Board of Selectmen - Regular Meeting

Tanya. All right, we're going to bring to uh order the board of selectment agenda meeting for December 16th. Um we have a lot to get through tonight. So uh we are going to ask first if there's anyone here from the public would like to speak to something that is not on the agenda. Mr. Jud, would you please come to the microphone? And for a lot of new faces, if you're going to speak, you could come to the microphone. Make sure it's on. It'll be green. Give your name and address uh and go from there.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Harry Jud, 25 Stack Drive. I was hoping you guys could give us an update on the solar projects that we discussed last March. So there is this Thursday um Kir is bringing a conceptual consultation to the planning board about the um facility on the landfill by the high school. There is I have to and we haven't dealt with it yet, but looking at the um meeting minutes for that it really what they're asking the planning board is about the connection from the solar field to the town grid. That's what will be discussed as a conceptual consultation at 7:00

and the sandbox. Say again. The sandbox, what about that project? Uh there's nothing in front of the planning board on that yet, but I don't know if others have any updates. There's I've been in direct contact with our town attorney who is working on the matter. There's one sticking point we are trying to resolve. Um all of their sticking points have been resolved and so there's just one outstanding issue. We're just trying to get final clarification on contract for both projects. That's great. Y thank you. But it is all moving along. It's it is uh as you know a slow process to get things done uh in municipal government but it's moving along.

Well, I I will add that since March I've signed off on almost 30 contracts for solar projects elsewhere. It can move more quickly and I'm glad to know that it's finally moving. Thank you. It is moving. Yes. Thank you. Anyone else from the public um want to speak on an issue that's not on the agenda? Mr. Wheeler? Just make sure it's on there. Thank you.

Yes. Uh Mike Wheeler at the Mountain Center Road. Uh last meeting Elena brought up the subject of the old meeting house and whether they were going to put a warrant article or something across for painting and and general repairs. Is there any word on the wording of what exactly that warrantica will be? Elena, do you want to deal with that? You're the closest to that issue. Um, I have no idea what the wording of that warning article would be. I know we did get the opinion from council after last week's meeting. Um, that indicated that there's a preservation easement.

Yeah, you could put conditions on what it would look like or what can be done with it or not done with it. Right. Um, you're talking on the what it talks to repair it or for the sale of it. Are we getting confused here? Well, it sounds like the town overall it's and this is my opinion of the opinion that I read. My opinion of the opinion. It seems like a a

the an easement could be placed period on that property if one does not exist whether you sell the property or not. you can place um a preservation easement on the property. Uh that would put stipulations on what could and could not be done with that property, both for us as a town if we were to keep the Bob meeting house or for a potential buyer. um if the town were to vote to sell the the property. So

warrant article that's coming isn't necessarily going to be just for the people to vote on appropriating money to do the general repairs that need to be done on it, but more a case of the town has full intention on looking into selling the building rather than repair. There's been no decision made by the board at this point uh regarding I know there's no decision. Yeah. So, regarding the language of the warrant article or the direction that a warrant article might go, that's the problem. What which way is it going to go? Is the board recommending? We have not made a recommendation.

Sell the building to just maintain it like they have since 1985. It's reiterate what the vice chair has said. We've made no decision either way. Okay. So, there's not even been a vote. No vote, no motion. Uh, no discussion about a voter motion and tonight is the first time I've ever heard. When is the deadline for I believe for the board. There's a the deadline for petition war articles which is passed. No, no, for regular not zoning is passed. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then the board just has to have it posted the whole warrant by February 23rd 2nd.

Yeah. It's near the end of February. So we still have time. So you've got till February to figure out exactly which way things might go one way or the other. Either way, if it if there is a warrant article, it would be up to the town and the voters to decide on which way to vote and it wouldn't be a decision of the and the two different there's different warrant articles do have different um deadlines. So, you could have if there's a warrant article that has financials attached to it, that has a different deadline and process than a than a non um monetary warrant article, which is uh goes for citizens petition warrant articles as well.

For a citizen warrant petition, when would when when's the deadline for those would have to be? If someone was to just throw in an idea of their own, how when would that be the deadline for that be? Same thing, February. It's that one's uh beginning of February. It's a little bit earlier. We can get you that exact as well, Mike. And how many signatures would you have to have? 25. 25. You can get 25 people to sign. Make sure they're registered. Yeah. Yeah. And it would have to be in before February. Yeah. 25 registered voters, I believe.

Another quick question about the fire truck that you people uh approved the last meeting. It was for 1.123 whatever the number was million. And supposedly if they the reason they wanted to have it done then was because they could get a 70 odd thousand deduction if they place the order because it takes two years to get the truck and okay the 70 grand that they that you're going to be saving. Where does that 70 grand go? Does that stay in the fire truck fund to buy? We understand we wouldn't have been able to afford that based on what we set aside without that discount.

Yeah. And this was approved by the town voters at town meeting to make this purchase and we've simply found a way to save some money and get us a truck faster. Right. No, I I understand all that. The overall difference I think this is where the confusion is coming in. The difference if we had not done a one pay was 70,000. It would have cost 70,000 more which would have blown out of the water uh what we had uh what we had set aside and voted on at town meeting for that piece. So there isn't really 70,000. The cost difference I think was 30. I'm trying to remember. Was there wasn't a 70 pool of money? No.

There's not a random No, but there is there is a difference. There's a financial difference. And even if it's like five grand is the difference, that money then lapses to the unexpended fund to buy this particular track. How many years did it take putting money aside to get to the one this million dollar figure? That would be a When did they So fire truck? That's hard to say because we update and modify the list of equipment that we might need. You know, 20 years ago, we might have started saving for a ladder truck or a pumper truck. Yeah. And then five years later, we need something different. Price changes, things like that. Right. Or the needs of the towns change. Yeah.

So, I don't think you could say for any piece of equipment that exact piece of equipment has been planned for, right? Like they said, the truck that they have right now is a 2008 and that two more years would be before you get the new one. By that point, that truck would be 20 years old and you're replacing it with a million dollar truck. Now, is it already worked into the equation that that over the next 20 years you'll put away another million dollars and you know damn well it's exactly how our CIP million by the time that time comes and you'll have to adjust that figure. Exactly. But that's all figured into the equation.

Yes. That's exactly why we have a a CIP program here to make sure that we are planning for big purchases long in advance to make sure that the impact to the taxpayers is minimal. Yeah. And the old fire trucks can either be sold and to recoup some of the money. Is that part of the it so we've done a bunch of different things. Uh one truck we traded in on the new truck. There was a year where the tradein wasn't that good and we sold it to a third party. Wasn't there one they converted into a plow truck or something? We converted into a plow truck. Yep. Uh and so we've had we have a a long history of uh being smart with our resources depending on what is available to us at that time. Now

if I could just touch back real quick again on the bully meeting house. It needs to be understood that that is is a historical building. It's owned by the town since 1985. And since 85 the town has put minimal minimal amount of actual money into the building to maintain it. There's been grants, there's been tons and tons and tons of volunteer work, things like that that that keep that thing in in in shape. And at one point they had a guy come in and supposedly with a drone and it the price went from started out two or three years ago 30 grand to paint it and keep it maintained and that grew to 40 50 grand and then it went to 4050 and 100 and 200 500 and 600 and the sky just kept going out of sight and then so they had another fella come in and do another back down to 50 grand. I think you need to understand that we are not prepared for a decision on Bob Meeting House. Not today.

Um and so I think having, you know, having a conversation with us about some buildings that you think are valuable, it it's just premature to have this conversation. Okay. Okay. But just as long as it's in the thought that it's really not a building that should be sold under any circumstances. That that's all I get to say. That's all I get to say. All right. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone else from the public wishing to speak on something that's not on the agenda?

Okay, we're going to move on to our discussion items. The first one is no parking on Stack Drive. I'm going to give I suspect there's some people want to speak on this. This is a discussion around parking. It's not a discussion about a business on Stack Drive. The board tonight is here to figure out because the issue that's been raised and we've been sent photos is that people are parking on the street and the police chief among others is worried about the safety of that road because of the um interesting design of it and having cars on a street causes some problems from snow removal to sight lines and everything else. And so I know that this issue and rightly so has raised some temperatures, but we're here tonight to discuss the parking and not the business. With that said, we were we will listen um about the parking issue for as long as you want to be here. Um so we have some decisions to make whether those signs that are out there right now and as I said at our last meeting, they are unsightly and we know that. Um the decision we're looking to make either tonight or in the future is do we make that policy a permanent issue because of safety concerns. So given that I'd like to invite anyone from the public who wants to speak on this issue. Um just in the interest of time I'd ask that we don't repeat um as you know too much. But again if you'd like to speak please step to the microphone name address and uh we're all yours. Just make sure it's on there. Thank you.

Uh, I'm Mary Beth Walls. As most of you know, I live at 25 Stack Drive. I am at the opposite end of the street from where the house in question is, so the parking signs are not in front of my house. But I'm here to propose that I think the selectmen are taking the wrong approach on this. And there is a general feeling that the existence of this house and the neighborhood somehow burdens the neighbors and certainly I would say by placing no parking signs in front of eight houses and that's what you have right now is eight houses out of the 30 or so on the street that you are burdening the neighbors and I think this is the wrong approach rather than burdening or punishing the neighbors because this is hair I would suggest that what you need to do is go directly to the company that's running it earlier one of the neighbors did go to the company and asked that they stop parking on the street and for a while they did they as we all know, started parking on the street again. But I've also heard, I have no idea if this is true because it was through the grapevine that there's a change in management there. It would suggest to me that what we need to do is find out who the current management is and address this issue with the management. Since the signs went up, they are complying with them. They are parking on the driveway. They have made room to have all the cars in the driveway. There's no need for them to park in the street. And I think that they seem to be interested in trying to be good neighbors. And if they're interested in being good neighbors, then let's take advantage of that and not burden the neighbors that are there, but make them one of the good neighbors and and convince them that they cannot park even one vehicle on that street. If that fails, rather than put up permanent no parking signs, I would suggest that you put up maybe pass an ordinance or something that limits the parking to say two hours or four hours shorter than any other shifts that are there and then enforce it. And that way the neighbors who perhaps want to hold a social gathering can still have neighbors park in front of their house for four hours. And you know, Saturday night I was invited to a party down the street. I walked down that party and walked past

another party. And both parties had a good number of cars on the street. They were down at my end, both parties. So they were not where the no parking signs are. But should those neighbors further down the street want to hold a party, that's an unfair burden on them that their party guests are going to have to walk a quarter mile down the street to get to the party because you guys have chosen to block it in front of eight houses. The reason it was in front of eight houses, Mary Beth, is because the thinking was if we put it only in front of Stack Drive, what a rational person would do would be to park in front of 10 stack drive. I understand.

That's the reason we did it. It's not We're not trying to burden eight houses. is we're trying to think, put ourselves in the mind of um an employee of that facility and where I would park if there was a sign in front of one house saying don't park here.

