[Speaker 10] (0:06 - 0:08)
We are live on land.

[Speaker 1] (0:10 - 1:24)
Great. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the November 22nd 2021 board meeting virtual meeting.

You are welcome to access this meeting here on zoom. Watch it online on Facebook live. I'm a government channel or government access TV.

And if you have any, we don't have public comment tonight it's a very short agenda. Just focus on the town meeting warrants. But if you do have comments you can join the meeting and raise your hand virtual hand and Ali can let me know or email me with any questions.

My name is P tip come first letter of my name, selling my last name at swan Scott ma.gov. So, like I said tonight's agenda is really short, it's just a discussion possible vote on the fall special town meeting warrant articles, and, and then a vote to close the warrants so that it can go out to print tomorrow. So with that, we'll just share my screen. Yes, please.

Thank you.

[Speaker 11] (1:32 - 1:33)
Can everyone see that okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:38 - 2:27)
Yes, those like double monitors right now because there's so many. Okay. All right, so we'll walk through the article and I just want to mention tonight we have with us I'm sorry about that town moderator Michael McClung and finance director, Amy Sarah.

And welcome both of you thanks for joining. Okay, so article one. Can you scroll up Ali, sorry.

I don't have a big screen so I'm just gonna have to read it from your article one Sean I believe you're just going to speak to this in more detail. Since we have gotten more detail since the last meeting, amend appropriation for fiscal year 2022 operating budget.

[Speaker 2] (2:27 - 8:40)
Thank you Paulie so this is generally some housekeeping. Typically we hold off until the annual town meeting to do some inter departmental transfers, but given the fact that we're having a special town meeting and we've had some situations that have risen that really would allow us to address some of the needs. The town's FY 22 budget when, again, we're not asking for additional appropriations we're just meeting our statutory obligation to transfer lines.

And so this typically would be done either through the annual town meeting or at the end of the year shuffle. And so just stepping through. We do need some additional administrative staff support.

This has been a unusual year with the pandemic, and certainly with some staffing levels in the administrative support area. We see more meetings, more online meetings, more grants and projects and I'm seeking a transfer of $30,000 into the town administrators department budget. These funds have corresponding sources that we're taking them through.

And so I'll list really the transfers that we're asking. To go to and then I'll outline the transfers transfers that we're seeking to transfer from once I go over that so under the legal department insurance budget property and casualty insurance. We had a final insurance amount that came in after the budget was voted of 21,800.

And so that would be a payment that we'd be looking to make. We're looking to add some additional funds for employment screening for the library director and the police chief searches for technology. We're looking for an additional 17,000.

This is for zoom and upgrades of antivirus software and a copy release. These were items that we just frankly needed to budget for that we didn't correctly budget. We also have a request for an increase of $30,000 for contracted consulting services.

This is for that Windsor ab playground as we all know we've seen cost escalations, given, you know, some of the issues with supply chain and all of the challenges with a global market that has seen some cost escalations. This is a project that the town has received grant funded funds for and we're certainly looking to make sure that we make a generational improvement for that part but we're seeking $30,000 of additional funds for the police department we're looking to transfer $118,000. This is for the services of MRI, or, in particular, our interim police chief, David curse to the end of February.

That's really the outer limit, but we do have some tailings and the salary line for the police chief that can help on those. And we're looking for $55,000 for equipment for the police department. This is for communication arrays that would help us address a critical communication need that has been identified by chief curves and the police department.

We do have $25,000 capital item for communication so the balance of 55,025 is the amount that she occurs has asked for a first phase of improvement. And so funds to offset that $282,000 $800 transfer come from the following lines $10,000 from the accounting budget assistant accountant line this is tailings, we build that position later in the fiscal year so we have $10,000 available in the assessing office we had a part time assessing admin at $22,000 and again that's tailings we have a vacancy in that position so we want to transfer funds out of that.

Their tailings in the HR director position and other vacancies in that office of 69,400. We do have $30,000 in the reaction of $40,000 in the salary reserve or seeking to transfer $30,000 to address some of the staffing and other needs. We have $40,000 and maintenance tailings, give up for, you know, these are vacancies.

As I mentioned earlier there's 69,400 and tailings or unexpended funds in the police chief budget that we're anticipating and $30,000 and tailings in the patrolman line. As I've mentioned earlier we have more vacancies in the patrolman line that we've had some since the beginning of the fiscal year. And in the senior center aging services department we have $12,000 and tailings in the outreach worker position, and so that total of 282,800.

And again, these are transfers inter departmentally allows us to really address some of the critical needs that we have within our appropriation. And I'll be seeking a select board and finance committee's support for these, these transfers. Amy.

[Speaker 1] (8:41 - 9:03)
Sarah our director of finance administration's available if the board has any specific questions about some of these transfers shown for people watching, if you can remind us that we need 10 meeting approval for interdepartmental or within a department transfer if it exceeds a certain percentage of the budget of that particular budget.

[Speaker 2] (9:03 - 9:53)
There are line items in the town budget, not the school budget but the town. And we have to live within those specific lines I imagine those lines were put in a time and an age where there was not a town administrator, or perhaps, you know, somebody that was ultimately responsible for the bottom line. And so each of the department heads had to live within their appropriations and so.

In order to meet our, our town bylaws, we have to keep each of the line items whole dor does not allow Amy or Patrick to expend funds out of light items that are have gone in the red, so to speak, even if the town is in the black. We have to make sure that we're in the whole.

[Speaker 1] (9:55 - 9:56)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (9:56 - 10:23)
Just getting to your other part of your question. At the end of the year. There's special legislation that was passed that does not require town meeting approval but we have to wait until the end of the year, and certainly that can be cumbersome so rather than do that, you know, it's always probably best practice to make the changes as soon as possible, and we'll have less to deal with later.

