Board of Finance - Regular Meeting

Okay. So, the meeting is called to order. Mr. Kelsey has arrived. Mr. Russell has not. So, let me ask for a motion to seat an alternate in Mr. Russell's. Um, I'll move to seat Mr. Walsh. Mr. Walsh. Is there a second? I'll second that. Uh, any discussion? [clears throat] All in favor of um seating Tom in Andy's place say I. I. Any oppose say nay. Any obstensions? You're up. Tom,

the the first the first item is the approval of the March 10th minutes which um were were circulated by email. I don't know if anybody needs a hard copy. I'll take a hard copy. I did see the email, but I love a hard copy. Bring it. Oh, if you didn't bring it, that's fine. here. Excuse me. Thank you. May I help you?

Maria, let us know when you've gone through. Oh, yeah. I did look at them already. So, yeah, I did. I did. You were here last, but you're Oh, no. No. I was here. I I know. So, medically. Well, actually, you're an alternate, so you can't vote, and it's very confusing. [laughter] Yeah, it should be. But yeah, because she she was there. She was here. She's not tell you how to vote. In any event, does anyone have any comments or questions before I call for a motion? Then a motion to approve the Mark 10 minutes. So moved. Second. Kim and Candace. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Any oppose say nay. Any extensions? One. David.

Okay. The next item is the financial reports that were distributed in hard copy last week. I'll start with just a a couple of little questions. Um well, first a comment on uh page two of the revenues. I noticed that the um investment income is coming in above our conservative budget. So if you take a look at the current month's revenues and extrapolate, you'll get a current year revenues of about 953,000, which is about $400,000 above the budget. So you know that that's not a good number because interest rates can go down. But just keep that in mind when we're talking about the budget that we may have up to $400,000 of revenue that's not in the budget.

Well, also yes, also with that um interest rates started at over five were already down to 3.4 3.5, right?

But I extrapolated based on the February uh income. Yeah. The earlier months of the of the fiscal year were higher. And I even put a note on it. And I have a question for you, Anita. On uh page 13 of the expenses and incumbrances, you have some of the beach associations that have been paid in full and three of them that have not.

I'm on page 13 of the actual and budgeted expenses and incumbencies. the point of order. I had to wait. They did not because their year is different and we're doing off of May through September. So they she was not in town. So I had to wait. She sent me the bills from last year. So we had a full so I can do her numbers and um edge. They're the ones that um I sent it to the wrong email when I got in touch with time. He got back to me. He brought me everything in. Um they had their checks in March

for Ed. So Bob has gotten you the information now. Oh, good. He's all set. Um the other two way north um from what they um and you've gotten what you need from Oakidge at this point. I say the third one is Oak Ridge. Do you have the have their information Oak Bridge? No, they had a balance. They were under they uh projected over. Oh, okay. So, they they've gotten all that they're entitled to. Thank you.

Anybody else have any questions? Um, it looks like there's some projects that were planned at the police station. Are those in the works for spring? Is it painting? It's the fire alarm painting and the door window. Yep. All planned. Um, I noted that Shoreline Gateway has not spent anything yet. Shoreline Gateway project on on the first page. Uh maybe I don't know if they're planning to do something but maybe we can bear this in mind as we do the next budget.

Do do you know Martha how about the Shoreline Gateway Committee and Yes, I do actually. I talked to Michaela today [clears throat] um and they're working on they're they've been working a lot on their presentation to the zoning board for the zoning changes uh that relate to the sound view district and to uh the area of 156 or what we sometimes called miscellaneous V north. So they've been working on that and that's what they've been spending their time on. So, they haven't been doing any of their projects at this point in time. Well, they haven't sent Anita any bills. I got that.

But they're alive and doing their thing. Good. They're working on what they need to, so they'll be ready for the presentations to the zoning board. Anita, I have one more question on um page six. under Rogers Lake Authority. The budget for the Rogers Lake Authority docking fee was $900 and the current year expenditure is about $5,000. And I just don't remember. I should, but I don't remember what what's that all about. The docking fee.

That was the extension for the dock and the um regional school paid half. It was $9,000. They purchased a $10,000 dock and we split the cost with the regional school district. So the cost to the town was 5,000 which was split half and half. So it's it's it'semized here as a docking fee, right? But it's not a docking fee. It's a dock construction expense. So they will no longer have dock fees going forward because they'll have their own dock. Fair enough. We did, didn't we do a special appropriation for that? Yeah, we did. We did. So

interesting place that to miscellaneous other Well, I think where he told me to charge it. Yeah. I think Mark's contention was that um he could cover his share of the dock, which was about $5,000 out of his budget and still not go over. Right. So he was when inclined to do it that way. Correct. Okay. No, I'm I'm only quarreling with the the line item description of docking fee because I don't think that is correct. Well, it'll be zeroed out to nothing going forward because they won't have a docking fee anymore. We already put that in for next year's budget. Took it out. Yep. Any other questions?

Okay. Um then the the budget and I I assume Anita that you passed out these sheets as a summary of where we are on the budget. Yes. Um have we voted on all of the budget line items or are there any that are still in suspense that people are waiting to confirm? Voted on all. We've got all of them so far. We're way ahead of the game. Don't knock out. Thank you. And Martha, really uh it's you and the board of selectmen probably you driving the schedule that has accomplished this. Well, we wanted to give you a vacation. Sorry it wasn't your

So I'm I'm on the last page looking at the total which um you know the current budget is on the last page 45394. The the new budget total is 48603. a total of 7%. Now the 3,200 uh dollar increase interest well I'm saying interestingly um if you look at the line above 2 million of that increase is region 18. Can can you if you subtracted region 18 what's our increase? 1,179520

and and 556870 is um additional over and above last year's capital/ transfer is out and the general government all others every other department total is 622650

which is what percentage increase percentage I'm here. Was it the total approximately 4.49 for general government?

Four 4.49. Yes. Okay. So, general governance increase is 4.49. And if you remember, we've added a couple positions in that. We made another we've got create another full hunt and the police and the public works included in those numbers. And how about does is that does that include capital? No, capital by itself is a 4% increase.

Right. Well, I think those numbers are interesting, right? So, general government 4.49, capital 4.0, uh, region 18 6.44, uh, with a total increase for us of 7.07. you know, discussion. So, I I mean, so I was part of increase.

I'll tell you right now, you can take out one of the policemen because we have two policeman positions open. One was to replace Wayne and we've had it posted and we've had zero interest. So, um we still have that. So we could take out the extra one because 90,000 the new the new position but plus have benefits though too. So we'll save some money there because Derek said he can't find anybody to fill Wayne's shoes right now.

So let's just concentrate on getting someone to fill Wayne. If by some miracle of all miracles they find someone who might be interested, they can come for an appropriation and tell you they want to hire somebody else. But let's not tax the taxpayers if we're not ready. So with benefits, what is it? 150,000. Well, 64. No, that one. She'll figure it out. Okay. Um, anything else? Well, we don't want to go too fast for you.

Well, I do have a couple recommendations that if you want to It has not gone to the board of selectment. I want to run it by them. Um, one of them is, and I did talk to the auditors, in our miscellaneous fund, which is our bond 09, there's approximately $13,000 that is interested on our we are allowed to use that in the general funds. So, I wanted to transfer out $100,000 if you want to just make it an even number and move it to the general fund as a transfer in. So this would increase our revenue 100,000 um to offset expenditures. Um

what was that money intended for originally? ARPA. It is the ARPA money we acrewed interest on. Oh that's just the interest on the interest we are allowed to spend through funds. Um the other one I spoke with Tom. um the IT budget. In the IT budget, he has 45,000 in the budget. Um we're going to not use that. We're going to take it out because under fund 25 there's approximately 53

3,100 that he would like to reallocate to that purpose to the upgrade to the technology for the 2627 year. The other one is is that in his operating budget or in capital? No, it's fund 20. It was for it refresh. Yes. We're going to take away the 45 in the IT uh transfer out

and he is just going to reallocate money that is already in fund 25. Is fund 25 the IT fund? Okay. Oh, yeah. Right there. Okay. Numbers. It's very light. I missed it. I'm sorry. They were up at the top. We need big big numbers.

Now, wait a minute. You said he had 200 and something in there. No, 53. 53. He has 53100 in his in his um I meant is it miscellaneous was no it's in another fund so you can reallocate it. Oh, the miscellaneous one is in his fun 125 125. Right. The total amount of money in there according to the financials that we just got was 18467. Correct. So, we'd be taking he wants to take the 45,000 out of that number. He's going to use um

I just want to make sure that I'm reading this correctly. Yeah. Right. And what is that fund supposed to be for? It Well, I know, but like what? It's all different. Just capital IT projects. Currently, right now, he has $53,027 um that was designated at one time for a purpose and is not going to be used for that purpose. So he wants to use that for his fiscal year 2627 money instead of taking an additional 45 from the general fund and move it in it. He just wants the money reallocated to use. What's the project that's not going to

the one that have nothing? It was the transfer scale 2000 for the scale upgrade. We did not done that. 10,000 for the A for the town hall ARPA money. 21,116 was for the town hall surveillance. We had ARPA money. 10,000 was network wiring capacity security. They said return to um surplus and $9,911 for the server room AC install return to surplus.

