of the state, Connecticut, New York. They're buying properties up here to spend the summer and then they close the place up and they go someplace else. I mean, the people want to leave the big cities now. They they're not content to be there anymore in our in my age group anyways. and and and I'm calling myself old, but anyways, I I that's what I see coming here to Island Pond. And I' I've seen that trend happening here. People are buying property to come here for the summers and then they leave

and they'll rent their place out to snowmoilers and stuff in the winter time while they're down down someplace else, which still brings economic de development here because they're spending monies here. But you don't have that. You have a transient population that's coming here now. That that's how I'm looking at Island Pond.

So we could we could look in previous we we've probably collected this information about owner occupied and and how many dwellings we have in the previous town plan or previous census. So, we could see if a larger share of the of the housing stock is vacant and seasonally occupied to see if that trend that you're talking about is actually are people are outsiders buying more of our housing stock all the time.

That That's what I think. I I I I see that. I mean, look what's happened around the lake. Locals don't own camps around the lake anymore. It's it's owned by everybody from out of town. I mean, and and they're coming here and spending the summer and then they leave. But yet we we have snowmoilers that are renting that those camps to to go snowmoiling in in and in in the winter time. And and I that's I find that the the the locals here don't own much around the lake anymore. I mean, you can't deny that fact. Well, obviously that the town [clears throat] of Brighton government has to eminently domain purchase a hundred of your acres and put up a bunch of houses.

There we go. I mean, you got the perfect I mean, I I I'm just This is what I see happening in the town and I and I mentioned it to the school board at the last town meeting. I mean, this is becoming a bedroom community and and I don't know if people want to admit to it or not, but that's what's happening here.

Well, we can certainly take the previous um data points and and show long-term trends. I mean, we've got it from 2010 and I'm I'm sure it's available from 2000 as well. Um, if we're going to show that kind of trend, I think it it makes sense to go like 30 years. Yeah. I just an idea, that's all. I'm just putting something forward. Yep.

I'm not trying to be pessimistic. I think I think what I'm talking about is good for the town also because it brings in dollars to the town. And if that's the case, that that means we need more restaurants and we need more things for the people who come up here on the weekends and people who come up here for the summer and wintertime activities. And I mean, we we don't have a lot to offer here. Just charge the part- timerrs more property tax. We do that. or charge them a vacancy fee.

Some some cities do that. Yep. They do exactly that. Even though in some ways they're your dream resident because they're here six weeks out of the year, but they pay taxes for the whole year. That's right. But they don't they don't do go to our restaurants or spend any money if they're not here. No, but while they're here, they do. Yeah. For six weeks. How many how many people in this town go to the restaurants and how many times a a month do they go? I think it was in there once a month. Yeah, that's not much. That's locals. It's it's the outsiders that are supporting what we have here. That's right. Exactly.

I've seen I I myself at at the at the American Legion have seen more outsiders coming here now than the people who originally supported the Legion. It's not the original people who lived here that's that's supporting the Legion. It's everybody from out on the outlying areas now that are supporting the Legion. That's it. Used to be the other way around. And it used to be the other way around. Huh? Says you're all getting old. Yeah. They're all dead. It's getting so you can't even get into good places. I'm just saying that, you know, we we should think about this. I mean, this this is what's happening and and

that's what I'm doing. And I mean, she's done a good job, but I I haven't heard much said about this. Well, we can also look at the survey respondents, those who did indicate that they come here seasonally, and find out what their habits are, how they change, how they vary from those people who live year year round. [snorts] Um, keeping in mind that there were very strong sentiments about people who felt like who lived here year round who felt like they were being forgotten.

