00:00:00,267	S1:
We're ready.

00:00:05,200	S1:
Okay. Good evening and welcome to the Wenham Select Board meeting for July 9th, 2024. It is 630 and I will call the meeting to order. Please note that our chairman, Peter Clay, will not be able to join us this evening. And I will be chairing the meeting in his place. Uh, we'll ask for a roll call attendance as we are on zoom. And this meeting is being recorded here. Dare to parade is present. Gary.

00:00:35,701	S2:
Gary Cheeseman present.

00:00:37,467	S3:
Ben and Simon. Present.

00:00:40,100	S1:
Karen.

00:00:41,267	S4:
Karen Unger. Present.

00:00:43,367	S1:
Thank you. Uh, first up on the agenda, we have public input. Ten minutes is reserved for public input, two minutes per person. And we ask that you only speak once. Participants wishing to address select board during public comment. Please do so as we are in zoom by virtually raising your hand. Please identify yourself by name and address. Blackbaud may not deliberate or vote on matters discussed during public comment, but that are not on the agenda, and we will be discussing the public comment policy later this evening. But for tonight, I would ask that public comment happen now during the public input section. With the exception of if there are board and committee representatives here to speak to a particular issue within their purview, such as the Master Plan Advisory Committee on the Master Plan agenda item will entertain those at the time. But otherwise, all public comments we would ask you to go ahead now. Uh, can you let us know if anyone has their hand raised?

00:01:51,868	S5:
I see no hands.

00:01:53,067	S3:
No.

00:01:56,467	S1:
Thanks. Nice. Okay. We'll go on to reports and announcements. Just as a reminder to everyone, we've been asked to submit our reports and announcements in advance so that they can be placed on the agenda. So as there are none listed, we'll move forward except for one item that has come to our attention today. Uh, town hall staff was notified that some residents had received flyers about three a zoning in their mailboxes, and there was some confusion about whether this was town sponsored correspondence. So we would just like to clarify that it is not. This is from a private group or organization. And as a reminder to the community, I please ask everyone to be mindful of the fact that it is, in fact, not legal to use mailboxes to distribute items that have not gone through the US Postal Service. And I will quote from their website. No part of a mail receptacle may be used to deliver any matter not bearing postage, including items or matter placed upon, supported by, attached to, hung from, or inserted into a mail receptacle. So we ask that people are mindful of that. Thank you. Uh, first item up now is correspondence in the packet. We have emails from Courtney Ashwood and Lawrence Oak regarding their request to the Select Board to, uh, prepare or request the preparation of an amicus brief in support of the Milton case in the MBTA zoning litigation. So I will open that up for discussion from the board.

00:03:53,868	S3:
I'll have some comment if. Madam Chair.

00:04:00,167	S1:
Thank you. Ben.

00:04:01,367	S3:
Thank you. Um, so I've read those materials and I've read the flyer that's, um, distributed, um, today by a group that's opposed to section three a. And I know that, um, people have strong feelings about the issue. Um, as I've mentioned before, I think that our planning board has acted very responsibly, responsibly and well in, um, having us as the town of when I'm in a position to comply with the requirements of this state law. Um, I do not support, um, having the town join an amicus brief, uh, in support of the Town of Milton position in the Supreme Judicial Court case. That case is going to be argued, I believe, in October. Um, and so the SJC, you know, has the issues in front of it. They've been briefed by by one side by the attorney general, and that that brief was included in the Select Board meeting packet. The town of Milton brief, uh, isn't due yet. I believe it's due, um, somewhere around the beginning of August. And so it'll be interesting to read what the town of Milton's position is, but, um, I would not support, um, um, joining the the the group of some municipalities of Hamilton may in fact be one of them. That is, um, staking out a position, uh, in favor of Milton's position. Um, I personally, uh, favor the state's position in the matter. Um, as one member. I'm not advocating that we filed an amicus brief in favor of that position either, but I personally would be opposed to joining that effort on the antitrust section three a side.

00:06:07,868	S1:
Thank you. Ben. Gary. Karen. Gary.

00:06:12,868	S2:
Yes, I would agree with Ben. I see the issue as being.

00:06:19,567	S2:
Determined in the judiciary. Certainly the governor's office and the legislature have developed this policy, and I see no gain for the town to get into the legal brouhaha at this point, that if the result comes out one way or another, we would follow it. But right now, I think it's a better left to the larger cities and towns to sort this out.

00:06:44,968	S1:
Thank you. Karen, anything to add?

00:06:48,167	S4:
Yeah. Ben, I have a question. Um, I've tried to to find out the number of municipalities that have actually signed this. Or in addition to Hamilton. I don't want to fall. Um, I don't want to fall on the sword if we. If we're the only ones doing it. But I also am a huge advocate for for supporting our, our local towns. So I'd like to know, um, how many have signed this or how many have participated in it?

00:07:21,367	S3:
Yeah. I don't I don't know the answer to that. Um, Karen, I, I, I think that the, the flyer that was circulated today, uh, purported to list some of those towns, but I the flyer had so many inaccuracies in it that I wouldn't want to attest to the list that it included as to that question. Um, so I don't know the answer to that. I do know that, um, and this was something that I think Margaret Hoffman posted on the MBTA communities page of our website. Uh, there is a, um, a running, um, graphic, um, that is being maintained by a planning organization led by, uh, Judy Barrett, who some of you may know and is a planning consultant for a lot of cities and towns. That shows the number of municipalities within the MBTA communities, um, sector that, that that have either passed the zoning or have met whatever benchmarks of compliance. And, um, um, I need to pull that up to look at it. But there's, there's several dozen communities that are in compliance, as in having actually passed the the rezoning that in Wenham is scheduled to be put up in front of the special town meeting in September. But I don't know the answer to your to your question. Um, I'm sorry to say I, um, you know, my my own position is is based just. Thank you, Steve, on the merits of, um, of the issue. And so, um, I don't I don't favor it, regardless of how many towns are signing on to the amicus brief, but I don't know how many have signed on.

00:09:08,167	S4:
My only concern from a town perspective is are we the outliers? Um, you know, if if.

00:09:15,167	S4:
Our our neighbors in tow have signed this, um, and it doesn't hurt. I don't understand why we wouldn't, um, adapt to that, but if if there's a feeling against that, um, you know, I can hear. I can hear both sides of that.

00:09:30,667	S1:
I think if I understand it correctly, it's not a matter of signing on. Then you can correct us if it's wrong, but it's actually the production of your own town's amicus brief. Then. Is that correct?

00:09:43,467	S4:
Yes. You are correct. Yeah, that's my understanding.

00:09:46,801	S3:
I know there's there's one law firm out of Lynnfield that is, um, that has represented the group of Rockport citizens, not not the town of Rockport, I want to emphasize, but a group of Rockport citizens who have filed a lawsuit separate from the Milton Matter. So there's a firm out of Lynnfield that represents that group. And I believe, I believe that that firm intends to write one amicus brief in support of the Milton position, and then it would just list the towns that have signed on to that. That's my understanding. That's how it normally would work, as opposed to, you know, 15 separate amicus briefs from 15 different cities or towns. But I don't know that for sure. But my my understanding is that it's a matter of signing on to one amicus brief that would that would represent however many towns sign on to it. Um, what Steve has put up is, um, what I was referring to. So and it's updated through June 4th so that the communities in green and you can see there are, you know, 2 or 3 dozen have um, have already passed the rezoning that makes them compliant with, um, with three a so, um, I definitely don't think, Karen, in response to your point, in my in my opinion, we would not at all be an outlier in declining to sign on to an amicus brief. Um, I think that probably the way it'll shake out is that the number of towns that sign on to that are actually smaller than the number who, um, aren't signing on and or those that have already complied. But again, my, my, my personal view is based on other, other factors. But, um, I don't think we would be an outlier.

00:11:32,400	S1:
Um, sorry, Gary. Go ahead.

00:11:34,267	S2:
Yes. Thank you. Steve. From the chart, the numbers I read 71 have already voted for this. And what, 12 disapproval? So it's running 6 to 1 in favor as well. As we said before that, you know, this is a governor's priority and the legislators priority to provide affordable housing, which we all know is in need in the eastern Massachusetts area. So I would I do not see any reason for the town of Windham to sign on to an amicus brief.

00:12:06,067	S1:
Yeah. I would just add my own comment. Uh, I agree with what Gary just said and and what Ben has said, and I actually feel that the balanced approach for our town to take is to proceed, as we have been doing with the Planning Board and their work proceeding towards compliance, while at the same time watching as everyone will, what the outcome of the Milton case is. And there seemed to be a number of towns organizations that are going to weigh in. Um, and I think I just don't feel that we have anything specific to add to that. So for me, the balanced approach is to stay the course and adjust according to what happens in the fall.

00:12:55,501	S1:
Any further comments?

00:12:59,567	S1:
Okay. This is not agenda for a vote. Um, certainly could be requested to come back at a later time, but I think for this evening, uh, that's where we'll leave it. Okay.

00:13:12,467	S4:
We have some hands raised. Um, I don't know if you want to. We have a bunch of hands raised. Yeah.

00:13:18,400	S2:
I think we've, uh.

00:13:19,868	S1:
I can't actually see them.

00:13:22,767	S5:
I just you did outline where I'm taking comments. We will.

00:13:27,300	S1:
Yeah, I did ask for public comment to happen in the public comment, period. Uh, just preceding this.

00:13:36,067	S5:
But apparently just. Madam chair, for your knowledge, it's, uh, Courtney Ashwood has her hand raised at this stage.

00:13:48,167	S1:
Gary.

00:13:49,167	S2:
I think we've covered this. We should move on. I don't think you already set the policy this evening for the public comment.

00:13:56,167	S1:
Okay. Thank you. Courtney. Um, sorry about that. Was the request to do public input at the beginning, but you can certainly come back at the next meeting. Um, and we have your correspondence as well. All right. We are going to take an agenda item out of order. Um, out of respect for Vicki's time, who is here to speak specifically to item F on the agenda, which is the town hall, HVAC electrification discussion and request for the Select Board's authorization to move forward without pursuing geothermal study due to time constraints, with the Arpa funds needing to be committed to an allowable use by December 31st, 2024. Thanks, Vicki. Are you going to start or.

00:14:42,000	S5:
I'll jump in. Um, so the reason. The reason for this is so the town just to give some background. The town identified the HVAC replacement as a, you know, a relatively critical need. Uh, within the town hall, we have, um, humidity problems that are requiring the each each room has its own. I don't know what a good term is, but like, monitor either that, uh, serves as the air conditioning and heating through either, you know, forced, uh, refrigerant or forced hot water. And with the humidity, they are being forced to double duty as a dehumidifier when they're changing the temperature of the air. So we have significant amount of condensation building up and rusting out the drip pans, and the water is running down the inside of the walls of town hall and down into the basement, causing water damage. So this was originally identified and was going to be replaced relatively quickly with an in-kind replacement with fossil fuels. And, you know, we had we had got a quote or two above it about it. And our Arpa funds were dedicated to this project. Uh, however, it, you know, was brought to the board's attention that there could be some air quality issues in the town hall. So we, um, we connected with the state's, uh, Department of Air Quality, I believe, and they came out and did a study and, um, made some conclusions and recommendations for the town. The town was then able to be awarded a electrification grant to explore the option of electrifying the HVAC with the town. So we we pursued that avenue and have the study done. They came up with some preliminary numbers and things we would need to look at. Uh, and then that leads us to where we are today with needing to move forward with, you know, at least pursuing the grant to, um, to acquire the funds to do an electrification upgrade, because the electrification, the cost to move to electrification is significantly more than an in-kind replacement. And

00:17:17,467	S5:
the Climate Action Committee has, um, not not in a formal way, but, you know, would would like us to look at, uh, geothermal, but geothermal. And this is why, you know, Vicki from amongst other reasons, is here. They can talk a little bit more about it, but that would displace the folks at Town Hall, would have to close town hall and move people out while it was installed. It's extremely disruptive. It's extremely costly. And based on at least this is just, you know, armchair analysis. But the individual that the group that did the BQ, who is the group that did the electrification study, at least the preliminary one, um, you know, concluded that, you know, it is probably financially not the payback period is, you know, way outside the realm of of what would be feasible. So with all that, you know, we're really just here to ask the board to allow staff to move forward because we need to have a package developed by September. I mean, October. Vicki was at 14th.