[Speaker 9] (10:23 - 10:23)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (10:24 - 10:40)
Great, thanks. Just wanted to clarify that in case anyone was wondering. Okay, anyone have any Amy if you wanted to add anything.

Don't feel like you have to but just want to put that out there before I turn it over to board members.

[Speaker 7] (10:41 - 10:44)
I'll just answer any questions if they come up.

[Speaker 6] (10:46 - 11:07)
Hey Sean, I had a question about the police equipment. Does the $55,000 request for communications devices does that does that bring us up to a to a level of of operation of mean does that does that get us. Does that get us to where we need to be from a public safety perspective.

[Speaker 2] (11:07 - 12:24)
You know, I am not in the best position to answer that question but I think what I'll share with you what she occurs has said it will allow us to address phase one, and I've looked at a promulgation map of signal throughout the town I've asked Chief Archer to help me look at where we can get a location that can strengthen the signal. There are some additional opportunities for us to enhance the ability for officers in certain areas of town to strengthen their radio communication with the car and strengthen the cars ability to communicate with the radio signal arrays. They do weaken in certain sections given the granite and buildings that we have around town, and so that the promulgation of signals really needs to be looked at very carefully we have just a couple of neighborhoods on the waterfront that these funds will help address, but as we go forward.

I think you will see additional requests to enhance and add additional components to strengthen our communication arrays.

[Speaker 6] (12:25 - 12:34)
Do we have any idea as to as to what that second phase would would cost and our in our grant is grant funding or match funding available.

[Speaker 2] (12:34 - 13:38)
Yeah, the additional phase cost estimate is about $300,000. And yes, always. There are grant funds in fact I was surprised that we had yet to apply for grant funds and I made it clear that my expectation is that, you know, that's our first position, we go look for FEMA.

Mass Department of Public Safety grants, we look at Homeland Security grants these, you know, communication since 911 has been their top priority and making sure that we have resilient communication systems is a huge function of public safety and emergency management. Chief Archer, just this year wrote $320,000 grant for public safety, and we were under FEMA, and we were able to get that, you know, we just need to put our hat in the ring, and I'm sure that we'll, we'll get some funding.

[Speaker 6] (13:38 - 13:58)
So, so Sean as far as this, as far as the second phase I mean I'm certainly fine with the 55 with the $55,000 but kind of looking ahead, I mean with the second phase, we can, there will be someone at the department either the new chief or, or someone else within that department who will take, you know, who will take this on and write this write this grant.

[Speaker 2] (13:58 - 15:48)
Absolutely. And I mentioned to Chief Kurz that we're happy to partner. We have a community development team that's excellent at writing grants we have town staff that that really have set a pretty good template for putting a front end of a FEMA grant together so we're happy to collaborate and, and ensure that we have an opportunity to address some of those communication difficulties I will say that over the last three weeks Chief Archer has met with the town of Marblehead, and Salem, public safety individuals they've also conveyed that they have some concerns about radio interoperability and communication so there's a regional need here, and I think, you know, this, while this is a little bit of a surprise to come up in the middle of a fiscal year. I think, you know, there are going to be some real opportunities to really strengthen our resiliency.

When it comes to these communication needs. There will be some news that will report over the next few weeks. You know we did identify a location in Marblehead that both Marblehead and Swampstead believe will help be a good repeater station, and I'm working out some details on that that I hope to share with the board in the very near future.

That said, you know, I have, I did make it clear that, you know, we're, we're transferring funds to address these needs I'm not going back asking for new funds. I'm looking, you know, we're looking first at the police department budget she occurs was mindful of the fact that you know that's the first place that we look and we're transferring $30,000 out of tailings in the police department budget to address. You know, needs that the police department has identified is critical at this point.

[Speaker 6] (15:49 - 15:53)
Thank you for the clarification. No further questions.

[Speaker 4] (15:56 - 16:14)
Is there, I have a couple of questions, if I may, the, the temporary staff support those two lines. Can you explain why it's to instead of one, like, why isn't it a 30,000 or like where is that support going.

[Speaker 7] (16:14 - 16:42)
The way that our budget structured is personnel and expenses are two separate legal lines. We currently have a temporary staff person in the office so it's an increase to their hours, and the additional 18,000 will come from an outside temp agency which has to come out of an expense line, which is why we had to split it into two different lines. Just to work within the legal budget.

[Speaker 4] (16:42 - 17:03)
Okay, so the 12,000 is to increase hours for existing staff basically and then the. And then the 18 is for for 10 people. I don't know it may make sense to note that in the table for people but if the question comes up for town meeting.

[Speaker 1] (17:04 - 17:08)
Two different positions then. Right.

[Speaker 7] (17:10 - 17:18)
No, they're both doing general administrative support in the town administrator's office. It's just part time.

[Speaker 9] (17:18 - 17:21)
But it is to people. But it is to people.

[Speaker 4] (17:24 - 17:56)
Similar, like, just similar note on the on the Windsor Ave. If we could just change that to like Windsor Ave playground or something or park just so when people are reading this they know what that means. And then, Ali Can you go up to the language of the article. Is that see where there's, it's underlined for that.

What seems like an error is that what is that. I don't know.

[Speaker 1] (17:57 - 17:59)
It's the legal version of therefore.

[Speaker 4] (18:00 - 18:25)
Okay, so is that correct, I just didn't know, because when I, even when I read it, it's not just adding an E when I read that sentence it doesn't make sense to me but it. I thought you were wondering why the word had well to raise and appropriate or transfer from available funds money therefore or take any action relative there to that makes sense to lawyers in the let's say this way to town council review this.