And and I and I understand that feeling. Absolutely. Absolutely. There I I understand that. Forgotten how? Forgotten. And I just said um like particularly for like economic development um it said you know it's you know stop promoting just for the tourists. There you go. Those were some of the some of the comments make. Yeah. But I don't I still don't understand that because if you're promoting it's for the whole town. It's not just for tourists. I

I mean we we have we have you know things during the summer you know fireworks for instance that's just that's for locals as well. Um anything that's that goes on is for locals whether they participate is their own it wasn't for the outsiders they wouldn't have the fireworks. Exactly right. No, I'm just I'm reiterating a sentiment that came up again and again in the open-ended comments in the I saw those. Yeah. Yeah. That's like

and I do think some of that is people don't understand that, you know, a lot of that those things that they that we we do for the the tourists. It's because we do have we can obtain grant money to help pay for that. But that grant money doesn't support local entertainment. That grant money only works if you're using it towards attracting tourists to town. That's the way the state and the feds have set up. So, it's kind of I won't say it's a game, but it is kind of a game. You know, if the locals want to enjoy that stuff, well, we have to bring other people in or we're not big enough to pay for that kind of stuff on our own. Yeah.

And I don't know that we're good about, you know, really telling people this is how this is paid for. It is not you paying for this to for the for the tourists. This this is, you know, have to pay for part of the grant. No. No, they don't. The grant the grant does the whole thing. No, I mean like all of those concerts and everything we've done. No, that's from They don't No, the town does not pay for anything at all. No, because it's it's through the it's through the community. Most of it's from the Frank community forum. Yeah, maybe we're threatening this year because we don't we haven't gotten approval on our grant money for this year. So,

yeah, that's a concerning fact here. I don't know what's going to happen this year. Yeah. The town certainly can't afford a $30,000 bill for fireworks. It's not 30,000. It's not exaggerating. It's 20. Well, with the increases and everything, I just added a little bit. Yeah. [laughter] What's 10 inflation? Mark. Yeah. Inflation. Yeah. But $20,000 for what? An hour and a half. No, it's 20 minutes. I don't think $1,000 $1,000 a minute.

No, Allison, you've done a terrific job on this and I we really appreciate all the information that you've gotten us and and it and it makes us talk about other things and you know that's why I brought a few things up tonight is because there's things that we should talk about. Absolutely. I mean that's that's always good to see. So, any other comments or questions? I can flesh out this draft and uh send it to you. Um I would invite your next meeting. Okay.

Yeah. The only thing I'm going to say is uh we need to if we're going to attract people to do multi housing, we need to do some sort of an incentive to get them to do it. Yep. And that's what she's talking. Yeah, she's already talked about that.

I think that like the ship program which is just being um rolled out now is is is a major it's a major incentive for um certain developers. Um they have to be comfortable sharing their numbers with the public um to show how they need those funds to make it pencil out. Um, the Vermont Housing Investment Program is a little smaller scale and it's a little more one-on-one. It's smaller um sums of money, too. It's like about 50,000 per um unit created. Um, but it's again, it's a great incentive. Um, I had some friends of of um some kids of some really good friends of mine create um a really fantastic apartment in their brand new house or the house that they had just bought and they had renovated it and um everybody was happy. Um unfortunately they um brought in a um exterminator um to um do like a a fumigation um and they left the pilot lights on. So

oh everything went up but otherwise it would have been a great example and I would have said yeah but I mean it that's no fault to the VHIP program.

Yep. [snorts] [clears throat] Um, the other thing I would like to add is I think people have to realize we we pass the town plan and it goes to the select board. If the select board decides they want to pursue these things, all of which are this is really good to want to pursue these things, but there's nobody on the select board that's going to pursue those things. and they're going to they're going to have to assign the initiative to take to pursue these things to to some kind of staff members who I don't know that we really have. So I mean I don't I'm not saying this shouldn't be included. I'm just saying when you talk about it it's great to really do unless the planning commission members themselves want to take on the responsibility of pursuing these these strategies and these goals. I I you know that that would be great but other other than that it's going to be staff.

