Robinson School Building Committee - Regular Meeting

a panelist and we can uh Oh, now we're down to zero. One, two, three, four, five. We only have five. Okay, so we are definitely below quorum. Two. The re I think the reason I always do the the math for quorum is Tom you and Michael were added as individual members not one and then an alternate right from permanent town building. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So that does bring us to 12 which would be 6 + 1. And now we are 1 2 3 4 5 six seven. Okay. So, as long as in Oh, that must be John Cunningham in the attendees list. So, we'll do that him. Okay, now we've got everybody. We just needed to give it another minute and we're already recording. It's great. Okay, let's just make sure. All right, great. I'm going to call to order this meeting of uh the Robinson School Building Committee. That's right. Now I'm remembering Kristen said she couldn't make it today. Um for Tuesday, April 29th, uh our first order of business, which my my apologies that um I did not send I forgot to send out the meeting minutes with the agenda. So, I'm going to put those up on the screen um for us to take a look at and see if I can get them a little bit bigger. Uh so, these were from April 8th. We approved minutes. We gave an

update on the certification of vote. Um the website had some quick updates. This was our meeting after town meeting. So, we gave a couple updates. We had some questions on the timeline. Is this one right? Um we uh discussed the enrollment certification. Um had some follow-up questions for them. No update on the second site locations and an action item to chat with the communications consultants. Any feedback on the minutes? or do you need another minute with them? Everybody good? I can't see heads now because the whole thing changed. That picker. Okay. I'll take a motion to approve the April 8th minute meeting minutes. So moved. Thank you, Dr. Chu. And a second. Allison. Second. Thank you. Okay. All in favor of approving Tuesday, April 8th meeting minutes. Tom, I have to abstain. I wasn't there. Okay. I'm in I Lindsay. I Dr. Chu I. John Le. Allison. I Kevin. And I also want to let you know that I attended um two weeks ago a meeting as well that nobody attended. Just want to let you know that I was really excited about our committee and we had a week off and so wasn't sure what to do. But if we could do separate minutes for that meeting, I'd appreciate it. No, no rest for Kevin. He's he's attending meetings with nobody. Um we must have missed each other because I think I delved into that as well. Sat there for a few minutes

before I realized. I'm really sorry. We're It's okay. We're going to talk about um moving forward a schedule and and set those dates because it's you're not the only ones. Sorry about that. Um so Kevin was an I Tom Clay. Hi. Uh and John, is that you? John Cunningham on your iPad. I wonder if you if the mute button is a little bit harder to find. I'm an alternate so I don't know what I should say. All right. Great. That's right. Thank you. So, that was one, two, three, four, five, six, seven within one abstain. Okay, great. [Music] Um, close that. So, um, I I don't think today is in my mind more of a bit of a check-in on a couple things. Um, so it it might be short depending on how how long it takes us. We do have a sort of a followup from our last discussion about the enrollment letter. This was in your email. Um this should not be new to Tom and John. This was um in the select board packet as well. And if you follow um school committee ongoings, it was in our packet um as well last night. Um, and this is just an updated letter from our last, uh, discussion on the ETH. Um, if you recall, uh, we had a couple sort of clarifying questions for the MSBA team. Dr. Chu, Lindsay, and I met with them, um, on the 10th. Um, and it was a great conversation. I thought we really um you know they have all these kind of constraints of for like I feel like a formula for what they put in the letters. Um and uh so it was very helpful to like actually talk human

alongside the legal of the letter. Um, you know what what I guess I want to make sure to call attention to for the committee is um that this updated letter obviously reflects more of um what this committee has talked about and what we've presented to town meeting in the community which is that this feasibility study will include analysis of the option for absorbing the day school um as well as as a slightly larger option. So, you can see from the new uh the certification that there's now three project sizes. I'll pause there, Tom. Yes. Uh I'm I'm trying to find the uh I mean there we have two letters, you know, a summary one and then a fairly long one as you say, fairly legally ease. That took me a couple of reads to try to parse it. Yep. And uh I'm trying to find the should have printed out wrote on it somewhere. It said that they will not pay for the part of the feasibility study that includes the day school. Did I read that correctly? So I open this to Lindsay and Dr. you to correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that they they encourage us to study that project within the budget of our approved feasibility study. um and that the feasibility study part is eligible for reimbursement, but that ultimately that project, that larger project um would splinter off into a portion that is not reimbursable because the original eligibility letter was for Robinson and Abbott. Correct. That's the way that