[Speaker 3] (18:26 - 18:27)
Yeah, they did.

[Speaker 10] (18:28 - 18:29)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (18:29 - 18:37)
All right, that's to raise an appropriate or transfer funds available available funds. Funds money.

[Speaker 4] (18:37 - 18:42)
It actually doesn't, but not funds money is the weird thing to me.

[Speaker 3] (18:43 - 18:50)
I think that's actually an error isn't it from a variable funds money, therefore, just gotta read it with the right affect.

[Speaker 2] (18:54 - 19:07)
Yeah, there may be a comma needed. But you know, these are the, you know, we'll review this again with town council for the scriveners clarifications.

[Speaker 1] (19:08 - 19:11)
Yeah, just just clarity it's not even an error but yeah.

[Speaker 4] (19:12 - 19:19)
Yeah, that's all. I didn't have any questions about the. Any other questions about the actual transfers.

[Speaker 3] (19:21 - 19:38)
Sean, I have a couple. So, can you miss going back down now. So can you tell me for the line item for community development it says contract descriptions contracted consulting services is the $30,000 for contracting services or is it for equipment and work.

[Speaker 2] (19:42 - 19:47)
That's for a contract for equipment.

[Speaker 3] (19:48 - 20:03)
Okay, so I guess my question has to do with why for this and the $55,000 for the for the police communications, why are we not using capital as a capital article as opposed to using and having it be a budgetary matter.

[Speaker 2] (20:05 - 20:53)
So these came up. You know, after the capital, and we've looked at the operating budget, and rather than go and add them into a capital, you know, made a decision to fund these through the annual fiscal year. We have some tailings, and frankly, you know, with the police budget, or the police issue, you know that was a need that just arose, and it's outside of that annual capital funding timeline, and, you know, if we needed, let's just use a different example if we needed a police cruiser, because one of our cruises totally blew out mid year.

[Speaker 3] (20:54 - 20:58)
Would you seek $80,000 of tailings or would you be making that capital article.

[Speaker 2] (21:00 - 21:11)
If we had tailings I'd probably initially look at tailings. You know, I'd wait on on the capital. It would all depend on on, you know, what the circumstances were.

[Speaker 3] (21:11 - 21:25)
When I looked at the budget, you know, we appeared to have some flexibility in some lines, and so let me, so let me tell you why, why I think it matters more so than just being out of cycle, we previously approved. Sorry, Paula.

[Speaker 1] (21:26 - 22:23)
No, I'm sorry for interrupting I just wanted to clarify something on Windsor but I, I think it might your point will still be relevant but Windsor Ave we got, if you remember, we asked for capital funding. I don't know if it was the last town meeting, and part it was the playground there was being partially funded by a grant that grant is set to expire before the spring. And so if we waited on the Windsor Ave playground construction.

We would lose that $40,000 in grant money that we got. And so, you know that that's the timing issue of this. And also I just want to note that Margie has, has applied for a grant funding for this so the hope is that we won't end up needing it.

But in the event that we don't get the second grant. We don't want the project and the grant, the grant to lapse in the project to be further delayed. Thanks.

[Speaker 3] (22:23 - 24:02)
So, so I don't think it's a question of the timing. I think that it's just a question of the vehicle, and we can have it be a capital article for this town meeting more and if we had posted. So, so, so from my perspective what this does is I think this, these will be now be the only two capital things that sit in our operating budget for this year.

And so I don't, it just seems inconsistent that we're not going to do a capital for this and that they're going to sit and and if you will, in a way skewer our data when we're when we are in fiscal year 2324 25 and look back, I know we're only talking about, you know, roughly $85,000, but our budget comparative analysis is going to always have an asterisk now saying well you got to take out one time expenses that were in here. And so to me it just doesn't.

I don't hear a compelling reason not to do a capital, it literally requires. It wouldn't impact the fiscal year 22 budget at all, because the debt service wouldn't hit until fiscal year 23, and it would take one meeting of the capital improvements committee. And so I just it seems strange to me that we're doing it out of cash flow for backup better better phrase then, then we are as a capital article.

It just, I don't think timings it so it just seems like we should be consistent with how we're doing it I appreciate that it wasn't in the capital plan which raises the question as to why the police department hadn't identified this as a need, and the police department hadn't included it in the capital plan but that be that being said, it's a necessity so I don't question that at all. It's just now a question about whether or not it's better here, or whether or not it should be a capital order.

[Speaker 2] (24:04 - 24:57)
You know I appreciate that I, you know, I guess, you know, as I kind of look at the, the town budget and I look at, you know, whether or not we, we have available funds already appropriated. You know, I'm, my first position is, is always really when people ask for additional funds for projects. Just to look at the operating budget and see where we, we can meet the need.

If, if I get that. Um, you know, we, we have a capital committee and, you know, it probably from a procedural standpoint, you know, capital should should follow a capital rigor. I think, you know, this is probably a question of just expediency at this point.

[Speaker 3] (24:59 - 25:30)
Okay, so my point is it's not just, I understand it's here, and to change it would take effort, but I'm just saying that it's more than expediency, right, I mean it's a policy thing, and it's also going to skewer our operating budget to reflect one time expenses which I think we've worked really hard to keep clean. Article two, by the way, which, you know, is I think a bonding one as well. So we're already talking a capital article so, but neither here nor there, I've said my piece.

[Speaker 11] (25:41 - 25:50)
Any other questions. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (25:51 - 26:21)
All right, so do you all want to just do you want to do people feel ready, this is the first time we're seeing this detail, do you want to vote to recommend this after I mean, obviously, I guess the first question is, are we comfortable, we have to keep it on the warrant. But are we comfortable voting on it or do you want to wait and have a further discussion about it.