00:18:25,167	S6:
18th. Yep.

00:18:26,167	S5:
October 18th for submission for the state grant that would hopefully pay the difference between the cost of a fossil fuel replacement and electrification, which is probably in the tune. Between 6 and $800,000 would be the delta between the two. Uh, and we need to have the Arpa funds that were going to be funding. The difference that the grant doesn't pick up emitted by way of a contract or an agreement committing those funds for this project by December 31st, or we're supposed to send the funds back to the federal government. So at this point, you know, to be perfectly candid, it is going to be extremely tight. And, you know, we really need to just move forward, I think, and Vicki pointed out earlier today, and it's really a great point, is that, you know, this project started as an in-kind replacement on fossil fuels and there was no discussion of electrification. Um, you know, through the various changes and, you know, we've it's now moved to, you know, it's a light. There is a likelihood that it could be, um, a replacement for a fossil fuel system and move to electrification. So I think, you know, town is certainly, I believe, done its part and due diligence and at least trying to move to a more, uh, greener alternative. And, you know, the option the alternative is if we don't get the grant right, it will have to be an in-kind replacement. And we'll be looking at some sort of electrification replacement, uh, at the end of the new system's life cycle.

00:20:06,667	S5:
Uh, if you want to jump in and out of it.

00:20:09,367	S6:
Yeah. No, that's a great summary of where we are today. It's been a long road, and the project's evolved a lot from the beginning. Um, like Steve said. So I'm happy to answer any questions about how we got here or, or other options we looked at or or whatever other questions you all may have. But the grant that Steve's talking about is the Green Communities grant. And when there's been a green community since 2010, you all were one of the first communities to get the designation. And we've gotten, you know, $1 million through green communities over these years. And now they're offering a $500,000 decarbonization grant for projects just like this to pay for that delta between a traditional fossil fuel in-kind replacement and an electrical electrification project. So this really fits right into their grant opportunity. I can't say how competitive it's going to be, Hamilton applied, and we're still waiting to hear. So I don't have a good feel of your chances, but it's worth going for it. And that's due October 18th.

00:21:16,400	S1:
Vicki, my question is if we were not to receive the grant, I'm assuming. But could you clarify, is it then prohibitively expensive essentially for us to do electrification without the grants?

00:21:30,767	S6:
Yeah, you'd need more money. The Arpa isn't enough. Yeah. The Arpa was was was appropriated with the intent of an in-kind replacement. So you'd need more money.

00:21:42,767	S5:
To the tune of probably the $500,000. So we'd have to raise that through other means. Whether, you know, I think the only alternative would be a debt exclusion.

00:21:56,467	S1:
Okay. That was the question. Thank you.

00:21:59,667	S5:
But again, you know, then it'd be going too much into the weeds. But you can be committing to a project that you may not be able to see through the end because you'd be committing. You can't really commit to a project without the funds being appropriated, and we'd be committing to a project we effectively can only pay half of to a company that's going to do the work in anticipation of hoping that town meeting will. Um, let's say there's not a way around it, but that's you know, it's not it's not super straightforward from, you know, finance lot perspective.

00:22:41,667	S5:
Sorry.

00:22:43,100	S2:
Is there a, um, alternative use for the Arpa money if, uh, you know, we got the deadlines here. If we do not hear back for the grant, then it's clearly not affordable for us to do the whole project without considerable increases, which we would not get to the next town meeting, which means the Arpa would expire. So is there a smaller scale, uh, HVAC fix at the upper level, or would we apply Arpa elsewhere?

00:23:18,501	S5:
No. The pool. I mean, you could do you could do either or. So I mean, we still the the project as originally scoped which you know is just replacing essentially what we have there with a newer version on fossil fuels is still appropriate to use Arpa funds to fund. So that that could be our fallback. And, you know, and the other fallback is the board could be like, well, we really like the electrification idea. We want to spend the Arpa funds somewhere else. You know, obviously it's got to be an appropriate use the board to go through that exercise of I think we ended up having 16 or 17 at the pullout. It's been a, uh, about a year and a half now, but I think there was 16 or 17 projects we were able to get to the first ten. We could start moving down the list. Um, you know, that's those are kind of the alternatives. But hopefully, you know, we're having a different conversation. And at the end of the year where we've been awarded the funds and we're moving forward. But that's kind of the push, really. We gotta, you know, get off the pot, so to speak, and really move because we're really behind the eight ball as it is, as it is right now.

00:24:31,367	S1:
And the HVAC is in relatively dire straits. Is that accurate?

00:24:37,000	S5:
Yes. Right.

00:24:45,667	S1:
Other comments.

00:24:53,167	S1:
So I think we're not actually on this for vote Steve. So do.

00:24:59,467	S5:
I think generally the.

00:25:01,000	S1:
Generally the.

00:25:01,968	S5:
Board is is is is appropriate in this case because I have the authority to move forward with all these projects, um, with a vote about a year ago. But I just I don't like to, you know, starts, you know, this this would be a relatively large shift from the direction we've been trying to include the Climate Action Committee explore all electrification options. But that's kind of cutting that short a little bit and just, you know, moving ahead with the grant process.

00:25:35,901	S1:
Any objections to Steve moving forward as described. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you Vicki.

00:25:46,367	S7:
You're welcome. Thanks for having me. No problem.

00:25:49,567	S1:
Appreciate it. Okay. We will go back to, uh, a under new business, the board and committee appointments. Uh, there are some adjustments to the list that will be approving this evening. Would you like to speak to those?

00:26:07,501	S5:
Yeah, sure. So this this round, this year's annual appointment process, I think Highlights the need for again, another formal process right before when I first started. And you know, I can't speak to how it was before, but generally there was not a lot of interest. Not to say that we have a ton of interest in our boards and committees members, but board and committees. But this year we do have a couple contested races. The other or I should say contested interest. And the in one of them involves, uh, a seat that has an incumbent. And typically in the past, the board has just routinely if the incumbent in that's in the seat would routinely reappoint. But in this case I believe it's on the um, it's the.

00:27:01,200	S5:
Scrolling down, um.

00:27:05,400	S8:
Portable housing.

00:27:06,567	S1:
Affordable housing.

00:27:07,601	S5:
For affordable housing trust. There is um, there is interest in the seats, including the incumbent. So I think the board, you know, and to make it open and fair, I believe the board will need to entertain all interest and not make a routine reappointment. Uh, look at all the candidates and similar in, um, you know, for that reason, I think that, you know, we should work on a policy A and B move that appointment off at least one meeting cycle so that we can coordinate to get the folks on to speak to the select board and have the board maybe have a discussion as to, you know, how we're going to handle it in the future, because I believe that to be the most fair way. And secondly, the, uh, Conservation Commission has requested the board and the letter from the chair, Phil Russo, was in the packet to defer the appointment to the seats on his board because he would like the opportunity for his board to interview the candidates first so that they may make a recommendation, which is another area for clarification. I believe we need because the the board started a couple of years ago, I believe, started requesting a recommendation from the board, which I think is a great thing because they're closest to the work that they do. It's just, you know, now it's I just need feel like we need some consistency so that we can apply that consistency to all the boards and committees and make sure that, um, all the boards and committees are appropriate, making appropriate recommendations in a timely fashion and that, you know, everybody is getting that fair shake if they have an interest on the seat, interest in a seat on a board or committee.

00:29:07,100	S1:
Yeah, I'm in support of thinking through a policy and a time frame to go with it. And I guess I would also question whether we should, um, refer the Affordable housing Trust candidates to the Affordable Housing Trust and afford them the same response, same opportunity it still has requested for con com for them to interview the candidates and decide whether they'd like to make a recommendation, but I think that's also a possibility. Comments.

00:29:42,767	S1:
Ben.

00:29:44,267	S3:
Um, I agree with that, Deirdre, that we, um, you know, that we see if, uh, affordable housing wants to take that same opportunity.

00:29:58,067	S5:
And I think that at least the option I mean, something to think about as you're talking is, um, the option to, I guess not make a recommendation, right? I believe it should be the board to. You know, be like, yes, would like to interview the people or if not, then you can't recommend one person and not interview everybody. You know what I mean?

00:30:21,200	S1:
Yes.

00:30:22,067	S5:
And so we kind of put that in writing so that we have a system to follow so that everybody is treated fairly in the process.

00:30:32,267	S1:
So for this round, can you request that of the Affordable Housing Trust, if they are willing to or would like to interview the three candidates and decide whether they want to make a recommendation or not?

00:30:45,100	S5:
I can do that. It's no problem.

00:30:48,567	S1:
Anyone object? Okay. And I'm guessing we will go along with Phil suggestion also for any issues with that.

00:31:01,067	S1:
Okay. And then Steve, one more Adjustments.

00:31:04,400	S5:
Yeah. The, uh. Yeah. So thirdly, the Ada coordinator, Jim, our co director, no longer wants to build the role of the, uh, Ada coordinator. So he had requested that Patrick Hogan be, uh, his replacement. However, he is a he would be a volunteer. And Deirdre rightfully pointed out that we have more than 50 employees here. So that we have we are required by state law to appoint a, uh, a town representative that is an employee of the town. So we are working towards a solution to that, but do not have one for this meeting. And, uh, we'll report back to the board at a later date.

00:31:52,467	S1:
And I'd just like to thank Patrick Hogan for coming forward and being willing to serve in that capacity. And, uh, you know, we regret that we're not able to do that based on state law, But hopefully we can engage him and his expertise in other ways. Thank you. Okay, so, uh, is there is not discussion. Uh, with someone like to make a motion, starting with the cemetery commission.

00:32:24,000	S2:
All right.

00:32:26,767	S1:
Gary.

00:32:28,000	S2:
All right. I move to appoint Linda Smith to the cemetery commission for a term beginning July 1st, 2024 and ending June 30th, 2027.

00:32:41,667	S2:
Are we taking individual votes, or do you want all red?

00:32:44,567	S1:
Do we have a second?

00:32:47,167	S4:
A second.

00:32:48,467	S1:
Thank you. Uh. Any comments?

00:32:52,067	S4:
Nope.

00:32:53,000	S1:
Okay. Roll call. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

00:32:56,567	S2:
Yes.

00:32:57,567	S1:
Ben.

00:32:58,501	S3:
Yes.

00:32:59,300	S1:
Karen.

00:33:00,167	S4:
Yes.

00:33:01,567	S1:
Thank you. Motion passes.

00:33:03,767	S2:
All right. Next.

00:33:05,167	S1:
Council on aging. Sorry. Go ahead. Gary.

00:33:07,300	S2:
Do you want me to read them all or.

00:33:08,901	S1:
Sure. Go ahead.

00:33:10,167	S2:
All right. Move to appoint Gretchen Muschamp to the Council of Aging for a term beginning July 1st, 2024 and ending June 30th, 2027.