I mean isn't that how it works now? Pardon? Isn't that how it works now? Yeah. I'm just making sure everybody realizes that just because they make motions that there's not no magic wand that things automatically happen just because motions are made. I understand that. Are we all set on this discussion to move on? Allison, you're going to stay for the zoning, right? Yeah. I just want to observe and I'm going to put my mic on on mute. So, but I just I I would like to find out what you're doing with the zoning. So, just to see how it dovtales.

Sure. Um, so that's what we're moving now to the zoning and um the update. I don't really have an update from Nick this week because um Joel, you had emailed him certain things and I knew he was probably working on that and with Christmas and everything going on. I mean, I think he didn't probably have much time, but you did talk to him about the sisters, right? On Derby and and um Horton, right? He knows about those two right now. Right. We're going to get into those when we talk more detail.

Yep. Um I don't know of anything else. I haven't seen any other uh permits or anything on the board. There's only a couple. I I wrote to him and told me because he signs his his things as acting zoning administrator. He's really not acting. He's the zoning administrator. There's no provision in the law for acting. you know, in order to be free of us, he'd have to resign probably, you know, but he he seemed to think that we were actively looking for another zoning administrator, and I said, "We're not really." Oh, wow. But he liked the idea. I I said, "You don't have to use that acting part anymore."

And then you told him about the CO papers to put them in with the permits, and he liked that idea. So, Is there any other thing to report? You think we're good? Yep. Okay. Um, so next, I don't know. I I had Joel, I didn't give you a paper because you're not here, but I do have a whole draft on the the next one that we're doing of the So, there really wasn't much Allison on the zoning. Um, but the revisions for the Airbnb, maybe VBOs and stuff like that. I have a a whole draft from Burke which has all the information of how they set theirs up.

I'd like I'd like to be able to read Oh, no. I don't want to discuss that. I was going to the next the next meeting I'd like to discuss this definitely very important. I did I did read um the long-term rental. Yeah. Uh where did it say provide to resident by rental owner for a fee for more than 100 81. So are they according to this anybody that has apartment buildings is going to get charged $35 per apartment per year for rent. That's what I was reading. That's not gonna I'm sorry. That is

who charged. I don't agree with that one. Who's charging who? Well, this is the Burks one. So, I myself I'm saying that we should not be doing that. But is the Burke charging them? Yeah. Yes. The $35 for long-term rentals. Yeah. For like if you have an apartment building and you've got three apartments,

three apartments, you're going to get charged $35 per apartment per year. And Joel, I think I think the reason for that is if you look at this paperwork that we got uh they have the vant department of safety shortterm rental safety, health and financial obligations. What they're what people who are renting shortterm have to follow which also long-term apartment buildings. But we're getting into an area now what the big cities do. See what happened here. I'm just saying that's shortterm. So I think they I think Burke just put that in there. It's not a state thing. No, I don't think so. We can do Department of Health. That's something that Burke does.

Just short term. Yeah. Yeah. But also long-term rentals. Some of the cities in Vermont, right, follow a a Department of Health Safety regulations, which we don't have here. So, so if you're going to have somebody going out and inspect apartment buildings, which the state does right now, yes, they do. But if you as a town are going to do it, then they charge a fee. And I can see the $45 fee for that. Yeah. Because they go to make sure that the railings on the porches meet that and there's no lead and they I mean, there's rules and regulations. You don't even have a clue what's out there. It's it's very

No. And and I get it. I think it's good for 45, you know, because as far I mean, we have apartments and I know that short-term rentals, I can see that you should look at that, but I think charging the landlords in this town $35 per apartment per year is I never mind that. I thought they did that. That's somebody that said 20. The only reason you do that is if you had an inspection program. That is correct. Talking about don't have that. I mean, if you then you could justify the fee because it's paying for the for the program. But just to charge a fee and have no program, though, right? Yeah.