Overbudgeted the So the air conditioning's in cheaper. Okay. We got the security done on the doors when we put them in. So we're good. So it's not that those projects aren't getting completed that we just did from other places. Okay. So that would reduce the budget that his 45,000. Okay. The next would be I talked to Eric um Buff Bar 29. Currently in the budget um the paving is 237,600.

That's an estimate. An estimate. It's not hasn't gone out to bid yet, right? So, we're thinking 3760 can come from the money in fund 29 because that's what we take in as revenue from the rentals and there's money in that fund. How many dollars again currently in the fund? No. Are you recommending we take from the fund? 37.

37. Thanks. And then um the remainder 200 we would use a 100,000 in this year and then in the following budget do another 100,000 so the paving can happen in June July of next year so we could split them the 100 and 100. Okay. Might get a better deal on paving next year too than we would this year. I I got a question I'd like to ask just because I don't have the history. You do. When was the last time I went up and looked at that. When is the last time we paved the bus point that? Probably when we built it. It's been a while. Does it look bad?

No. I look like cracks need to be filled. And I And I don't know what it is. Is it, you know, two and a half inches of binder cord that are compressed? Another two and a half. Is it road quality surface? I I I just don't know the history. I would think because of the weight of the buses that it's it's a pretty good grade. It should be what they call road grade, construction road grade. I just wondered when it happened. And to my knowledge, I never remember hearing it talked about being repaved. It was just when they built it. There was a big chunk of it that got repaved when they did something with

a propane tank and they had to put in new ballards to like protect it and they needed to do new paving for that, but it was only a piece of it. It wasn't it was expensive. I remember [clears throat] ballards were expensive. I don't remember but I did the ballards. We just did the ballards two years ago. That's so I don't remember huge paving. Okay. So So

so there's also another way to look at this. We also have to look at the fact that we and you heard it from Ian. We talked about the possibility of electric buses. So, by putting off the paving, the closer we get to when we could do the paving, we might have a better idea if we're going to have to go to electric buses. And if we're going to do that, then we're going to have to be make some changes in that parking lot anyways. So, it would be better to move that project a little bit off just to see where the we start to get our notes from up in Hartford and find out what they're going to do. So, so do we know when it was originally paved? 12 years ago. 12 years built. So it isn't five years, six years, it's 12 years. Yeah. Okay.

And I don't even think it's been crack sealed and and restriped or Yeah, it certainly needs that. I mean, I just looked at it. You know, I'm just looking at what I would see outside a UPS building in an apron and you know how often you do things. I'm just trying to get a sense of 12 years isn't significant. Ed was the one that suggested it needs to be repaved or the bus. Oh, Eric facilities. He handles that. I'm wondering if Yeah, we could reevaluate that. Um, yeah, even if you could get five more years out of it, I'm all for upkeep. We all want to have proper upkeep, but um, you know, I walked over there as well, looked at it, and [clears throat] looks like crack ceilings could could be an option to extend it. Yeah. I mean, this is nice chunk of money we're talking about here.

So, this is really something that if I'd known that you were going to talk about it, I would have had Eric here just to run this through. So, I'm hap Anita and I are happy to chat with him tomorrow. I'm sure that we can work something out. It's not the end of the world, but I would maybe start saving a little bit for it. Just so maybe 25 50. Yeah. Just put something I subgrade is failing. Yeah. You shouldn't have to repave, right? Um if you crack seal and um you keep it up every 3 years, you're fine. I mean, it looks like it needs to be crack sealed and sealed. at least that and a quick look.

But I just want to be sure we should be making that investment this year. Maybe we should be acrewing, you know, that type of thing. But, uh, Fred looked at, so I went up and looked. I just drove around, looked at things. Certainly needs to be crack sealed. It certainly probably needs to be sealed because the ultraviolet light eventually affects the the road surface. But I want to be sure we need to do it. Yeah. 237 grand is a lot different than you know 45 the next years. But this is precisely the discussion that we need to have at this moment. Yeah. Right. When we see the increase in the budget, right?

And then we look at well, you know, where where are potential reductions? But Anita, I want to go back on the increase. So wait, like can we finish that? Yeah. So do you want us to talk to Eric just to get some other ideas? Did Eric talk to Ed about options? Yeah. Um I think we should bring Edition. Yeah, Ed will not handle that paving bid. That the bus barn is considered a facilities and Eric will will work on it. Ed Ed could give us an opinion. Yeah, he will. Oh, yeah. He'll give you an opinion.

We're not cold patching. I can tell you that because he doesn't like that. But we will definitely have Ed weigh in on what he thinks can be done. Um, we're happy to do that. We'll bring them in and talk to them. I'll get you some options to decrease and for push it off for a while. That's fine. I mean, we don't do our roads. We figure our roads are every 15 to 20 years depending on the road. Yeah. Given the road priorities we're going to have at all the potholes, you know, we may be shifting dollars that way. I'm just looking in terms of priorities. What do we spend over the next five years? And it's material. It's not five grand. So,

yeah, it's it's to $4 million. We are putting together a grant called the trips grant and it's between 300 minimum is 300,000. The most is $2 million for paving. Um and um we're looking to do Anita and I sat down with Ed the other day and pulled up some of the road major roads that need to be done like Warpill Town Woods and what was the other one? Rogers Lake Trail. Those three really need to be done. Um, so I also talked to Christy Zelich today because look to see if we could put in a dual grant request for Townwoods. If they did, maybe that would get us the whole road. So, uh, we have a question into the grant people to see if we can do a dual grant. If not, we could each write one for Town Woods and then we could will include the other roads on ours. But, um, at least we could try for it. I mean, 200, if I can get $2 million for paving, I think that would be pretty good.

Be great. So, so the questions I would have for Ed is, you know, when do we last crack seal it? When do we put a put a sealer on that? And and the 12 years is when it was built, so we know that number. So, it would just help to know those things. Sometimes crack seal doesn't work that well. Understand that. Understand you have to do that often, but that's cheap. Eric will have all the notes because Phil Partek handled all that. So, I will have him review it. Okay. Thank you. Yep. I want to go back to the percentage increases. Can she finish her thoughts on changes? She's got a few more. Oh, more chance. Okay. Well, then you can get to your percentages and as long as you're in charge, Martha, I'll let you

I'll let you do I'll let you do it, but she was wanted to finish. We interrupted her. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Anita. uh in the fund there's another $22,947 that was put in prior for police body cams. Well, under our capital, we have police body cams that they're asking $41,000. We can reduce that number by the 22947. So then that would come out that would be in that other bunch because it's already incorporated. It's already out. 22947 is the reduction.

Then I had um Anita, there's there's nothing else ancillary that's required. I was going to ask that. So be because obviously you have um whatever you're saving the information to you've got the body cams, right? So that's one part of the axon is the axon part of that was storage as well and that 41,000 for the 41,000 for five years or six years out. Yeah. And that includes the storage. But was there anything that we needed to purchase here for that as well that it would have done for like backup purposes or our servers or anything along those lines that

I was and I I spoke with Derek on this. They didn't but they do the backup. Who who are they? Axon. Axon the company. And Axon is the one who's doing all the work with the state police. Yep. So I remember discussion and if worse came to worse there is um another probably about another 30 or 40 I want to say not a little more uh unassigned money in fun 25. some money still there

as long as we're not short in terms of equipment that's required which it doesn't sound it sounds like what you're describing with the new firm right because we started out six years ago with body cams and it was a completely different group and you know a different setup and that sort of thing. So, um, and right now currently the state is still doing it, but the state is thinking of giving it back due to the individual challenge. That's why it's in the but we've heard that for three years. So, yeah,

they're also trying desperately to hang on to their resident state trooper programs. So, they find incentives to keep us happy. The next um I had was I was given back about $10,000 in insurance, but now getting back one police officer, I can reduce insurance by 40,000. um emergency management um said he can reduce his 150 for radios down to 125 this year giving back 25,000 and the other thing would be the transfer out to the reevaluation currently we have if I'm not mist say 170,000 in that fund. So we might not need to give them 20,000 this year.

Wasn't it 183? 173. Yeah. 173 or 183 that we had in that 175 133. So if we only gave them 10, it's going to be 185 and they're valid now for another two years. So I I think that we really need to give them 20. So it'll be a reduction to 10. Yeah, if that makes sense. And then we can bring these to the mortise blockman. What's that total if we did all of those? I just added to my list. believe

I have 180547 in reductions of removing things and then the ARPA interest makes it 280 547 again please Kim 280547 and the two components are 181 it's 180 well she said she could use a 100,000 of ARPA interest correct but so 18547 plus 100, right? Okay. I might I might have missed something. Oh, I don't have the full-time police officer. I don't have the full time.