[Speaker 3] (26:21 - 27:07)
So, I guess my only issue is that this, the way the warrants drafted now it doesn't give the finance committee any room to really talk about what I just talked about whether it should be bonding or operating budget, because there's no there's no capital article that could be amended to include this. So a fincom recommendation to bond this money. I think would be beyond the scope of the warrant, and so it wouldn't properly before town meeting so I'm a little concerned that if the decision is ultimately to you to bond these two items and not use transfers that there isn't a vehicle to allow that to happen through recommendation of income and decision to town meeting.

If others don't care about it, we can go with it.

[Speaker 1] (27:07 - 27:34)
I guess no I just wanted to give everybody space to reply if they want it but I guess my question is, if there's no way that that's going to, and I'm not being sarcastic but if there's no way that's going to change at this point. I guess I'm, I guess I'm just wanting to clarify what you're suggesting in light of that. But Michael you do have your hand raised if Peter you don't mind waiting for a second.

Maybe he can shed some light here.

[Speaker 5] (27:35 - 27:49)
So I would just want to confirm that town council has reviewed this, and the, you know, the requirements for any item of a certain value with a certain useful life and town council is satisfied that this is the proper course to fund this item.

[Speaker 2] (27:55 - 28:04)
So, town council has reviewed this one but um, you know, I didn't get them to opinion on the specific capital.

[Speaker 3] (28:06 - 28:11)
So useful life was Michael asking a question or making a statement.

[Speaker 9] (28:13 - 28:14)
I will.

[Speaker 5] (28:18 - 28:25)
Thank you. I was asking whether town council is satisfied that this met all the requirements. Good.

[Speaker 1] (28:27 - 28:43)
All right, so I guess I'm Peter, I think you're the concerns are legitimate and Michael your point is very well taken. But I guess I'm just at a loss for the moment as to where this leaves us because the warrant.

[Speaker 3] (28:43 - 28:48)
I don't know.

[Speaker 5] (28:48 - 29:12)
Yeah, no, it's it we are we are boxed in because I would agree you, you do not have an option to put this item in this warrant in any other fashion. And if town council signed off on that. You know, that's what we pay them for.

But I do ask the question but the useful lifespan, and the dollar value, whether that's consistent with the charter.

[Speaker 3] (29:12 - 29:24)
Right, but we can we can put capital items in our operating budget. The question is whether or not the capital item requires is eligible for bonding and therefore capital and goes through our capital improvement process.

[Speaker 5] (29:24 - 29:29)
We can just spend the operating budget to fund it instead of body.

[Speaker 10] (29:29 - 29:30)
Yes.

[Speaker 5] (29:30 - 29:46)
I do believe the capital improvements process. Ask for review of anything at that useful life for dollar value. Let's check see whether if funded for operating.

[Speaker 3] (29:50 - 30:05)
I did yeah my recollection is if we're not bonding it. And we're just finding it here I don't think it through our charter goes through capital review but my points more than mechanism. I'm happy to have capital improvement.

Look at this.

[Speaker 1] (30:07 - 30:10)
You're wondering as a policy decision whether this is the best idea.

[Speaker 3] (30:12 - 30:17)
Um, yeah, I mean I'm, I'm asking the question I know my answer.

[Speaker 1] (30:18 - 30:19)
No, no, yes. Okay, right.

[Speaker 3] (30:19 - 30:33)
You're not wondering you're, I'm not wondering I'm suggesting it's not the best idea but, but I also appreciate that because we didn't see this and have this conversation before five minutes before midnight, we don't have the time to add a capital article.

[Speaker 10] (30:37 - 30:38)
So I don't think there is.

[Speaker 3] (30:38 - 30:48)
So I don't think there is a solution, I guess is my point. Then come just has to recognize that if they, if they're not pleased with this there's no way to remedy it at this town meeting.

[Speaker 4] (30:58 - 31:09)
So can I suggest maybe we don't make any sort of offer any sort of opinion in terms of favorable action. Just move on.

[Speaker 1] (31:11 - 32:06)
I was just I'm just wondering if I don't know. I was just wondering the extent of incomes role in that regard I certainly want to give them the discretion but if it's within. I guess it would have if it has future implications and that would certainly be something to weigh in on but because it's not actually changing the funding, this year, that's, it's kind of just a, it seems more apologies policy decision but to your point Peter.

How it might have implications that are further out than that, then that is something that they should weigh in on so. All right, we'll just postpone it then we'll postpone a recommendation and we'll wait to hear what income says and at the next meeting, then we'll have to review that and talk again. Does that sound good, everybody.

[Speaker 3] (32:07 - 32:27)
Yeah, I do suggest that we present this to the capital improvements just for recommendations I think the I think I'm. I think the moderators correct that the charter doesn't really specify bonding it specifies capital. So, if these constitute capital items then capital improvement committee should review it and make a recommendation as well to town meeting.

[Speaker 1] (32:27 - 32:34)
Should we get, should that just be part of the advice that town council gives us before we ask them to convene a meeting for this.

[Speaker 10] (32:36 - 32:37)
Sure.

[Speaker 1] (32:38 - 32:43)
I'm just asking because it seems they're not going to meet for any other other meeting anyway.

[Speaker 10] (32:44 - 32:45)
Article two.

[Speaker 1] (32:46 - 34:15)
Oh, article two. Yeah. Okay.

All right. So Sean, will you follow up with town council on those two specific items, please. And, and also those two specific lines and also to Peter's question about capital improvements need to weigh in on that.

Thanks, which I'm even if they don't have to I'm fine with them doing it too. I keep scrolling on my screen down to article two but I, it's not my screen. Any other questions or comments on that.

You're good. All right, article two. Really hard time with my screen here.