00:33:20,100	S3:
Second.

00:33:23,000	S1:
Discussion.

00:33:26,000	S1:
Move to a vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

00:33:28,968	S2:
Gary. Yes.

00:33:30,868	S1:
Then.

00:33:31,801	S3:
Yes.

00:33:33,167	S1:
Karen.

00:33:33,968	S4:
Yes.

00:33:35,601	S1:
Excellent. Motion passes.

00:33:38,367	S2:
Okay. Move. Move. To appoint Kristin Crockett and Peggy Roll to the Hamilton Cultural Council for a term beginning July 1st, 2024 and ending June 30th, 2027.

00:33:53,701	S1:
Second. Second. Okay. Discussion. Okay. Deirdre says yes. Gary.

00:34:00,400	S2:
Gary. Yes.

00:34:01,701	S1:
Ben.

00:34:02,667	S3:
Yes.

00:34:03,601	S1:
Sharon.

00:34:04,300	S4:
Yes.

00:34:05,701	S1:
Thank you. Gary.

00:34:09,000	S2:
Hey. Move to appoint Michael Reed to the Historic District Commission for a term beginning July 1st, 2024. And then in June 30th, 2027.

00:34:19,300	S3:
Second.

00:34:20,801	S1:
Thank you. Discussion. Okay. Vote. Deirdre. Yes.

00:34:26,267	S2:
Here. Yes. Yes.

00:34:28,667	S3:
Yes.

00:34:29,868	S1:
Sharon.

00:34:30,667	S4:
Yes.

00:34:32,100	S1:
Okay. Thank you.

00:34:36,868	S2:
Move to move to appoint Anthony DeStefano to the Windham Housing Authority for a term beginning July 1st, 2024, and ending until the next regularly scheduled local election in April.

00:34:49,267	S3:
Second.

00:34:51,367	S1:
Any discussion? Hey, Deirdre. Yes, Jerry.

00:34:56,200	S2:
Jerry. Yes.

00:34:57,968	S1:
Ben.

00:34:58,868	S3:
Yes.

00:34:59,767	S1:
Sharon.

00:35:00,567	S4:
Yes.

00:35:01,767	S1:
Okay. Thank you. Motion passes. And one more.

00:35:06,067	S2:
Hey. Move to appoint Kristen Crockett to the Windham issues of Social Service Committee for a term beginning July 1st, 2024 and ending June 30th, 2027.

00:35:17,701	S3:
Second.

00:35:20,467	S1:
Hey. We'll vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

00:35:23,767	S2:
Yes.

00:35:24,968	S4:
I had a I have a quick question. We didn't have discussion on that. Yeah. I, um, I just had a quick question, and it's, um, nothing for for Kristen, but is there a limit to the amount of amount of appointments that an individual can have? And, and so there's not and I only ask because I think Kristen is signing up for quite some, uh, quite a lot of airtime here. So um, which is fine. I mean, more power to her, but, um, but also, you know, affordable housing. I mean, some of these are they seem some of them are awesome and they're great. And I love the I love the idea, but some of them may be a little contradictory. So I, I worry a little bit about that. Um, it's um, but if that's not, if there is no limit, then I guess more power to her.

00:36:20,667	S1:
Like there is no limit. And Kristen is a municipal employee in another town, so I do feel confident that she knows what she's getting herself into.

00:36:30,767	S4:
Okay, that's. I just wanted to triple check because her name's all over this.

00:36:33,601	S1:
So it.

00:36:34,601	S4:
Is. I just want to make sure that from that perspective, too. It's, um. It's a lot. It's a lot of work.

00:36:43,367	S1:
Jerry.

00:36:44,501	S2:
Yes. And the solution? It's not a problem, but the this is still an opportunity for other people to sign up. Because even with all these appointments over the last two months. We still have vacancies. So.

00:36:58,868	S4:
Yeah. I mean, it's when my only concern too is, is is it overextending a little bit. Like if are we leaving the you know she takes a two week vacation. Are we leaving some folks in a lurch like across the board here? Because I think she's on five appointments. So.

00:37:15,400	S1:
Um, she's on on three, actually. And I know I'm not certain about all of them, but I'm pretty sure Cultural Council only meets once a year. I believe that's correct.

00:37:25,467	S4:
Oh, okay.

00:37:26,601	S1:
Gary, do you know that?

00:37:28,067	S2:
Yes. Unless something special comes up and really, you know, otherwise it's just going to be a vacancy, which is an even bigger problem.

00:37:36,400	S4:
So, yeah, more power to her. I just wanted to make sure that, um, it was okay. Okay.

00:37:41,667	S1:
I think they're not all on the same frequency. My point, I believe Cultural Council is once a year and wish is not terribly frequent, I believe. Um, but I think she knows what she's getting into.

00:37:56,767	S4:
Great.

00:37:57,901	S1:
Okay. I'm just going to retake the vote. Uh, so once again, this is on the move to appoint Kristen Crockett to wish. Correct. Yes. It was. It was moved and seconded. Deirdre. Votes. Yes. Gary.

00:38:12,501	S2:
Yes.

00:38:13,567	S1:
Ben.

00:38:14,567	S3:
Yes.

00:38:15,968	S1:
Karen.

00:38:16,701	S4:
Yes.

00:38:18,100	S1:
Okay. Thank you. The appointments are completed. We will move to see on the agenda. Margaret Hoffman, will is here to present the finalized master plan as approved by the Planning Board. Very exciting. Is Margaret, uh, a panelist?

00:38:37,567	S8:
No.

00:38:46,767	S9:
Unless she might be under. Yeah, she's under the town of Wenham, I think? So let me just.

00:38:54,367	S9:
Promote her. I believe that's her.

00:39:09,667	S9:
Are you here, Margaret?

00:39:11,767	S4:
I am, yes.

00:39:13,200	S1:
Yes she is. Margaret.

00:39:16,267	S4:
Hi.

00:39:17,767	S10:
Um, thank you so much for having me on tonight. Um, so most of you know, we've been through this two year process three years plus, I think, actually, um, of creating the town's master plan. It's finally done. And it didn't occur to me we probably should have had a cake or something tonight. You know anyone who has cake at your house? Go get it. Eat it now. Um, so the the master Plan Advisory Committee did a wonderful job. And, Deirdre, thank you as vice chair. Um, Joanne Forcella was the chair of that committee. She did an amazing job, and the planning board also put in a lot of hard work and effort into this. The Planning Board did vote to adopt the master plan, as they made a couple of small edits after the last draft, but they finally did adopt it. And as far as general law goes, that's pretty much all that has to be done. The planning Board adopts it and then would send it to the state. But as, um, you know, we wanted the select board to also have a chance to officially adopt this master plan. There's a lot that's going to be done in this plan. There's a lot of recommendations. I'm I'm assuming you've all seen it. You've had an opportunity to look through it and, you know, get some a good sense of what what's to come over the next years, the next ten years. So this is a ten year master plan. Um, but I did want to officially present it to you. And I'm sorry, I don't know if any of the other board members are here. Um, Michelle, are there any, um, planning board members or master plan committee members? It's hard for me to tell. Um, anyway, if they're here, I want to thank them also for all the hard work that they did over the past couple of years. Um, so the next steps, I guess, would be for the select board. You can officially vote if you'd like to. And just to adopt this master plan. And then that will give us the, um, confidence we need to go ahead and present it to the state, which is part of mass general law, to send it to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, which used to be DxD. So, um, yeah, but if anyone has questions about it or about the process or what you've seen in it, um, it does. There are two parts. There's the master plan, which gives you all of the, you know, there's lots of great pictures and wonderful information about the community and what work we went through to get to these ideas. And then there's the actual action plan, which gives, um, actionable items to be done over the next ten years. And responsible parties. This action plan is something that the community will, um, continue to work through. Um, depending on, well, Steve's office, the and the select board, I believe the select board will have a great part in this over the next years too. Um, especially anything that has to do with financing. So, um, but yeah. I'm sorry. Here is a copy of the master. Uh, this is the action plan. So you can see there's lots. We had lots of great pictures. Um, a lot of work was done. There were, um, the five core themes. And then each theme has a list of action items to go along with it and to achieve those goals. So I don't know if anyone has questions or comments and just.

00:42:44,367	S5:
Before any question. I just want the board know that they don't have to accept the time, right? This is an opportunity to ask any questions, request more information. Yeah. You know, ask for an opportunity to review it further. You know, and also we've been where land use has been working hard to develop, um, you know, an implementation plan so that, you know, that is coming. Uh, this is really just the planning board has gone through this process. They've, you know, arrived at this master plan and are, you know, delivering it to the select board and the select board, um, you know, essentially needs to adopt it or accept it as written so that we can start implementing, uh, the things that are found in this document.

00:43:41,367	S1:
And I'll open it up for discussion in just a second. But I wanted to echo what Margaret said in terms of thanking the Master Plan Advisory Committee. It was a great group who worked very hard and very thoughtfully. It was a pleasure to serve with this group of people. I also want to thank Margaret Hoffman, who put an incredible amount of work into this as well. Could not have done it without you, Margaret.

00:44:04,601	S10:
As.

00:44:04,868	S1:
Well as Valerie and land use office.

00:44:07,467	S10:
Officer and Michelle.

00:44:09,400	S1:
And Michelle. It was a team effort for sure.

00:44:13,601	S10:
Yes it was. Thank you.

00:44:15,868	S1:
So I'd like to see if the board have questions or comments on the plan.

00:44:25,100	S1:
Gary.

00:44:26,601	S2:
Yes. So my thank you to all involved as well. And I think we had significant public participation in this whole process. But I'm would encourage people to understand that this ten year plan is going to need more citizen involvement. Either through committees or through volunteering as well. Uh, I also would recommend this final document is up on the website to correct.

00:44:54,167	S11:
Yes, yes, yes.

00:44:55,567	S2:
So citizens ought to, uh, review it in detail, read through it and see where we're going to go over the next ten years.

00:45:03,167	S10:
Great. Thank you Gary. Good point.

00:45:09,767	S1:
Ben.

00:45:11,267	S3:
I also just want to add my thanks and appreciation to everyone who spent so much time, um, enabling us to get to this place. Um, in participating in just some, you know, portions of the process along the way. And then in reading the the final documents, I've been struck at how thoughtful and and nuanced, um, a plan this is that really tries to strike a balance between, um, a number of different objectives that through the, um, the information gathering and sort of solicitation of input phases came to the fore as, as important, um, objectives and principles that that citizens and town officials and town staff had for the next ten years for one. So I think it's really done a great job in trying to, um, you know, strike the right balance between those various equities. And, um, I'm certainly prepared, um, tonight, if the rest of the board is to, um, to accept and approve the master plan as presented.

00:46:28,567	S1:
Karen, would you like to comment?

00:46:34,968	S4:
No, I'm purely just echoing the the rest of the boards. Thank you to everybody for their participation. It's been a long time coming and and I'm extremely pleased of the work that has been put into this as well as the final outcome. So I'm prepared to vote as well. Great.

00:46:53,868	S1:
Thank you everyone. Uh, if that's all the comments, then I will entertain a motion.

00:47:02,601	S2:
I'll make the motion. Can we, uh, throw up the front page?

00:47:12,467	S2:
So I am moved to, uh, for the select board to accept and approve the Wenham Action Plan from the master plan dated May 20th, 2024.

00:47:25,868	S3:
Thank you.

00:47:27,400	S1:
Great. Thank you.

00:47:29,267	S5:
Sorry. This is the action plan. Um, we wanted to just adopt the master plan.