they had talked with us about it. our interpretation of their previous letter thinking that it didn't prohibit us from looking as to whether or not we could absorb the day school. They said that was correct. They didn't include that in the letter that they sent to us even though we had talked about it in the meeting because they were also concerned about if that would be new information for our community. So they're trying to be very supportive of how where we are at in the stage of communication and the back to the legal ease part and the template that Valerie was talking about our initial S so SOI and the scope that they invited us into the eligibility process for only included the Robinson school and the Abbott school since we discovered in the process that we thought it's possible to actually absorb the day school as well too. They're saying they encourage us to explore that, but they're bound by the by the by the letter that they originally invited us into. So the feasibility, they encouraged us to explore that with the feasibility um within the the the approved budget that we had. And then yes, what Valerie said is that if the if the community decided to move forward with the larger project of a thousand students, um then there would most likely be aspects of that building, parts of that building that would be including the additional students that they would not that they wouldn't reimburse. But all of that information would be available to us before the community makes a decision. So whatever we bring forward from the feasibility process with whatever this committee

thinks is the preferred solution, it will also say this X amount is reimburseable by the MSBA and if you did this, this X amount is reimburseable. So, all of it will be communicated because all of that comes to us from the MSBA before we would move to the community with um a vote for to fund an actual project. Lindsay. Yeah. And I'll just add I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but I think we got a draft um feasibility study agreement from them. I think this just to we we can double we can check the language in there and ask any clarifying questions on just to make sure that all of the you know architect scope or diligence work under the 1.6 6 million if we're studying this other larger option just to make sure that those costs are in fact eligible. Um I think the details will be flushed out in that that larger agreement. But that was my understanding as well from our conversation with them. Right. Does that clear that up Tom for you? Yes. You're saying that it doesn't affect the feasibility study, but it will affect any uh construction project that we may decide to do. Yeah. Yeah. I And I I feel like I really asked them in plain speak like we told the community we need we want to get to a point where we've at least studied that option and we be able to present that, you know, that picture. But we did present that I think didn't Yeah. Yeah. And that's one of the things we had said Tom is we shared with them that this was already community knowledge. So the the second letter that they sent us doesn't really change anything from their end and from the conversations we had. It's just that the

first letter was really responding to what the scope is. And so they said they've they've done this I think they said for three or four other communities who have done similar things to us with that that we're doing. So they said they could they would be happy to re resend a letter to us so that we can share with the community so that the community sees what it is that we've been talking about. Okay. Yeah. I will say I I had to read this a lot. My impression of it is is that there's they must have like existing paragraphs sort of templates that they kind of drop in and and that it it I agree with you Tom. I had to read it a couple times. It doesn't flow. It's a little it's not flow. Yeah. But great great discussion, great clarifying question. It is an important sort of point in our process that I really want to make sure everyone's clear on so that we don't get to a um my other question was I assume that you all are okay with their projections on number of students. Yeah, that's what we we looked at in their methodology. I mean I will say in one we can ask them clarifying questions um but it is their methodology. So if we don't agree with it, then we had a chance to say, "Hey, we think you should consider this." But it is something that ultimately they establish and then we sign off on agreeing to. And so we did do that. Yeah. And you know, they acknowledge the housing developments. There's um a 15% what what I thought was interesting is not only is there sort of a a there's a 15% buffer on the other schools. So on the non-p project schools, they give a little bit of buffer for growth um sort

of districtwide. So it's not just like a magnifying glass on the project. Okay. Any other points on this updated enrollment letter? So we um there was a deadline of the 24th. We got all the signatures required and um scanned that off to them on the night of the 24th. Um and oh, sorry. Um and so that is officially submitted um as Lindsay mentioned, they uh emailed us yesterday um with a feasibility study agreement as well as a certification of legal counsel. um two documents that we will obviously have our town council review and I can um share with the committee for um your all of your review as well. Anything you want to add there, Lindsay or Dr. Chu? I know you were copied on those. just that they're, you know, they're wanting us to sign the agreement once we've reviewed it and it won't be official until the executive director is um able to sign it following the June they're anticipating the June 18th board meeting. They'll vote to approve this in which case she would sign it and we would then be officially entering the feasibility study phase. Yeah. And I um actually did a quick follow-up question to Maria to clarify that timeline that these are the final steps, the final deliverable in the eligibility period. She confirmed that was true and um she expects that we can