I think we had gotten a number on what he exactly was. And then another thing, if I mean, I know it. Always jive. Sorry.

Do you want me to mention it? Do you want to mention it? Do you want me to mention it? The other option is that we have about 700,000 plus in the open space account and a 75,000 contribution to them. This year coming year, we could reduce that by some and still make a contribution. We're required to at least make a contribution of $1, but we could make lower the 75,000. And again, and David, I think you've mentioned this at meetings before, if they come to us with a land purchase that they want, we're probably going to have to go to an appropriation for more money anyway. Um, which we have in the bank. So, uh, allocating it off for a year when we don't see something coming. Um, and again, I could check in with Greg, but I don't I have not heard from him saying he's thinking of anything at this point in time. So what did we allocate for open space this year?

75. So we could reduce it by 75 effectively. We have to get something. Well, 74,000 we give them $100. That's just that would be up to you what you'd want to allocate. I would go more than $100. I'd definitely go more than $1. Well, then maybe 74,000 reduction even with $1,000. No, I mean, but to David's point or your point, it makes sense if they've got a plan to spend it and they want to buy something and they have to go to a town meeting anyway. That's more than 700,000. Yes. Yeah. Actually, wouldn't we have to get

Well, I think even Yeah. has to go to town meeting anyways to approve real estate. I mean, in tough times, everybody's got to chip in a little bit. reduce it by 74. But why why reduce it entirely? Why not why not cut it in half or something like that? I just Well, it's a it is a big number. It it'd be different if the balance were 50 grand because their argument is somebody who wants to sell 200 acres wants to know you got something in the kitty right now. Exactly.

So that they're not 100% at risk of going to a town meeting and getting voted down. That's understandable. So at 700 grand all of a sudden like that's a lot of money, we've proven our point to whomever they may have eyes on in terms of potential sellers. So um but if it's 20 grand or 25 grand, I don't think it is going to move the needle too much. But we still have the goodwill from the folks who support open space and you know, nobody gets their their nose bent out of shape. So I don't Our track record for supporting all of their purchases is strong. It's 100%.

I think Open Space realizes that and that's the question is how much money do you need to have in there to show that there's good Yeah. When you had Diana Atwood Johnson, I mean every year it was like can't we go up from here and so I think we're in a better spot right now. So what's the what's the sense what's the consensus? Reducing the 75,000 to what number? 10 10 the 10,000. Okay. So So that would be a savings of 65,000. I think what what we're going to need is they needed for you to put a new budget together and then we're going to vote on it as a whole.

Well, you got to run it by the board of s. Uh we won't be able to vote on this until after April 1st because the number I am using is the estimate still I that's fine. What we just did here um adds up to 559303 including the 100,000 from AARPA. Yes. All the numbers 559. Thank you. This doesn't include the bus bar. It does. It does. It still includes the reduction of a 100,000 for the bus bar, not the holding out the 376 and the 100.

So what's the 597? 559 303. Thank you. So if we did the bus bar, you could essentially cut another the percentage down in half the increase between capital and general government increase because that would be about 4%. Yep. So I want to go back and talk about the the percentages. Uh you you said that the general government went up by 4.49 and capital about 4.0. Yeah. That was Yes. Over last year because last year last year last year the general government was 13877602.

Right. This year is 15 um without any adjustments 15 57122 51572 correct the difference is 79520 and that's an 8.5% increase. Yeah. So I don't I don't understand the four the 4.49 49. But regardless, the total budget increase including capital and general government before this discussion today is 8.5%.

Right. Well, that's what I'm saying. Of the total increase of the 1,179, 4.49% of that is general government and 4.01 is that fair enough. So those are the components of the eight of the 8.5 right? What did you say the budget for 2627 is for general government right now for last year for this year with no reductions? No, this is everything but this that's the 15057 157122 because that's all numbers except

that doesn't match this. This doesn't Are we about 14,500, right? Includes capital, doesn't it? Yeah, the 15 million includes capital. Yeah. No, I just But I just wanted that general cover. I know. But that's the number she just gave is the number I got when I took region 18 out of the grand total. Oh, okay. Remember we started it was saying take school out of it. Yeah, which is fine. Except I don't It can't. So that Kim, that's when you take the 48 and back out, right? Read. Yeah, it's I just did that a second ago. It's because we pay 79%. Yeah.

So our increase.4. So that's what I wondered too when he reg there's another general government number. I don't know what he was referring to, but we usually get back like between 600 and 800,000. So if it's higher this year, then a million would make sense. Lime gets significantly less because they only pay the 20%. Okay. So that's general government. This number is deceiving and that does

that did in that number includes two positions. One is a maintainer, one and also the police. We took the police out and we are not sure about one if we'll find someone or not. I think we'll find somebody but And how much was that police officer removal cost? Like that his salary cost? Do we have that? The police officer was 73756. Okay. Is that insurance the 30,000 for insurance? For insurance. Yeah. So it's 100. Okay. Oh, I thought you said 40,000 reduction. another 10 because they gave to us at 10.5 to 10. So it was 40 or 30.

A total a total of 40. Okay. But we said the police was a total of 103. So she the insurance is broken out of there. The

um the salary is 73756 and then their benefits were 30,000. Right. Another 10 and I would and I reduced insurance by an additional 10 myself. That was my other judgment. And that brought from what I had prior the estimate on everything uh 22 ms down. So now it's if after we get the numbers from the regional school it would be you're going to use another 800 from fund balance. We don't know millions from fund balance.

I mean we put 1.2 back there earlier this year 1.2 in on the sign. So it' be up to you what you want to use from fund balance if you want to think of that. I'm I'm just doing the arithmetic. The the increase today before our discussion is 1,179520 and then we just knocked off 559303 leaving us with an increase of 62217. dividing that by the um 13877 get us to 4.5 if I did that right. Would you would you

put all my numbers again if you guys want to talk to put all Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. What did you say the total increase was six? Say what? What was the total increase? too. Well, the the the increase before the discussion is 1,ion1 179520, right? And we're going to reduce that by 559303. Okay.

Leaving an increase of 6 620 217. But BJ of that 559 100,000 is revenue the 449 is the expenditure site 459

right Well, I'm getting a 5.3% increase with those um reductions. Martha, I think the one other thing I know you guys are applying for the trips grant

um that we had talked about might need to change is what we're contributing to the road fund and that Ed needed to re-evaluate the paving schedule. Um we did we did have a conversation with him and we did make some changes to the paving schedule. Um Ed had misplaced his copy of the paving schedule, so he went ahead to put out bid. He missed a street or two. Um so that's why I'm really hoping that we get some money from the trips grant because that will help us immensely, right? Rogers Rogers Lake Trail should have been done this year. Um and they're in bad shape. Yeah. So, we are um

well, I think we just wanted to also re-evaluate our five-year projection and make sure that we're still on target. We um are going to make the changes to the list. I don't think Anita's had a chance to do that yet, but we were moving things around with him. Um we met Monday morning at 9:00 and went over everything and we'll make the changes to the big plan and we can have that for you the next time. Um, the grant I believe has to be in maybe it's June. I want to say it's June 1st. Is it like a rolling approval process? You put it in. So I'll be

So you won't hear till after June 1st if we get it or not. Yeah. Be a while. I mean, I think but there's figuring out this best burn caving situation could could be a big Mhm. help. I think we can if we can I think we can find a way. And then I think just that, you know, really looking at what the unassigned fund has in it and what we can use would make a big difference too.

Well, the percentages I get are on the on the general government including capital. Everything other than region 18 with the reductions that Anita has articulated uh is a 5.3% increase over last year and the total including region 18 is a 6.1% increase over last year. So the 7.07% 07% on the sheet is reduced to 6.1% with these cost savings

look better on my screen but um on this screen when I just put everything in and I will

currently I'm showing um for all other government, general government um would be 14671575 which is a total budget increase over last year of 793,973 of that increase in capital is 200 11,323. So that percentage is 1.52%. And general government is 582650 4.2 of that increase.

Anita, you got a total increase of 790. 793 93. I I got an increase of 730. Where there's where's the city? Well, I I I just took the um the initial increase of 1,179 and I subtracted 449303 something in there. Oh, the police one. Yeah, I forgot the police. Say what? The police. The 73756.

I forgot the police. Yeah, I I got the insurance card. I didn't get the police. Okay. 72217. Sorry. 7227. Yep. The number I got. 72207. 217. 217.

Yeah. Okay. 211323 is capital. That's zero. 1.52.

1.52. And general government is 508894 3.6. Six. Seven. That's 5.2%. Okay. Um, am I I'm assuming that you haven't run any mill rate extrapolations or have you have a piece of paper for us?