00:47:35,367	S2:
All right.

00:47:36,167	S5:
Motion to.

00:47:37,000	S2:
Amend the motion to strike action and insert master.

00:47:43,367	S3:
Second.

00:47:44,567	S4:
Yeah.

00:47:46,667	S1:
All right. Any further discussion? Okay. We'll proceed to a vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

00:47:53,701	S2:
Yes.

00:47:54,701	S1:
Ben.

00:47:55,667	S3:
Yes.

00:47:56,501	S1:
Karen.

00:47:57,367	S11:
Yes.

00:47:58,501	S1:
Thank you. Congratulations. Motion passed and we have fully approved master plan.

00:48:04,868	S10:
Yay! Thank you all so much. Great. Thank you. Congratulations to all of you, too.

00:48:13,767	S4:
We should have cake.

00:48:15,467	S1:
Yeah. Have cake.

00:48:19,167	S5:
Any reason for.

00:48:19,901	S7:
Cake?

00:48:23,167	S1:
Okay, next up on the agenda is item E, the internal account transfer requests to be presented by our finance director, Jeff Gillard and our town administrator, Steve Poulos. Geoff. Am I handing it to you?

00:48:40,167	S5:
I am prepared to the to the details. I'll just. The board's aware this is, um. We did not post this for a vote. However, we do need a vote. So I think the board will have to take a vote on this. This is these are relatively routine that the reasons change. But it is routine that at the end of the year when our accountant is closing the books, we need to do these internal account transfers to, um, essentially, uh, zero out or create a positive balance in any overspent accounts. So generally, what we do is we, um, transfer funds from accounts that have surplus and move it into accounts that are in a deficit. Usually it's not a it's not a written policy or. Um, but generally in Wyndham's history, we'd have the Finance Committee review and approve these before the Select board sees them. It needs both their you know, the approval is contingent on both, uh, both boards approving the transfers. However, the Finn was unable to, uh, get a quorum at their last meeting when they were going to review this. So it is coming to the select board first. In this case, time is you know, it's not a super rush, but it is somewhat, uh, of the essence here because, you know, Jeff is, you know, working hard to, to get the books closed and we really can't move forward until it the authorization to make these transfers. And then I'll let Jeff fill in anything I missed and kind of walk through a little bit of the, uh, granular details and the reasons for the need to transfer funds.

00:50:27,667	S12:
Great. Thanks, Steve. So up on the screen now is a revised list. We sent a list around yesterday. Um, but we are actually today processing the last payroll and the last vendor payments for FY 24. So the list yesterday contained a lot of estimates. Uh, now we have more actual numbers. So this list has been trimmed down a little. And it's also, uh, the the dollar value of what we're moving around has been reduced quite a bit as well. Um, just to sort of follow on with what Steve was talking about. Um, just to give people a kind of refresher course on on how the budget works when, um, passes essentially a wage and expense budget. We don't have the town vote on a line item budget. So at the end of the year, what we need to do in most cases is make sure that no wage, um, item or no expense item for any given department is in a negative balance. Uh, sub accounts underneath that can be negative. So for example if you know let's just take police if um, you know, their police regular wages had a positive balance. But police overtime wages had a negative balance. As long as those net two more than zero, there's no need for a transfer. Um, what we're doing here tonight is, um, under Massachusetts general law chapter 33 B, which allows towns, uh, essentially in May and June and for the first two weeks of July to make transfers between wages and expenses, which is not allowed in other times of the year, and also to make transfers between different departments, which is also not allowed during the year. Uh, so what we have here is sort of 13, um, groups of transfers. Um, and so what I will try to do is, um, walk through and just kind of give you some of the rationale behind why some of these accounts might be over. Um, as Steve mentioned, uh, Mentioned under 33 B um, they allow you the special ability to move money between wages and expenses or departments. But to do that, they require that both the Select board and the finance committee sign off on those transfers, which is why we have this sort of two part setup that Steve was mentioning. Um, we need to move, uh, $7,230 into the selectmen salary and wages line. This one's pretty simple. We've got, uh, two additional select board members in FY 24. Um, wasn't in the original budget. Uh, so we are taking money from the $20,000 town hall salary, reserve line, uh, to, uh, to handle that, uh, overage. Uh, the second one on the list is small. Transfer about $500 to fill up the assessor contract services line. Uh, that line has gone over for this year for a couple of reasons. Um, one, we migrated the Patriot software from our local server over to the cloud servers in Danvers. So some extra costs were incurred for that. And also it was a full revaluation year, um, for the town and, uh, Patriot uh, provides the software, but they also provide some, uh, consulting services to help us, uh, doing the valuations in town. Uh, so there's a little extra work this year. And that led to the contract services line being, uh, over, uh, for FY 24. Uh, the next one, uh, $4,300, um, in finance, contract services. Um, you know, this one sort of makes sense. We paid Marcum LLP an accounting firm to provide a professional to, uh, man the finance director position while the town was searching for that replacement. Uh, so, as you can see, uh, there wasn't a finance director being paid. So the finance salary wages has a surplus. We're using that money to pay for the consultant that was essentially covering, uh, you know, the finance director position during that time. Um, next one down here. Uh, it covers kind of the town hall, uh, budget. Uh, so we've got, you know, town hall, gas and electric. You know, we're higher than budgeted. Uh, and we are moving, uh, 1050 and $4,600 there from what was set aside as a town hall, uh, slash utility reserve. Um, back in FY 24. Steve can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the town elected to not, uh, adjust every single budget for utilities and instead to hold $100,000, sort of at the town level, to be available. Uh, to help any department that, uh, you know, incurred extra costs in the utility space. Uh, so there's a transfer for those two. Um, then there's a couple of smaller ones. Um. Town hall postage. Uh, we need about $1,600 there. Um, and that is about $1,500 in town hall. Miscellaneous. Uh, frankly, I can't speak to too much to that 1500 that falls under miscellaneous. But I would say that the postage budget is probably a little insufficient, and it's something we need to look at. Moving forward, uh, Michelle might actually be able to wait on that a bit more. Um, and we had some additional money available in town hall salaries and wages that we're going to use to fund the postage and the miscellaneous expenses there. Um, next one on the list. We need about $1,500 to fund the town clerk salary and wages line. Um, we ended up needing some additional coverage. I think back in January, February or maybe February and March. Uh, in the in the town clerk's office. Um, and so, um, you know, we had to staff the office during that time. And we're just simply, again, reaching into that $20,000 salary reserve line, uh, to help us, uh, you know, cover that additional need that we weren't aware of. Um, you know, at the beginning of the year. Um, next one is permitting, you know, kind of the building, uh, building inspector, um, department there. Uh, in total, we're over, uh, in the expenses there by about $9,900. Uh, and speaking with the building inspector, I think this issue really arises from the fact that, um, it sounds like maybe his actual budget request hasn't sort of filtered up into the actual budget for the last couple of years. And so he's he's run into these shortfalls, which, um, you know, it looks like we just hadn't, you know, put in the extra a couple of thousand dollars into that budget. Uh, that has been addressed for the FY 25 budget. We did ensure that he has the requested budget Amount in the budget that was approved for FY 25. Um, the next one is sort of. Um, it will seem kind of silly, but I mentioned earlier that we do wage and expense budgets. Uh, but in some areas we get into a little bit more detail, uh, where residents vote on the budget and the, the school budgets is one area where we break out an expense line item for the operating budgets of the schools and also the debt budgets for the schools. Uh, and so that what we're looking at here for $5,207 is a transfer that needs to be made from, um, the, um, the operating assessment to the, um, the debt assessment. Uh, when we prepared the FY 24 budget, we probably did not have exact allocations from the Essex Tech district. Um, the total was sufficient, but the breakdown between debt and operations was a little bit off. So this is just kind of a housekeeping, uh, transfer uh, to, to sort of even that out. Um, next one here, uh, street lighting. It's over about $5,600 for the year. Um, you know, as you would imagine, is largely driven by utility costs there. So we will be dipping into the utility reserve there, uh, to fund the additional costs in the street lighting budget. Um, next one, refuse collection, a trash collection. This one is over of just about $13,000. Uh, you know, Steve might be able to speak to this a little bit more. Um, but, um, you know, that's largely driven by increasing costs, uh, you know, in the trash collection space for us. Um, and we've elected to use the funds available under the town Hall Utility reserve to help us sort of balance, Balance out the trash. Trash budget. There. Um. Next one is not general fund. This is the water department, which is a different fund, which is largely funded by, you know, user fees. Um, we're looking to move $12,000 from the salary and wages line into the, uh, just general water expense line. Uh, and I would say this is largely driven by the fact that the, uh, there's a couple of things. Expenses that are incurred in the general fund. Um, there are employee benefits, health insurance, dental insurance, that type of thing. Um, that are charged to those, uh, or the town pays for, for employees that work in the water department. And so at the end of every year, we go through and look at what those costs were, and we move those expenses from the general fund, which is tax driven, and move those expenses into the water fund. Um, and then we also have what are called indirect expenses, which, you know, mass general law allows us to take some expenses that are incurred at the general fund level for things like town administration, finance, and allocate some portion of those to a fund that is largely user fee driven. And so we do that for my finance department. And then, um, the town administrator group, uh, with with Joe and Michelle and Steve. And so in total, those came to about $120,000 or so. And I think we had only budgeted, you know, a little over 100. So that's that's why you're seeing a $12,000 difference there. And I know Eric has been working with sort of like a man down or half a man down in the water department for a while. So there are some funds available in the salary and wages line. Um, next one is just the Council on Aging. Uh, we're moving about $890 worth of excess salary and wages, uh, to apply against $585 of miscellaneous expenses. You know, typically sort of programming, uh, and that type of thing. And then also $305 of some expenses that were allocated to the Council on Aging van account. Um, you know, just kind of a small housekeeping thing there. Uh, last one on this page. Uh, another utility, uh, library. Uh, you know, it needs about $9,000 to balance out the various, you know, heat and electric utility charges, uh, at the library. Uh, and we'll tap into the utility reserve, uh, to help offset that. Um, and if I switch to the next page, um, there's another charge, uh, here in the library. Uh, we there was about $3,000 of HVAC expenses that were booked to a library capital. Uh, you know, this kind of a repairing capital for the library. Um, I know there is a bigger FY 24, uh, capital project approved. I think that that hasn't gotten started yet, and this was some expenses that were incurred earlier in the year were charged to this account. They weren't really part of the larger capital project. Um, and so we're just taking some excess salary funds and using them to offset this, this capital charge. Um, in the operating budget. And it should be noted that, you know, the library is a joint, um, a joint effort. And, you know, we Bill Hamilton, uh, we run the library and then Bill Hamilton for their share. Um, and so, you know, this $3,000 cost is, um, you know, being absorbed. You know, more than half by by Hamilton in, in the invoice that we just sent them for the final bill for FY 24. Um, this final section here, uh, is debt. Um, and it's this is largely just moving money between principal and interest. Um, you will see in the middle there, there's a charge for a dollar and a charge for $13. When we did the estimates for FY 24 debt, it looks like we must have come in just a little bit short, about $14 short in total. So we're moving some money left over in our municipal audit expense line to help offset that. Um, but if we walk through these, you'll see we're moving $2,313 from, you know, principal payment to interest payment. Um, 15,000 or so, um, from from, uh, principal the interest. Um, and then there's 1802 thousand, uh, down below there on the various debts. And if you think about this, it sort of makes sense. So we we the way our debt is structured is that all of this debt you're looking at here are in what we call state House notes, which are, uh, forms of debt that are run through the Department of Revenue. It's short term debt that you you just sort of re, um, you pay it off in full, but then, um, you they reissue re-issue short term debt each year. And so what you'll have is, you'll say, have $100,000 that you'll owe on a note. And what you'll do is you'll you'll pay $100,000 to pay it off. And you might say, you know, now we want to take out 80,000. Roll that into the next year in new debt. Um, and so essentially what you've done is pay off $20,000 in principle. Um, what happened last year is, you know it. When we make the budget, we don't have final numbers on all of these things. And so, you know, we're making estimates. Uh, and if you think of where we've been over the last, you know, 12 to 18 months, we're in a rising interest rate environment. And so my assumption is that when we, you know, these estimates were made last year, um, you know, the debt estimate was was too low, uh, as rates were rising. And so therefore we had to pay less principal, um, and pay more interest. But the town only authorized us to pay a certain amount of debt. So when we made the painting and when we redid the debt. Um, in in April and May, we, you know, we had to pay down less than we had anticipated because the debt, the debt service, the interest on the, on the debt service was higher than anticipated. So we didn't pay any more than the residents authorized. We just had to shift and pay more debt than we had anticipated. Um, you know, the downside of that is our debt. Our interest cost is higher. And, you know, we didn't pay down as much principal as as we had hoped for. So, um, so that's that's sort of what drove that last kind of, um, $21,765 worth of, um, transfers there. Uh, so in total, you know, just under $95,000, you know, went from one account, you know, from the transfer from accounts to the transfer two accounts. Um, you know, it should be pointed out none of these are increases to the overall budget. These are just moving approved budgets, uh, around to, um, you know, deal with where we had some surpluses that we could use to, to fund, um, some, some deficiencies in certain line items. Um, I know I've rambled on quickly here about a bunch of different things, so I'm happy to answer any questions anyone might have on these.