You know, the thought occurred to me, too. I'm sure it occurred to everybody on the street that that's why you did such a large area. And it was pretty obvious that's what you were doing. But nevertheless, the result is you're burdening eight houses plus the people beyond them who may have an event or some reason that they want to host it. I know one of the people on the street is the minister of the Unitarian Church who periodically hosts um small church events at the house, small meetings. You can just tell by the number of cars there. They would not be able to park where he is because of the way the signs are. You know, they'd have to come down the street the other way. You're just you're making this harder on the neighbors instead of taking kind of a a more enlightened approach and that is just deal with the company. They seem like they want to deal with us. So, let's deal with the company and get an agreement from them that the parking will 100% stop all the time.

So, if we can rewind, just get a quick clarification because I wasn't here last week. Did we in fact put up signs for 1300 ft temporary? Not uh it's not there's a map here. Yeah. 300. I heard there's a map here. 300 feet. Yeah. Yes. And well, it's 300 feet in each direction, right? Which is 600 feet. So if we rewind that though,

we knew last week when we did this it was this was a very short solution, right? We were just trying to immediately have them stop parking on the road. Ideally, we would talk to them like good neighbors and ask them to please stop doing that. That takes time. So like to address the short-term issue, we were just trying to say, "Hey, enough of parking on the street. We know what's going on." It it I think we all raised up raised that that fact that it is an unfair burden to the rest of the neighborhood and we're open to solutions. We're absolutely open to solutions. This was just a really short-term measure to get them off the street for now. So, I'm hoping tonight we'll come up with a plan and hopefully we can move forward with that plan in this discussion. Something that's maybe less burdensome to all those neighbors. I don't disagree with that. It's it's it's cumbersome, but we have to address the issue. Sure, we can ask them. We asked them once, it worked. They parked back in the street. Like, it's just going to be whack-a-ole, I think, for ever. So, we do have to come up with a solution. Two-hour parking, that sounds all right. You know, there are there are ways around it. I think there's creative people in this room. We can figure out what's what's the best what's the best foot forward for everybody.

Or four hour parking. If you're holding a party, two hours is probably not enough. Four maybe. And we they work in eight or 12 hour shifts. So, if you got four hour parking, you know, the they can't park there for a shift. Anyway, that's my observation is I just think it's, you know, there when I was in the legislature, there was a uh a line that you learned very early on and that is beware of unintended consequences. And I think there are unintended consequences to the approach the town is taking right now and I would suggest that we should be looking at a different approach.

Thank you. I remember from the conversation that we all raised the possibility of some unintended consequences, but the urgency of the matter was something that we all agreed on to uh tackle it for a temporary solution. And we're open to hearing everyone else's opinions and thoughts about what a permanent solution might look like. And it was also really important to the board to make sure that um the residents of Stack Drive did not feel as if decisions were being made immediately for them without their input. Um and I feel like there are quite a few possible residents here tonight. Um we did not want that same problem that occurred the first time. um with having the facility be exempt from certain zoning. Um we didn't want that to happen again with a no parking ordinance. Um so I'm glad to see that people are out here tonight. Um and that uh the caroling clearly you went carolling right door to door uh worked and you know hopefully we can come up with a solution. Can I ask and to what extent have you reached out to the owners and how much contact have you had with them and what was their response?

David is and I know there is a private group that reached out to them. The police have the police reached out to them as well. Yeah, I spoke to someone from the state and they gave me the person that was managing the home the name of Susan but I guess it's changed or I don't know. I heard that. I have not reached out to them to know, but yeah, and I have a number for Susan or I'll call the state again and see.

But I think you need to deal directly with the company. The state is just the they hold the contract. The company is the one that's running the show there. And it sounds like you've not had extensive discussions with them and and tried to to work with them to come up with the solution. And you know, the police were called there. So the police may have been dealing with none of that, but but nobody seems to have reached out and tried to work this out with the company. And that to me should have been your first call. So just an observation. Thank you. My name is Harry Jud. I live at 25 Stack Drive. Yes, the gorgeous redhead is my wife.

I'm sorry. Are you laughing at her being gorgeous? No, I just I'm just going to take 10 seconds for you to say that. It only took five. Look, Kip, I appreciate what you said, but um respectfully, I think it's what's in the house, not what's on the street. That's not correct. permit me permit me to complete my observation if you don't mind. Okay. Before you correct, we're here to talk about parking. I understand that. But

when the house was being renovated for months, there were vehicles parked on the street. There were pickup trucks and other vehicles. And that didn't seem to be a problem. And I think what's happened here is because we now have permanent residents regardless of their mental capability. It's because it's now a permanent fixture. And that is what has triggered this from the more temporary to what is perceived as being an ongoing issue. That's my point, J. I'm not talking about whether people are or not entitled to be there. So, if I might, it's great that you're addressing it now. The town has known about this since March. The fire department has inspected. The police department has inspected. The town was notified in March this was going to happen. And at risk of sleeping on the couch tonight, I'm going to disagree with Mary Beth that I think the outreach goes beyond the company that's operating it. This is a state enforced situation on us. The letter, that snippy letter that we got from the AG's office, you got from the AG's office clearly states that this is coming from HHS. And I think there are avenues to deal with this from the state because let's face it, the state has the contract. They are going to have more influence than you are in getting these folks to respect the neighbors. So, I'm going to say not just the company, you've got avenues with the state. Uh we have at least one state rep in the room now, I think. And there are things that can be done. Um, we certainly have in the past worked together in that that area. So, that's it. I know that it can be controlled. Um, for what it's worth, I've had events at my home with over 100

people, never had a single complaint because we managed the traffic and the parking and it can be done. I appreciate the concern that you're trying to address. Yes, it is a business. It's a residence with people in it. That's my point. of why it's how the house is being used, not what's parking on the street. Thank you.

Yeah, I can't I can't speak to the construction vehicles. The fact is we're responding to complaints from residents and those complaints started much more recently than March. And I'm not going to judge their motivations about why they're complaining about it. I'm taking it at face value when they email us photos of parking on that street that they are concerned about parking on the street.

And I hear you and I too am not going to question the motivation but and rather I'm viewing it as it's now seen as a long-term situation versus a construction time. You know, you you hire a company to come put a new roof on your house, they're going to park on the street for a few days and then they're going to be gone. And I think that's what we all expected with the renovation of that house. We spoke to the folks while it was being done and they never gave us any understanding myself any understanding this was going to be anything other than a single family dwelling

uh going forward. when the folks first the first lady moved in and her aids Mary Beth went down and met with them that's when we first you know she went to welcome them to the neighborhood was first we learned this was something other than a single family dwelling so I appreciate it come up we were you're faced here we can't turn the clock back to March but we are going forward and again I'm with you Kip I'm not judging why people are concerned rather I'm speculating that now that it's a long-term and not just a situation with construction vehicles, it's needs a permanent solution. Thank you.

I think that we don't disagree with you on that. That of course anytime there's construction and there are construction vehicles parked on the side of the road, we all expect that to be a temporary thing and we move on from it. Sometimes we get complaints about construction vehicles. In this case, we did not get complaints about construction vehicles. And as Kip said, we are responding to what we've heard from the community and making sure that we do our due diligence to respond appropriately and effectively to handle an issue that seems to be more permanent than a temporary construction issue. So, I think we're on the same page. Can the record show this the first time Angela's ever agreed with me on anything? A broken clock is

Thank you. I do have to get down the hall. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um, yep. Just make sure that microphone is turned on. There's a button there. It will turn green. Thank you.

I'm Nancy Reinhardt. I live at 80 foot road. However, my driveway is one stack. Um, so I'm right on the corner if you're wondering what that is. And I was a resident of 30 one stack for 35 years. So, I'm familiar with the neighborhood. Um, my concern with, if we can only talk about the parking, is that the driveway, four cars can fit, two cars can fit inside the fence. Four cars can fit side by in the driveway. That's six cars. During the snowstorm, my son came home from work and there were seven cars on the street with cars in the driveway for only four residents is a bit excessive. My solution, I have two. One is to limit parking on that side of the road, which you would put a sign down on both sides of one stack. Um or the second one is just overnight no overnight parking. None of us residents ever have I seen overnight parking on one stack. Sorry stack. No, thanks to Harry.

He missed that one. Well, good for him. Um, I lived across the street from Harry and we were at odds, by the way. Very much so. Um, so I think those are the only two viable solutions I can come up with. Or put the no parking signs on if you don't want to do it all the way up that side of the road, do it where the first sign is to the second to the last sign on that road. You mean the like physical signs like a permanent sign that says no parking?

This is and I think we want to be clear. There's a lot of these signs around town. You never notice them, but there are lots of places where you can't park on the street around on Alvin. Oh, I know that. But you don't put the sign up like every 10 feet. You say no parking 150 ft this way. So what you're seeing there now is much more intrusive than what would ever be, if adopted, would ever be put there. Right. Um, in terms of the parking in the facility, this is the problem with the original approach, any normal situation, you would when I sit on the planning board as the select board rep, when we're looking to bring in new businesses in town, one of the biggest things we do is make sure there's enough parking.

Correct. You that you have to have enough parking so you're not spilling out. And because of the way this business came to town, they were exempt from that process. And this is the result of that where it is a residential driveway trying to serve as a business parking lot. I understand. I was on the planning board for 20 years too. So how that goes and conquer has the worst parking in the world. Yeah. But anyhow, set aside, I'm concerned about our neighbors and the aesthetics of the neighborhood with so many cars being parked there.

And why were there so many at the start of the snowstorm? You can't possibly have all those aids for four people. I think your concerns were raised to us before. I think the pictures that we saw outline what it looks like when there's a lot of cars there. Um, ultimately the police chief will pine on this and I I understand what you're saying. Thank you.

So, generally during the day when I drive by multiple times, there's maybe three cars or possibly four. Uh, occasionally there's been more than that and they park on the street. I can understand, but I don't know if they're having meetings there or what they're doing. But they're only have four residents and that's a lot of parking for people that don't drive. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Gow. Good evening. Andrew Grill, 21 Stack Drive. Um, I just kind of wanted to bring up, uh, we can stick to the parking, but it does bring up sort of a greater point. Um, in the New Hampshire DH DHHS grant agreement, uh, exhibit B, uh, that was submitted, uh, regarding this business being able to come in. Um, section 1.2 says once target properties are identified, the the grantee must provide information regarding the proposed home, including but not limited to location size, proximity to community amenities, number of intended residents, environmental fit for the proposed population, uh, and any planned renovations. So, um, I mean, there's many points to stick to on this. Arguably, there are no amenities proximal to our neighborhood. Um, so it's interesting to I mean especially additional parking in a city in a more urban area, you would have plenty of parking to be able to contribute to a business like this. Um, this neighborhood has a bunch of kids, uh, one of which already has a developmental disability. Um, so when discussing environmental fit, um, I don't know where that was taken into consideration at all. And lastly, um, uh, how is this factored into the environmental equation? We we're sitting here right now, people taking time out of, you know, a week before Christmas, right, coming up to discuss parking in a

neighborhood that people bought into not expecting to ever have this conversation. We're talking about and we're talking about parking, but we're talking about parking for a business. Um, and the reason why we're here to discuss this issue is because this has drastically changed our neighborhood environment. And if we have to sit here and talk about a bunch of signs that are up here for a temporary fix, that has changed the aesthetics of our neighborhood. That has changed the sentiment of our environment. That is our neighborhood. And that has changed um how everybody is living uh where we live. Um, if we're talking about more permanent fixes, if we're talking about the inability to be able to take care of snow, if we're talking about the inability to be able to deal with cars on the street, um, that is now a permanent change, a permanent consideration that everybody has to deal with, uh, in in a neighborhood that this was never even close to in the cards of something that we're going to deal with. So, um, there's not much to be able to respond to here. I think it would be helpful to hear, do you think uh no parking signs should be put up or not? Parking on the street should be allowed or not. That's really what I'd like to hear, especially from a resident of Stack Drive, that you support the temporary parking signs, you support permanent parking signs, and do you think it's a safety issue? Those would be helpful questions for me.