I did not because I wanted to do some of these changes. So I do have an estimated number for you and I just for whatever you not for the not for the record Michelle um with all with all the changes we just made currently I don't even um and that's because last year you gave me 800 so it would not include it over last year would be 1.08 1.08 08 increase of the mill rate increase and if we took $800,000 again from the um

assigned so last year's mill rate was 16 and change right 16.23 23 I think. So now we're at 17.2 some odd. I need to get it down. It would be 76. 16.99 and 76.76 is the increase. 800 it would be 16.99 would be the mill rate of 76 increase. What if we took a million?

We took a million it would be 16.91 and 68. I mean to the extent you have your calculator. I mean my take-home message is that it's hard to make a big change by putting in 800 or or a million. I think the impact on the actual taxpayer and what they're paying is is very subtle, but it's cumulative. You know, if you make that change every year. Yep. I mean, I'm not saying don't do it. I just

I mean otherwise think about the fact that we're continuing to send more than a million dollars a year into that undesated fund

and that's all taxpayer money. So, we agree and um as you know um Anna and Andy and um Fred and I have been meeting and and talking about this and we met actually yesterday and I just want to read you um the minutes um this the uh statement we came out with at the minutes. Um hold on. Um the undesated fund is at 15.6 million. 1.5 was transferred to the undesated fund at the end of fis the last fiscal year. As we exceed 37% of budget, old lime moves into an unusual group of five to seven towns in Connecticut with burgeoning undesated funds. We agreed that reserves in excess of 30% of budget give diminished returns. for example, favorable bonding and other benefits. We're inclined to recommend that an amount of the undesated fund which exceeds 30% of budget is eligible for transfer um for this purpose that we're talking about right now. Um and we acknowledge that um addition of amounts of $1 million or less make small differences on tax bills. And I'm gonna just let the other people who are in that conversation,

but but just to repeat your numbers, what's what's this the starting point for the undesated fund number that you had there? Well, that was as of July 30th last year. So, this report here gives us 156. Well, but what was the number that you gave? I I quoted the number that's in here, which is 15.6, six. But I also acknowledged that after this report was created, we put another one and a half. No, no. Oh, but when when you say we put another one and a half, how did we do that? That's what we returned to the undesated fund last year when the fiscal year closed. But but but but that is included in the 15.6. No, it's not. It's not

because this report ended on July on June 30th. Not a not after the we had to wait for all of the This is where we ended last year's conversation. Yeah. And nobody could understand I I don't think the reason I was going through the exercise for projection. Yes. Is at June 30th of this year, what what's the cash that we actually have?

Yes. Right. And we we had two different time periods and everyone was in confusion and it was political season so people were silly in the head about lots of different things. But it's important to be honest about what that number is and to have a good fiscal policy that's a guideline because it's only a guideline just in case because the other thing that's happened is we have significantly increased once again the risk of our town's um tax roles because with the Reval um an awful lot of wealth has been um now further shifted down towards the shoreline. So that that has an effect as well. When you look at those five to seven towns, it's kind of a dog's lunch and you don't know what the um what the particulars are of some of those towns. Um some you do, but it was interesting that there were very few shoreline towns.

We agree. We agree. So we um Well, but I I I still want to fix the numbers. I don't understand. the auditor to say that as of June 30th, our undesated fund was 15.6 million.

Well, I agree with Hold on. I agree with Dave that we need to get an actual number from Anita, but for our purposes because we were just going off of something that was published that everyone agreed at on June 30th, this was the amount. So, if we had that same exact amount right now, this is how much money we would have and this is why we would choose to do it this way, but because we know it didn't go down. Um, So anyway, we looked at a whole bunch of different things that different towns have been doing in order to mitigate the concept of them living near the shoreline because as we heard the auditor say, she said that last week she she's like it doesn't add any additional risk that you're a shoreline town. We were all kind of shocked that she would suggest that, but she said no, we don't recommend or see anybody else doing anything like

Yeah, she's not an actuary. She's just an accountant. So, but she hasn't seen that from anyone else either. So, we started looking around and Andy referenced um what something that Branford started doing which we had our flood and erosion control had considered making a suggestion to do it back in 2017 or 2018 um and hadn't actions hadn't been taken on it but it was basically to create a resiliency fund. So rather than have within your undesated fund, so you don't actually like create this special I'm the one that told Andy about and I also told Jimos about

Yeah. But but we've our flood and erosion control actually worked on this like a long time ago and did a presentation. So we were inflating some things. we were referencing some of this stuff, but

that we instead of just making this unassigned fund grow with a way that we weren't sure what we would end up doing with the money, aside from showing the bonds people that like we have a big pot of money, that we would allow ourselves the ability to use this money to a certain point. We wouldn't let it go. And we discussed this with um the policy intern who's helping us create a draft policy around this of she specifically said less no don't you cannot go less than 17%. But you guys could create a higher number. We felt like we would like a higher number but 17% is the accepted standard because that's two months of you know costs and stuff like that. So if we decided to actually fund things for resiliency and because we live in a coastal area, that would also be something that Brford has seen the bonds people look favorably on and keep them at a AAA rating because they have seen that ahead of time and said this money is to be used for resiliency purposes recognizing that there is things such as climate change and there are flooding events and if you mitigate those ahead of time then you don't have to necessarily work. Yes, if a giant hurricane comes a giant hurricane comes but at that point even though the federal government is sort of like all over the place at the moment they're still coming back and there's still bills that are being passed in order to make community block grants available and fix things like supertorm Sandy. So that's what we would have to lean on because there's no way that we can fund that sort of recovery. But we can fund things that make these people who look at us and decide how much money are they willing to give us for for other projects. They can say okay but they

have this money set aside and they understand that if someone wants to do beach erosion control and that's what our flood and erosion committee are doing. We have acknowledged that that's appropriate. So, one of the things that we thought we would do with the excess of 30% was say we're going to leave that in the fund, but we're also going to suggest that that be used for these sorts of projects. I don't I don't that may be further than the group is gone at this. But I mean, but I mean, I think that's an important discussion because otherwise we're saying right now, well, we're going to take a million out and hope it works out. But that's not that wasn't our discussion.

That's not in the committee. We're not Well, but what I Let me just say what I understand you're saying, which is interesting, is that rather than just have a lump a lump of money to offset a decrease in our grand list if there's a hurricane, we have a quote unquote informal designated fund to fund resiliency efforts. Right. So, so yeah, the committee is thinking consider this. This is consideration. Can you could you I'm still trying to find what what is the committee recommendation in I'm not following

we haven't come up with it yet but before we got into distinct numbers tonight because we didn't talk about distinct numbers that I just didn't want anyone to think that we were suggesting we should go from 37% to 30 tonight. Okay. We're just introducing tax. We've introduced a new a new concept of creating a fund to pay for um uh climate uh flooding flooding problems.

The remit of the committee was to write a policy and we're we've got a draft but we're nowhere near a mature enough conversation to present all of this to the larger group. So the statement that I read was really as far as we were willing to go given that we've only met twice. No, no, that absolutely fair enough. And all I want to do is pick your brain to the extent that you guys have talked about this. Okay.

With the caveats that you haven't made any decisions, but just get the benefit of where you are so far. So there is a house bill that allows um towns to set aside money for resil resiliency and Anita kindly provided the committee with the the guard rails about how that money can be um invested and so as Anna pointed out Brford has already taken advantage of this this legislation and we think it's a great idea and Brford started with a million which I think we can agree is like almost nothing in the face of um something like uh hurricane Sandy but we don't really we're not prepared to say what number is correct whether it's 1 million or 10 million and of course what the impact would be on the undesated fund. So, we're kind of trying to have a framework and pick out rough numbers and and 30% of our budget is a size of the um undes undesated fund. And at that margin, we feel like going above 30% you're not really enjoying a lot of benefits anymore. You're not going to go from AAA to quadruple A or the the margin of of

but you may need money for sidewalks. You may may need money for Grassy Hill. Absolutely. So, so there are other items that, you know, are not about making people feel better because they save $10 on their tax bill that they're not going to notice. Well, and that's certainly part of the discussion that we'll have, but let's take it one step at a time. What's the purpose of the legislation? Why do we need legislation to establish a resiliency fund? What does the legislation accomplish? And there's a national resiliency fund. I actually met them last week. Say that again.

A national resiliency fund committee. I actually I met them last week at a retirement for the town of Brford's finance director. And that's they this is where you know a lot of it came. Um I I know I knew him. He retired just recently and he has a new person who's there. Um but he's known for what he did with that program tax. Um so I mean you can benchmark off of a lot they did there and there's the national route to get other notes with. I I'm just asking what does the Connecticut legislation do?

They're the ones that'll they're the ones put guidelines in place for it, you know, so that people aren't just putting it something together. There's guidelines to everything. So what counts as resiliency? Yes. Well, citizens you mentioned Candace something about investment. Uh does the resiliency fund give broader uh permission to invest the dollars than are otherwise available? It had there's a document that has guidelines as to what types of instruments you can use to invest that particular money with that particular earmark.