01:06:17,567	S1:
Okay. Just a clarification. So we do need to vote on this this evening as I understand it, because we are up against closing the books for the fiscal year. Correct?

01:06:29,100	S12:
Yes. And I believe Steve and I had talked about maybe this is something that has happened here in the past and went is that I believe the Select Board could, um, vote to approve these transfers contingent upon Finance Committee approval. Therefore, if for some reason the Finance Committee didn't support one of these, um, you know, that would not have your approval either. So that I thought that made some sense when Steve mentioned that.

01:06:56,868	S1:
Okay. Do we have questions from the board?

01:07:02,501	S1:
Gary.

01:07:04,100	S2:
I've just echo what Jeff said, that our budget process worked very well here. When you consider that we had very small changes, required less than 1% of the budget here. And the second point I would make is the the use of the utility reserve. That's a new line that we've developed, right, Jeff? And certainly has come in quite handy here to plan for contingencies such as that.

01:07:31,000	S12:
Yeah, I think one of the nice things about doing it that way, and Steve can speak to whether if, you know, this was the idea or not, but if you were to increase each one of the individual budgets, um, you know, you have a little less control because now 7 or 8 departments have bigger budgets, um, that, you know, tend to not get smaller as the years go by. So this gave you a little more control over where that money was. And the hope being that maybe this was a somewhat short term, um, thing we would be facing. And therefore, you know, it's a little easier to just shrink that reserve moving forward rather than saying, you know, a bunch of different departments. Uh, hey, we're trimming your budget back. Um, you know, typically departments will find a way to use those funds if they can. So it you know, I think, as you say, it worked as intended. And I think it was probably a smart way to approach this. Uh, you know, from the times perspective, last year.

01:08:22,968	S5:
That was exactly the intent, Jeff.

01:08:28,467	S1:
Great. Ben or Karen, anything to add or comment or question?

01:08:34,367	S3:
No.

01:08:37,367	S4:
No.

01:08:39,200	S1:
Okay.

01:08:40,100	S3:
I'll make a motion.

01:08:41,601	S1:
Sure.

01:08:43,767	S3:
Uh, I move to approve the internal account transfer request presented by the finance director and the town administrator, conditioned upon the subsequent approval of the Finance Committee.

01:08:56,100	S2:
Second.

01:08:58,267	S1:
Great. Any further discussion? Okay. Let's vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

01:09:04,567	S2:
Yes.

01:09:05,501	S1:
Ben.

01:09:06,367	S3:
Yes.

01:09:07,267	S1:
Sharon.

01:09:08,000	S11:
Yes.

01:09:09,167	S1:
Great. Motion passes. Thank you very much, Jeff.

01:09:12,801	S5:
Thanks, Jeff.

01:09:13,467	S3:
Thank you. Thank you.

01:09:15,267	S12:
Thanks.

01:09:17,267	S1:
Okay. My apologies. I forgot to mention. Uh, we moved past item B on the agenda, which is the fire department promotion and badge pinning. Uh, because we are on zoom this evening. That has been postponed so that they can actually have the full in-person experience and invite their families and so forth. So that will reappear at a later meeting. Okay. Next we have item G, our town administrator, to provide us an update on the town clerk search. Steve.

01:09:50,467	S5:
Yep. So, uh, as the board's aware, we posted the job opening about three weeks, probably about a month ago now, and we've had ten interested individuals. We are interviewing them this week and we will be meeting as the panel. The interview panel, I know those some talk back and forth about the food select board members of a working group, uh, in the first preliminary, but I opted not to. And to make this more of a staff recommendation to the board for, you know, a list of finalists out of the ten interested individuals for the board to interview in a public meeting. So we will be wrapping up these interviews on Wednesday and will be, uh, sitting as a group, hopefully coming up with a determination either Wednesday or Thursday Way to reduce the group from ten to 3 or 4. And those. Those individuals will be notified of their. You know. Uh, you know, they're moving to the the finalist group for a second interview. And by the 16th of, of July, this will give them a couple days to, you know, discuss with their partners, uh, family members, friends whether they'd like to proceed with the process, because the next process will be a public interview set to occur at the Select board's meeting on the 23rd. Their names will have to be posted in a public forum. So our website and on the 18th to comply with open meeting law, and they will be interviewed in public on Tuesday. We believe Tuesday will likely be a long, Relatively long and drawn out meeting because there will be some other, um, business that will likely have to attend. However, we are going to try to keep it light with the other business, and I'd like to ask the board if they would, how they would like to proceed, if they would like to maybe set up a deliberation only meeting on the Thursday or Wednesday in anticipation, if you would like to do your deliberation on Tuesday. We would like to try to notify the candidates. Um, Karen.

01:12:27,267	S4:
All right. I'm sorry. You're just thrown off, like, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Sorry.

01:12:32,467	S5:
Tuesday. Tuesday. Right. So Tuesday the 23rd. Sorry. Is the. Is this when we're set to interview? The select board is set to interview the the primary, the, you know, the finalist candidates. Um, On the 23rd, which is a Tuesday, it would likely be a long meeting. So I'm asking the select board what their preferences would they like to look at, setting up another meeting for deliberation and selection of the candidates to give you time to reflect on your notes either Wednesday or Thursday. So that would be the 24th or 25th, or is the board's preference to interview the candidates and then move to a deliberation on the 23rd, which is which is Tuesday? I believe it's important that we move this process relatively quickly because we want to have the individual start by, you know, right around the first week of September, either the last week of August, first week of September, second week of September. So we have some overlap this. So I think we're in a good place that that if the Select Board made its decision on the week of the 23rd. At some point we could notify the individual by Monday or Tuesday, the 29th or 30th of July, and that gives them a month to notify their employer and make any arrangements to start with the town of one of them by the first week of September, which would then allow for a two week overlap if necessary, with the town clerk. The currently temporary appointed Town Clerk clerk.

01:14:28,267	S1:
Gary.

01:14:30,167	S2:
Quick question first when will we receive resume packages prior to the interviews?

01:14:37,968	S5:
You will. You'll receive.

01:14:46,000	S5:
And so that that's a good question. So you'll either receive the the packets. I'm trying to I'm trying to think if we release the names in the public forum through email. Um, you know, I guess they become a publicly requested record out of the personnel domain. However, if they're notified on the 16th that they're being requested to move into the finalist group and they accept, we could send you the packets on the 18th, uh, prior to the agenda being posted, because it would be in the public domain. Anyways. I'm just trying to think in the, um, you know, out of respect for the individual's privacy, they choose not to move forward with the process due to privacy concerns. Uh, not wanting to be posted in public, I would, you know, I'm hesitant to release the information through email before that. So is the 18 18th acceptable to the board for the 23rd? Or would you prefer something sooner?

01:15:57,567	S2:
It looks like the 18th, as far as I'm concerned, works because that's your deadline for posting the agenda for the meeting anyhow. Right. That gives us the full weekend to read the resumes and perhaps develop some good questions for Tuesday the 23rd.

01:16:15,467	S1:
Yeah, I think the confidentiality aspect is very important. So we need to respect that part of the process. But that raises another question about questions. And how do we formulate questions for the interview. Uh, given the OML constraints?

01:16:34,067	S1:
Steve.

01:16:35,000	S5:
Um, I think that.

01:16:39,000	S5:
Maybe a good way to go about that is to send. If each member could send me maybe 3 or 4 questions, uh, identifying two of the questions as their primary questions and 1 or 2 of the questions as backup questions, I could then work to compile a list of ten questions, you know, using two primaries. Well, try to use the two primaries from each board member. However, if there is a redundant question asking essentially the same thing, I could pull from a backup question and then the board. Then the questions could be asked in a random order. You know this the board could select its order at the beginning of the meeting and either change the order of the questions to match with the individuals who are interested in asking the question, or just go one through ten and rotate through the list to rotate through the members. Um, equally through the ten questions.

01:17:48,601	S2:
That's essentially how we did it on the previous town administrator selection board, though I think the, uh, each of the board members at the end of the ten had the opportunity for one more individual question or follow up, but that's just becomes a matter of how much time you want to spend. Yeah.

01:18:10,000	S5:
And I think it's just the one I remember, if that's the way I, I'm fine with that. But if that's the way you want to make sure if you don't ask it to the first candidate, you really can't ask it to the second candidate unless it's, uh, you want to ask the same questions to everybody unless you can logically get there through discussion in, you know, something like a follow up from from something that they specifically said in their answers.

01:18:37,701	S2:
Schedule wise to I just point out, I think you have a major, uh, planning board meeting on the 24th.

01:18:45,767	S5:
Julie, I'm not aware. I'm.

01:18:48,167	S2:
I think that's what the three a discussion meeting within the board.

01:18:57,100	S1:
Within the board. But there's not a public hearing.

01:18:59,367	S2:
Yeah, not a public hearing. No.

01:19:01,968	S5:
But I could occupy Peter.

01:19:04,868	S1:
Um, yes. I mean, my preference would be to have some time between the interviews, even if it's a day or preferably I get two days, maybe for the Thursday if we can do it. Um, so that we can deliberate on what we've heard in the interviews, but also so that the public has an opportunity to see the interviews and to submit comments and recommendations if they choose to.

01:19:38,667	S5:
And then.

01:19:41,100	S5:
There's no other comments. Finally, does the board want to start at its normal 630 time or look to start earlier on the 23rd?

01:19:55,601	S1:
How long for the interview? Sorry, did you say 30 minutes?

01:20:00,400	S5:
Yeah. I mean, you know that that depends on how it's tough. And we've been finding that we have ten questions in the panel we're doing with six folks, and the interviews are ranging from about 30 minutes to about 50 minutes, depending on how talkative the, um, the person being interviewed is. And, you know, in any thing they say that promote any sort of follow ups or further questioning.

01:20:32,801	S1:
And you anticipate a light agenda other than the interviews.