I think it's very clearly a safety issue to have permanent vehicles to have vehicles permanently uh put in that location. Um, I do think, uh, putting up parking signs is an indication that, hey, this is an area that we consider to be a danger area and should be, you know, uh, especially on a permanent basis, we should prevent having people um, parking there. That's a choke point. Um, especially on the corner. Um, but that's what we should really be keeping the comments to tonight.

We started there. I think it's really important that we we focus on your opinion as it rel and you hit it on the head but there's lots of people behind you. Your opinion as it relates to safety parking signs temporary parking signs permanent I've heard your position. Yeah. Yeah. I think we want to know what people actually want. Is it 4 hour 2hour? No overnight parking park. No parking permanently. We want this conversation about a year ago is what we want. But um so to speak again I I really what would be helpful for us tonight is

I have what I have on the record. We can move on right. Yep.

Hi my name is Shannon Gerard. I live at 16 Stack Drive. Um, I've missed a few of these meetings now. So, I would actually like to read my testimony since I'm actually the one that lives at the elbow of this um neighborhood. So, if the committee is willing, I I would like to share my my thoughts if that's possible. Thank you for allowing residents of Stack Drive the opportunity to speak tonight and for accepting input from our neighborhood. My two primary concerns are safety and transparency. I apologize if anything I say has already been addressed as I am still catching up with all these new developments. I do find the timetable of this process interesting. It appears that we are now holding meetings regarding new developments that probably should have been addressed over a year ago. I do feel at least anformational session of some kind should have been taken place so we could have had an open and transparent conversation about process with the goal of streamlining communication on matters that directly affect our neighborhoods and ease some questions and concerns. Why did we move to Bow? My family and I moved from the west end of conquered to in 2019. At the time, our previous neighborhood had seen a significant increase in fast-paced traffic, raising safety concerns as our family grew. We were intentionally seeking a quiet and safe, familyfriendly neighborhood.

We purchased our home on Stack Drive after a family who lived there for 30 years. They spoke of a quiet neighborhood, very minimal traffic, only residents and their occasional guests, and an excellent school system. They wanted another growing family to enjoy some experience, to enjoy the same experience they had raising their three kids. Most recently, that vision changed a bit. Approximately a year and a half ago, decisions began unfolding regarding development next to our home without any notification to us or to my knowledge to other nearby families. The first indication my family had that something was changing really came from my children who excitedly thought another family and kids were moving in so they could play together. My late husband and I didn't have any information at all to share with our children, unfortunately, with the questions they had of when are they moving in. We eventually received a letter just recently after people had already moved in. The letter should have not been sent solely to one household, nor should it have come only from the company involved. Did the town receive this letter? Notification should have come from the town as well to all impacted neighbors before changes such as a business took place. I believe that would have been the neighborly thing to do. Today, we live next to a business that brings increased vehicle traffic, six or more vehicles per day, often on rotating or extended shifts, potentially including 24-hour operations.

Vehicles regularly use the main road for stack in various times as a turnaround at the dead end which is in front of my house. Stack drive is not a traffic circle or a parking lot. Our house is located at the elbow of stack drive which gives me a clear view of consistent daily traffic flow. Drivers visitors use the elbow which is the dead end. a constant turnaround, which is also an area where children meet to ride bikes, play outside, play games, meet to walk to other houses to see friends, but also disrupts our quiet area, especially right in front of my driveway. Instead, I now come home after a long workday to find numerous bright orange parking ban signs placed along our street. Again, not one bit of communication or even a heads up as to why the parking van signs have been staged there. My question is, is there more going on than I know? Because now I have concerns about what else do I not know? Again, I feel like a simpleformational session probably would have helped ease some of this to understand the demographics and assess in preparation of all this. I'm a working mother of two young, beautiful kids, doing my best to balance full-time job, family responsibilities, maintain a safe household, and staying involved in our community that I love. The well-being and being a good neighbor matters deeply to me. My children now ask why police cars and ambulances are frequently present nearby. I find myself having to explain in some way only as a mother knows how to aid some anxieties about what these emergency responses may be with very limited information about who is coming and going. This is not the environment I

had quite expected when we chose to raise our children here. But I'm trying to be very understanding and patient and educated with these decisions made so everyone has a home and is safe. I welcome new neighbors, but there must be some clarity about the level of activity that is appropriate in a residential neighborhood. I am also concerned about the impact on property value. Would any decision maker here have purchased a home on our street knowing there would have been increased traffic, potential safety concerns, or potential increase in frequent emergency response activity? This is a real and valid question for you all. I moved to BO expecting a higher standard of communication. I recognize that some residents may feel differently, which I respect, but that is likely because they are not directly affected or do not live close enough to experience these changes firsthand. I want my children to play freely and safely. I want to come home without feeling like I need to monitor traffic or who's pulling another U-turn in front of my house. I did not sign up to be on a constant alert. I'm asking and trusting the town to re-evaluate the situation with the safety of all residents and endure our children and families as the top priority. Moving forward, it is critical that the town developments like this are discussed openly and early with all impacted residents included. Transparent communication, thoughtful planning, and safety must come first. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, so two things. One, we were surprised by this as you were. It didn't go through any process. They didn't we didn't elect to be a town where a facility was coming. Uh, we didn't participate in an approval or a beating process. We were the same as you, other than it wasn't in our backyard. What would be helpful for me is um your opinion on should we adopt a temporary or permanent parking ban for the time being on Saturday? Um, I mean I just listening to some of other um speakers I maybe like an hourly parking of some kind would would be okay. Um, I I would have to think about it and if it's possible I I I could write to you all and let you know some of my thoughts once I catch up and think about this for a little bit. Um, you know, I do feel parking is one thing, but there is also there's a lot of traffic even just with the the neighborhood. I mean, the um the owners that live there already. Um, and then adding on to the additional, you know, services that are happening next door and just it's just constant all the time. I mean, I don't think there's one morning I wake up getting my kids ready for school and I take a sip of coffee and I already have two or three that are looping around. My kids getting on that bus in the morning is my priority and they get on there safely. I whether it's people walking around, whether it is, you know, cars, you know, going back and

forth, I know my neighbors now. I know who's there, who's home. The cars are familiar. I couldn't tell you between two to 10 vehicles. I don't know who they are. And unfortunately, in sort of a a world that we live in, sometimes it's just nice to know what's going on next door just a little bit. Um, so maybe just kind of doing a solution of a temporary I think that's really

parking. Um, that's helpful to me because I think my preference and I'll kind of tip my hat to my preference is that we can work with the property users and get them off the street voluntarily. That is my preference, but that already failed once and so we need to do something to make sure they understand this isn't just an ask they're being told. And so that's really helpful. Thank you so much for coming out today. Um, and I I did I just want to recognize that I uh I did talk to Senator Tara Rearen about this. Um, she is absolutely wonderful and very responsive and so um I I know she is aware of this and she did know that I was coming tonight just to talk. She was very supportive of that. Um, you know, she did get contacted as well. I mean, if this is taken to a state senator level and they're doing conversations and reaching out to state agencies, I I do think moving forward if this does happen again, I think we need a better outline about how we proceed so that all parties involved are are taken care of and heard.

Thank you.

And just to reiterate, we were not aware notified by the state. So there is an issue that needs to be dealt with at the state level, but here we are mostly concerned with the safety and the parking. And we have received um information from our emergency services including the police chief and fire chief about um the concerns on the road and that pinch point especially where you live that if there are cars parked there that they can't get emergency vehicles through safely. So whether there is an issue of an emergency at your home or 14 stack or any of the other um homes, we want to make sure that our emergency service vehicles can get through to get you all the help that you need when you need it. And so the parking thing on the street is a major safety concern. And like I said, we have received information from the police chief that there's uh line of sight. There's concerns about um the seasonal hazards with snow removal and a majority of a huge amount of

and just to respond um I just you know for next door too this is helpful for them as well if if they do have emergency services that are coming

to this facility. I I think it would be helpful to them because if they have individuals in there that need immediate attention and there are too many cars there that is also um a congestion or a difficulty that might affect them to get the care that they need. I'm just trying to make that this is for everybody. Exactly. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Christa Thal. I live at Seven Stack. We have um a no parking sign right in front of our house. Um thank you for making this an agenda item. Um I just want to double click on the safety. I have four kids um 9 through 16. We're constantly walking Stack Drive. We're constantly going there up to Long View and back. Um, my oldest son loves to run. He's constantly making roots on Matt My Run that always includes stack drive. And I, um, was just talking with one of my neighbors. I'm so freaked out about that corner. And I'm always telling them, and this is before 14 stack, I'm always saying, "Assume people aren't paying attention. Please go like the the wide way because people whiff around there." Like even, you know, neighbors can do it. Um, and so that corner is is very scary to me. Um,

it's one of the it's one of the more oddly designed corners. It is for sure. For sure. I think at the last meeting, I think Andy brought up the safety issue with um the cars parked there. Um, and so I am concerned about that for sure. Um, we also we have friends over, you know. Well, I mean, Sunday night we had um five families over um just to get together and so we often will use street parking. So, I don't love the permanent signs. Um just so I'm clear, you don't love the permanent signs or you don't like the no parking at any time sign.

What's the difference? So Mary Beth raised the point and this I want to make clear like we're we're trying to come up with a solution that works for people and we're glad that you showed up to sort of bring us solutions. So we had not discussed the idea of well make it no longer than four hours. Right. And so are you against any sign on the street or are you against a sign saying no parking 24 hours a day? Um I'm against the no parking 24 hours a day. Okay. I also have a question. Since it's a business, is it possible to do separate rules for that house? I doubt it. I I think the question is, is it a safety problem? Yes.

If it's like, and that's the problem for me, right? If putting six cars in front of 14 stack is a safety problem, what what are you willing to trade? Are you willing to have four hours a day where it's a safety problem or two hours a day where it's a safety problem? Because it's that's the real issue, right? I am not in good conscience going to say that's a dangerous corner and six cars on that corner is dangerous. But if it's a Christmas party, no, I'm I'm just not right. It's either it's either dangerous or not. Uh now it might be that we have 600 feet is too long. It might be that it needs to be 500 feet. It might be that if you're across the street from for if you're on the left side, if that's not a safety concern and you're happy to have cars parked on that side of the street, but understand that will mean seven cars from this overflow of facility will be on your side. I don't know what side you're on. Uh, and so I think it's helpful to understand that if it's a safety concern or just you or just an inconvenience,

it's 100% a safety concern for cars there. It's an inconvenience if we're going to say no parking at any time and then everyone is like just trying to shove up my driveway like do you know what I mean? I mean, but it definitely is a safety concern and that's that is my primary concern. So if it's a Is is it only a safety concern if we said four hours a day? You know, you could park there four hours a day. Is that reduce your safety concern? Well, would they be parking there four hours a day if they have park? If you need to if you need to park, you're going to park four hours here, then you can move your car seven feet and park four hours there and then you can move your car four feet and park it four hours there.