return those documents by May 19th about 3 weeks she gives us for review. So um okay. Um, so I'll I'll speak to our communications work. So, as as our at our last meeting on the 8th, um you know, coming out of the town meeting approval, um I felt very energized to like of all these ways to keep the community up to date on this project. I think that, you know, we certainly don't want to get to a point where um members of the community are being asked to vote on something in some amount of months um and haven't been sort of uh educated along the way. And we know that there will be outreach as part of the um um sort of the the feasibility study as the feasibility study kicks off in the fall. Um, and so Kristen had suggested I meet with the town communications consultants, that's capital strategic solutions. Um, and so I had a meeting with them. It was great. Um, they have had experience in this area. They um re, you know, they recommended no such thing as as too much communication. Um, and we talked a little bit about this may be sort of it feels obvious once you say it, but they talked a little bit about like um that there are sort of tiers of responses. So when there's when we like hire an OPM, there's this like tier one response of drafting a press release, having it go out on all the town um website, news flash, social medias, um town manager newsletter um and on our internal website. And then when there are other updates that we feel like are sort of medium tier that we could do, maybe it's not the full press release,

but it's like a town a news flash on the town website. So thinking that helped me think through um you know our process and our timeline to say like okay when it's this major announcement it would be this suite of this package deal sort of and then if it's this like you know these smaller milestones um we can approach it in different ways. Um, one of the biggest takeaways I found from our conversation was they were very uh supportive and eager for us to get an active website. Um they thought that, you know, you could have um smaller updates as we go that we could be more in control of um on a website and that anytime you do like the press release and the news slash, you're really pointing people to trust this one source of information on this project website. Um, so it that was helpful because I feel like in my mind I had kind of uh deprioritized the website a little bit to think like, oh, that's a nice to have. When we get to it, we'll get to it. Um, but they they were really um helpful in reframing that. Um, and if you recall at our April 8th meeting, um, Kristen had mentioned that Mike Wells, the town IT director, is investigating an a a separate website idea for the economic development committee. Um, and so she recommended uh um aligning with him to make sure that if there's any efforts happening in that space that we could leverage them for this project as well. um he and I have played a little bit of phone tag, so I have yet to connect with him um since coming back from break. Um but that's my next step. Um and then at that point, I'm hoping to loop Allison in. I know you've um offered support for what, however, whatever this manifests into as

a next step. So any feedback on that? Just want to point out that the broken link on the uh news flash page where it says for updates. I don't know. You're right. Um I guess I didn't check that. Okay. Well, I'll get that updated. Thanks, Tom. Tom, did you raise your hand? Yeah. Um the uh so as as you've correctly pointed out, the economic development committee is facing a similar issue. In their work with u Mike Wells, uh there had been an assertion that that the uh the kind of town the main town website generator that the town uses uh could be customizable and could be, you know, tweaked to to fit all kinds of needs. It turns out it can't really be customized very much. like you can change the color of like the headline banner and maybe that's it. So probably the crossroads decision for this group would be do we want to have it follow the same format or do we think we'd be able to much better communicate if it was a different website sort of organized differently. Um and that raises the question of well if it's a different website and it's hosted in a different way then it probably has some money attached to it that we have to think through. But um that's the update that I have. The economic development committee is sort of struggling because they they believe they can do much more and it is an outward facing website to try to attract, you know, potential businesses to town and other things. So um so they're trying to navigate through like can they create something that's separate and who would pay for it. So we may be facing the same same questions here.

