Brandon Board of Selectmen Meeting
June 24, 2002
NOTE:
These are unapproved minutes, subject to amendment and/or approval at the
subsequent board meeting.
Attendance:
Lynn Saunders, Chair, Ken Torrey, Vice Chair, Jack McKernon, Bruce Brown
and Richard Baker.
Also in attendance:
Michael Balch, Roy Newton, Frank Farnsworth, Frank Mazza, Steve Cijka, Buzz
Racine, Mei Mei Brown, Bette Moffett, Terry Kline, Bill Hatch, Anna Scheck, Ed
Barna, Bruce Rounds and Bob Kilpeck.
1)
Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 7:20 p.m. by Chair, Lynn
Saunders.
a.
Agenda Adoption – Motion by Baker/Torrey to adopt the agenda as
presented. Passed unanimously.
2) Consent Agenda – Motion
by McKernon/Baker to approve the consent agenda. Passed unanimously.
a.
Approval of Minutes – minutes of the Public Hearing and regular meeting
of June 10, 2002 – approved.
b.
Fiscal
i)
Warrant – approved.
ii)
Purchase Order – none.
c.
Appointment of Maurice (Buzz) Racine as Code Enforcement Officer –
approved.
Ms.
Saunders introduced Mr. Racine to the Board members.
3) Town Manager’s
Report
Mr. Balch said that Ms. Patten had planned
to give a report on the town hall tonight, but was unable to attend. He said that they all had the letter from Tom Keefe in their
packets regarding his design for the steps.
He has researched it and proposes that they do what was there. He
believes that he can make it non-slippery and have it meet code.
Mr. Balch wanted any input from the Board now that they had the chance to
review the drawings and proposal. It
would not be constructed in this construction season.
The roof is presently being repaired; they have patched it before, but
this is a long-term repair. The
ground will be reshaped and other measures will be taken to avoid the water
along the back wall this season and next season the steps will be done.
Ms. Saunders said that she would encourage Mr. Balch to
consult with Mr. Keefe about the masonry, because he expressed concern saying
that it was a complicated issue when setting stone on top of a concrete
foundation.
Mr. Balch will discuss this with Mr. Keefe.
He said that this is pretty tricky and they may want to have Mr. Keefe
come down and do a couple inspections while it is going on.
Mr. Baker asked if this is a case where they may need
to do some significant work on the inside at a later date and have to get up
over the new steps to get to it?
Mr. Balch said that there will absolutely need to be
interior work done later, but they can certainly require in the contract that
the steps not be used. They can put
staging up and work around them.
Ms. Saunders said that the thought behind putting in
the new steps was that it was one closer step to making the building usable and
therefore creating more interest and more potential funding.
Mr. Balch said that several employees have come to him
requesting to have July 5th off.
He spoke with Mr. Dick and it was his opinion that there would be
virtually no business in the office that day as the attorneys will be closed
etc. He has spoken with the
employees that if they all agree to use vacation time, if one person wants to
work, they will need to keep a minimum staff there.
If they are all agreeable to using vacation time, is it all right with
the Board to close the office? All
members agreed to this.
4) Committee
Reports/Announcements
Ms. Saunders said that the Historic Preservation
Committee is near to being done with their draft of the Brandon Workbook rewrite
and it should be coming to them in a couple days for their review.
They are coming to the end of their grant at the end of July.
Mr. Baker said that at the session at the Police
Academy last week regarding transportation, it was abundantly clear that they
will need to keep their eye on each of the next several sessions of the
legislature to make sure the money is there for Pittsford and Brandon as the pie
is shrinking. They were very
successful in getting money for engineering, but in the future they will need to
fight for every dollar.
He said that he was at a meeting today regarding public
transit and there is an initiative to develop a reverse commuter route.
It would start at the transit center early in the morning, pass through
Pittsford to Brandon to bring anyone who might work in town and then it would
depart Brandon back to Rutland to hook into their other routes between 7:00
–7:30. It would mean that some of
the 450 people a day that drive to Rutland might be able to take the bus.