So, is it possible to have different standards for them since they're a business? No. I think what's possible is we put up signs that say no parking and if if somebody needs to have people there, you know, we get special permits for people who are having, you know, somebody's having a state sale or celebration. Are there occasions where you might say, "Yeah, somebody could have permits for a couple hours for an event, provided we made appropriate safety concerns, including if somebody had to have a large party, we have a cop there with a sign."

We can look into that, but I think it's highly unlikely that we can hold them to a different standard than anyone else. Not even with them being a business. I we these aren't these are personal pasture cars. It's not like they're parking Amazon trucks, you know. We might be able to say that if it was

I mean, since they're employees though, they're, you know, it's not it's it's not like they're inviting friends in. So, I I I just I would love to ex if you know, that could be explored for, you know, these are this is a business. These are employees parking there. If that could be explored, I think that could be a viable solution. Um because as Mary Beth said, then the rest of the street isn't being penalized because this benchmark happens to exist on our street. So it thank you. Thank you. Thank you. What an exciting Tuesday night. Yeah.

The most we've ever had on stack. We should have held the meeting on stack drive. Why not? Because there's no parking. There we go. Party at N. Get the Reinhardts.

I'll be really brief, Laura, just to add on to what everybody else is saying. So, uh, Carolyn Richley, Ten Stack Drive. Uh, I have three children ranging from the ages of 11 to seven. Um, we have a long driveway, so we personally don't have a problem parking on the street, but there is a no parking sign currently. There are two um in front of my house. Um so one uh the no parking ban is way too large if we're talking about just addressing that one home or residence. Um it's it's at this point we're past the straightaway and we're already going around another current turn. Uh it's not applicable. Um two, I want to know what your enforcement plans are. So, right, the whole point of putting out no parking signs is to be able to enforce something. What can the town actually do? What would the measures be?

You can give tickets to costs. Okay. Right. I think I think the police would have authority for that. I think they give tickets as a deterrent and repeated or dangerous violators would be. So, would that be to the individual or to the actual management of the company?

No, whoever wants the to claim the car back would then And so I'm going to repeat what Christa just said. I mean, so I get that we're saying that these are POVs, right, that are parking on the privately owned vehicle. Yes. Parking on the street. So you could only ticket a private vehicle owner. However, I disagree because right, it's a it's a company that is consistently using residential street for their business parking. That definitely crosses a road. There has to be some sort of I know it's not in the ordinance directly. I get it. I combed through it. Kip, thank you for giving me a number of references. I also combed through it as well. But this does seem to be a gray area where we're not just talking about one of Stack Drive residences abusing street parking privileges.

I think the uh portion of it that's about the business that we keep hearing is more of an issue with the state and not an issue that this board can act on. But what we can do is take action regarding the parking and the safety concerns. We can't seem to take action on a state facility operating in a residential area that we were not informed of, that we were not given any heads up about, that did not go through the planning process that any residential or non-state facility would have to go through. But what we can do is address the safety concerns and the parking on the street. Any business related concerns, I believe, would be a matter to take up with the state. And so we want to just make sure we're staying within our lane.

I understand that. I do think this could be an opportunity for BO to change an ordinance because this does actually seem like an issue that could repeat itself, right? if there is a a commercial type business in or near a residential area who's abusing parking privileges on a major on a right of way. That does actually seem like that's something that could be repeated. Again, keeping the type of business out of it, I don't care. Right. So, I'm just saying it wasn't a lot more tools, right? If it wasn't a a state entity, correct? Right. Our our process would be different. you know, you have to get a permit to run a business out of your house.

So, what do you recommend to us to as residents then? So, we're also state residents. So, who should we be complaining to if you're saying this is a state problem? One, does safety is safety paramount? Should we have signs up? That's what I need to know tonight. The second is tell Elena tell Rearen Elena select woman Elena who is also state representative. Oh, that's what I meant. Representative talking to Rearen. Yeah, I think there are a number of communities across this state that are dealing with these potential for these facilities that are going to be heard next year in the legislative process. Being a participant in that

is is one of I'm not opining on which one which way you pick. What I'd like to know is is safety paramount tomorrow and do we want cars parked on Snack Drive tomorrow? You want me to pull those signs out tomorrow or do you want me to leave them up? I personally would love for you to pull down the slides. Um, if if we really insist that safety is a a concern there at that corner, I think we need to be very precise about what we're talking about on the actual corner. Get our emergency managers involved because it's not the whole length that it currently is. Um, and I personally agree with only a 4hour parking limit sign.

Thank you. Um, so before you go I think we've all come to the conclusion the signs are pretty unsightly and we have a really broad area that could be narrowed down. What I'm not hearing is a sort of a solution. Would it be hey maybe we we put no parking signs in front of 12 14 16 on both sides of the street and call it that. No parking at the corner. Like we know what the intended goal of this is. How far are people willing to park to walk to their right? So

I think it's really important to recognize too that we have input from a fire chief, a police chief. Um, I'm sure if we had asked the bus driver that takes this, I'm sure the bus driver would have loved to fill us in. That's a really good, you know, and and we have feedback from Yes, we have feedback from DPW and what it was like to plow. Um, so I'm concerned doing nothing it doesn't seem like an option. No, it's not an option.

Um, because We do have to guarantee the safety of everybody on the road. I mean, no, I completely agree. That's I mean

apparently my proposed solution is Okay. The same as we don't tell Salt Shad on 3A how that they how they use it.

Kind of go back though. I want to come up with a solution at least shorter term, right? If it's another week or if it's another two weeks or three weeks. Are there other people to hear from? I just I thank you so much. Better get out of the hot seat as well. Like

Hi, I'm Destiny Brady. I am a resident at 32 Stack Drive. I'm at the other end and in my experience I haven't seen what everyone else has seen but that's probably because I'm at the other end. I think if there are safety concerns there's always been safety concerns and there will always be safety concerns. So if we have actual evidence that this is a safety problem and we have done the studies and there is a good rationale for it then we need to ban parking in those specific areas. But as a resident of this neighborhood, I know many of my neighbors use street parking for birthday parties, celebrations, and I think that whatever decision the board makes needs to be based on evidence. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Good evening, Chris Keefe 13 stack. appease everybody. That stinks. Your solution of perhaps as as weird as that may be, if you're having a party, get a permit. I mean, we're this is further inconveniencing residents is unconscionable, but we are where we are. So, I mean that sounds like a reasonable solution.

365 days of six cars in the street is a lot. That's a lot. That's a lot of safety concern. Thank you. Thanks.

Anyone else wish to speak? My name is Mike Kremer, Ninstack Drive. I'm in the middle of all the signage there. Uh, the primary cause of the current nuisances and safety concerns stem from the operation at 14 Stack Drive. Prior to this business moving in, parking was not an issue in the surrounding community. Addressing the symptoms, the street parking without addressing the root causes, the impact of the property's operation sets a bad precedence. Moreover, requiring cars to park along the road to scooch further down uh because of a no parking zone creates a nuisance and a hindrance to the surrounding neighborhood. Um we should be looking at they're the cause of any safety issues, they should be respon they're responsible for it. If you're going to do no parking, it should be uh only residential parking only. Uh that would mitigate the on street parking of that facility. Those cars are not registered to that house. Therefore, you could tell them they can't park there and this is only a residential area for parking.

And so what that's an interesting uh thought. What do you do for uh the parties? Right. Somebody just had a football party. So those cars are are going to be okay. That's one day. But no, but we you have to understand that I understand you want to have a conversation about the business and we've already explained to you the state super zoning that took any authority away from the town. This has to do with safety, right? And so today our question is, is it safer to put up no parking signs or to have no signs? Well, you're trying to pigeon hole a certain response authority we have here.

And I'm telling you, if you put up no uh resident only parking signs, that would mitigate most of the problems on that street. uh as far as outside and if there's residents in the area that have to park there for whatever you know affair they're having you know call the town and get permission. It's absolutely preposterous too to be asking permission to park in front of your own home.

We get it. I appreciate what everyone's saying. We we have authority to put up no parking signs because we have a safety concern on the street. That has to apply to everybody who would be wanting to park in what we we are deeming an unsafe spot. If that is the only tool we have, what would be helpful to hear is would you rather no signs or signs?

Have you contacted the owners of the business and told them that they're creating a safety hazard? We we when we first we were first made aware of this, we were promised um I heard from several people promised we'll never park on the street. Don't worry about it. You don't need to do anything. We're going to be partners. We're going to be partners with the community. And I have photos of six cars, right? They're they are not partners yet. And what I what I love for them to hear about this meeting tonight and for them to say we're going to do this. We've got a system in place and we put some gravel in and you don't don't put up the signs because we've done this on our own. we're not going to have a safety concern. Is that the solution? Is that a perfect solution? It is. It's a perfect solution for the safety issue. But until they're willing to do that and and show us that they're willing to do that, I would rather look at an ugly sign.

So, has the town exhausted all other options? Have they contacted uh the owners of that business and said, "You're creating a safety hazard with your employees." Well, they saw some signs in front of their house last week that Yeah. So have I. I got six of them in front of my home, I think. And the our emergency services have been there a dozen times in two months, right? And so if

police, fire, and I want I want to be respectful, but we've said it again and again, the state has said to the town of B, your rules are meaningless. Your problem is with the state and we're going to we're trying Let me finish. The problem is the safety issue of the parking. That's what we're here to talk about. We're trying to figure out how to mitigate the safety issue, but we are not in a position to be telling the state what to do. They've made very clear and our lawyer has told us, you really don't have a leg to stand on when the state claims they have the right to. So you haven't nobody here has reached out to the owners of the business and said your business is causing a safety concern.

Nicolopolis has answered that that we we I I don't have I heard from them. They reached out to us when we first raised this issue and said don't worry we won't park in the street. We hear you. And that lasted about five weeks. And so the signs went up last week and I was happy to see that they stopped parking there. Um, I think it's a wonderful idea and Mary Beth mentioned tonight that there might be a different person and Dave knows someone to contact. We will contact tomorrow morning. Would you rather temporary no parking signs be up or not? That's what I think we should look at residential only parking.

If the two options are temporary parking signs, nobody can park there or everybody can park there. What would be helpful to hear from you is which one of those options? I think we have to look at a third option. Do we have uh given that this state has a certain level of immunity for town ordinances and rules and everything, is it even possible for the town to enforce a residential only parking sign on a state facility?

Yeah, I hadn't thought of it, but I I my thought is probably not that they would get they would get the same they would come up and say, "I'm here as a necessary aid to a resident. I need a parking pass. That's where I'm going with this is that I really appreciate that suggestion, but it may be it may very well be and I don't say this with 100% authority, but it may very well be and it's something that we can look into and contact our lawyer about, our town lawyer about, that the state may be immune from following even that sign. So, we want to make sure that we are addressing the concerns of both residents on Stack Drive regarding the parking and the safety concerns.