Dr. One of the things that I know um we had talked about and Kathy had mentioned was whether or not we want to create a simplified Google site that is easier for us to control that is linked here as well too. Um we've done that for other things uh within the within the school system. Um it's something that both could point to. It's just it would allow us a little bit. Now, it's a Google site, so it, you know, it's it has limitations, but um but that was something that that wouldn't cost us anything. So, Alison, did I see you on mute? Did you want to add anything? Yeah, I think I mean, I'm not an expert in this. Um I've I've just had to learn different types of website development for each job that I've been in, and they've all been different. Um, so I'm happy to like learn through this process, but I do um I've never done the Google site. Um, but I do remember when we first started talking about this, I remember looking at it and texting you Valerie about I think a a small cost was associated with it. And I know that cost like I can I don't know if it's possible for me to like donate to pay for the basically the URL. Um, and then I think we can just go from there. But I I kind of wanted to to play with it a little bit um to see what it was like before really bringing it to the group. But I'm kind of paywalled before going like before I can do anything. I have to actually pick what the URL would be and pay for it. And it it was something really small. So um but that's an option and I would be willing to donate that to the group if that's allowed. Um, I appreciate that. I I I actually

don't know off the top of my head the mechanism for that. Um, I guess it be something I would check with Kristen on. Um, oh, Kathy, hi. Um, I think most you'd have to determine if the domain like rsbc.com is used elsewhere and if you purchase that, I know through Google it's $10 a year. Yeah, it's really small. Yeah, I was playing around with different ones. I just didn't want to make a decision on any of this without talking to, you know, the group and then it kind of once it was brought to the group, then Kristen said, "We should talk with the economic team." So, it kind of stopped to try to collaborate there. Sorry, Kathy, for cutting you off. Go ahead, Tom. Uh I'm a bit flummxed about uh I both support and am cautious about everybody going in different directions when we're doing website stuff. Uh I'm a little bit flumx by the fact that the layout mechanism that the town is using is so limited. Uh yeah, Civics Plus, I think, leaves much to be desired. Yeah. And uh I mean, I've done this stuff professionally for years, and I'm just concerned. Uh, I I I don't know if I want to talk to Kristen or uh Mike about, you know, what's going on here because I I hate for everybody to have to do their own thing because eventually there's security issues and all sorts of issues beyond that. You know, what happens if somebody defaces their website, things like that and public

records concerns and everything. public. Yeah. All that stuff. Yep. And it just I I I applaud everybody for wanting to do something, but I'm also wanting to warn people that there's concerns here, but at the same time, I want to make sure that we're able to do things that we need to be able to do. Oh, yeah. I mean, I think one of the um inspirations for investigating this is that it's like that Allison has offered to um support it support many updates along the way, which would take that off Cathy's plate or off someone else in it, you know. So, I think that's attractive to me. I, you know, I want to make sure that that we have that um sort of independence. Um, but I think I think you raised some good points. I guess I would um maybe propose that if you can articulate some of those um and then some of your concerns, Tom, and then either directly reach out to Mike Wells or Kristen with them. Um but um I Yeah, go ahead. Uh Tom, uh who economic development committee is also looking at this. Uh yeah. So you could either talk to our consultant or um whose name I'll have to dig up for you or Cheryl who's the uh the current chair. Um I almost feel like if it's makes sense to you Valerie, I almost feel like I should go just talk to Kristen and Mike quickly and say what's the constraint if these communicationoriented websites if we need more flexibility than we're going to be able to get from Civics Plus. I I almost don't want to ask to be regulated like give them the opportunity to say no. I just want to say like what what's the what's the consequence and how do we manage it if if we need to do something different and maybe we do the same different thing as the economic development committee. But that's if we

if we all do the same different thing at least that will reduce our legal and all that kind of stuff having to get the things correct. Okay. Let let me since there's two that are facing basically the same problem. Um, let me ask and and I think uh like if we need to move forward and have Allison start doing some work, I don't think there's a lot of risk of going forward on spec and getting the site and beginning to do a little bit of development. I mean worst case is we uncover some extra capability in Civics Plus and end up going that direction. Yeah, I mean we you schools use um Google Workplace all the time like it's the public school Yeah. platform because it's so cost-effective. Um, and websites are so day-to-day now. I I mean, I don't really even know of infiltrating or having any data breaches or anything like that. And for our use, um, we're re it's really just a landing page of of narrative like text. We're not doing anything fancy. We just want to have the autonomy to, um, update on the daily if needed. I I I understand, but I mean just like I just the broken link and broken I would think I would I would think Oh, Lindsay, I just cut in front of you. I'm sorry, but I was just going to respond to Allison quickly if that's okay. Um, I would think especially if it's if we're talking about a $10 domain and we can still ask this question of of Kristen concerned about this committee, but so much of this work has already been supported by the school budget and by the town budget that if the school district was to purchase the RSBC URL or whatever we decided what to do, that's very different than actually going ahead and using it, right? So, that would allow Allison to actually create