Okay. Article two approved transfer of free cash pedestrian safety infrastructure to see if the town will vote to raise an appropriate transfer from available funds or borrow the necessary funds to fund the design and construction of pedestrian safety infrastructure improvements in town, including all incidental or related costs or take any action relative there too. Okay.

Before anyone. I see if anyone wants to make any comments on this my understanding is that there's a presentation, still being developed. And we don't really have sufficient detail.

laid out yet to actually weigh in on this as we would want to similar to the article above, we don't have that level of detail so is that is that accurate Sean.

[Speaker 2] (34:17 - 34:32)
That's accurate, you know, we do have a scope of work we hired a consultant back in June, and there's a pretty detailed scope of work that we could present but certainly, but it'll be further developed.

[Speaker 1] (34:32 - 34:51)
That's right. Right. Okay.

In light of that does anybody want to hear sort of the preliminary workings that Sean's doing or are we comfortable just deciding whether to keep this on the warrant and hearing more details later when they're developed and making a recommendation at that time.

[Speaker 3] (34:53 - 35:00)
So just keeping it as is. We can always make a recommendation for indefinite postponement and move on to article three.

[Speaker 1] (35:01 - 35:04)
Everyone okay with that David and you have good to me.

[Speaker 4] (35:06 - 35:12)
The only question is just the title of the article. It's still saying free cash.

[Speaker 3] (35:12 - 35:23)
Yeah, thank you for doing that. So at the last meeting I had asked that this be bonding, and it still says free cash. So it's no it's article two whoever's highlighting it's article two not article three.

[Speaker 4] (35:24 - 35:45)
So, so what language in the article change but just the title of the article still saying approved transfer free cash so I don't know, should be approved funding. Thanks Neil for catching that same for the table of contents obviously Ali.

[Speaker 8] (35:47 - 35:54)
Thanks for bearing with me if I make some of these edits in the moment I appreciate that. Just a bit. Well, it's doesn't get lost.

[Speaker 4] (35:54 - 35:54)
That is fine.

[Speaker 8] (35:56 - 35:58)
Article two is approved funding.

[Speaker 4] (36:02 - 36:08)
In general doesn't look right now, and an approved funding and not a free cash yeah there you go.

[Speaker 8] (36:10 - 36:11)
Thank you all.

[Speaker 1] (36:13 - 37:01)
Thanks Neil I forgot to mention that. From the email I just saw. Okay, so we're voting we're keeping it on the warrant and making recommendation at a future meeting, and moving on to article three approved transfer of free cash collective bargaining agreements to see if the town will vote to transfer some of money from free cash to vote provisions of collective bargaining agreements between the town of Swanscott and certain town and or school department unions or take any action relative there to. So, Sean, do you want to. I'm assuming we don't have more details on specific numbers here, and we're going to want to wait till fin calm weighs in on this.

That's correct.

[Speaker 2] (37:02 - 37:08)
We do have some of the analysis, but I'm still waiting to get back from a couple of the unions.

[Speaker 1] (37:11 - 38:03)
Anyone have any questions. In the meantime. All right, so everyone's comfortable keeping this on the warrant, obviously, and voting a recommendation at a later time.

All right. For approved transfer of free cash adjustment adjustments to tax rates to see if the town will vote to transfer from free cash sum of money to the account of current revenue to be used and applied by the Board of Assessors and the reduction of the tax levy for fiscal year 2022. Sorry, or take any action relative there too.

Okay. So we heard, obviously the presentation from last meeting. And income has is discussing that later tonight, I imagine.

[Speaker 2] (38:06 - 38:27)
Yes, I would imagine they'll discuss each of these articles. As we've discussed, you know we'll be meeting again on December 1 and we'll determine what type of policy position will take with regard to setting the tax. So, I think this will have to wait until board meets.

[Speaker 11] (38:27 - 38:36)
Okay. Okay. I concur.

Peter.

[Speaker 3] (38:37 - 39:35)
The. I want us to think about how best perhaps to have this dialogue, because I anticipate there may be a divergence of views as to how much free cash to use here between either members of internally and within boards or between boards. And just given, given that I just wonder whether or not we should be thinking about either asking fincom to join us for that conversation on the first, or maybe you can coordinate with the fincom chair and think about if there's a way to do that just because I think it's important that we find commonality to the extent it's available to be had.

But I do think that there could be a divergence of opinions on here and a really healthy, frankly a healthy conversation. This is a great problem to have. And it's something that we haven't had this problem before and it's a good problem, but I think it could be a really fruitful conversation.

[Speaker 1] (39:37 - 39:49)
Sure. I'm happy to reach out to Tim. After tonight and see if they want to.

Is everyone comfortable with that not comfortable but comments thoughts on that idea.

[Speaker 4] (39:49 - 40:37)
I think it's, yeah, that's makes sense to me, I would just reemphasize, I didn't, you know, this is a short week December 1 is feels like it's tomorrow. And I know at our last meeting. So just coordinating that sooner rather than later but also at our last meeting we had asked for some additional analysis on free cash and forecasting you know what will be available, we're going to need for fiscal 23 so the sooner the better on that information.

And if we're inviting fincom to join us then, of course, I would want that information we shared with them.

[Speaker 2] (40:37 - 40:43)
That's in the works, Neil, I expect that hopefully by Wednesday we'll have something that we can share. Thanks john.

[Speaker 1] (40:44 - 41:13)
Okay, so I'll reach out to Tim and see about a joint meeting on the first about this we'll see obviously if where they're at after tonight in terms of their recommendations or opinions and then Sean you will be sending us something. Before then, in advance, like, couple days before then right with a with financial forecasting information to complete the analysis that we started the other, the other meeting right.