I think it's critical um that it that what we're doing isn't targeting their legal use of that property. Right? If if the reason we have no parking signs up is because we truly believe it's a safety issue, it's a safety issue whether it's a resident, whether it's a resident guest, or whether it's a home health aid. And I I can't I don't you know, if we just say, well, we're going to narrowly tar this so that we can achieve an a result against this facility, I don't I'm not sure it's going to stand up to scrutiny.

Correct. And we have heard and this kind of goes to where I think Sleen Flanigan was going um about trying to figure out a solution uh and making sure that we are considering all solutions. We have heard from the chief of police that their recommendation is 150 ft on both sides of the road approaching both the left turn and the final righthand turn um to make sure that the roadway remains maneuverable for crisis response vehicles and residents year round while addressing critical visibility concerns. So that uh does address some of the concerns that were raised here about the length of the no parking zone. Um that is a recommendation we have received u and I think should be up for consideration for from this board.

Uh thank you. Yes. Sorry. I did see it coming in and out. But yeah, thank you. So before we have people speak a second time, is there anyone else who would like to speak for the first time? Mary Beth, can you come in? Speak to the Thank you. And just make sure it's on there.

Mary Beth Walls, 25 Stack Drive. This is just the lawyer in me. This is this is a town road, not a state road. I think for safety issues, the town cannot be preempted by the state in terms of trying to regulate safety issues on a town road. That was the one point I wanted to make right now because there was some concern that the state would have the ability to preempt. I don't think they do when it's a safety issue on a town road. If it was a state road like many roads in town are, I think there might be a legitimate concern. That is not a state road, it's a town road. I think the town has final authority.

Yes, I I I agree with that assessment, but I think the difference is whether it is residential parking or no parking sign. And I think that might be where the there might be some confusion. And I just want to add one more thing that occurred to me when I was sitting here as long as I got the mic and that is something like, you know, we have our driveway sealed once a year and for 24 or 48 hours you got to park on the side of the road. If you've got permit parking or something or, you know, you got a 4-hour limit, you know, those kinds of things are going to interfere with people's daily lives. It's just another thing to think about about how it's going to affect the residents.

Mary Beth, I agree with you on that. Lots of houses do that right at their driver's seat. If you live in a spot that is so dangerous that you can't do that, you don't get to park on the street just because just because it's convenient for you. You just, you know, there are plenty of spots in town where there's not enough space to have your car parked on overnight. Plenty of places in town where you have no parking signs. Sure. But Stack Drive is not one of them. And it's not so dangerous that people don't park there overnight if their driveway is paved. I see it all the time. I think I think according to police chief, parking by this corner might be dangerous. All right. Anyone else wish to speak?

I just had one question. Nancy Reinhardt. Um, what if instead of uh resident only resident parking, you put both residents? That would cover the parties that we have that are neighborhoods. Um, I understand, but I don't think that's singling out. I don't think you're singling out the business or but would include the whole town. The argument could also be made that these are residents. They do live in this home. They are bow residents. And so that I'm posing that as trying to establish thinking about the whole situation, all sides of it, that if the state came back to us and said they are residents, you can't enforce this.

Yeah. I think the question is, is it safe to park on that? It's not. So, is there anyone else in the public? We're going to have a discussion and I would appreciate if you would sorry once we start our discussion, I appreciate if you let us really hash out. We've heard what you have to say. If we have a question for you, we'll certainly want to speak to you, but we need that chance to basically discuss what we view as the best outcome. So, over to you, sir.

Hi, I'm uh Pete Brady. I'm at uh 32 stack. Um, what we have here is sort of a perfect storm of crud. You have a miserable corner. You have a facility that is not controllable by the town. Um, and we're seeing issues around potent, you know, parking, etc. Um, I'm worried that if we're making a permanent decision without a lot of data other than we're seeing all these cars. We don't know, you know, with respect to everybody here, we don't know what exactly that number is during the day. How do we know? Is it shift changes? Is it just people showing up? Um, I could see having a a temporary parking ban, but I think without having the data of what's actually happening around that facility and whether that's also police, fire, whatever, um, it's really hard to make that that full picture.

Thank you. Um, I just want to make clear that when we a a permanent sign versus a temporary sign. We are talking about the difference between the bright orange cone temporary signs that you see now and a more permanent sign that's air quotes um being a standard um metal road sign. There is nothing in any action that we take that would prevent a another board um um or this board at some point in the future from saying that those signs could come down. So this is not a matter of in perpetuity there will be signs if that is a decision that the board makes regarding the term permanent. I want to be clear on that. This is not necessarily for the next hundred years unless we were to say for the next hundred years but I think we would be very careful. That's

the point is I want to make I want to make that clear that that's the difference between temporary and permanent. We have the ability to if it doesn't work out to change that. Absolutely. And that's the point you're trying to make. If we come up with a solution that doesn't doesn't work, we have the ability to change it at a meeting. Correct. Any further discussion?

I appreciate I appreciate everything. Um, I appreciate everything that everybody said. I just heard you talk a lot about hypothetically you don't know whether we can do this. You don't know whether we can enforce. You don't know if the state will do this. Well, we also don't know whether or not these actions could be enforceable on the state either. And we do have a lawyer and we do have somebody here that could look into that stuff. So, uh, absolutely.

Residential parking is a means for enforcing residential parking versus business parking. It is used in multiple places around the state in order to enforce residential only parking instead of business parking. So I'm not sure that that is the answer that I am looking for. If we're looking for an answer tonight and we're taking tallies, I don't know that that's something that I want to get behind. But if we are looking for solutions, that is something that potentially a lawyer could look into as far as what options are there in the state for enforcing for residences instead of businesses. So, uh, since nobody knows, maybe we could push that%

agree. We often seek guidance from our town attorney to make sure that we're acting within the letter of the law and that what we do is enforceable. So, appreciate that. Thank you. Um, anything further? Can I have a recommend, Could I have a recommendation to the board?

So, I'll be first off, I'm going to start with my personal position, which is I would adopt the both police chief and and DPW recommendation. I would adopt it right now. I'm not asking to do that. What I'm asking to do after people hear that that's what I'm saying is I think um given that that I would do that and maybe others would um we don't need to decide this tonight. We could take oh we could leave the ugly signs up. We could endeavor to have a conversation with the facility and give them a chance to find a resolution that works for everybody. Give it a couple weeks, see if they'll commit to using the driveway appropriately, and if that's the case, in a few months, take down the temporary signs and and everybody's learned a lesson together. I think short of them committing to protecting the safety of our residents voluntarily, I would adopt the option of police chief.

I was going to echo that. My solution, he says that now I said what is that?

It's 150 ft on either As I read it for, this is a memo from the police chief. It's online. Everything we have is is available to the public. It's 150 ft. No parking signs basically on either side of that. Um it's called Lj Junction. Um so that that addresses the safety issue. It doesn't really address on street parking because um I believe just looking at our map um 14 stack is further it extends further 150 ft. But that's so I was going to say with Chris my suggestion is if we care if safety is an issue we we do what the police chief has suggested we then take two different tracks. We and I'm happy to take the lead on this, approach the business and say, is there a way we can get this in writing that you will create a parking situation that is only on your property? And then third is speak to our town council and say, is there do we have the ability to make residential parking only and would that apply? That's and we don't have to decide anything tonight. I'm happy to vote on the 150 feet tonight.

A permanent 150 ft. Yes. Because that is we that is I've driven by there and um I'm one of those people who's turned around in front of your house, ma'am, because I wanted to see what it looked like. And it is a it's just you wouldn't design it that way. I could feel the eyes on me. And so I would happily vote on the 150 ft tonight because that is an unsafe intersection. And there's other intersections in town where we've done this. But I think the other two steps can also be taken. And if in time we find out that we're allowed to have residential only parking on that street, we extend it out further because that's a great solution. Then there is no real problem. Do you want me to make that motion?

I Yeah, the board wants to keep speaking. I'm happy to hear obviously other people's views. Well, what I'm hearing is I don't know if I I actually I'll take a step back. I actually don't know if 100 looking at the the frontage lots, the frontage footage. I don't know if 150 ft is is is the answer. That's the chief's answer. It's his answer, but and DPW and DPW. So, you're thinking more. What's that? You're thinking longer than longer. I'm thinking longer than

because this is the chief is only talking about safety and he he views that intersection if he can have no parking on 150 ft. He's thinking about safety only. We understand that it's just

that's I don't think so. I as also your unfortunately your property often isn't exactly what you think your property is because the town has rights from the center of the road for a certain amount of distance. I know it's annoying. So So the Oh, sorry. Go ahead. I think we're all like chomping at the bit at with different ideas. I don't I don't think I'm ready to to prepared to do this right now. I What I would be prepared to do is to definitely shorten up the the length, you know, lengthen the length. What's that? You mean extend the length? Um, no. Currently,

currently the temporary signs shorten up the distance. I know we don't no one likes, but they are serving a purpose. shorten that distance to cover only, you know, a few lots and or maybe around the bend. Like I don't think they need to go all the way down to past I'm trying to look at my map on my phone to see what the numbers are. So there's 97 past seven. I I think we're at we're at 300 right now, right? Yeah. 300 from from that property that property line 150 each way. The chief was 150. So no, but he's going from the corner, not the chief is worried about the safety of the corner.

So like this map is about the property. So there's another band at 12 maybe. Is that accurate? Yeah. But does it have I don't think it needs to go that far. So does like Yeah. Yeah. So, I was my What are you basing these numbers on? Because I'm going off of the the Chiefs and

Well, what I'm hearing, it doesn't need to go all the way down. If you come around and take a right on the bend and keep going down, that can be shortened up. Certainly, you're coming from stack and taking a right. Right. That's what the chiefs are. So what I'm what I'm saying is in the short term, I think we should just shorten up this distance here. Keep this here. Why don't we just leave it temporary while we get some answers to these questions? I think we can remove a few cones. It's just it's cumbersome. I think we can move a few. It's going to take us a couple weeks to get some answers.

Yeah, absolutely. It will take us deal with in January, right? But we got we're snow season. It's not a great time to be parking on the road anyway, right? No, I realize that. So, I that's my proposal. I I would like to shorten up. And again, I'm sorry. I'm like trying to come up with house numbers here to to see what what we what we have. This would be approximately 150 ft on this map from the center of the corner. 150 that way, 150 that way, which would all 14 reasonable if we're talking about safety concerns and not a specific propert about these and these that's my proposal.

So for so from the so approximately your proposal if I'm understanding you correctly is from the center of the corner the dangerous corner in question down past you would say corner from this corner. So the inside corner. Yes. Okay. Going this way. Mhm. Which would be I you know I don't have um so maybe to the far boundary of 12

on this map. So I want to make sure that I'm just show giving the visual here that from the center of that corner uh selectman Flanigan you are proposing approximately 350 ft from the center of that corner right and then 150 going 150 which would 158.9

on the corner So, this is not based on safety, but based on what? No, it's based on safety. Sight lines up here. I'm going to go with the chief over you on the safety call. I I don't I'm just not ready with you. See the visual just this is 150 approximately and what Ian is saying is going this far like in that direction. I don't I'd be prepared to

I'd be prepared to accept the recommendation of 150 ft and see where we are at that point with the nicer more appealing metal permanent signs for that for this specific recommendation. And in the event that that is not sufficient, then we could address going further if we needed to uh if we found if the chief found that there were additional safety concerns beyond that 150 ft. That's where I'm at.