Okay. I want to I want to go back to the numbers though. um as of June 30th and this is an iterative process. We're not jumping to any conclusions. Uh the the auditor said we have 15.6 and then you said and it sounds a little familiar but I don't remember that we add to that 1.2 maybe Anita do you know the exact number of the undesated fund right now? The uninated fund as of 2425 the end of it was 15,590 88443

which is unassigned. That's the 15.6 right? So 1,39824357 is assigned. It's part of our fund balance here, but it's assigned. It's all the different carryovers that you did. So that's 1.3. And then we have it's non-spendable what it is. It's like Boston, but still the undesated fund remained at 15.6. That didn't change. That was at the the

but we decided to take 800,000 from that for this fiscal year, right? So that's effectively a balance of 14.8. No, this the 15 six is is after the after the eight came out. after no the 15% as of June 30th would be 2025 it won't get a new fund balance until the year is done so no because the eight would have come out for the July 1 start of the year currently we're we're doing um we have not used that if we do better than budget we often don't even pull the right

you know and I mentioned today we've got $400,000 of additional investment income so we typically do better than it's really an accounting calcul you look at the revenue sheet, it's going to show you that we're actually doing better then and we'll probably not touch you. Yeah.

Right. Um but just to get our heads around your your numbers, the 30% I I when I when I do this, I don't look at the at the the numbers the auditors do, but rather our budget for the coming year, right? So our budget for the current year is a total of 45394. So I'm just going to divide, you know, the the number is 15.6. I think it's less than 37%.

We haven't gotten to 37 yet. It's 34.4%. If you if you if you look prospectively, so we have 15.6 at the end of the year and our budget for the coming year is uh you know 45394 then it's 34.36%. And there is one other thing that we still don't know at this time. Um Martha reminded me because I sent her an email. um on the WPCA clean water that loan will we'll probably start paying on it next year but we have to figure out something but we have no nothing yet again just throw out numbers um 30% of the current year's budget is 13618 the delta between the 15.6 6 minus 800 is 14.8 the 30% of this year's budget is 13.6. So that delta is 1.2 million. Again with understanding that the subcommittee hasn't come up with any re recommendations yet. If one were to use the 30% as sort of a fair benchmark uh then we have an excess prospectively of about 1.2 $2 million.

All else being equal, other things being equal, right? Yeah.

I will say that the um let me give you one one more thingy. What's happening with the region 18 debt? So this year and it's included in the budget um compared to I'm sorry the coming fiscal year compared to the current year uh and included in Ian's budget is an increase in the debt service of 45 our share of about 82.6% uh is an increase of 45,000. The following year 2728 um the increase in the debt service our share is 307,000. The following year 228,000 the following year minus 124 then minus 699 then minus 682. So for the next two or three years uh we're going to have an increased burden in the six figure range uh low six figure range of u of debt service from region 18 and then it's going to start coming down significantly. And my takeaway from that is it's something to take into account but it's not a big driver as it as it has been when we you know went from nothing to uh the the renovation plan. So to to Dave's point, um the committee actually talked also about um generating a list of um upcoming um big ticket items, we imagine. Um there were some paving things that came up, a fire truck that came up. I think we all kind of know what some of them are. and um you know putting them on a schedule so that we can understand in as as best we can. You know it's obviously imperfect and and has risk associated with with it but as best we

can understand what we're going to be asking of the undesated fund over the next 5 to 10 years. We have that done for you. You know that I I think we we noted that too. So, um I think Andy had a list in an email. Um so, no, we we put it on our Excel sheet. We've got five to seven years. Could you send that to Candace so we can add it to the stuff that we're looking at? We can send it. It seems [clears throat] the fund should operate within a range to account for the billion years and the expensive years coming forward. Just range.

Anita, you gave us when we were talking about the the mill rate, you gave us a mill rate of 1.08. 08 mil increase. Was that after today's reductions? After today's reductions

and that took us to 17.2. Is that right? 16.23. We're at 17.23. Well, that that would increase the rate to 16.99 divided by 16.23 is a 4.7% increase. Okay. So, so that's what we stand with no withdrawals from from surplus, right? So then the question is do we want to reduce that increase and if so by how much? So the question when do we start talking about the revenue side of this? How hard are the revenue numbers based on?

Well, this this isn't this is from Anita includes our our assumed revenue numbers which could be higher or lower. Yeah, it could be higher or lower. I think you know investment income's going to be higher. We I mean historically we're conservative in our budgeting. So typically at the end of the year I think there are some exceptions David maybe some years back where the actual performance for the year was un was was worse than budget but most of the time it's better than budget as a combination of lower expenses than budgeted and higher revenues than budgeted.

Okay. I think I was surprised that um the collected taxes per by percentage were lower last year than they had been in prior years, which isn't typical. It was only collection rate was a little Yeah, the collection rate was a little lower. It's not so far. It wasn't incredibly significant, but I was surprised by that just because it's usually hovering right around 99 and it had dipped into the 98s which was still above it just barely above what we budget for but we felt comfortable going up because every year we were over 99%. So um I don't you know I don't know why that would be the number that we have now

calculations all of these calculations are based on all of the assumptions the expense assumptions yeah we were at like 98.8 something I think was her collection rate. So how much would we increase the tax collector by this year? You seriously? [laughter] What do you mean? The tax collector's office went up very significantly this coming budget because her part time is going fulltime. Yeah. No, I I get it. Yeah. But collections are going down. [laughter] Not a great investment. I think that

Judy Tuker had her issues, but [laughter] she was tighter than two coats of paint. So Anita, if we if we did if we just for discussion sake, if we withdrew a million dollars from surplus, what would that do to the mill rate? 16.91. Yeah. 15.91 15.91. And Anita, what won't we have the sheet that we've had for the last several years since you've been here and then prior to that where we've got the various alternatives?

I have it and I didn't want to do it until we made the adjustments. But I have it up right now and I'm looking at it. Yeah. Well, then you also want to find um there's a bunch you got to run stuff by the board of selectment. So we we still got this is all very preliminary. It's not just why I want to run everything that we just talked about all the reductions by the board of selectman but I wanted to run it by you versus for your blessing before I bring it to the board of selecting and not have your blessing um and um and we may find something else and again this is in draft form I didn't want to be in the news tomorrow

the discussion of what we're going to take from the undesated fund I think is preliminary at this time and I think all of it is very until until we have the other things button down it's not worth having that conversation but to have at a high level you know what we're thinking is is fine you don't so he just he just presents it and then it goes to referendum and again you want to think about it's basically just a bill because they they're sort of their own government number right now what they are going if You can do what you want.

We did get by law 2% loan. He can't give it back to us. When he's every budgeted correctly, right now it's a combination, but it's the same as homeowners. It's pretty straightforward. 20 years straight line amortization, right? He's got $3.5 million. I don't think so because we have one. Hey guys, it's it's really hard to hear what an

I'm one conversation instead of two. Yeah. Yeah. So, so this is very preliminary, correct? Okay. Bottom line, and April, as of April 1st, I will have um the definite numbers um after first from the regional school because that's going to that could change if our percentage goes down. That that will bring our numbers down. Yeah. Yep.

I mean, what we're doing here, $100, you know,$100,000 is not going to change it that much, but we go back to um the E1 is that would be that's big. Yeah. And the $400,000 that was being discussed about potentially dredging somewhere that's that's not in here. Am I correct? No. No. No. Okay. So, I'll be sure. Another big number I'd looked at over the time period. Yeah. We heard you were going to do it for 150. I don't know if we're going to We should 175 total. [laughter] All right. Well, I think this is a good start. Does anybody have anything else you want to say tonight? No.

No. Um Martha, you can't be here next week, right? We don't have a We don't think we're going to have any change in any of this to have a meeting next week. We were going to say I'm not here next week and I can't be here next next week. I can't be here next week either. I can't be here. I can I I can be here. You don't have to go to the chorus concert. No, I don't have anyone to chorus. Thank god. We had planned on giving you a week off because you're ahead of schedule. Make a difference. And so we were going to give you a week off. Okay. So, we'll we'll not meet next week.

You're going to finish the bud. You are going to finish your business, right? Because I have things on it. Yeah. [laughter] But I'm just looking at the calendar. Um, what's the week after next? What's the date? That would be the I think the 30th 31st 30th or something. We were gonna We were thinking you'd cancel that one, too. And then we'll the board of selectmen would would meet. An Amina will go over all of the numbers with us on the 6th. You'll meet the 7th. And we'll have a final budget. Well, and and the town meeting is like two weeks after that. Yeah. So, as soon as you finish on the 7th, you'll start sending me your notes for your PowerPoint presentation so I can work on it. [snorts]

Yeah. I'm I'm just I'm just wondering whether that's cutting it too close to just have one meeting where we're sure we can finalize. We'll have you can have two. You're scheduled for this other than the 14th. Yeah. Because I don't think we nothing's really going to change until the board of select meet and discuss these changes and we get the number for region 18, which we don't get until April 1st. So that means we don't meet until the seventh, right?