[Speaker 2] (41:15 - 41:17)
Yes, we're working on some of that analysis.

[Speaker 1] (41:19 - 41:21)
And you'll send it up, someone will send it out.

[Speaker 2] (41:22 - 41:24)
As soon as we complete it will send it up.

[Speaker 1] (41:25 - 42:17)
Thank you. All right. Article five appropriation from transportation infrastructure Enhancement Fund, this is, I think we already voted on the dollars.

Thank you for casually highlighting that that was very thoughtful. I wouldn't have caught on so it's good that Peter just said it, we're done. Yeah, we recommended it.

Okay, article six approved transfer of water enterprise fund retained earnings and article seven, following in the footsteps of our moderator here, approving transfer of sewer enterprise fund retained earnings. Article six being in the sum of 90,000. These are accurate numbers Sean right at this point.

[Speaker 10] (42:18 - 42:19)
Yes, they are.

[Speaker 1] (42:20 - 42:48)
Sorry I have a bad memory 90,000 and article seven and the amount of 190,000 to reduce the water and sewer rates respectively. And the finance committee recommend we were waiting on that to vote on a recommendation for that because the finance committee was had not weighed in on it. And they have, and that one alley I was actually getting to but thank you.

And so, are we ready to Michael you unmuted Do you want to chime in there.

[Speaker 9] (42:49 - 42:51)
I just wanted to clarify that part.

[Speaker 1] (42:53 - 43:00)
Oh yeah okay sorry. So I'm wanting to just see if others are ready to make a recommendation on these two articles.

[Speaker 3] (43:01 - 43:09)
I just, I would ask the financial team to confirm that the water and sewer budgets are tracking consistent with the approved amounts at the Maytown meeting.

[Speaker 9] (43:11 - 43:12)
Yes.

[Speaker 7] (43:13 - 43:15)
Reporting for that.

[Speaker 9] (43:15 - 43:18)
Sorry, Amy. Michael, can you last second I'm sorry.

[Speaker 7] (43:19 - 43:28)
Yes, we are trending as discussed at the Maytown meeting. But we can provide additional reporting if the board would like.

[Speaker 3] (43:29 - 43:41)
Yeah, that would be great if we could just have it so that we can just have that information to make sure, and that you know you don't anticipate, you're not seeing anything through the end of the fiscal year that is a flag for you.

[Speaker 10] (43:42 - 43:42)
Okay.

[Speaker 5] (43:43 - 43:58)
The only other question I was going to ask is whether to make sure that town meeting will have the retained earning balance as a, you know, where it stands regard the financial guidelines.

[Speaker 7] (44:02 - 44:05)
I will make sure that we have a slide for that as well.

[Speaker 10] (44:05 - 44:05)
Awesome.

[Speaker 1] (44:07 - 44:26)
And I do remember Amy that that's this would this, these would still be within that. Yes, yes, obviously we the numbers we need, but I'm sure you'll do that as you say so, um, I'd make a motion to recommend favorable passage of Article six.

[Speaker 9] (44:28 - 44:28)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (44:30 - 44:32)
All in favor. Oh wait, further discussion.

[Speaker 12] (44:35 - 44:36)
All in favor, you have to do a roll call.

[Speaker 1] (44:37 - 44:48)
Yeah, I know. Yeah, sorry. No, no one's trusting me tonight although for good reason.

Peter's values. Hi, Neil Duffy. Hi, David Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (44:48 - 44:48)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (44:49 - 44:55)
And I'm also an eye. So, article six is favorable action.

[Speaker 12] (44:55 - 45:00)
I would make a motion to approve our record recommend favorable action of Article seven.

[Speaker 9] (45:01 - 45:02)
Second, I can.

[Speaker 1] (45:03 - 45:04)
Any further discussion.

[Speaker 9] (45:06 - 45:06)
Nope.

[Speaker 1] (45:07 - 45:08)
David Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (45:08 - 45:09)
Aye.

[Speaker 1] (45:10 - 45:11)
Peter's values.

[Speaker 9] (45:11 - 45:12)
All right.

[Speaker 1] (45:12 - 45:13)
Neil Duffy.

[Speaker 9] (45:13 - 45:14)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (45:15 - 45:59)
I'm also an eye. Passes. Favorable action recommended unanimously.

All right. Article eight. Want to skip this one.

We don't have to. All right. Establish a solid waste enterprise fund to see if the town will vote to accept the provisions of GL chapter 44 section 53 F and a half and create a solid waste enterprise fund commencing as of July 1 2022 into which receipts from solid waste user fees including but not limited to the sale of pay as you throw bags will be deposited and from which expenditures for solid waste collection and disposal services shall be paid or to take any action relative there too.

[Speaker 3] (46:00 - 46:27)
Hey, Polly before we have discussion, I'd like to make a motion for favorable action on this, I think it's really important to keep it in the warrant I know there's some continuing conversations about it, but the concept is really sound and really important, and I think it should be here and I, I'm sorry I. Yeah, so I would actually sorry, make a recommendation for favorable action. Because I think as the policy heads of the solid waste.

It's important that people know where we are understanding that there's still a conversation to be had.

[Speaker 1] (46:30 - 47:06)
That's great. Thank you. Is there.

Is that emotional. Is there a second, second. Okay, can I Amy I just, I think, given the detail that is probably going to be outlined at the time of town meeting, we should, I would recommend taking out including but not limited to the sale of pay as you throw bags just because it's.

Does anyone have comments on that I mean it's a number of things so I just feel like it that that one example almost is more confusing than just receipts from user fees generally.

[Speaker 9] (47:08 - 47:08)
Okay, I'm fine.

[Speaker 1] (47:12 - 47:13)
That's fine.