It’s not a sure thing, but it is a possibility.
Even the state has acknowledged that Brandon is a very under served area.
One of the things they are looking at is using the area near the
industrial park as a park and ride scenario.
Mr. Baker wanted to apologize to Mr. Bill Brooks
regarding the comments he made at an earlier meeting about his facility on Route
7 north of town. He in no way meant
to imply that he had done anything wrong, or broken any rules or regulations and
certainly agrees with him that it is a nice looking facility and is very well
maintained. He can appreciate his
sensitivity to his comment during the Board’s discussion on the land use map.
He only hopes that Mr. Brooks will understand his sensitivity to the fact
that not withstanding it’s a great facility, but it doesn’t belong at the
gateway to town and he wishes it could have been built someplace else.
Mr. Torrey said that he didn’t know how anyone
driving down the road would know whether they were in Leicester or Brandon at
that point, and now he is calling it the “gateway to town”.
Mr. Brown said that the Planning Commission was given
the directive to look at the land use map and come up with suggestions for
improving the map. Susie Leonard
from Regional Planning has offered to help them with the revisions and other
assistance they might need.
5) Education Update
Mrs. Moffett said that this would be the last announcement for Neshobe
School for the summer. There will be a summer school July 22 to August 2 for
students K-5. It will be under the
direction of Sharon Desforges who will have four teachers and two teenage
volunteers. There are 85 students
signed up from Neshobe and Mrs. Desforges said that any parent interested in
enrolling their child, contact her at the school.
They will offer breakfast and lunch for the students with kitchen help
being volunteers from the community.
6)
Citizens Public Forum
Mr. Mazza said that having had a long-standing interest in municipal
government, he is confused over recent development taking place in our own
municipality. Prior to the last town meeting, in perusing the town report,
he noticed the inflation in the line item for the Superintendent of Public
Works. He was informed by the Town
Manager that this is an appropriation to assist in acclimating the new person
into the position. Recently he read
in the Brandon Pittsford Reporter that the position of Administrative Assistant
had been created. He was surprised
and pleased, because this is a position that he has long implored the different
Boards to implement. When he
terminated his stint as interim Town Manager, he again implored the Board, in
lieu of filling the position of Superintendent of Public Works should it become
vacant, that they consider creating a position of Administrative Assistant.
He learned tonight that they have appointed Buzz Racine, and he sincerely
can’t think of a better person for the position.
He noticed too that he has been appointed as the Code Enforcement
Officer. Looking at the job description for Administrative Assistant,
it’s quite a list; that person is going to be very, very busy.
He asked if they were still pursuing the position of Superintendent of
Public Works.
Ms. Saunders said that she believed so.
The Board has not discussed anything different.
She said that Mr. Racine’s position also included what was previously
the Code Enforcement Officer, so it’s not like they created a new position.
It was a reconstructed position with some of the clerical work being done
by Janet Mondlak.
Mr. Mazza said that as he recalled, the last person that filled the Code
Enforcement position complained that the workload was such that she couldn’t
do it. He is wondering how this
person is going to do that and all the related duties.
He said that he also understand that the Board has restricted our highway
department to strictly a maintenance unit and there is a foreman for the highway
department and an excellent person at the waste disposal facility.
He hopes the Board would consider whether they need the Superintendent of
Public Works if they have a position, as it was initially intended of
Administrative Assistant.
Ms. Saunders said that one of the things that the Superintendent of
Public Works does is a lot of the red tape work for the highway as well as sewer
fund grants. Applying and
administering those grants takes up a lot of time, and it is something that Mr.
Cijka is not interested in taking over
in his job. She doesn’t think that the road foreman would have the time
in his schedule either. So those
two departments need someone, and as mentioned Mr. Racine as well as Mr. Balch
have full plates as it is. The
Board will talk about it when it comes up, but she sees a need to keep the
Superintendent of Public Works.
Mr. Baker said that he thought grant application and administration was
part of the new Administrative Assistants job description.
Ms. Saunders said there are other areas that require grants.