Right. So it doesn't really make sense to meet until the 7th because there's nothing material that we can change unless we want to go back through this ourselves and cut some stuff. But I think it's it would be better if we looked at this and we if I think if we looked at this and we said this isn't good enough, Marc, you got to cut another half a million dollars like that. We did it last year. Mhm. And we said this is the selectman's budget. If if we don't think we can pay for this, then it goes back and and we give these guys two weeks to to But I have a sense we might want to cut a little more. Yeah. So, I guess my my question is, do we want to meet on March 31st? We won't have final numbers.

Vote no. I would vote no. It's I think two weeks after we have final numbers is cuz Martha might find some more things that time. Yeah, exactly. I think that's what we should encourage. Yeah, last time I did. You did. You did great. We said cut another couple hundred thousand and you did. That' be helpful. Okay. So, we're going to meet on the seventh. Our next meeting will be She did it last. No, no, I know. I know you did. What you said? Our next meeting will be on the 7th. April 7th. That's my brother's birthday. Oh, yeah. I'll invite him. [laughter]

And then in an emergency, we can meet on the 14th or we can call a special meeting. Yep. If we have things to hammer out. Okay. So, you found that. So, then to me. Amazing. Let's write that down on here. April 7. So, okay. [clears throat] Are we other but business yet? Say what? Where are we on this? April 7th was the next business. Yes. Environmental study proposal appropriation. Um, this isn't just tell tell us narratively what what's going on with that.

Okay. So, this is 102-1 Mile Creek Road where we have 8 acres of land. We have a right of way into the back of it and um early late August September area, Michael Barnes and Jim Lampos took a walk there um and what they found sort of surprised them is that there was um what we would call like a farmer's dump where old cars, blasts, etc. were dumped. There is a small river outlet that leads to the Black River there. It's a beautiful piece of property. We don't really um have any intention to do anything with it. Um actually the person at 102 Milo Creek is asking to uh build a new house there, take his that house down, build a new house, but he still has to remain and give us the right away. Anyway, they went, they saw um Jim found a bottle. He figures this happened. the stumping was probably in the 1940s50s, but environmentally we should find out what's there. So, um, when we were at the CCM convention in December, Jim got talking to a company called TRC out of Windsor. Uh, they he said they'd come down and give us a free look and they came and walked it with Jim and said that we could do a site assessment for $4,500. So, I could take this out of engineering, out of ED's engineering, but it wasn't really engineering. So, I didn't feel comfortable doing that because it's really an environmental assessment. So, I'm like, well, where does this come from? And Anita and I bounced it around. And I just didn't feel like I should make this decision. I was like, is it a special appropriation? Is it what is it? Because we don't really have this. The only environmental testing that we have in it is for the landfill and occasionally for water

testing. So, I just wanted your input on this $4,500. If you tell me to take it out of engineering, I will. Otherwise, you want to give me an appropriation of $4,500 for selectman's miscellaneous, you could do that, too. But I didn't want to just make this decision. And J, we talked about this for board of selectmen too. We wanted guidance like this is a totally different ballpark that we've ever been in. But it once we have this assessment, we'll be able to apply for brown fields to clean it up and that block probably will not cost us. We can probably get 100%. And that's our goal because we don't think whatever's there we would hate to think was going into the Black Paul River. So you the idea is that you would ultimately apply for the grant with the submission deadline of January 28th, 2026 as described in the email from Aaron McBride. Is that right in the email that was sent to us?

Yes, that would be something that we would be able to I don't know if it was the exact was that a followup I didn't that was attached to it. Scroll down. It's, "Hi Martha, I would suggest attending the assessment webinar, blah blah blah." Well, that was that was Katie Deng who's the Brownfield's project manager. Okay, we did that. And then there's an email from Aaron McBride. Um, I didn't realize that was all attached. Sorry. And so Aaron describes this grant that you're you're going for. And the only question I have is that the grant is described as turning community assets that can attract jobs and promote economic revitalization. No.

And I'm wondering how many jobs and economic revitalization. That's not what it is. We went it's the brownfields assessment. There's something else she's doing talking about two different things. But the one that we're talking with with Katie Deng is a brownfields assessment. and she told when we went to do it this year, she told Katie we would have to have a site assessment before we could apply for the brownfields. So, lots of times there's there are other parts to pieces of it in the grants and there's a separate area for brownfields and it's not that. Believe me, we did a ton of research on it. I So, I'm sorry that you got

Okay. I'll just tell Jim that we're not doing it. It's okay. I don't want to get into this. I don't brought it forward to and I'm I'm asking questions. I'm not suggesting it needs to get shut down. I'm asking questions about about just so we know what we're getting into because financially a phase one always leads to a phase two most companies would suggest and if you read through his like caveats at the end

there's a lot of add-ons because a phase one leads to a phase two because really the phase one is just telling you who bought the property what it ever was before and we already know who bought the property we know what it was before and we know that it's now been a dump So the next logical thing to do is a phase two. So

So what I would have to do is go back to my emails with Katie Deng who is actually the coordinator for the grants and go back through all of those and tell you but I'm quite sure in my memory is correct that you just do the simple phase one and we're going to get you the grants for the phase two and the cleanup. And this may tell us that it's not anything and we won't have to worry. Have you guys thought about just cleaning it up? Like what's that cost? Like just taking the the garbage that's there like the truck and what or the car, whatever. It's a lot. It's dumb. It's it's in the ground. So it would be it's a very dumping risk.

We don't think that I mean if you guys are going to dredge, I guess we could go clean it. If you guys are going to do the dredging, I guess we Nobody's doing any dredging. Um, but so I'm looking at the GIS link that was sent with the email for 102-1 Mile Creek Road and it says it's 1.8 acres, correct? So I'm confused because now we're Did you say it was 8 acres? It's only one point. Yeah,

I thought it would connected it connects to another property, but I I've also had conversations with Greg Pto about it from open space because there's another person who owns property next to it that they connect. I thought it was 8 acres, but I could be wrong. I was so maybe we should just say 1.89. I don't understand the scope more more I think if you're if you do the phase one and you think that's necessary then I mean I I don't think you need an extra appropriation to do it. It's only $4,500. So but do you want me to put it under engineering? I just didn't feel it was legit.

What what might we use the property for? Is it a potential that there would I don't think it would be it would never be open. It would definitely be anything with the rightway. Anyone could go in and walk on it um and do whatever they wanted. But is it a space harbor management is interested in? I don't think so. I think it was really and truly that I think that somebody on a walk discovered the dump and I think Michael called Jim and said, "I think you should come see this."

Let me let me just read this from the minutes of the Open Space Committee Commission on June 24th of last year. town property at 1021 Mile Creek Road. This 1.8 acre parcel is owned by the town of Old Lime and there was interest from a private party in purchasing it. Open space has discussed a possible conservation easement on an abuing private property if the commission and owner proceed. The town parcel may serve as an anchor to the conserved private property and be worth retaining. A motion was made by Greg Futuma to discuss the property with the first electwoman blah blah

and the neighbor does not want to do the they don't want to do put it into the conservancy at this point in time. So I know that's where we are and that's where it just came in to play. I I just I mean Martha, I do appreciate you um you know looking into this and your the stewardship, but I think there is a concern that this might lead to something more than we want. And I know you're saying we could get a grant to clean it up, but Well, and I'm not familiar with the extent of the, you know, it's there. So, it truly could need cleaning up, but I just think we just should be very careful what we get into. Yeah, we're going to be of knowledge as soon as we do a report. So,

you know, there's going to find something. There's going to find something. And um you know as you walk around town I mean I there are properties where people have dumped things in the past all their trash and the rubbish from like 20 30 years ago. Um I mean the property that like nearly abuts this property is horrendous. I mean I wonder if there's really you know toxic things there that we really really need to be concerned about or it was just somebody's you know dump. But again, I I appreciate what you're trying to do, but I definitely need to be careful when we get into I mean, since we're offline, I don't know the direction. All right. Well, the direction of groundwater in that area, I don't know, but the there are properties nearby that are clearly not well taken care of

and one have stuff that's been there for a long time. So, you could end up finding stuff on our property and then have to prove that it's from coming from someone else's property. I just want you to know all of those facts and as long as you're okay with that then yeah proceed with it. But it could it that particular area of town is not like pristine looking from the people who maintain the properties in that area. So

well I I guess my question is whether um having more information rather than less information increases our liability. Um, in in other words, if we're deemed to know about uh, you know, pollution in a piece of property, does does that impose more obligations on us and we simply own the piece of property that's polluted? Yes. That knowledge is is is worse than ignorance. Well, especially when it goes wrong eventually. Mhm.