If I may, I would I would like to see chief's recommendation with the temporary signs first. Um, we I think first of all, this is a prime example of why zoning exists, if I have ever seen one, and why a lengthy process exists. Um, because when it is circumvented, this is the problems that we're going to have. And this is not going to be the end of the problems that we do have, regardless of what facility it is. um and or what business is being run. No matter what, this has drawn our attention to the fact that there's a safety issue at this corner. Um and and that safety issue needs to be solved. I would say temporary signs at the chief's both chiefs and DPW's recommendation. Let's see what that looks like. um and also simultaneously be calling on some accountability on behalf of the facility. Um contacting them saying, you know, we've been here for hours. We know how the neighbors feel. Do you? Um and and share with them a copy of the chief's memo that there is a safety concern and what are they willing to do? Um, but I also think a a more permanent solution needs to take place on this corner. Either way, I want to make sure that there's fire trucks, ambulances, and buses, and plow trucks that can get through and to people in a timely manner.

I'm not opposed to the temporary signs in that 150 ft as recommended. However, I've also heard the concerns from residents that they do not like the temporary signs, the look of that those temporary signs and that um that is a burden on them to be viewing those signs so brightly in their face uh dayto day. And so I don't think it's a great effort on uh DPW to put to install the metal nicer looking signs in the area where they recommend them to be. Um

there's nothing legally stopping us from put making temporary signs that are embedded in the ground and not in cones. Right. So, and we could always move the if we just if it was found that 150 is not sufficient, right? That we could move them.

Well, what I'm hearing from the board, I can just try and summarize to move to a motion. I'm not sure Slack McFlang would agree, but having putting up 150 putting up signs at the chief's recommendation that are not embedded in cones, but are in the ground, but making clear to people here, these are not permanent. We will have to decide on whether we change the town ordinance to make it permanent at some point. At the same time, I or someone else will approach the facility again to see if we can come to a sort of an agreement in writing and at the third that we would talk to our lawyer about other options that were raised tonight. And I very much thank you for that about like residential only parking. Again, even if it's a 5% chance it's true, it's worth a call to our lawyer on that. So, I think if someone wants to make a motion, I think that can probably get done tonight.

I just want to make sure we're not ordering, printing, or it, you know, I don't want to be paying money for something that is y might be temporary. Well, um I'm okay if we have these signs on hand um and it's something that is just being stuck in the ground, but I I just I don't want to be customizing signage. Do we have no parking signs at DPW that are in a box in a Well, we have we have no parking signs out there. They're just not attached to a pole.

My my point is no parking signs exist that are owned by the town of Bow and so I don't think that paying for um no parking signs would be an issue. But I hear what you're saying that we don't want to incur any costs related to this. Um I mean we're going to be paying for the labor to put them in and then take them out and then put them in again. Right. This is if we truly believe it's a safety issue spending $100 in sizes. What we what is the opportunity cost of tonight costing us 35 people here spending an hour and a half.

So is there a motion? I'll make a motion to um approve the recommendation from public works director and our emergency services chiefs for the installation of metal no parking signs into the ground for 150 ft from the center of the L turn. What did you call it? The L the L. L the L intersection.

So 150 ft from the center of the L turn in each direction. Um both sides of the road and I would make clear that they are not permanent signs in the sense that we are changing our ordinance. These are temporary signs. These are temporary signs that look nicer than the orange cone signs, but these are signs that are official Town of B no parking signs that go into the ground versus being housed in orange cones.

And just not to throw a wrench, but just know that those wouldn't be enforcable until the ordinance is put into. So, it wouldn't be we it'll look good, but it won't be enforcable. It would be enforceable in the same way that our temporary parking signs are enforceable. They say an emergency. I mean they if there's difference no permanent sign. We get that. I think all right. Is there a motion? There's a motion. Do I have a second? We're in the voting. In the middle of a vote

vote when we get to discussion. That is correct. We are aware because this is a the safety. We're talking about the safety of the intersection. It is not a matter of Yes, we have viewed that. We understand that we're going on the motion is on the recommendation from DPW and emergency services. I have a motion. Is there a second? All right. Hearing none. Motion fails.

We have I'd like to keep it the way it is. I'd like to shorten up all that. You should make a motion. I'm sorry, but when I brought this to the floor, whatever the last meeting, the situation that I brought up about the choke was not about cars within 150 ft. The situation that I brought up about the choke was further down. So the legit we just the vote didn't just the vote just

brought up that further down. So the motion that you guys are talking in discussion I to be clear the there was a there was a motion that failed. Draw the conclusion from that that you will. It failed because it was too short. Um I You can make a motion. Yeah, I I will make a motion. I just want to make sure I have my addresses correct here to see what to make sure my frontage is correct.

If you're going to you can use lot numbers if you're if you're concerned about using addresses. Okay. Just so everyone knows, we have a map that lists your lot number and not your address. So, I'm looking on my phone then for the use the lot number for a motion. Well, 31 A is 10, 31B is 12, 31 C is 14. Which one's 31B? 12. 12.

12. Uh C is 14, and Gerard is 16. I would make a motion to move temporary no parking signs from the far end of the L. So what what direction was that? North the north boundary point of 31B and 31F to the eastern boundary of 31H. that you're you know what I I really want to second your motion. I really do. I just want to make sure I fully understand.

I know it's hard it's hard map. So there would no longer suggest it starts at it starts at the property marker between 31 A and 31B. Correct. 31 J and J 31F. Yeah. And it goes to the corner of the property of 31H and 31 I 31 H. Yeah. across from 31. I will second that motion. So, you'd be removing two signs. We're shortening the distance certainly, which would be approximately 171 ft of signs. Yes. Yeah. I'm just saying for clarity, you're asking to remove two signs. The first two. Yes.

You're just remove So, you're just removing the ones that are in front of or in the middle of Yeah. I'm just shortening the 3 34 J would no longer have 34J which might be 31 A would be losing each one. So that might be number 10 and number what about 31 G and 31 I. So 31G is going to have one direct directly across from 31H.

So just at the corner just here and here. Okay. So, between the property boundary of 31 I and halfway between the property boundary on 31G. Yes. Those would stay there. So, you are only taking away two signs. Well, I I don't think you need to have I don't think there needs to be that many signs. I don't think we need that many in the end either. Put a sign from here around the corner. Yeah.

All right. We have a motion, a second. Do you want to include uh for discussion purposes, do you want to include in the motion a removal of more than just those two signs to achieve what you're talking about having fewer signs but covering the larger distance? I think I mean that the number of signs and placement of signs should be left to DPW and police so that you can see them but that they don't they are not putting we are not requiring the placement of the signs between there's a lot of sides there's a lot of there's a ton of them and so I think those probably could be spread out

that if if this is the motion and this is the prerogative of the board that we would see fewer signs but still covering a larger area than the chief's recommendation of 150 ft. Is that what I'm hearing? Is that motion second? Were these I didn't catch it. They were temporary. Yeah, these are these are temporary. Understand that nothing's enforceable until we have chang. So these are temporary signs. So we can certainly enforce. Are they orange cone signs or are they in the ground signs? Whether puts them on a post or I'm just I'm just asking for clarification for people

part of the motion but this is part of the discussion right there's been a motion section so that do we want to try to get them on some wooden stakes rather than metal stakes we want to put metal stakes in the ground I mean do we want to lose the cones and still use the temporary signs I'm open to I'm open to suggestion I'm maybe I'm optimistic maybe I'm naive but I'm hopeful that in a few weeks with some discussions The problem is we can resolve this. Yeah. And let it give me a chance to do that. Give us give us a chance to do that. Okay. And let's not in the interimm have cars parked on the street. Y that's what we are. We have a motion a second. All those in favor say I. I.

Opposed? Nay. Eyes have at 5 nothing. We're going to take a fivem minute recess.

Um sorry. This is not about the use of the house. Yeah,

just to wrap up the presentation here right here. So, we start to do this. These hopefully go fairly quickly. Then we'll be on to it.

bring the meeting back to order. Um, we are going to table discussion items two through six to our next meeting. Um, so we're going to move on to the consent agenda. I make a motion to approve the consent agenda. This is just the annual nomination of of the health officer. I'll second it. Have a motion, a second. All those in favor say I. I. Oppos? Nay. Eyes have four nothing. But Cheryl's going to come in for the budget review. So we'll deal with all that stuff in the first meeting in January, whenever that is.

Yeah, she had child care issues. Angel made it. I seconded it. I made the motion. Chris seconded. Yes. Yes. I was literally just thinking somebody give me some candy. Thank you, Cheryl, for coming through. That is exactly what I need. just for as we sign the consent consent agenda just so there's so we want to make clear we're going to remove two of the signs we're going to try and trim out the rest of the signs you don't know what we're talking about um and as I said to Andy and others like that's not the end of it

right

um and so David if you and I and maybe Elena given her state position can reach out to the facility and then um I'll talk to you about the what we can ask the lawyer about the residential only parking. Um, and I think that we'll make clear because I don't think this is the last we'll hear about it is like there's in my head there's two issues. There's a the safety issue on the corner and the larger issue about the parking and they're not mutually exclusive. We can solve both of those. All right. So, moving on to the budget. Um, I know last time we got it down from 62 increase to 43 increase. Um, so maybe David and Cheryl, if you can give us like the current status and any outstanding decisions or issues you'd like us to address tonight, that would be helpful.

I have none. As long as you have everything you guys wanted for So in this, but I apologize. I did something I've never done before, which is a budget night. It's your favorite. It's your favorite. My favorite time of year. It's like Christmas or tax season. Um, and so just so I'm in the right spot, we have a 3% caller in here across the board. Did we make a correction? Uh, only new position is still the the assistant deputy fire chief. That's the only new position and that replaces the part-time position for and emergency management. And emergency management in police. Did we reduce the overtime back to where they were?

No. Okay. So, I'll make a motion that we reduce the overtime back to last year's budget amount. Um, obviously, they're going to exceed that number when they when they get through the year, but it will be exceeded because we've not filled positions that are full-time eligible positions. Well, yeah. How much it was? I think we were 50 last year. They went to 75. We'll be going My thought was they went higher. We took some back. Yes. Uh, it's an increase of 25,000 over the last budget. So we are proposing a h 100,000. They are currently at 75. Okay. So my my recommendation is we go back to 75. Not because they're going to not going to need that overtime budget, but it nets out is what you're saying.

On the other flip side, we have the savings from the opening open position. I would be fine with that.

Um I think we and I'm going out of order again because I wasn't you here. Um I think we should include in here the $150,000 from Bo rec revolving fund to the budget like we've done the last two years. Um B revolving fund has sufficient funds in it. It even has sufficient funds in it if at some point it was appropriate and voted on to build an addition. I think this is part of a multi-year commitment we've made to kind of funding back to the community for the capital outlay of that facility we paid cash for some odd five years ago now. So that's not proposed by

what would that be? No, that's it's been proposed for at this board level. Yeah. And and supported by the Did you I know you were chatting there, but not a problem, but that that is taking 150 from Borc revolving fund and contributing to the budget. My math that is 1% if not more. Each percent is what? 125. No, it will not affect the budget. Yeah, this willffect from one revolving. Okay. Okay. So, we wouldn't be bringing the percentage down. It would be reducing the balance in the REC revolving fund by the 150,000 on July 1.