something. And I think to Tom's point, before we actually publish it and before we actually use it, but I think $10, but what what we don't need is, and I totally appreciate it, Allison, offering to to donate it, but I think you're right. That's where it starts getting sticky. But I can I can assure this group that the Westford Public Schools has the $10 within our budget to purchase the the the URL. So Allison, if the committees if this committee is okay with that, I would have Allison, you and Kathy could work together to figure out how we do that. And like I said, the school district, we we do use Google Sites for a lot of different things. And Allison's right, it has become our go-to in many ways. But I I agree with all of Tom's concerns, both Tom's concerns, um about uh about whether we act whether that's actually what we do. But I think if you if this group is okay with it, I would I would propose that we at least get the URL so that Allison could see what she could do with it. Lindsay, I was just going to say um depending on how much content we want to put up prior to getting our OPM on board um we could also I OPM firms um and architect firms, but I would prefer the OPM firm to do so could manage a website for us um and may offer that as part of their services. It would, you know, so that's something to consider. Um, but we may want to go ahead and purchase the URL now so that we have that for them then to use. But that's that's an idea as well. Great. I'm seeing some head nods. Do is there consensus to um have Allison investigate you purchasing a URL and

work with Kathy to do that? Okay. Great. Great. Okay. Awesome. That's very helpful. and Tom has an action item to follow up with Mike and Kristen on constraints. Um and we'll go from there. Okay, good. Thank you. Appreciate that. Which Tom? Um it sounded like Tom Clay is going to use his existence with um his exing relationship with the economic development committee. Okay. Uh where did I leave off? Is there a um domain name that you want to focus on? rsbc.com or Allison might have some in in mind too. I was comfortable sort of trusting Allison's expertise um on what she recommends. Um yeah, I would try and stick with an org um if we can and um whatever whatever's available. If it's Robinson MSBA like it is um I would keep it consistent with what we've been using. I think but I I think whatever is easiest. Tom, so we can't get rsbc.wwestfordmaz.gov because that's a thing that we actually already own. I don't I don't know that I can answer that. I would have to do something different because that is it's already attached to that page. Yeah. But it isn't. Oh, it's What is it? What's the name of it? If you put a dot, I'd have to talk to Mike Wells to ask how our DNS is working. Uh, but the deal is if you have

a dot before the westford mass.gov, that is not involved with the page, the web server that happens before the web server. Okay, it happens at the uh name lookup. So, I could ask Mike Wells if that's possible or not. I'm out of my depth here on content. But, but I think the term you're Yeah, I think the term you're looking for is a subdomain, right? Oh, I know it's a subdomain. I was trying to void. I guess I would I guess I guess I would um prefer I I think while we refer to ourselves as RSBC and we know what that means, I think the Robinson MSBA is the more um universally recognizable term um instead of like kind of truncating that down to another uh acronym. Um, and everyone knows I'm a fan of acronyms, but I feel like the Robinson MSBA is a little bit more community level. Um, and so finding a way to incorporate that, I think, in the URL is what I would support. I mean, somebody could go ahead and get the Robinson msba.org because you can names pointing to the same thing. Yeah, sounds like Alison, you can investigate that. Okay, great. Great. Um, okay. So, uh, I guess what I also wanted to give an update on second site locations. Um, the land use department team has put together a very very preliminary initial draft um, list that has been shared with me. Um, I think

it's it's a very rough list. There's, you know, it's it's got a um, 100 properties on there. um that you know exceed 20 acres in land area. Um we obviously you know some of them are privately owned, some of them are are town owned um or town organization related owned uh and some of them have buildings on them like so there's still a a work to do to call that list down further. Um, I would propose that uh that we that I can work with Lindsay to um further call that down in terms of whether that timeline works to um sort of have that second site narrowed a bit before we bring the OPM on board um and to just make better use of their time and and money, right? Um so that was always sort of the plan to do a little bit of that leg work up front I think. Um so that list is not public record yet because there is um you know private companies names on there and properties and that would be a I think protected by executive session when you're anytime you're talking about um land uh negotiations. So or strategy with with regards to that. So that's just a quick update on there. Um, I do want to just make sure we talk about how the committee feels about um, our next couple meetings. Um, we obviously have those two legal documents that will be reviewed and sent back to the MSBA by the what did I say 19th. Um we are on we would plan to be on the June 18th um