01:20:37,801	S5:
And that is the goal. Yeah.

01:20:40,567	S9:
We do.

01:20:41,000	S7:
Have a. Sorry.

01:20:44,367	S1:
Karen. Go ahead and then, Joe.

01:20:47,968	S4:
I was just going to look from a scheduling perspective. Um, Ben, if you can make the 23rd work, I can actually start at 530.

01:20:56,467	S3:
Yeah, I can, I can start at 530 or even earlier, if that's what we need to do to comfortably fit in each of the interviews, plus whatever business, other business we have.

01:21:14,167	S1:
So that's the 25th, right? Sorry, Joe. Go ahead.

01:21:17,367	S9:
I just I would know that there's, uh. Um.

01:21:20,000	S11:
We're right. Sorry.

01:21:24,267	S1:
Go ahead. Joe.

01:21:25,868	S9:
I just wanted to make note that we had planned originally to have a National grid hearing that day as well. Notices was sent out to a butters. However, I believe we can have the meeting be had a subsequent date. Um, we wouldn't have to set out another notification. Um, but that originally, uh, we had national grids set to to meet that night. Now, we could also have them rearranged time, I think. Originally it was for 615 or so. Um, so that's just something to take note of, but we can discuss other options as well.

01:22:02,000	S5:
Yeah, it was just full of work to move that.

01:22:07,501	S5:
Hearing. We'll move the hearing.

01:22:10,100	S1:
So to clarify, we're talking about the Tuesday, July 23rd meeting, potentially starting at 530 with a follow up meeting on the Thursday evening for final votes, final deliberations and a vote.

01:22:32,167	S5:
That's my understanding.

01:22:36,167	S4:
Any chance we could make the 25th virtual?

01:22:43,567	S1:
Seems like we could. Steve, any problem with that?

01:22:46,367	S5:
No. No problem on our end. That's the board's preference.

01:22:51,467	S1:
Okay, so.

01:22:52,801	S4:
We can make that work. So.

01:22:56,300	S1:
Interviews in person and final deliberations on zoom.

01:23:02,400	S1:
630 for the 25th on Thursday. That the preference.

01:23:08,801	S3:
Works for me. Sounds good.

01:23:11,601	S4:
Hold on one second. I, um, let me triple check something good.

01:23:18,567	S4:
The 25th. I can start at any time. So if we could, if you wanted to do it early, we could start it like, you know, 3 or 4.

01:23:28,667	S4:
You want to do it earlier?

01:23:34,467	S3:
Um, I don't think I could do it until 6 p.m. on the on the Thursday myself.

01:23:42,000	S11:
Yeah.

01:23:45,200	S1:
Okay. 6 p.m. on Thursday.

01:23:49,567	S1:
You'll have to check these with Peter.

01:23:51,968	S7:
Yep.

01:23:53,467	S5:
And then the, uh, one more final question. Something we've run into in this interview process is, um, scheduling conflicts and, you know, a life events that arise in a request to have it remote. So in the event that an individual is scheduled to be here in person and they ask to have a change to remote, does the board still want to entertain interviewing? You know, do you want to move forward with an interview in a remote capacity or to consider it. You know this. This is when the interview is. And you know, if you can't make it, then, you know, unfortunately, there are other candidates.

01:24:38,467	S1:
So to allow the candidates to appear by zoom. Is that.

01:24:41,501	S7:
The.

01:24:41,667	S11:
Question?

01:24:42,467	S7:
Yes.

01:24:45,367	S5:
It's going to happen.

01:24:49,100	S5:
And I want to have an answer because our next meeting will be the interview. So.

01:24:56,601	S1:
Strong feelings on this.

01:25:02,100	S5:
And I think the ideal is that they're in person and that's what we're pushing for. But if something was to come up would would that conflict, you know, remove them from the process and the board size?

01:25:15,767	S3:
Then I think as long as this would pass legal muster, which I think it would, but it may be worth checking with KP law that we say that in person is is preferred, and that that preference is would be part of the, um, evaluation criteria. The only reason I say that is I wouldn't necessarily want to, uh, knock someone out of the process if they weren't able to be there in person. Um, because, you know, maybe some emergency, some legitimate excuse. But I recognize we have to have sort of one uniform rule so we can't take it case by case. Um, so I would say that that would be stated that it's the strong preference, is that it be in person and that that would be one of the evaluative criteria. Um, so, you know, everyone will come in person unless they absolutely can't. And if they can't, there, it may affect how the person is evaluated, but they wouldn't be disqualified. I don't know if others think that's a good compromise.

01:26:36,667	S1:
I'd agree with that standpoint.

01:26:43,000	S1:
And I guess a question what happens during the actual interview? Evening. Can we request that the candidates are in another room and come in for their interviews? Or is given that it's a public meeting, can everyone sit and hear everyone else?

01:27:00,767	S7:
Yeah.

01:27:01,000	S5:
I mean, I can get clarification on that. I think you can make the request. However, you can't force it. Force A and maybe make a request out of respect to the other candidates, you know, would ask you, but you certainly can't. It's a public meeting. I mean, you certainly can't prevent anybody from attending. And.

01:27:28,100	S1:
I guess we'd request that they each have their own time without other candidates.

01:27:33,100	S5:
Yeah. I'll get clarity on that and make sure. What's the different environment now from the last time we did public interviews?

01:27:40,367	S1:
Yeah, that would be great.

01:27:45,167	S1:
And you would like questions? Our preferred questions from us by when?

01:27:55,868	S5:
I see you sooner the better. But, you know, like next, next Tuesday or something. If that's okay with the board, then that gives a couple days to get them together and get them out with the packet on.

01:28:12,167	S5:
Just as I'm saying that probably will distribute. We'll distribute them at the meeting at the beginning of the meeting of the board, a chance to go through and review them.

01:28:20,501	S1:
Yes.

01:28:27,701	S1:
Anyone have any other comments or questions? Steve. You have what you need.

01:28:33,567	S5:
I believe I do. Thank you.

01:28:37,567	S1:
Okay. Agenda item H, um, is a bit of a mouthful, so it seems to me I'm going to let Steve explain it, but it appears to be a request for the select board to request the finance director, um, to develop assumptions and review it with the fin com to help guide us the Select board in drafting the budget message for FY 26. So, Steve, would you like to clarify that a bit more?

01:29:07,667	S5:
Yeah. So this is.

01:29:11,868	S5:
An attempt to include the board has expressed interest in including other boards and committees and the decision making process. So historically, the budget message is the select board's and will likely remain to be. The budget message is what goes out to boards, committee members, department heads. Uh, you know what the Select board is looking for? Uh, in their budget, you know, are they looking for reduction in costs? Increasing costs? What sort of colas are we looking at? Um, level funded level service, uh, you know, all those variables. So this. I feel like we could bring the finance committee. It's a good opportunity, particularly with three new members, to bring the Finance committee in to, uh, work with the finance director in creating a revenue and expenditure model. It will do a couple things. I think it will help the new members understand the, you know, the limited revenue sources that we have in Massachusetts for local governments. Uh, it'll help them understand some of our fixed costs and budgetary pressures that are outside of our control, as well as just the general components and make up of our expenditures being mostly salaries and service delivery type business, and then allow them to comment and critique it to a level that they're comfortable with, and then bring it back to the select board as a model that can help guide your own development of the budget message, and particularly with the three collective bargaining agreements that we're currently in negotiations for. And, um, any other assumptions that we have moving into the FY 26 budget process?

01:31:09,868	S1:
So you're again looking for our assent basically, and.

01:31:14,767	S5:
Yeah, and how about draft to make it official? I'll just draft a quick message to the new finance committee. And Jeff, uh, saying, you know, that this, like, board's looking to have this developed, uh, and for the, you know, the finance committee to comment on it, maybe they want us to review our some of our permit fees or something like that, just, you know, get them involved in the process and some early stages of the planning, something that we normally would do internally. Uh, at this time of the year, we'll bring the Finance Committee in.

01:31:51,267	S1:
Any discussion from the board?

01:31:59,767	S1:
Nope.

01:32:00,567	S2:
Gary, I just say that, uh, we got great talent now on the Finance committee, as we've had in the last couple of years. So let's use them and get them involved in the process early. Really?

01:32:15,267	S7:
Okay.

01:32:17,667	S1:
I think we're good. Steve, you're all set?

01:32:20,601	S5:
Yep. Good. Thank you.

01:32:23,167	S1:
Okay, we'll move now to old business. Uh, item I. We have continued discussion on our goals and objectives that we have been working through for the last few meetings. So this is our spreadsheet. If everyone had.

01:32:38,167	S5:
Been able to bring that up.

01:32:40,400	S7:
Yeah.

01:32:42,100	S1:
Chance to look. So we've we're moving through the categories. I think tonight we're great that Jeff Lard is here. But to talk about the finance and budgeting category and perhaps it.

01:33:00,167	S1:
So again.

01:33:01,167	S7:
We're working.

01:33:02,467	S5:
On that.

01:33:08,200	S1:
Prioritizing for this year And I guess one distinction I wanted to just make sure is correct. Steve and Jeff, the budgetary software that we've now budgeted and will be purchased is the external facing budget software. Correct. But the internal accounting system that the town uses is still a need. And I believe that that's what number one is on this list. Is that correct?

01:33:37,868	S5:
Yeah. Well, yeah. That's correct. Just the clarification. The budget software, uh, is public facing but also has a backend component. So the the accounting software is a standalone item. Uh, it always has been. It's just a purely chart of accounts. Uh, Jeff can probably go into more detail, but it's usually we extract what's in the accounting software and do it on the back of napkins and excel. But, uh, you know, this this tool will be. Um, certainly light years ahead of that and certainly. And be able to bring it, bring it to the public.

01:34:21,868	S7:
Jeff, can.

01:34:22,567	S13:
You see this gold spark sheet?

01:34:25,501	S5:
Yeah.

01:34:26,000	S7:
Yes.

01:34:26,667	S5:
Pretty small, but you can see it.

01:34:30,267	S5:
Go to view.

01:34:35,667	S7:
Yeah.

01:34:36,067	S13:
Just open another screen for some reason.

01:34:42,868	S5:
I think zoom.

01:34:46,267	S5:
There you go. That's good.

01:34:50,367	S5:
Yeah. I mean the finance. I'll let Jeff if you want to shed a little light on that. But the, the he, he just went through a software transition in Essex and would be looking at probably a similar line of product as that Eunice, which would probably be the Cadillac, at least in the municipal space here in Massachusetts, uh, is extremely costly. And I think we've talked about this before. I'm not necessarily sure it justifies. Uh, well, maybe not complicated enough to to justify the cost, but I could be swayed otherwise.

01:35:31,200	S1:
Sorry. That's the accounting software you're talking about.

01:35:34,267	S7:
Yeah.

01:35:34,767	S5:
Which is, you know, that's a need. Because we're at the end of where the economy software we use is called soft, right? The is no longer supported by the company that made it. So there's no changes. There's no updates. You basically you're you're locked in as is. They don't fix any bugs. They just kind of just gotta make it work. So we're fine right now. But this is certainly something that needs to be part of the discussion in the next couple of years, I would think.

01:36:10,968	S1:
It needs to be budgeted for.

01:36:12,868	S7:
Yes.

01:36:14,767	S12:
And Steve.