All right. So, Joel, I have a copy for you. I can put it in the mailbox of the planning board over there. Yeah, I'll be in I'll be in I would have been in today, but I had a number of problems here at the house. So, put it in my mail box or lay it on the listers desk or somewhere. Yep. message desk over here. Yeah, that's where um and and James, I have one for you as well. Do you want me to put it in my mailbox or where do you think Tanya can come up and get it or something? Scan it over to me. I can I can ask the girls. I can ask the girls. Okay, I can scan it and email it to Wait a minute. Where's mine? There's the

This is the original. We did it on both sides. But if you're g The only thing is that if we're going to charge a fee for short-term rentals, that means the fire chief is going to have to go do inspections. And is he willing to do that? You're going to have to pay him. So how how much are how many of these are we going to do? Is it going to be doing? I don't know. So that's what I'm getting at. If you're going to charge a 35 programs are a nice idea, but if if we don't have enough of them to pay the salary, there's no point. You're just adding an expense for the town. That is correct. That is correct.

My take on that is if you're going to be charging somebody $35 for the fire department to come and inspect their place, give him the $35. How long? $35. Is it going to take them an hour to walk around the house? I mean, you're making money. Just We're not making money for the town. Really? That That would be the idea. the money that would be the fee that you would charge would go towards paying for one of which is the guy. Yes. Does he want to take on that responsibility is what I'm getting at.

Well then pay one of the volunteers. It's like Mike says, I you know, in order to pay somebody to do that, you'd have to have a lot of liability, right? A lot of people a lot of liability to put your name on a thing that's saying that that that short-term rental meets the criteria and then if something happens, then guess who gets sued? Well, for God's sakes, if you have a fire department and they're all trained I mean, you're talking about being scared about walking into somebody's house if they if they're trained correctly. I'm just saying that there's liability issues along with this. There's quite a bit on the checklist here that they have to look at. Don't the insurance companies

care about whether somebody rents their part of their building? Some some do, Joel, and some don't. Well, the problem is is a lot of them don't tell their insurance company, and they're not going to tell the town either. Yeah, of course. That is correct. No. And and really do we want to know? Well, we want to know for for taxes, right? No, my other my other concern with this is, you know, this is it's great to say the fire chief can go do it. Does does Rick have the ability to do the writeups? Who's doing all the paperwork that goes with it? Who's scheduling all of it?

You know, it's more than just that, you know, walk around the house for 10 minutes. You know, there's a whole, you know, I'm sure Burke has a department that sits around and does that work. We don't have a town parks office with any capacity to take on more work. But yeah, and also just to let you know, when you've got a fire chief that's doing this, he's been to courses to how to do this and he's taken on the responsibility. So he goes and gets trained and has documentation and he's been trained to do these inspections. So this this gets into a lot deeper than does Zatan really want to get into this?

I think a lot of it is not just that. It's I mean I'm talking this looks more like a fire marshal thing here. GFI outlets. Oh. Oh yeah. They go through the whole thing, right? short-term rentals supposed to have GFIs, carbon monoxide detectors, one on each floor. I mean, that it's a it's a whole scenario of rules and regulations that we don't have a full-time inspector to enforce this. Well, and then and if something happens, then it falls back on the town because we off we're charging. Yeah. If you charge for a service, you're responsible.

Yeah. you inspect, but will everybody read this and then we'll talk about the next meeting. I think that's a great idea, Mark. Yep. So smart. [laughter] Okay. Um, so we're going to table that for now and we'll get the papers to Joel and Yeah. James and I'll approve the minutes of I'm sorry. We're not done yet. We're not done. We're still talking about our pay raise. We got a pay raise. Oh Yeah. Okay. So I the only other thing too uh do you want to go into the uh other business? The other business I only wanted to mention is our next meeting is on Martin Luther King. So aren't we closed?