[Speaker 4] (47:13 - 47:42)
I mean I had a similar thought on, and I defer to you Polly but just where it's describes the expenditures for solid waste collection and disposal services shall be paid, I mean, is that general or not generic enough language to encompass what you envision this paying for.

[Speaker 1] (47:43 - 47:46)
I know I'm instantly regretting, why did I not send.

[Speaker 3] (47:50 - 48:15)
So, I would again, this is my my suggestion I think Neil's asking a really good question by keeping this Morgan article in here, there's opportunity for the motion on the floor to have slightly modified language, and that will give time for town council and Polly and whoever to to work on it and reaffirm their comfort on the specifics. So don't mess with the language that town council already I wouldn't do that I wouldn't do that town council's already looked at this.

[Speaker 1] (48:15 - 48:32)
Yeah, I would say, though. Honestly, the only other change that I would maybe make now that I've given it my deep critical thinking is, I think. Sorry, sorry.

Okay.

[Speaker 3] (48:34 - 48:37)
Don't bother us, don't worry about us Ali we're just trying to have a meeting.

[Speaker 8] (48:40 - 48:51)
I'm just playing around. I wanted to put it back in, and so I'm sorry I didn't quite understand are we leaving this as it is then before town council it's editor.

[Speaker 1] (48:51 - 48:56)
Now you need neither of those comments. No, we're taking that out.

[Speaker 8] (48:57 - 48:59)
Okay, we are taking this out. Okay, I'm just gonna try to change it for myself.

[Speaker 1] (48:59 - 49:49)
Got it. Move on. And you'll obviously take out those comments right because my like, obviously I will try to remember to do that.

Yes, the only other change I would say is, it is true from which expenditures for solid waste shall be paid. And I understand that there's like that catch all language at the end but I would suggest will be deposited and from which expenditures related to solid waste, because it's not just collection and disposal it's the composting. It's the mattress grants, you know, it's, it's a lot of other things related.

It's the metal recycling. So it's really not just solid waste. I always think of solid waste collection and disposal as our contract.

And it's, I think it's, it's definitely broader than that.

[Speaker 3] (49:50 - 50:29)
So, yeah, so, so Paul I think there's. I think you're raising a good point but if you look at the way in which we talk about solid waste we talked about solid waste is the garbage and recycling as recycling. Right.

And when we talk about disposal versus tipping feet I mean there's just terminology. So again, I'm just going to suggest that you. If you want to add something that's fine.

But we should work on it between now and time meeting and perhaps have a floor motion that has more refined language that encompasses exactly where you're going, which is other recycling green initiatives composting etc that may not technically be solid we could do for services related to solid waste.

[Speaker 1] (50:30 - 50:38)
If that's what can you just type that in as a maybe alley and then maybe. I don't know. But you're right here, we can I'm just I'm sorry about that.

[Speaker 3] (50:38 - 50:47)
So why don't we do how about this how and from which expenditures for solid waste and or recycling collection and disposal services shall be paid.

[Speaker 1] (50:48 - 51:02)
But it's, it's, that's kind of where I'm getting at all of that is in included in our contract. Whereas the other things are other initiatives that are related that are also going to be paid for out of this.

[Speaker 3] (51:04 - 51:14)
Yeah, I wasn't trying to limit us to our contract but I hear what you're saying solid waste this doesn't refer to our contract this is solid waste collection and recycling. So I mean we can. But anyways, I hear your point.

[Speaker 1] (51:18 - 51:19)
We have to decide this right now.

[Speaker 3] (51:20 - 51:29)
Well we're closing the warrant, but again it's not, it's not irreparable we can work on it and suggest to revise language as our emotion.

[Speaker 1] (51:29 - 51:34)
Neil you were told unmuted which I know you have some thought in there, that is going to be really helpful.

[Speaker 4] (51:34 - 51:47)
No, I was gonna say exactly what Peter just said I don't think we should have, like, we're probably probably won't come up with the right language right now and then it won't be reviewed by town council so maybe we just come up with it.

[Speaker 5] (51:50 - 52:03)
Yes. I understand the question that you're raising. And it might be cleaner just to remove the words collection and disposal.

[Speaker 1] (52:03 - 52:07)
That's kind of that's what I was suggesting I agree. Yeah.

[Speaker 5] (52:08 - 52:20)
That keeps the, the language of the article broad enough for an amendment, if you had to limit it to collection and or disposal and some other solid waste service. That would be German.

[Speaker 1] (52:23 - 52:24)
Peter.

[Speaker 3] (52:24 - 52:27)
Oh, the Harvard degree has spoken.

[Speaker 9] (52:28 - 52:29)
Yeah, I'm good.

[Speaker 1] (52:29 - 52:52)
I'm going with the Harvard degree. No, I'm just kidding. You.

I want to respect all of your thoughts here. So, I think this is great. You just think it's two thumbs up.

Okay. All right. So, anyone want to.

[Speaker 3] (52:52 - 53:00)
So we've had a second to the motion I've made the motion, and I'll revise the motion to reflect the revised language for favorable action about that.

[Speaker 1] (53:00 - 53:16)
Yeah, I'm sorry. All right. Is there a second.

So again, any further discussion. Okay, I'm giving that two seconds. I'm just telling us.

Hi. Neil Duffy.

[Speaker 9] (53:17 - 53:17)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (53:18 - 53:20)
David Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (53:20 - 53:20)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (53:21 - 53:30)
I'm an eye. So thank you. Article nine, do I need to read this.

[Speaker 3] (53:30 - 53:31)
Oh, we've already done it.

[Speaker 1] (53:31 - 54:31)
Oh yeah. Okay. Oh, we did that.

Look at us. Look at us again. Article 12 national grid easement.