The document comes out. So, it's it's a tough deal. Are you what's what's the greater risk? the risk that you are polluting because we own it now or the risk that something down the road. So, it's I it's a it's a legal risk issue. Well, I'll tell you what. I know that Jim wanted to be online tonight because he wanted to be able to discuss this and his concerns, but he couldn't because he had another commitment. So, um, I can tell him that you'd like to talk to him because he's really the one driving this and I'm just the presenter.

Um, but we didn't come here for permission to do it. We we voted on board of selection unanimously that we thought that we should do this phase one.

Um, we came I came on my own saying, "Hey, I want to be transparent and I don't want to sign something off to engineering which isn't really engineering." So, I came to ask the people who keep the checkbook legit and asked for where would you like me to do it. You are telling me that you don't want me to do it and that's fine for the time being. You want more information, but I will get all the information from Katie. Dang, I will make sure that you see that we can would qualify and I will have Jim come the next time in April and he can present his concerns about this property and the environmental impact that he sees.

Okay. So, it's not a typically it's not an urgent matter so we can sit on this for No, it's just that we've had it since January and we wanted to let Ryan know that we were acting on it and we told him that we approved it and then Jim said, "Will you sign it?" And I said, "I won't sign it." until I can legitimately fussify it on into the budget. So that's so that's the differentiator. You're not coming for permission. You're coming to find out where can we put this right in the budget. Okay. I didn't want to just I was trying to be legit

and it went a whole different direction. Well, but it's I mean it's certainly something that should should be attended to and I think all the board of finance is saying that you know we have some questions and more information would be okay beneficial. So I do have another I think that what what you said what the question you raised earlier is really the critical one whether property that we own is is at the moment leeching contaminants into any adjacent property. In other words, if it is a current source of pollution for others, uh, we have to stop doing that.

I think we were more concerned about the waterway. The biggest thing was the waterway that it's next to and whether it's leeching into the waterway. That's right. Well, I agree. So, I do have one other thing to ask. Um, ask or a tell.

Well, it's a it's a definition of your bid policy. So, we um in our capital expenses, we have the $200,000 for the Halls Road sidewalks for engineering. Um we asked for the proposal which is in your book from Nathan Jacobson who is our town engineer and when we were having a discussion at the board of selectmen, Jim said, "Well, that's over 173. That proposal for engineering is over the $20,000. So perhaps we should go out to bid. But then um when I spoke to other CEOs and things, they said, "Well, it's is your town engineer." And Jacobson is is our town engineer. And when I mentioned it to Aaron Mortonson, he was a little he goes, "We're not going to we're not going to be your person." And he goes, "We're your town engineer." I said, "Well, part of the bid policy." So he said, "Can I read it?" So he um came back and just said, "I appreciate you giving me the bid policy." And he said, "The application section of your policy states that quote, policy shall apply to all except under nine section 9 expenditures for routine professional services who are appointed to handle ongoing routine town business on a regular basis such as but not limited to the town attorney etc." Meaning like town engineer as well. I he said I believe um Nathan Jacobson as town engineer is an etc in that exemption and and we were selected by the form by a formal RFQ process for town engineer to perform ongoing and routine professional services and designing a sidewalk in town as a town engineer service making the bid policy procedures not applicable and I do believe that they think they did the um probably the engineering for

Ferry Road as well for Tim. So, he's saying that according to the policy, he feels that there's an exemption. If you would like, I'll get a legal rep on that, but that will cost us money. Uh, idea of what it is, but so, do I go out to bid, which will put the Halls Road project about 9 to 12 weeks behind or do I allow to use his professional services because he is our town engineer?

How did we pick him as a town engineer? Like, what was the process for that? We had for that we had an RFP proposal. Uh we interviewed three maybe it was four. This was just as when I was a select person. I did sit in on it and land Juice. They had the Land Juice people come. Harold Thompson, Eric Knap, I think Paul. No, Paul wasn't there. Um was there a time limit on Rachel Gadio was there for inland wetlands. Was there a time limit on how long their appointment as town engineer was or was it just like

No, it's just like hiring your town engineer and they keep providing you with good services. We didn't go back at all. We don't we have a retainer. We don't pay them anything unless we use their services. How how much do you anticipate this uh project will cost? Well, their proposal is it's in your book is 173, but Tim Jim's on the Halls Road Committee, so I'm pretty sure we're going to get that down because he nickels and dimes them. 173.

That's the most that they anticipate for permit. It's permitting um study, all the different environmental study things that you have to do. It's all in the proposal, which is all in your budget book. I mean, it it does seem to me that if they had to go through a essentially a bid process to become our town engineer, like that would be silly to make them bid again. Well, this is not routine project. Yeah, this is not routined and very routine. Yeah,

it was the this is not a treeine um item for a town engineer. So it's a discreet project in in my my personal view. Um but also are we doing a survey? Because for 12 years I've been talking about the starting point needs to be a proper survey of whatever area is going to be affected. And it started out with Huntley as well as Halls Road as well as Lime Street. Um, and if we're not starting out with the survey, I think we're putting the cart before the horse once again.

It's I don't I don't have it open, so I don't have my book, but I can tell you what the proposal includes. And we do have the BSC design concept and the that were origin. They didn't do a survey though. I know, but I could It's all in there what we have because they took Nathan Jacobson went and got everything they had from BSC. Yeah, the state has also done some work because it's state property and they have talked to Nathan Jacobson. Um, Kim, do you have it? Were you are you able to find it quickly? I don't know if I can find it quickly.

It It's Nathan Jacobson to Martha Shoemaker. Is the date January 28th, 2026?

Yeah. And can you just if you go I think there's a list page Candace that sort of goes through one by one. Um so I just going to I'll just make one comment really quickly while you're looking. So my only concern with just automatically kind of giving them the the the go green light is that this is not like routine maintenance. It is a special project. they're g I just don't want to set the expectation that anytime we do something that's not routine maintenance, they're our go-to guy because they gave us um you know because we we have them as routine maintenance. So I don't I guess my thought would be as a taxpayer I'd probably want a couple of other people to come on board and give a bid just because again it's not it is outside of that routine maintenance. Now you guys might disagree which is totally fine. I just didn't want I just don't want it I want it on record kind of with the idea that like hey this is separate. It's just separate from that. If they're hired as the routine maintenance people that's great but this is this is not that this is something different.

Yeah. They they didn't design the bridge right? No. But that and I'll bring you up today on that as well. Would we normally if we had a town engineer that sat in town hall with a design they would do this. I mean, I think that's the question. We saying he said if you had Tom Metaf, if you had Tom Metaf still working here or anyone else, he'd be doing this work and sub sub pulling out the whatever. So, if we had an engineer upstairs,

he'd be paying this job doing this job. I mean on that line conceivably anybody that is going to go out to bid is going to bid the exact same way that they have bid. They're going to see the specs for the bid and they're going to match those specs. Right? It's the connectivity grants. You have to work within the parameters of it. So you want someone who's worked on them. So that is important. Okay. And they have done that. Um and so the amount was 170 something. He knows the grand and he's done it. This is swarm water or something.

Is that in here from Jacobson is about storm water general permit? I have public education program implementation. Did you not put the one in for 146 to 17? Hold on. It's supposed to be in your book section capitalipping for it. Um I mean Okay.

I don't know how you do I I see what you're saying and I I I see where Maria's coming from on this too. I just I do feel like he has a claim on that. Like if this is considered I guess it would be is this considered routine or not? For us, it's a really big project, but for a lot of other towns, it's not like building sidewalks is not that big a deal. It is something your town engineer might do. So, I don't I don't know how you I don't know how you decide on that. We can't say that he has a claim on it without seeing the RFP and the response to the RFP and understanding what is it that we agreed to do for us. Yeah, to be our tone engineer BJ because we

would there need to be a definition of what does that mean? Yeah, we got nothing right. I'd have to go back and it was six years ago, five years ago. I would have the right to do every engineering project that the town has. So I I mean I would

well I would think more substantively the question is do we want to go out for an RFP because we think that somebody else might do it better or I in other words I would I would doubt that we have a legal obligation to have these guys do it. Um the question that you were asking is do we have a legal right to let them do it under the bid policy. I will also pull their contract because Tim signed it. I'll have But then but then think about, you know, what do we want to do?