Mr. Baker understood it to mean all grants were to be done by him.
This is something that was discussed by the former Board prior to his
being re-elected in March. He thinks that in fairness to the administration, the
Board and the voters, that when they make some of these decisions, there ought
to be a formal motion from the Board with a vote in the minutes.
He looked over the minutes for the last few months and what they have
done is taken the former Code Enforcement job and created 1.7 positions to
replace that 1.0 position. The
former Board did all of that
with
full knowledge of its intention but he doesn’t think they were straight with
the taxpayers, because there was no discussion of that in the budget.
So the budget that was put forth to the voters, which they approved in
good faith, did not mention this. Now
this was handed to him after the election that he needed to be read into.
He fully supported the idea of having an Administrative Assistant and
hiring Mr. Racine especially with his background, because he was led to believe
that the Administrative Assistant would take on all the load for the grants and
if there was a replacement hired for Mr. Rounds, that person would be more of an
engineer running public works and not handling all the red tape.
Ms. Saunders said that the whole Board took part in the discussion of the
Administrative Assistant and it was discussed in more than one meeting and there
was plenty of opportunity for the public to speak.
Mr. Balch said that when they originally started designing the budget ten
months ago, they talked about hiring someone part time to do some economic
development work. Then they decided to shift the position around.
They said that they would use that money since the new position was going
to do the economic development work, there was additional money in the budget to
shift over to support the clerical side of the work to be done.
That money is available and is in the budget and rather than discretely
funding economic development, that is funded in the other budget and it moves
the $10,000.00 over to address that.
He said that the other thing that they talked about at that time as far
as funding the additional clerical was that they would continue to keep their
fees consistent with what other towns are paying and use those fees, as the
amount of clerical work with code enforcement will be variable. The way those
clerical job descriptions are written is that the hours are based on the number
of applications. In terms of the
source of funding them is all in the budget.
There is fee revenue over and above what is projected.
There is the budget for the Code Enforcement Officer and there is the
budget for the Economic Development. The
funds are all there and while they are not as clear as they could have been had
they developed the budget later as planned, they were all there.
Mr. Balch continued saying that the Administrative Assistant can’t do
all of the work for all of the grants; that was never the intent.
The intent was that it be the place where they are applied for, and the
place where they would be controlled. A
lot of the research and filling out of the forms would have to be done by the
various departments. Mr. Racine
would not be prepared to fill out the Justice Department grants or to fill out
all the information for the highway or sewer grants. The individuals in those
departments will be pulling together a lot of the data in order to file the
grant applications. The point is
that the deadlines will be observed, there will be one person orchestrating the
whole thing, pulling it all together, writing the overviews down, writing up in
a very professional manner the things that need to be put together and sending
those grants in. Mr. Balch said
since he has been here, the town has received over two million dollars in grants
most of which was through Mr. Rounds department.
With Mr. Rounds leaving and a new person coming in, they will gain and
lose things, as always happens. One of the things that Mr. Rounds is superb at
is grantsmanship. He has a very
good track record and they want to be sure not to lose that.
The three things that he is really looking for out of the position are:
economic development, code enforcement and grants.
Those are the three primary pieces of the job. Much of the clerical work
will still be done in the places that they are done, but all of the control will
come to one place and thus be followed up on.
Mr. Balch said that in economic development, Mr. Racine will be the
leader. He is full of ideas and enthusiasm and has already impressed him.
In the other two areas, he will be the coordinator and organizer, but
there will be a lot of support behind him.
To
answer another question that Mr. Mazza had, he thinks they are going to be able
to do several things to make that job easier.
Debbie sincerely believed that she needed more help in that department,
however typically towns more than double our size get by with one full time
person. He thinks that maybe the level of energy that was put into
it, and he thinks she did a very, very fine job, was perhaps more than was
really called for in some instances. He
thinks that maybe the ordinances should be toned down a bit. In fact Mr. Racine
was in his office today with some ideas to do just that.
Mr. Brown agreed and said that the rental codes will be taken care of on
a contract basis, so a lot of the time consuming duties will be shifted
lessening the burden on that position.