MSBA um meeting agenda. Uh, and aside from the website and some offline work on sec the second site, there's not a whole lot that would be um, you know, a good use of everyone's on this committee's time. Um, so I think I would propose maybe a check-in in a couple weeks. Does everyone have a reaction to that? Okay. Um, how about like June 3? June 3 or be the week before? Uh, no. When when do we need to have any comments on the docs back to you or who do we send those to, I guess, is another question. Um, the the Yeah, that's a great question. The So, the legal docs are expected back to MSBA by May 19th. So I can send those out and any direct comments should I think just to not violate open meeting law would go directly to me and then I can funnel those to Kristen as part of the legal review. Um okay. So why don't I send that out today and ask for feedback on those by Friday close of business just to give legal enough time. Yeah. I'm wondering if that's enough time actually because um just depending on what if they have to if they have to do any drafting um they get it on the 16th and then they wouldn't have a um they'd only have maybe uh Monday morning in order to like make any changes or to even respond to to to the comments. So I'm I'm wondering if we ought not get those back um earlier to give time to react. Oh, I meant by this Friday like for our this Friday. Oh, okay. Okay. I I see

this as I see I mean I'm trusting legal sort of with the review and if we as individual committee members want to do that due diligence and read those documents and have any feedback I welcome that. Um but I I think that's sort of an initial uh piece that that is superseded by the legal review. So I guess um I can send those out today. Does that make sense? I took it to me yeah I took it to me the 16th. I was looking at the uh I started on the 19th and I just kind of flipped back a week to look look at the days. Yeah. So why don't we say any internal feedback would be due to Valerie by May 2nd and then legal can incorporate that and have you know hopefully then they don't use those full two weeks but um like you said to get that back for them by um as soon as possible before the 19th but I don't necessarily see that as an agenda item for discussion just if that um speaks to you for an internal an individual review, please um feel free to do that. Okay, that makes sense. Okay, so with that said, that th those pieces would be turned into the MSBA um by the 19th and we would be on their agenda for the 18th. Um any updates between now and then that would happen with like the website can always be emailed out to the committee, but like I said, I'm just trying to make an efficient use of everyone's time. I know this is during the workday that I don't know that um there's like a decision point or discussion point on some of that work. So, how does everyone feel about that June 3rd as a check-in? Okay. Sorry, Tom. Was that a hand or a No, no, it sounds good. Okay. Okay. Great. All right. So, let's plan for June 3rd. Um is there anything else? Lindsay, at one

point we had talked about um sort of beginning a draft of the what the RFS would look like in in to sort of hit the ground running as soon as we get that green light. Um would that be something in terms of before the MSBA board meeting? I'm just looking at my calendar, the June 18th. Do you feel like that um would be something that we could have an initial discussion on at the June 3rd? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So, draft RFS website update. Thanks for the reminder. Yep. And um we'll have the final copies of the legal docs by then and any any um update in advance for the MSBA meeting. Okay, forgive me. Um, we've talked so much about uh various locations for site one. What What was the one that we landed on as a definite site one? I think the the existing building is always site one because that renovation is part of the study. So, they're always going to do a an analysis of what can that site handle for repair and renovation. But great question because yeah, you're right. Sometimes we assume something and move on. And um I think that's helpful. I guess leads me to my next question that you know with that very comprehensive list of potential site twos. Could we also identify a potential site three? That really is site three. Site three. Right. So site the list site two is is next is here next to the Abbott School. Okay. That's what I was thinking. what we what we're really talking about is looking for site three. So that's but that's a good point, Kevin. Yeah,

thank you for the clarification on terminology um so that we don't further confuse anyone watching. All right, so next meeting June 3rd and um let me know of any concerns or uh questions in the meantime. I will get those legal docs out to the committee and any feedback due uh back to me by the second, please. Okay, I'm seeing head nods, so I guess I'm not on mute. I'll take a motion to adjurnn, please. So move. Oh, there you go, Tom. Okay. And a second. Second. Thank you, Chris. Nobody wanted to uh adjourn. Yeah, it's a beautiful day. I'm trying to get you back 15 minutes. All right. Thanks everybody. All in favor of adjourning. Appreciate it. Take care. Thank you folks. Bye.