01:36:18,067	S12:
Just just to weigh in. So, um, we did speak with soft, right? Um, I don't know, maybe three weeks ago or so. Um, as you say, it's not being supported or, you know, improved upon. Um, but it does. It does functionally work. Um, you know, and it does the chart of account work and everything that we needed to do. Um, we are in the process right now of moving that software from a local server over at the police station, um, to the Danvers Cloud platform, which is where we move the Patriot assessor software. Um, last year, um, we're hopeful that that is going to improve, um, the usability of the software. Uh, you know, today is a Tuesday, and we do vendor payments and, uh, payroll and all kinds of things and all the various departments are putting their bills into the system and it gets really bogged down. But I think that that is actually more of a function of our 12 year old server than it is of soft right itself. So we're hopeful that maybe the performance with soft right will improve fairly dramatically. Um, with the move to the to the Danvers Cloud. Um, you know, we did actually just switch in Essex, as Steve mentioned, to a product called Vader, which is really kind of the other accounting software that is at the soft, right price point. Um, they're both pretty similar. They have, you know, different pros and cons, um, the one, you know, but it appears that when I'm used Vader, uh, maybe 7 or 8 years ago, they actually switched from that to soft, right? Um, so, you know, I'd have to look back and see why we made that, that switch at the time. Uh, but as Steve mentions, the switch to munis, um, you know, from what I've heard, just the conversion of the system could easily be $100,000 as a one time investment, and then the software would go from being, you know, 18 to $20,000 a year to being probably 40 to 50 something thousand dollars a year. So it would be a significant change for us. So the hope is, as much as I wouldn't say any of us within finance or other departments love soft, right? Um, I don't know that you know, the cost to make the change. Uh, you know, it really could be justified to move to something like a munis. Um, I have had discussions with another local accountant about, um, a different accounting software program, um, that we might join up and sort of work together to maybe get them to customize for mass municipal. Um, and so that might be another, um, avenue that might be available to us down the road. Um, but that's kind of the status of where we are now with the accounting package itself. Um, so the software gave us no indication that that, you know, it sounds like for sure there's, you know, a couple of years left. Uh, anyway, so, uh, it's not probably a 26 or 27 budget item, but, um, it is something we'll have to do at some point. And certainly if the, the, the, the performance doesn't improve with the switch to Danvers, then that, um, you know, that might expedite, uh, the need to move, uh, and just real quickly, the clearing of the budgeting software, uh, we have already begun, uh, implementing and, uh, you know, sending them data and getting, um, data into that system. We don't actually take ownership of that software until August 1st. But, um, you know, the hope is we are well on track to have that, uh, public facing budget software up and running. Uh, you know, by the time we get to, you know, November, uh, and start to roll the budget out, um, and as Steve said, it's not just external facing. It does have some, you know, internal. Um, internal uses as well. But I think primarily folks wanted us to get that to, you know, improve how the budget was communicated, uh, to, to the residents. And I think we're on track to to have that ready to go for the upcoming budget season.

01:40:15,667	S1:
Great. Thank you. So it sounds like that should be held for now.

01:40:22,868	S5:
Yeah, I think it should stay on the list, but maybe drop in priority.

01:40:26,000	S1:
Drop in priority.

01:40:27,400	S5:
I mean, you want to be ready to make a move because you kind of stuff like that, you don't want something to go wrong and then be trying to replace it. You kind of want to anticipate it'd be a little bit of a head of a game, but it sounds like, you know, we have some time, but I think it should stay on the list because it needs to stay relevant.

01:40:49,868	S1:
The next three items are ongoing in any case, right?

01:40:55,267	S7:
Yeah.

01:40:58,100	S1:
And then some of these again. I'm not. I can't remember necessarily what we were thinking last year, but is the opt out insurance analysis still an issue?

01:41:08,901	S5:
Well, so that was that's a cost saving measure that, you know, it would. I still think that it's something we need to dedicate some capacity to look into. But it is I mean it is time consuming. It's relatively heavy lift. You look at restructuring our insurance to include a high deductible plan and then also to, um, create an opt out incentive. So that is you basically pay people to not join your health, your health care. So some of the communities are going to, you know, I don't even know. I think of $1,000 if you're eligible for a plan in Wenham, but you go with your spouse or partner or whatever. You get a thousand bucks a year that you stay off the plan, because us paying $1,000 is a lot cheaper than paying $18,000 with you on the plan. That's, you know, that's kind of the that's the logic to that. So at the end can can equate to savings. And they could be quite substantial depending on how many people decide to opt out and take the payment. Um, because health care is one of our larger fixed costs, that is growing at a rate far exceeding our revenue growth.

01:42:38,167	S5:
Yeah, but it would certainly be a multiyear rollout. It's a lot of a lot of research. And, you know, working with the insurance consultants or, uh, salesmen to come up with packages and dealing with the unions and making sure you can get it there. And then, you know, it's certainly a risk because you're working with assumptions that a certain amount of people are going to opt into it. And then there's saving, sharing. And when you initially implement it the first year or two, any savings the town receives by doing something like this, you have to share with the rest of the, the, the employees. So it's at the face. It sounds relatively simple, but just I just want to stress that there's a lot of work there. But it could be certainly it could be a cost savings for the town.

01:43:33,667	S1:
And if you could clarify what economic development, new growth. Don't recall what that stood for either.

01:43:40,667	S5:
Yeah. That was

01:43:44,100	S5:
it was really if I remember right, Peter's not here, but it was part partly partly tied to the iron rail and pharmaceutical um R&D development. Type space in the background. But then we generalized it to economic development because, you know, we need we need economic development and growth all over town. Smart economic growth. And the master plan has covered that well. So I think that that could be rolled into, um, you know, uh, one of the other categories where the master plan implementation is going to show up.

01:44:29,567	S8:
Okay.

01:44:30,567	S1:
And the DLS review we have in the above category and then permitting fees and market study.

01:44:37,767	S5:
Yeah, I think that should move up. That's in my opinion not a huge lift that you know some coordination. And you know obviously it takes some time. But I think that's something we need to do. It's also part of the new financial policies that were distributed a couple of weeks ago. This is something that we're, you know, we're going to be doing with some, uh, you know, relatively routinely going forward. So we might as well start this year. And I don't think we've I don't think we've benchmarked ourselves against other communities for our permitting of fees and quite some time. And it's certainly a good practice to do so.

01:45:16,067	S1:
You would recommend prioritizing that one.

01:45:18,868	S5:
Yeah, I do think we should bump that up. I think it's something that would do anyways this year, so I might as well make it a goal.

01:45:29,100	S1:
Okay, so at a minimum we have the budgetary software transition to clear of continuing updating of the financial policies, the track collection study and the benchmarking the fees and market study that people want to advocate for other things.

01:45:54,300	S2:
So is.

01:45:55,000	S7:
Your.

01:45:55,868	S1:
Sorry. Go ahead. Gary.

01:45:58,100	S2:
The question was, Steve, is there any available staff time available to take a look at the, uh, inventorying the grant awards and such or opportunities?

01:46:12,200	S5:
I mean, I think I think we're doing that. I believe we're going to start, uh, that new grant policy. We're going to start reporting.

01:46:26,167	S5:
Annually. Uh, you know, revenue and projects tied to that is that we had referencing Gary?

01:46:33,501	S2:
Yes. And, uh, I would think the first step is, you know, just a poll of the different departments to see what grants we're currently working on and then roll it into the budget as we, I think, previously approved. Right.

01:46:49,767	S5:
Yeah, I think that. Yeah, that's certainly doable. I think where would be 90% of the way there anyways?

01:47:01,100	S5:
Again, I think that's also part of the financial policies and the grant policy. So it's all good. All good stuff.

01:47:14,667	S1:
Other comments on the financial section or are we comfortable where we are?

01:47:21,667	S3:
I'm comfortable.

01:47:26,667	S4:
I'm comfortable with the goals aspects. Steve, I'd really like to have this filled in a lot more. Um, as far as our notes, we're still missing an action item or action date.

01:47:39,701	S7:
Yes.

01:47:42,067	S4:
So I know that, like, we're going through them line by line on a regular basis. But it's it really, really be from a best practices perspective. Have this written out. And if it's an ongoing working document to be able to say exactly where we are instead of having to go through line by line, we can easily have this updated. Um, and, and unfortunately, I think what's ending up happening and it's happened in the last three meetings is that we're picking a line item and saying we don't remember what this is, or, you know, Peter was doing this, um, and it's we're following some of the action items are falling through the cracks a little bit, and I just want to try to avoid that. If there's a way that we could fill out exactly what each one is or if there's vendors associated with it. Um, just from a best practices perspective, I think that it would be really great to have this completed so we can evaluate it a little bit more ahead of time. And that way, coming into this, we're in sort of asking, what is this where we have ideas and questions on the actual items.

01:48:42,267	S1:
So part of the issue is that we're working from this, which was last year's spreadsheet, and it was not thoroughly fleshed out. So that's the memory issue is going off of what we said last year. And I had done some of the updates but don't have all the details. So I think Steve and I can put our heads together to flesh it out further.

01:49:02,467	S5:
And I think I agree with everything you said. And, you know, I think the exercise here. But over the next probably two meetings until we get through the whole list is really just coming up with, you know, what, are we taking off? What are we putting on? And so I have an idea of where the board's head's at, and then I can take all that stuff and build it out with action items, and we can prioritize and fill all that stuff in. Because just because it's on, like, at least in my mind at this point, just because it's on the list, doesn't mean we're going to prioritize it for this year. Um, you know, we're going to be we're going to come back when it's all complete with action items, and then prioritize based on capacity. If that makes sense.

01:49:48,868	S4:
It's just it's hard to figure out, you know, and looking at the finance and budgeting aspect, we have 11 items. It's hard to figure out exactly what everything was. If we had a little bit more of a ten word sentence, what is this? Who's in charge of it? The action items, the dates that were coming from going for the next meeting, I think would get a lot more accomplished.

01:50:08,267	S5:
Understood.

01:50:13,868	S1:
So most most of the things that are blank are things that were not touched or prioritized last year. Um, so and we took off the things that were fully complete from last year and it's in the workbook, but on a separate page, so that we now will have a page for each year so we can go back as a reference, the information technology section, everything that we had put on for last year essentially got done, which is why it's mostly blank. And again, from last year's list, I don't recall what software referred to. And it may be that there's enough happening in the IT world unless people have additional ideas. Steve.

01:50:56,801	S5:
Yeah. No, I think that there's enough going on with in the IT world. I think we can build out. Similar to Karen's request for action items was certainly a number of steps that are going to have to take place this year to get ourselves off our physical server and into a virtual environment hosted in Danvers. So that will be, um, you know, that'll be relatively straightforward and building out that what needs to get done over the next 12 months to get us there.

01:51:38,267	S5:
And finished all the planning stages, signed some documents. So things are starting to move, but, uh, we're not there yet.

01:51:47,267	S8:
Okay.

01:51:50,267	S1:
All right. Do we have bandwidth to finish the last section, or do people prefer to postpone that?

01:51:59,567	S2:
I think a couple of those items might get to an extended discussion. So maybe next time.

01:52:06,367	S7:
Okay.

01:52:11,367	S1:
Alrighty.

01:52:14,601	S1:
And we have next item J under Old Business to continue the discussion and possibly have a vote on the draft Select Board public comment policy. And it might be helpful to pull that up. And I guess I'll just say at the outset that I've sort of rethought this a little bit and have somewhat shifted my opinion to throw a wrench in the works, but.

01:52:56,667	S5:
There's a lot of back and forth last time, but we listened to the tape a couple times today to make sure we captured everything, and really would boil down to changing the title and adjusting the listening session section to include the two minutes per person, then allowing a second round of speaking limited to one minute only if time allows.