And that that is not going to threaten anything in the rec program. Some odd 600,000 in there. Yeah. I just I'm not certain that I want to Was that a motion or hopefully we don't have to do a motion? We could just I'm writing all this down so if we need to make motions we can just go and do it. But this is I think good if anyone else has something else they want to interject here.

Um I'm not sure that I feel the same way about that 150. Uh we have done 150,000 two years in a row. Um but as we don't have a proposed solution for a community center and the idea of of shifting 15,000 was to save for a community center. Um I want to make sure that we are not shortch changing the needs and the requests of the recreation department um who has additional needs sooner than uh any solution to the community center could be achieved. And so, while I appreciate saving 150,000 for a future community center, I just I don't want to shortch change Darcy and her program and her needs. Um, and that if people wanted if the community if voters wanted to save more for a community center, then they would have that prerogative at town meeting. um to make that decision on their own.

Totally understand your position. Um and my counterposition would be we've seen we've seen actions from the community saying that the record revolving fund is an unchecked an unchecked fund that can be spent at the town manager's discretion without any view or view by the by the citizens. um that there is a lot of money there and there is a tremendous amount of money, you know, well over a million dollars of of revenue. Um but understood. Yeah. And again, this is coming just from hearing your proposal. This is my initial thoughts on it and um so is there any other

any other s before we start launch into votes and stuff? Is there I have some other things we can chat about? Yeah, that's Yeah, bring it on. Uh what did we do with interest? Did we make a correction in the interest based on we kept it level? How do you feel about that? Understanding we're going to make some hard decisions about do we fund something or not. I don't want to be overly conservative if if you think that we might have 20 or 30 or 50,000.

Speak now. So, I would like to keep the interest the same because I am anticipating rate cuts and we just had one and this budget doesn't even start for six months. So, I'd like to be conservative on that. We did increase or um we did propose to increase David and I the motor vehicle fees by $50,000. We saw year-over-year growth in Missoula motor vehicles. So, that's in that uh 4.3%. Yeah, we had the board requested more than what um David and Cheryl even proposed. That's Yes. And that was supported by Merdoula when it was checked with her that could accommodate that increase that the board request.

So that is 50,000 more than we had put into the revenue section. So that would be 3,172,750.

Right now it's 3.122750 which was an increase of 100,000 from the prior year. Um did we change did we get an update from the chief fire chief on ambulance billing in light of both the new

Yes. So he provided us with a memo. He did speak with comstar and the way we are billing now we are not going to see any significant increases in their ambulance revenue. So he was good with the number that we proposed because um again you never can depend on what calls you're going to have or how many but our billing will not see any significant increases based on the new legislation. What was the the list sher of cuts that the board did make or that at our suggestion was these three right? Those were the three that we proposed. Yes. So, as the health insurance was reduced,

yes, we reduced two of them to two person and then we knocked another 83 off paving and then added another 50 to motor vehicle registrations from what we had proposed. That's what gets us to the 4.3%. You took another 83 off paving after after the 100,000. He did speak did check with Tim to make sure that he was okay with that and it's been confirmed that he is satisfied with that mostly because one of the roads they wanted to pave they're about to tear up anyway for water stuff. So you don't want to pay the

right but typically we just move down the list to the next road and and so you just have to understand if we cut that's now $183,000 from last year's number. If we cut $183,000 next year's number and we go back to our historical average giving 130th of the town each year, there's going to be a shock next year. Well, Tim also has some left over from prior. So, his be using this year's there will be shock when you have to go back to the annual 600,000 if we've broughten it down by 200. Next year, we're going to bring it back to our just kind of historic levels

and we're going to that's going to feel like a 20 cent increase in taxes. Do you think it's better to allow DPW to have the funding to cover paving in excess of the paving need there needs only because

to avoid what it feels like next year. I think what's important is to understand that a paving budget is a two season paving budget for us because you can pave in the spring and you can pave in the next year. Uh and when we allow money for paving it's allocated for three years, David. Yeah. U and so I think I would be concerned with kind of shocking a number that's so big in our budget and so that kind of splitting I I also suspect that it will never get through budget the cut that we're looking to make

a 30% cut in the paving budget isn't going to get through budget committee we we've tried to do $50,000 cuts and yet had them come back and said um so I wonder if we should consider splitting afterwards splitting the 83 or splitting so the 25,000 from the overtime could go back into paving and we could add that back in and only have a an additional

So why did we only I thought there were four hires that had families factored in and not two weren't there four four open positions in this budget that we were budgeting. Now, we're assuming only two of them have family. Why don't we just budget two for all of them because it's not only that they're going to have family or not. It's going to be did they get hired? Were they there all 12 months? Are they a single? Are they a double? Are they a family? And so I don't think based on historic track records of our police department having I'll be generous and say two average of two openings for the last five years.

So you're saying instead of having family plans for two of them have every new hire assume that there's two people. I'm saying for the four open positions for next year only not changing a policy forever but for next year only to budget those all at twos. So that would save us another $19,000. So that so you have a paper um in your packet that would be the 38147 savings instead of 19,000. Yeah. So do we run into a situation where it becomes very difficult to make up that difference in the event that um there are two

the scenario that that that causes us some pain is that on July one we hire all four positions. All four positions and they all require and the police chief are all hired on July one and whoever gets the police deputy chief position is internal and we already hire his backup. Yeah, but you're talking you're mixing police and fire. Uh well because because it's a bottom line budget. We're I'm talking about the total town budget

and fire and the three police basically. you know, do we and presum hopefully there's a promotion for some of so all of those positions are filled at July one getting salary on July 1 and qualify for benefits on July one and needing something more than two.

My experience tells me that that's an easier place to cut than pay. So, would your proposal be um tell me if I'm wrong to add back some money for paving? We would take the $25,000 save from police overtime, add it back to that. We'd take the $19,000 and change from this this proposal and add it back to paving. So, we'd still be at a 4.3% increase, but our paving our paving budget would be 19 plus $25,000 more than what exists right now. Is that what you're would you propose?

I think those are some of the factors. Right. I think I would still like to see us get under four points if we can. That's going to take some more work here. Um, I didn't See what big capital are there any big capitals in here? How many car police cars are we buying this year? Uh believe it's I believe it's the one out of the general fund and then the one from the uh capital reserve fund. Um and did we look at the the standard for what those cars are we're replacing?

I've got to imagine we're slowing down the miles considering So, we are currently um set to get one patrol purchase one patrol vehicle out of the general fund. 68,400 is what that's estimated to be. And we are nope that's it just the one vehicle and then firearms rifles

which we have a quote in there for and then radio equipment will be replaced this year firearms rifle coming out of CIP are coming out of the budget CIP and then radio equipments coming out of CIP so it's 68,400 so it will be one vehicle and the chief does look and push off the vehicles if they don't need to be replaced so well yeah but I want to make that decision before like That should we should be making that decision today and not Oh, no. He already did that in the CIP process. Oh, he already pushed.

Yes, he's already Yep. Yes. David, are there any uh this is a new budget book for me and so it's it's difficult to see. Are there any um capital project building projects built into this budget kind of facilities projects of size? I'm not talking about you know placing a window or placing some door trim. No, it's basically

so lean. He highlights some. No, it's just basically Let's Yep. Municipal building LED 10 grand. Rain gutters 7,000 for out here. Remember, we want to try to uh post center school exterior paint 15,000. The large one is the phone internet system center 15 historic little squat. Oh, 1500. 1500, excuse me. To get us into the threes by my math.

Assuming that the police and the health net out the paving, we need to find $40,000 more dollars. Even if we put that if that putting that money towards that 40 grand left. Well, I'm saying the the changes you suggested, which I generally agree with, is changing the health assumptions and reducing police overtime, but taking those savings visav what we have right now, and giving it back to paving, we're still at 4.3% increase.

So, my quick math, and Michelle, tell me if I'm wrong, 3% of the budget is around $37,000. So, to get under 4% increase, we need to find $40,000 near. Okay. David, where do you recommend we find $40,000 to get it under? Well, you know, one of the things we went down from six already gave it all to No, you didn't. What are we assuming for gas prices for next year? We have a fixed rate on that.

Um, for gas prices I don't think we have a actual of yes 6050 we budget 75 we're going to 85 that's $20,000 more than we need. So the average that we're seeing right now um for for gas is 2.70 a gallon which is 50 cents lower than and then for diesel we're seeing an average of 2.722

where what's what tab am I looking I'm in public works I'm in the public works tab public works Yeah, I'm sorry. We've got a diesel budget that we use 65 and 23, 50 and 24, budgeted 75 last year, we're budgeting 85 this year.

That's per Tim's recommendation, and that can fluctuate sometimes with the amount of plowing that they do. If we said to Tim, we're going to take your plow blades or $20,000 in diesel that you're not using, there's no indication that that we're going to either gas prices are going to go up by 60% over last year. Uh it's this page is highway department. It's on that it's the second and 636 and those prices are across any that uses gas or diesel. So you'll see the same pricing in police and you'll see the same pricing in I think the pricing is good. Y

it's the it's the assumption on gallons the amount the volume. Yeah. So I think easy easy there's $15,000 just in diesel. So you're saying take um line 636 proposed budget 2627 from 85 down to 70,000. And and based on look, we used I don't have my glasses on, but it looks like we used 65 and 23 and 50 and 24. Yes. And so even and we all know gas prices are cheaper than they were cheaper.

Does this put how how does this affect uh Tim? Would he be okay with doing this cut? Because I'm generally supportive of what you're saying. I just don't want to have trucks on the side of the road running out of fuel is essentially we're not going to do that, right? No. And I think if Tim if in in Tim style, you know, I've now done a budget with Tim for 10 years. If if we make a miscalculation on this, he will show up next week and say, "Here's my memo." Yeah. that you forgot that last year we bought $20,000 of diesel right before the end of the year. Yeah,

but we're looking at two years here. I think that's I think that's a solid place. I'm fine with that. Um I think if we're looking to make a reasonable cut, um there's probably a little bit of that in I was going to say that's the other obvious thing. I think $10,000 there because one of the games we play with road salt is if the season's hard, that's hard. But if it's a light season, you end up with a bunch of money and you fill up the the salt shed for the next year and you don't have to spend. So it's really really lumpy,

right? Like 80 15 80 130 90 if it's a good price. Yeah. Yeah. I think um I think there's $10,000 there. You think we could do more than 10? No, because you know Well, last year we spent heavy, right? But that I think that was a a year where we did a big purchase, wasn't it? Yeah. Well, I think um I just don't remember what year it was like. Two years ago. It was like last year. Yeah. Two years ago. Yeah. I think there's 10 for now. Let's hold. So gas 15 under. So let me actually give the numbers. So that would be 125 for salt.

Yeah. And it would be um 70 for uh gas. The other big remind me on the construction standards manual. It's on the previous page.