Mr. Balch said that they intend to propose decriminalizing a lot of the
ordinances, so they can be taken to the municipal court rather than going
through the circuit court. This
would be a major reduction in the efforts necessary.
Mr. Hatch said that grant administration is much more complex and time
consuming than most people realize. For one person to do all of the
administration from the point of application through the accounting for that is
more than a full time job. He can
say that from an experienced point of view.
Mr. McKernon said that the Code Enforcement Officer has a duty to do and
has at times not been in a position to think about economic development.
Now that Mr. Racine is here, he will see both sides and work toward
economic development. He feels that is a very important part of this whole
scenario.
Ms. Saunders said that has been a goal of the Board for as long as she
has been on it.
Mr. Baker said that he agrees with Mr. Hatch, it is a big job, but it is
reassuring to know that there will be one clearing house and that will be Mr.
Racine.
Mr. Mazza said that he is very familiar with administration and town
government having sat in that position for a stint.
What he is concerned about, and he knows the town is not overstaffed in
any department, but he doesn’t want the town to become top heavy.
He finished saying that the Code Enforcement Officer does have an overlap
with the Planning Commission. They
may want to divide that position and have the Planning Commission employ a part
time position so that the Code Enforcement Officer is full time under the Town
Manager.
Mr. Barna asked on a three-rod road how far from the white line on the
side of the road is the right-of-way.
Mr. Balch said that it was 24 feet 9 inches from centerline.
It varies a little.
Mr. Barna asked that they cut the brush on High Street.
Mr. Balch said that there is someone working on that right now and High
Street was at the top of the list.
Mr. Baker said that the machine has been here a week and the part that
Mr. Barna is talking about is the right hand side of Route 7 as you come down
from High Street.
Mr. Torrey said that the machine won’t be bale to do what they are
talking about, they’ll need brush cutters.
7)
Consider Request from Brandon Industrial Corporation re: Possible Partial
Forgiveness of Loan Balance
Mr. Balch said that this is something the Board has previously discussed.
He had not received a response from the CDGB but he did receive an e-mail
from Ann Kroll which he included in their packets.
Her comments were that the proposal is acceptable to CDGB.
The bid to complete the road, water, sewer, electric and phone for three
lots is $146,000.00. The grant the town would receive from the state is
$100,000.00. He estimates that the three lots will generate $59,000.00,
$29,000.00 and $59,000.00 to $29,000.00. There
is no place on the developable part of the lot where the ledge is more than two
feet below the surface according to the tests.
It will be a difficult lot to develop and is likely to have less value.
The Brandon Industrial Corp. Board did meet last week, all of the
directors were there including Dave O’Brien and Van Schwiebert.
Their proposal was yes, if things are as previously discussed, and if
CDGB would go along with it and the State will actually come up with the
$100,000.00 then they would like to go forward and they had voted to go forward,
conditional upon those things. Motion
by Torrey/McKernon to forgive up to $55,900.00 of the Brandon Industrial Corp.
loan.
Mr. Baker said that as Mr. McKernon is a prospective buyer of the lot and
as such he should recuse himself from any discussion on this matter.
Mr. McKernon said that it remains to be seen, but he can stay off it.
Mr. Baker said that it was described to him that one of the reasons this
deal was going to fly was because he was going to buy a lot.
Mr. McKernon said that it was discussed a year and a half ago.
Mr. Baker said that they may need to do some serious work on the agendas
because he thinks there should be at least three steps taken.
One is the partial forgiveness of the loan and the other is to lend money
from the Nexus RLF to the Brandon Industrial Corp. and if they don’t get one
it’s not worth anything without the other.
The third item is even though they’ve had money flowing from Nexus for
quite a few months they don’t have an RLF and under the HUD regulations as
implemented by the State of Vermont, it’s actually the Board of the RLF that
would be making the decision to roll the money to a prospective investor.
So they need to be very clear that all parties understand that as they as
a selectboard approve a motion to lend the money to BIC that they are doing it
in anticipation of forming an RLF.