01:53:31,567	S1:
I think that captures what we spoke about last time. It's my concern that I'll just throw out there for people to comment on. I guess I've thought again about the number two section, agenda item, public comment, and my concern is that by allowing comments on agenda items, um, the Selectboard is not supposed to get into debates with residents, and I think it's very difficult when the comments are happening at the moment of our discussion. And I think either whether it precedes or follows, certainly whether it follows our discussion, I think it's very hard not to engage in a debate, um, and engage in a back and forth. I also think if we request that the public comment happen at the beginning and maybe extend it to make sure there's a sufficient time at the beginning, it also gives us a moment to think about the comments before we actually get to our discussion, but my concern is getting into this continual back and forth throughout the course of the meeting, rather than allowing residents to have their say in whatever way they want. At the beginning of the meeting, and then we do our deliberations. I guess to me it feels cleaner, um, and less potential to go down the path of getting into debates.

01:55:09,267	S1:
So I'll leave it there.

01:55:22,467	S1:
And also, I guess I'll just say we might want to wait until Peter's back to finalize this completely in any case. But Karen go ahead.

01:55:32,267	S4:
Well, using today as an example, we had stated that if it wasn't within the public input for the ten minutes, then they weren't allowed to to interject. Um, but using that as an example, we then did not allow Courtney Ashwood or Laurence Oke to interject on items that were on the agenda when they raised their hand to speak. So it's I mean, using today, it's a little bit confusing and it's confusing to them because they wanted to speak during the time that was selected on on our agenda. That's truly calling them out in order to be able to do that. But then we didn't allow that. So I'm a little confused as to where folks are to interject. Um, specifically when we're also allowing we're calling them out. Um, they should be able to be able to come up and add their two minutes. But I mean, using today, I don't necessarily know that that was the the right move, and I'm not sure where that would have captured that on this.

01:56:35,100	S7:
Gary.

01:56:36,868	S2:
Well, I think today you have to recognize that the new policy is not in effect. And in fact, the acknowledgement my name was only because they precipitated it with the email to us. So we were just simply acknowledging receipt of the correspondence as we've done at other times. But, you know, my intent or my view on this is we need to keep this as simple and straightforward so the public understands what the rules are. So, you know, I'd be more in favor of, you know, two minutes. That's it. Flat period. And we had the extended discussion on the in agenda the part two. But as um, as I think I said before, you know, I think our main concern there is to avoid debate between parties or between parties and the board. That's not the role of the meeting.

01:57:44,267	S3:
Thank you. So with respect to number one, open public comment. Um, I'm just mentioning this to contrast it in a minute with with part two. So for open public comment, my understanding has always been that, that it that it's not a time for debate or response by the board members, that it's just a time to allow the public to speak to whatever issue um, a member of the public wants to speak to. And the typically it would be for only for items that aren't otherwise on the agenda. Although I agree this policy isn't in place now, so I don't want to, um. you know, revisit what happened earlier, um, at this meeting. Um, for, for number two, however, when there's a particular issue on an agenda, I'm not so sure I agree. I, I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise, but I'm not sure that I agree that there should not be dialogue or debate. Um, for an agenda item. Um, I mean, I think that by the nature of the item there, there tends to be, um, just in experience, someone makes a point or asks a question, there's a response. So I'm not sure. I'm not sure that I don't know that I agree that we should be looking to frame, um, item number two in a way that, um, discourages debate.

01:59:19,567	S3:
Um, and therefore it may be that the allowance of one two minute speaking opportunity per person should be loosened if we can do it and pass muster with Cape law by, for example, saying that the chair can recognize someone for a second time. Um, as we as we have in the listening session, um, which would allow for, you know, a rebuttal or a follow up question or something. So, I mean, that's sort of my perspective. I like I'm eager to hear from any of my colleagues on this, on this issue of it's not a time for debate because I just don't I'm not sure that I'm tracking with with that when it comes to specific agenda items.

02:00:08,300	S1:
So I guess I could, uh, sorry, Gary, I'll make one comment and then you what I'm remembering and it could be not correct. Um, but from sort of training and orienting about being a select board member. I think that it's sort of part of the RMA. Best practice manual and so forth. The select boards should not be engaging in debate during select board meetings. So I guess that's where I'm coming from as sort of. My recollection of that is best practice. Um, and I could be wrong, Gary.

02:00:45,567	S2:
I think too. You know, I think this is a model for other committees and boards in the town, too. And I've seen multiple instances where an outside party once invited into, you know, number two type scenario that feels that they are now part of the board or continuing discussion and that they can, you know, continue to interject or, you know, go for or against other, um, actual board members statements. So, you know, I think that, um, you know, you know, as Emma says, you know, the decision and the debate should be amongst ourselves. And public comment is just a matter of receiving information from outside. Not a good give and take.

02:01:44,701	S1:
And I did spend some time it was not, admittedly, any kind of scientific study, but simply googling, um, public comment policies for Massachusetts select boards and read, I don't know, 15 or 20 of them. Um, and my sense from doing sort of that overview scan was it sort of seemed to split roughly 80%, 20%, where the smaller amount of town seemed to allow, at least in writing, that's not allowing for what they do in practice. That's not actually written down. So this was only written policies that I could find. Most of them tended towards public comment at the beginning, with only a few that I could find, um, allowing it throughout the meeting. So that's just another data point, but not exhaustive, admittedly.

02:02:41,868	S3:
Right. I think.

02:02:44,367	S7:
I.

02:02:44,467	S3:
Think deferring this, um, because we want to allow Peter to give his input and vote on it is a good idea. And and Frank that I think I'd also like to take advantage of that additional time to, to look at some of the same materials. I just, I worry about maybe putting a little bit too much of a straitjacket on our meetings because, um, whether you call it debate or just, you know, a coincidence of one comment that makes reference to a response to some other comment, I think it's just the nature of things is very often going to be some of that, give and take. I mean, I can think of. I'm trying to think of an example other than some of the more provocative ones that have come forward, but or in some of our recent meetings. But certainly, you know, there have been meetings where a member of the public makes a presentation and states a proposition, and then a member says, well, here's my view. And I don't think, you know, I don't agree with what was said. That's it's kind of hard to avoid making a statement that doesn't have some bear some connection to something else that was said. And I just wouldn't want to have a rule that that frowned upon that or put put it under too close a microscope. If we don't, if we can come up with more sensible rules that that avoid the kind of thing that you mentioned, Gary, of kind of an endless back and forth.

02:04:13,000	S1:
So the goal, I think, is to strike the right balance, right to afford people ample opportunity to state their comments and their thoughts on issues before the board or the town. Um, while also, at least in my opinion, maintaining best practice in my mind is to not go too far down the debate road, but maintaining best practice and sort of efficiency and running the meeting.

02:04:44,667	S1:
So I guess I'd suggest taking a look for those who have the interest and the time to see what other towns are doing. And as you say, take this up again when all of us are here. And Peter can also weigh in.

02:05:02,267	S1:
Anything further?

02:05:06,000	S1:
Okay, let's move to minutes. We have an executive session of September 5th, 2023 to approve and release. Would we like to start there? Any comments on that set of executive session minutes?

02:05:29,267	S1:
I'd like to entertain a motion.

02:05:34,868	S3:
I'll move to approve the.

02:05:40,767	S3:
Executive session minutes as prepared for the meeting on September 5th, 2023.

02:05:47,701	S2:
And we need to add their release too.

02:05:50,868	S3:
Oh thank you. I'll move to approve and release the executive session minutes of September 5th, 2023.

02:05:56,868	S2:
Second.

02:05:59,167	S1:
Any any comments? Okay. I'll vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

02:06:04,567	S7:
Yes.

02:06:06,000	S1:
Ben.

02:06:06,767	S3:
Yes.

02:06:07,701	S7:
Sharon.

02:06:08,667	S4:
Abstain. I wasn't here.

02:06:10,467	S1:
Oh, yes. Thank you. Okay. And the next one is simply to release, which have already been approved. The executive session minutes from April 2nd, 2024. Any comments on these set of minutes?

02:06:28,167	S1:
Okay. Like I might make a motion, please.

02:06:34,767	S3:
I'll move to release the executive session minutes of April 2nd, 2024.

02:06:39,367	S2:
Second.

02:06:41,767	S1:
Okay. Any comments? We'll move to vote. Deirdre says yes. Gary.

02:06:47,167	S2:
Yes.

02:06:48,167	S1:
Ben.

02:06:49,300	S3:
Yes.

02:06:50,501	S7:
Karen.

02:06:51,367	S4:
Abstain.

02:06:53,100	S1:
Thank you. And we have two sets of minutes. Uh, sorry. Open session minutes. Uh, the first is May 7th. Does anyone have comments or corrections? I did find one. Anyone have anything?

02:07:10,000	S4:
I have found two grammatical on both the seventh and the 21st, but nothing that would stop us from moving forward.

02:07:17,200	S1:
Do you want to mention the correction for the seventh first?

02:07:19,868	S4:
Yeah, I'll just send an email over. That's fine.

02:07:25,567	S1:
Uh, is it just typographical?

02:07:28,601	S4:
Yeah. Would you say it's people spelling errors? So I'd like a period where it shouldn't be. But nothing from a content perspective.

02:07:36,467	S8:
Okay.

02:07:38,767	S1:
I just had one correction on page five. The word opera. Opera was used instead of arpa. We don't have opera funding, unfortunately.

02:07:52,467	S4:
I'll be fine.

02:07:54,167	S7:
Yeah.

02:07:55,801	S1:
That'd be interesting. So if we can make that one correction and then Karen's grammatical.

02:08:04,467	S1:
Okay, then would you like to make the motion?

02:08:07,767	S3:
Sure I'll move to approve the open session minutes of May 7th, 2024. With the correction of Arpa, Arpa and a clerical correction or corrections to be provided by Karen by Karen. Excuse me.

02:08:26,701	S7:
Second a.

02:08:30,300	S1:
Vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

02:08:32,367	S2:
Yes.

02:08:33,467	S1:
Ben.

02:08:34,367	S3:
Yes.

02:08:35,167	S1:
Karen.

02:08:36,167	S7:
Yes.

02:08:37,367	S1:
Okay. And then, uh, the minutes of May 21st, 2024. Karen, did you have.

02:08:45,467	S4:
I had the same thing. I had three, three minor edits. So I'm more than happy to do this over. Yeah.

02:08:50,767	S7:
Okay.

02:08:51,367	S1:
Anything else?

02:08:54,701	S7:
Okay.

02:08:55,667	S1:
Take a motion.

02:08:58,467	S3:
I'll move to approve the open session minutes of May 21st, 2024, with some typographical corrections to be provided by Karen Anger.

02:09:08,267	S1:
Second vote. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

02:09:14,000	S2:
Yes.

02:09:15,000	S3:
Then yes.

02:09:17,167	S7:
Karen. Yes.

02:09:20,667	S1:
Okay. That concludes our agenda items for the evening. Thank you everyone. We'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

02:09:36,868	S2:
Clerk.

02:09:38,400	S3:
Oh, sure. Sorry. I moved to adjourn the meeting. Second. 8:40 p.m..

02:09:45,267	S2:
Second.

02:09:47,567	S1:
Okay. Roll call one last time. Deirdre. Yes. Gary.

02:09:51,467	S7:
Yes.

02:09:52,767	S1:
Ben.

02:09:53,567	S3:
Yes.

02:09:54,601	S1:
Karen. Thank you, everyone, and good night.

02:09:59,267	S3:
Thank you. Good night.

02:10:00,567	S7:
Good night.

02:10:02,567	S5:
Have a good night, everyone.