See if the town will vote to authorize the select board to acquire from Massachusetts electric company doing business as national grid by lease or otherwise the fee to permanent and temporary easements and or other rights in on and under all or a portion or portions of the former rail trail corridor between the present swamp Scott train station and the Marblehead border at sea view at Marblehead, and in parcels of land near or adjacent there too. And in consideration of the rights granted by national grid to release the easements acquired by the town by instruction recorded with said deeds in book 37335 page 58, or take any action relative there to follow if you don't mind, I can get the quick.

[Speaker 3] (54:32 - 55:30)
Yes, this is actually the fruits of a really good dialogue with national grid relative to the rail trail. Almost three years ago the town acquired easements from national grid for the rail trail national grid has come back to the town and said that their preference is to work with the town for the rail trail similar to how they worked in other communities such as Haverhill, where they've done a ground lease, instead of long term ground lease as opposed to a easement to keep title cleaner, and to have the ground he's kind of articulate the rules if you will by which the town and national grade will collaborate on the rail trail. So staff has been continuing those dialogues with national grid and this now just effectively will allow us as a board once that's ready to happen to swap out the easements for the ground lease with national grid. I really appreciate the staff and advancing this and collaborating with national grid on this.

[Speaker 9] (55:30 - 55:38)
With that, I would make a motion.

[Speaker 1] (55:39 - 55:55)
I'm sorry I'm like trying to click all the buttons but it wasn't in full screen. Zoom. Um, okay.

Thank you for that clarification. Is there any. Yeah, Peter, want to make a motion.

[Speaker 3] (55:56 - 56:03)
I just did you just, I did you just interrupted you. That's right. I made a motion favorable action.

Second.

[Speaker 1] (56:04 - 56:09)
Any further discussion. Okay. Neil Duffy.

[Speaker 9] (56:10 - 56:10)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (56:12 - 56:12)
The Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (56:13 - 56:13)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (56:14 - 56:18)
Peter's fellows. I'm also an eye.

[Speaker 11] (56:27 - 56:28)
That it.

[Speaker 1] (56:30 - 56:44)
We did it. Look at us. Yeah, we did some of it.

Um, right, so now all that's left is a vote to close the warrant, as amended.

[Speaker 6] (56:45 - 56:50)
Motion to close the warrant as amended. I can.

[Speaker 1] (56:52 - 57:00)
Any further discussion. Okay. All those in favor.

Either spell yes.

[Speaker 9] (57:00 - 57:02)
I know.

[Speaker 1] (57:02 - 57:04)
Hi, David Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (57:05 - 57:05)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (57:06 - 57:18)
I'm an eye as well. Thank you, Allie. Thank you, Michael.

Thank you, Amy. Thank you, Sean. Thank you on the board.

Anything else that you, anyone wanted to say relative to the.

[Speaker 6] (57:21 - 57:23)
We don't have to do anything to adjourn.

[Speaker 4] (57:23 - 57:35)
Do we have to do anything as far as a fixing. Our electronic signatures or anything is that yes I was just gonna say that. Okay.

So what do I have to do make a motion.

[Speaker 8] (57:37 - 57:40)
Yeah, we haven't. I don't know that we've traditionally voted on it.

[Speaker 4] (57:40 - 57:41)
Okay.

[Speaker 8] (57:42 - 57:45)
If you want to do good measure, you certainly can.

[Speaker 4] (57:46 - 57:46)
Sorry.

[Speaker 1] (57:48 - 57:53)
I'm totally kidding. I'm fine. Not my best signature, but it is mine.

Okay.

[Speaker 8] (57:54 - 58:11)
Thank you. Can I just, I mean, this is a. This is my obviously first time working on this, but I just want to clarify when the finance committee.

Does there. If they vote favorable action on items, can that still be added to this warrant, even though it's been closed before it goes to print? Are we done?

Everything that's here is.

[Speaker 5] (58:11 - 58:18)
The recommendations are not part of the warrant. They're in the warrant booklet. The warrant contains the article.

[Speaker 1] (58:20 - 58:22)
The word, what Michael? Sorry. You broke up a bit.

[Speaker 5] (58:23 - 58:24)
The word contains the articles.

[Speaker 1] (58:25 - 58:25)
Right.

[Speaker 5] (58:26 - 58:27)
The actual recommendation.

[Speaker 8] (58:32 - 58:35)
It's leaving a lot to be imagined with what he's saying.

[Speaker 1] (58:39 - 58:40)
Recommendations.

[Speaker 8] (58:40 - 58:42)
Thank you very much. Got it. Thanks, Michael.

[Speaker 1] (58:44 - 58:50)
Okay. Okay. Anybody have an issue with electronic signatures or anything else?

[Speaker 10] (58:51 - 58:52)
Nope.

[Speaker 1] (58:52 - 58:55)
Okay. All right. Is there a motion to adjourn?

[Speaker 9] (58:56 - 58:57)
Don't move. Second.

[Speaker 1] (58:58 - 59:01)
Okay. All those in favor. Neil Duffy.

[Speaker 9] (59:01 - 59:02)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (59:02 - 59:03)
David Grishman.

[Speaker 9] (59:04 - 59:04)
Hi.

[Speaker 1] (59:05 - 59:14)
Peter's values. I assume. Okay.

Thank you everybody.

[Speaker 9] (59:15 - 59:15)
Thanks everyone.

[Speaker 6] (59:16 - 59:17)
Thanks. Have a good night.

[Speaker 1] (59:17 - 59:18)
Great night.

[Speaker 9] (59:18 - 59:19)
Thanksgiving.

[Speaker 1] (59:20 - 59:21)
Happy Thanksgiving.

[Speaker 11] (59:24 - 59:25)
Thanks.