Yeah. What the we don't have construction standards in place for the town. what we use is sort of a combination of the state DOT standards and Tim calls upon the concrete standards a lot. So what this is is to develop take and develop what we want for road standards. Granted, it's going to be grabbed from a few different places because we certainly don't want to just take conquers because it doesn't all apply say to to us. So, this is for the engineer to put it together and it'll also be used um when we do projects, our own projects, but also for developers when they're building a road.

So, with curbing and because there was a problem recently with grates going on angled curb saw. Yeah. Yeah. I think this is a this is the thing that we should tell Tim we love. Do it and find 10 grand in this year's budget to do it. So say that one more time. Take it out here. Tim is a million500,000 budget, right? Find it in this year's budget and get it done. Okay.

Nope. Diesel and salt is next year. And if Tim wants to do it, if Tim calls us right now and say, "I need a plow." He wouldn't call us, right? We wouldn't get a call from saying I need plow or or hydraulic pump 10,000 in your half million budget. We got to need 5,000. Yes. Yeah. So we're at 35,000 in additional cuts. We got somebody else. Gas gets us 15. Road salt gets us 10. Construction standard removal gets us another 10. So we're at 35.

I don't want to mess with fields. uh solid waste. How solid are you, Cheryl, that we're guessing the right number of tons? Um I spent time talking to our representative and so he uh plotted out um some numbers are set and some numbers are a little bit flexible, but according to the contract that I got those numbers right from him, so I'm the factor will be how many tons of it, right? It's like gas. Yes. But we know it's 277ish, but is it going to be what?

We did and we did average the recyclable um just uh processing cost because that is that does change every month. So I think that was the estimate. I think Medulla can five find five more cars to register for us to get us to 40. Ian will do his part. Go by. It's a right off.

Let's be honest, those are a critical part of what we're delivering to a whole bunch of and they're not that good. I mean, it's you're right. It's like for a large part of the town that is the biggest thing they experience with us. So, Can you just remind me of tonight? Are we hoping to say yay off to budget committee? Yes. So we can then do the books and pass it on to the budget committee. Yes. We drop other licensing fees from 27 and 22 historically 17 other licensing.

I am in revenue now. I ran out of other things. You know, you're not allowed to miss during budget season because Yeah. Yeah. The rest of us have it. Can you pass the chocolate? So amped up. Dog lic. Yeah, the dog licenses and the marriage licenses. Why is it jumping down 5,000 more than last year? That was based on actual so it's the same as 20 so 17,800 for the total other licenses and fees we kept it the same

right but the actual 2425 was 22 I think it's asking why is that decreasing what's um there there was just expected so that affects both Meroula and Kerry and so the um it's they just expected um no the building permits are increasing So, um, they were just expecting they wanted to hold it at that because they they didn't know that we would have the 2425 levels. Well, it seems silly to me to have it down 5,000 off the last data.

Yeah. Well, it from the 2425. I mean, the difference is that's what I was saying is the building permits. Our actual was 95 uh two years prior. No, that's a different 124. Oh, no. Thank you. way off in this. It's the same as No, that's okay. It's the If you look on the next page, it's the same at for 25. They wanted to hold it flat. So, I think 5,000 more. That' be two. Yeah. So, did you want to increase the other licenses and fees by Is that instead of increasing cars?

Now, now you're just getting Um, and so with all of those and the 150 I'm doing this. So where would you like to add the 5,000? Separate those two in the other licenses and fees. Which one would you like to add? Looks like it' be back in the safety building impact. Safety building impact fees. That's the Okay. So That's a safety impact fees. Yeah. Impact fees. Can you So just point me I'm going to be Yeah. Yes.

Yes. We decreased the impact fee line down by 5,000. So I can add 5,000 to the impact fee line. Okay. You're saying impact fee is part of the other licenses. Yes. So other fees are made up of So you're going to go from 178 to 238. It's well it's split and the printing it's on the top. That's what I was So under return check fee the next one is impact safe impact fee safety building.

Yes. Uh that is on the human services section heritage commission human services. We receive two requests this year. Uh the one is the one we receive every year is from CASA. Um and we kept that at the 500. Last year the cap letter came in late. This year they were in very early. Um and so that is in for the 2900 that we had historically given except for last year when the request came in late. Um,

but those were the only two we've received. So, we're looking at Heritage Commission, human services. No, that's human services as part of a health agencies. Yep. Can you What tab? Human It's the health agencies tab. So we have welfare assistance and then we have I don't know. No, looks like this. Yeah. Okay. So you're got it.

And so we get a bunch of letters from a lot of good. missed us. But they didn't forget this year. They didn't know. And that's what we've traditionally given them. Which line? Community action.

Oh, human services. It's right. It's health agency is the next page.

So you're taking I'm suggesting we bring it down. So you'd save 1,900 there. Well,

just one uh thing that just for background the board can do that. Uh but in in the backup for community action program, they do provide information on what they actually provide directly to BO residents. Um so they serve 597 BO residents, 123 BO households, and 12,920 meals through our core programs. So it's 200 we provided 205,394 worth of service dollars which I don't know exactly is federal and state

what they asked for 4200. If we're talking about cutting small things then why wouldn't you go to page one of that same category and look at the differences there. Yep.

I don't know. But um I I also know that the Heritage Commission has money that they could use in from their fund that they could pull out and use and spend for We all have Well, no one uses camcorders anymore. Yes. I'm sorry.

2250. Wait a second. Just so I'm clear. So essentially crossing out the folder. Yes. You you get it back to 200. And then the preservation and restoration shelves was an increase over last year because that was at 350. Now it's at 510. And so moving again display shelves. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

I'm trying to do the math. So it's what's proposed right now is um 2,250 3,00 3,000

2250 is the variance. So it's an increasing by 2250. Anything else? of duty uh PD vehicles fuel gasoline. Yeah, they cut it

635. It reflects the actual usage. They cut it requesting a cut 3,600

based on actual usage. reusing fewer cars as it opens.

We tried fixing that thing, by the way. Needs a fan replaced. uh two were for certified and two were for non-certified. Uh two are on step one and two are on step three half the year and four half the year for the certified because I don't know who we're going to get. So I split the difference. So we move one of those certified stepif.

Yeah. I don't think so. If they're certified, they wouldn't start at step one. No. So somebody who finishes the academy, uh they would start, I believe, step three, three, four for that. No, no, no, no, no. If they come in even go to the academy, they start at one. If they have no conquer. Yes. They're at one. I want to come to hire them at one. It's a matter of Oh, from somewhere else. You mean they went? We didn't sponsor them. We have two that we're putting in at Yes. two have previously worked at another town.

Yes. We got a counter statement.

Yeah, I don't know if we've gone that that high. I think we've gone up to three maybe. Is your line of questioning regarding like are you going in the direction of trying to reduce? I'm I'm thinking I'm looking your positions that I asked what you uh two are at step one and two are at step three. So because I don't know if we would have so I split the difference. Yeah. Which seems reasonable with all the changes that we've suggested here and we want to agree on them. We've gotten to 45,000

and that would bring us below 4%. uh 44,150 and by my math that would bring us below 40%. So uh for every change we've talked about tonight but for the yes and I'll go through those with I would like to just so there's a so you can also get the recording the changes that we're going to suggest are that we reduce police overtime from 100 to 75. Yes. and we reduce the assumptions around health from two families and two two people to all of them have two people on it.

We'll take that we'll take the savings from those two changes and add them back into the paving budget. So we're still net neutral versus what we presented tonight. take all these numbers and we're well below to 39 which is what we think we are based on your calculation. We the my calculation does not include the police overtime or the or the health change

our last because it's our last I don't want to do calcul come back and say use whatever you can to keep based on these changes. We expect it to be 39,000 and that's okay. So that we end up at 3900. Yeah. Okay. Restore whatever in excess of that. Okay. So I'll start over just so it's really clear for everyone. Okay.

Reducing police overtime from from 100,000 to 75,000. reduce um changing the health assumptions that move us from 19,000 approximately of savings down to 38 of savings. We're reducing the diesel expenditure from 85,000 to 70,000. Reducing the road salt spending from 135,000 to 125,000. Um the construction manual removing that. So that line goes from 11,500 to 1,500. Mhm. Um we have um uh the community uh action program line reducing that from $ 2,900 to 1,000.

And then for the heritage spend, reducing it um from its current state down to $750 per year, sort of flatlining it. We are also going to increase revenue on other fees and taxes from 17,800 to 23,800. And then still 22800 22800

22 sorry 22800 those are the changes and then we will use that brings us below that brings us to something and then we will use whatever is left over that keeps us in the 3% range of increase and contribute that back to the paving line. So if that is um $40,000, if that's $35,000, move whatever it is you can that still leaves us with a three handle on the tax increase year-over-year. Okay. So there and if there's any clarity on I can answer questions tomorrow on that, but there's a recording. And did you want to add the 5,000 to the motor vehicle revenue? That's the only one you didn't mention.

Do we want to do both those things? Yes, we will add the 5,000 to the motor vehicle revenue. So that is the motion. We have a second. I'll second that. Uh for clarification now, adding that 5,000 to motor vehicle, do we are we saying that that is going to go towards paving or is that going to go to reducing the

we are targeting Yeah, all these changes have brought us by my math to around 3.7. But now we're saying we understand we need to do contribute more to paving. So anything that keeps the amount of money that gets us from where we are now 3.7 to 3.9 the delta there will go back into paving. So your your goal is to have the tax rate be 3.9% increase with any gap going back into paving. Yes. Okay. So, I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. I.

I'd like to make a motion. Did you say I? I did. Four nothing. Four nothing. Tanya.

I'd like to make a motion that we uh capital reserve. I I agree. I'm not I shouldn't someone will second that motion. I'll sec I'll second that. I think it's like it's become a tradition going to Chris's argument that is that both taxpayers trusted us. This is us paying back that trust to the taxpayer.

And ultimately in a couple years I want ultimately get on the record in a couple years I hope we have a forever solution. This is this is continued sign that the town of do that.

I agree with all the sentiments expressed here. My only concern is that I would I feel like we should check in with Darcy to make sure that she will be in a position to fulfill the needs of the rec department in the event that we are able to move that 150 to the community center. So, as the Bose select board rep, if this were to pass tonight, if we go to budget committee, that would give her an opportunity to opine there and I can bring that recommendation back here. I would appreciate that. Thank you. Uh, so vote. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I.

I. Eyes have it for nothing. Wait, you have a So, you have a budget, Cheryl. Thank you. Thank you so much. New format uh isn't so bad. Not what I'm used to. Change is hard. We don't get to see water coolers or we Is there an urgency that we have to approve anything like this tonight? We have to prove this tonight. That's that was the only thing

it's basically just approving it as is and I'm totally fine with it. Yeah, you had one issue. Do we need to go into nonpublic tonight for that or any other issue that's at the January meeting?

I'll second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Oppos? Nay. All right. That's the only thing that's pressing tonight. We don't need to go into public. The only thing I can think of is um do we have our January meeting set?

Yeah, we knew about it because we were consistent with He texted me this morning. Hey, we have a meeting tonight. All right. Um, do we have a motion to adjurnn? Second. All those in favor? I I would just like I know we're going to skip bottom lines, but I am just gonna I would like to congratulate Chris on going three and 0 on his motions today. All right.

All those in favor of a German say I. I. Eyes have it. Microphone.