And you don't have on the 19th. Yes. That's Martin Luther King. Yes. I hope so. Yes. Then we're closed, right? So we don't have a meeting. So we do not have a meeting. You sure that holiday wasn't cancelled? [laughter] Not yet. Have a time. It's pretty woke. So, it'll be the next it'll be the first Monday of the following month. Yeah. I love it. James, I mean, you guys you guys could meet if you wanted to, you know. It's nothing to say. Oh, yeah. Nothing says that we have We can't. But you're going to time and gonna You're gonna open the building for us? Yeah. No problem. They pay us. [laughter]

Yeah. What do you guys get now? Okay. 300 a year.

So that my my thing I brought up at the beginning of the meeting is this $300 does not make the the the cut anymore. [laughter] So you know it's uh it's it's it's it's a pittance that it's less than a pittance now. So, I I'm looking for either an $800 or $1,000 a year thing for because we do attend two meetings besides all the other stuff that we do during the year and all the reading and the outside meetings that we go to and I think it's time. I've been on this board for quite a few years now and I think it's time for an increase.

I agree. How about you, Bill? Maybe there's time for an increase. I think the 800 or thousand is a little Well, that's a little sketchy, too. But I'm trying to be fair. I was I was thinking I don't think that's what he meant. [laughter] No, I was thinking a little a little high. I don't think so. No, let's demand 1,200 and then settle for a thousand. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. No, no. I I No, I'm serious. I mean, we we we we attend two meetings a month and and look how long we've been here tonight and and uh you know, we've got a lot of stuff on our plate now and uh I just think that we we deserve an increase. I mean, one of the reasons that that the that the planning commission's salary wasn't increased historically is because when we had a development review board created and got rid of the zoning board of adjustment, the planning commission also stopped doing site plan reviews, which was a quasi judicial board that had authority over site plans and and development. And now the planning commission no longer has that responsibility which was a pretty heavy responsibility. So now your planners and so it wasn't the increases weren't as warranted shall we say as if you kept on having that strategy. But I do think the $300 is a little bit less than you ought to get paid.

A little bit less. So, I I'd like to make a motion that I we have an increase of up to $800. You can put a request in. You don't get to vote your salary. Yeah. No, no. I It has to go It has to go to the select board. I understand. But that's to me and then it goes to the select board. Oh, really? I should have the budget. Would you like to go out to dinner next weekend? [laughter] Anyways, that's what that's what I'm proposing is as a as an increase up to $800. Have a second. I'd like to make that into a motion. Go ahead.

I'd like to make it a motion that we increase the $300 to $800. That's your request. Your request. That's what I said. It's a request. It's a request. I just want your motion to be right. Okay. Do I have to say? No, she All right. Okay, we got a second in favor. All right. I Okay. Um, and I'm doing this at the beginning of the year. So, we start out. It won't go into effect until after town meeting day anyway because it has gone. That's fine.

Does somebody actually have to go to a select forward meeting now and request that or you know, you know that now we've asked you. Let me put it this way. The select board, it says it's easy to say no to somebody who's not there. Well, I'll be there. I'll be there. [laughter] Yeah, I'll be there. BILL AND I ARE going to be there anyways. So, you'll discuss it in the next meeting, right? Yep. Wednesday night. Vote on it though, right? No, I can't. I can't vote on it, Bill. Oh, boy. Yeah, you're gonna have to have We have to have the other three voting on that. Uh oh. Yeah, I'm not worried.

Heather, Bruce, and and Mike, hold your hold your raise in their hands. [laughter] We'll have to give them a nice big steak. So, anyways, that's that was my motion and hope hopefully the select board will appreciate what we do for them. We all set on that now? Yeah. the discussion. Uh I make a motion that we uh also uh uh uh the minutes of the meeting. Oh. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Did we approve the minutes of the meeting? Yeah, because I jumped over that. Everybody approve the minutes of the previous meeting. Yes. I'd like to make a motion that we approve the minutes of the previous meeting.

I'll second. All in favor? I. Now, the last one is I'd like to make a motion we adjourn. I'll second. [snorts] All in favor? I I Meeting is adjourned. Thank you.