Yeah. What's best for the town be? Because a town our size usually it's one guy who's the town engineer and he coordinates RFQS and RFPs. So that's what he or she does. Well, they also do other things. They go out to do surveys and things like that. They'll get some permits and that sort of thing, but it's a lot different. It's like using Susman Shapiro. When we had a a sole proprietor, um they were coordinating and you didn't have Susman Shapiro doing every piece of legal work for the town like they do right now. So, um I think

they still don't do all the legal work because when we had our for our former legal council didn't have land use experience, so they pulled their own land use attorneys in, right? Which is fine. They coordinated that. But I'm saying it's it's the same analog. So, um but where I started with this is if we're not starting with surveys this go around. I know we are. I know we are because he told he actually sent me an email and said this is the first survey we need to start on and that's when I said to him we might have to put the brakes on this and so that's when he asked to see the bid policy. Okay. So we we just don't have a copy of

17 yeah he's a shoe in I mean right like most people would be like oh okay put it out your bid. I don't like that term, Maria. The the piece. No, that's not appropriate. He's a professional. And he just said, "I don't understand this. We're your town engineer." And he said, "Can you tell me why?" And I told him and he said, "Can I read it?" And I said, "Yes." So, they're not in there. I'm not trying to make it sound like they're not qualified. That's not It's not that, but it's not.

But the idea that that he has the expectation that he would be able to do it Does make me pause, Martha? I mean, I'm just going to say it just makes me pause. Well, he was the person I call He has already sat in on the initial meeting with the connectivity grant people. He has already sat in. He helped us write the grant for the connectivity grant. He transfers. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, Anita. It's a J to the road fund,

right? Subsurface investigation. I feel like this would be a little bit easier if it was like a little bit more defined and maybe it is some place that just says like, "Hey, Nathan Jacobson does all of this stuff for us when an opportunity comes up because every four years we go out to bid and look for a town engineer and they keep winning the bid and we keep being happy with their services." Like I feel like that's a different conversation than Yeah. Like a bunch of years ago we signed a thing with them and it's routine maintenance.

It's and this may be under that contract. It may be routine maintenance in which case we don't even have to have this conversation. But what if like if we don't define those things then I think it does get sticky and I think it gets sticky for him too because he's looking at $173,000 contract and being like I'm not losing this. I'm going to hang on to this right in services professional services don't correct. Yeah. But 173,000 is kind of like a big like that's a that's a lot of manh hours. So, well, why don't you read what it includes because I don't have relationships. Well, I there's this

there are two different questions. One, whether we're permitted to um use the exception in the bid policy to let him do the work. And second, and and my guess is that reasonable people can disagree about that. Um but the second more substantive question is do we want to right does the the board of selectmen uh want to assign the bid the work to them without going out and seeking competitive bids but I I would I wouldn't think the board of selectman should feel bound by the contract we have with them to give a brook to them if we'd rather put it out to bid. That's all.

Do you have an opinion either way? I mean, would you prefer that they do the work? Um, I I like the work they do. They're very thorough and they're very good about keeping us on task. If they need something from us, they're honest and if they don't hear back from us in 48 hours, they're right back at it. Like, did you say you were going to get that to me today? Um, but I mean that's I know that I know that you um

you know we have a main office. I mean Michelle will tell you main office of three people and that we are the ones that write the RFP and it takes a great deal of time to put out an RFP. So it means that Katie's tied up for days and I'm feeding her information and we're formatting and putting it out and then we have a legal notice which cost us money. We have to put it out for legal notice. Then we have to do wait so many days and then you have bid opening and then you have to clarify the bid and then you have to make sure that the contract that they write to you is actually com. So it's a 12week process. It's a 12week process. In that time Halls Road sidewalk committee can begin meeting which Tim is coming in on Monday to uh put together a beginning agenda for that. Um, but it will put them basically at a standstill for a while.

Here's the other issue that I have in reviewing their proposal. Like I I would want an owner's rep in essence, which would be a town at uh engineer to to look over this and see whether attending one hall's road committee after the preliminary design is enough for us as a town. that they have two suggestions in the survey section for folks that say unless you have an objection, we suggest Davidson Environmental of Chester, Connecticut. Okay. But there's no RFP or RFQ requirement. It's just their suggestion unless we have an objection to it. And the same goes with we propose utilizing the services of our affiliates

land survey and technical services for subtask 1.2. 2 through 1.5. It's just fraught with um kind of uh you know contradictions and and things that um I would expect a town attorney to be objective about and it doesn't feel that way to me. So, so you would like us to basically write an RFP basically stating the thing. Let me let me just walk it through. RFP. No, but you're putting words in my mouth right there. Here's here's what I would

David. I'm asking you for I'm check telling you I'm telling you what I'm hearing and if I'm wrong then you can correct me. But but let me let me just truncate it because it's nine o'clock and we spent way too much time on a bunch of stuff. We now have a Halls Road committee which we haven't had for a long time. Right. We put it six months. Yeah. But we just got it up and running recently. No, they were appointed yesterday. They have not met yet.

Right. So they were appointed yesterday. So that is just getting up and running. Um, we have this long letter from Jacobson, our t town um, engineer to go through a whole bunch of stuff. I think I'd like the committee as their first task to review what Jacobson has proposed as the starting point. Okay, that's what I would suggest. you would like them to decide if they need to go out to RFP, but in the meantime, I probably should get a legal opinion because I don't want Jacobson to quit on us when they're in the midst of other projects for if you feel that that's true.

But I think that that makes sense because if the legal opinion is this is considered above and beyond the scope of above and beyond what it is, then yes, you go out to bid and then if it's not, then it is what it is and they get it and that's fine. Is our bid policy passed? Have we voted on it?

I asked you that when I became a select person because according to the notes on the bottom uh it was amended in 21 but never I cannot find note where you voted on it. I went through all your minute meeting minutes. I could not find it. Um Bonnie seems to recall that you voted on it at one point in time. She thought it it was 19, but then I found one notes. So I handed it to Andy, one of the first or third, you know, the first round of budget meetings that I went through as said, did you vote on this? Yeah,

I believe Candace, you have copies of that though that because I think 2018 um like package which has a whole bunch of policies. You think it's in we've been particularly focused on other policies in there which I can guarantee you are not final because they still have handwritten like edits all over them. So if there are other those are from Tim but I have but if there are other policies in that package that are incomplete I would hardly be surprised. The one I found was forbid that I found was from 2019. We and we that's what we've been following because when I think that's that's a defect.

I think every time we revisit this, we come up with the conclusion that it was fully baked but never passed by the board of selectmen nor the board of finance. So 2019 said it was had a D on the Well, if we had no bid policy, then we're unconstrained. says it was amended by the but we voted on it in 2019 and it was amended in 202

yeah that's that's fine but it needs to raise some questions about this contract I'll just have anybody from suspro looked at the contract and said it's okay to totally fine no it's more I mean I feel it's more of a proposal somebody asked we haven't gone into like I haven't gone down through the nitty-gritty with him at the moment, but because that's when I said to him, I think I might have to go out to bed and he was really taken aback. It was also out at 8:00 this morning.

I mean, I could see where he'd be. This is clearly a lot of work and he probably made the assumption that because he's been included in all of the other meetings that this was just a foregone conclusion that he was the engineer of record on this. So, I can see where he's confused and I can see where, you know, you were like, "I'm not sure about this. Fold up because this isn't a $5,000 project. This is a big deal for us." So, yeah, let's have Susman Shapiro double check it and say if this is the bid policy, this is covered or not covered because that answers the question and none of us here, I think, can do that. Okay. Is the bid policy in effect first and foremost? Well, if it was voted on in 2019 and then amended in 2021, then it has to be. I don't know.

You were all here. No, I wasn't here. David should know. You were there. Said every every time I revisit it, it was something that hadn't been active. I brought it up to your I brought copies of it and I It doesn't matter. It was okay. As we sit here tonight, we don't we don't have the bid policy in front of us, and we don't know whether or not the bid policy permits this to be a no bid contract, but it makes sense for Susman Shapiro to take a look at the bid policy and to tell you whether you are permitted to avoid an RFP. Okay?

And if they say yes, then you know, chat with the board of selectmen and see whether they you want to exercise that right. As I said before, I I doubt it's mandatory that you uh assign this to them, but if you want to permitted

anything else,

I I have one I have one quick confirmation. At a meeting or two ago, we discussed the uh the methodology for assigning uh grants to the beach associations. And I said, "Historically, it's been a two-part process. first based on budget and then adjusted to actual and I recommended changing that to um awarding the grant solely based on the prior year's actuals and having it be a one-step process and a one-step grant. And I think everybody thought that was fine. I just want to make sure that I remember correctly.

Are you going to put that as policy BJ so that we can put it into the policy book? Sure. because then we won't have to revisit it for a [clears throat] while because yeah there's an existing policy that is the complicated one and I would revise that to make it the simpler one okay with everybody because our policy intern is here for uh till the end of May around the middle to end of May when she finishes her master's degree and um if you can get a draft to her she'll you only give me three months I don't know They can do that. We would like to use sir all over time. I would like to use as much of her. She is magnificent. She's a magician. Where is she going to school?

Yukon. Yukon. Your tax dollars at work. But anyway, she she did some work for our little committee and she did a wonderful job. We were very pleased. So, so we need I I take the silence as an okay. [clears throat] Are we going home? We need to any public comment motion. [laughter] They all left. Need a motion to adjurnn. Yes. From you. I'll move to adjourn.