Mr. Balch said that what Mr. Baker said is true.
He got some documents in regarding the RLF.
Mr. Torrey withdrew his aforementioned motion.
New motion by Baker/Torrey to lend up to $60,000.00 to Brandon
Industrial Corporation.
Mr. McKernon said that to get the town moving in an economic way, he had
told Mr. Balch he would buy a lot at the Industrial Center to get it going.
If anyone else steps up to do so, he will step back so fast it’s
amazing. So when they talk about
his offer, he would like it put in the right light, and that is if anybody else
is out there, he’s out of it.
Mr. Baker said that he is concerned that the town is going to invest
another $119,000.00 and then be sitting there looking at three empty lots.
Ms. Saunders said that there has been interest and inquiries on the lots.
Mr. Balch said that he has prompted and worked with and have done a great
deal of work on them. Technically
the town is not the Brandon Industrial Corporation.
The reason this is back on the table is because he and Mr. Brown have
done so. He is by virtue of his
position one of the directors of the Corporation. There have been four people
come to them in the last year looking for lots.
Whether or not they are buyers, he doesn’t know.
Two of them have repeatedly asked how things were going so to him it
looks like legitimate interest. Two
of them are charged with finding a place to house their company.
Mr. McKernon had expressed an interest.
Mr. McKernon said there was no agreement.
Mr. Balch agreed saying it was just a discussion.
Ms. Saunders said that conflict of interest is entirely up to the
individual board member and only can be brought forward if someone does gain
financial progress if something is decided.
Mr. Torrey said that at the last meeting they discussed where people
could develop in town, so he doesn’t see any harm in removing some of the
stumbling blocks so there is a place. He
further said that because he is employed by Markowski, he should step out of the
vote because he saw where they won the bid to do the work.
Mr. Baker said that they did talk at the last meeting about doing more
for economic development and now it’s time to put their actions where their
mouths are.
The motion passed unanimously.
Second Motion by Baker/Torrey to forgive up to $55,900.00 of a
loan previously made to Brandon Industrial Corporation.
Mr. Baker asked where the 50% recapture kicks in on a cash flow basis.
Mr. Balch said when the cash comes in.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. McKernon asked where they were at as far as adding the lot around the
water tank to the Industrial Park.
Mr. Brown said that it was supposed to be included in the map, but they
only included a part of it, but the intent was to have it all.
It may be that there are some wetlands, but it was intended to be added
to the industrial park.
Mr. Baker strongly urges that they set up an RLF.
Ms. Saunders asked if the selectboard could be the board of directors for
that.
Mr. Balch said they could and recommends it.
8)
Reconsider St. Mary’s Church Request to Use Central Park
Mr. Torrey said that he is in favor of letting them use the park and
wants to hear why Ms. Saunders feels it’s a conflict of church and state to
let a church use the town park for a fund raiser.
The town voted at Fellowship Hall for many years.
Ms. Saunders said that the town taxes pay for that park.
It would be different in her eyes if the town were charging for rental of
the park, then they would pay just like everybody else.
But the town is not charging, so it’s the public funds going to the
upkeep of the park. She has a very
strong feeling about separation of church and state and this is just a piece of
it, and it was reinforced by the attorney’s opinion.
Mr. Torrey said that it doesn’t make sense to him how private citizens
can use it to make money, but a non-profit organization can’t.
Mr. Baker asked what private citizens were using the park.
Mr. Torrey said Lary Fusco and the Farmers Market.
Motion by Torrey/McKernon to allow St. Mary’s Church to use the
park for a fundraiser.
Mr. Baker said that he feels stronger now than before.
This opens the door to any so-called religious group to use that property
and we won’t be able to say anything about it.
For example the group that came from Wisconsin last week to Montpelier
protesting abortion with grotesque pictures of aborted fetuses.
If they came and requested permission to use the park, we would have to
grant it to them. He thinks the
line should be drawn. The other
aspect of that is other times when there are religious organization in the park
they are doing it as a community-wide function.
This is a specific church using it for their sole financial benefit.
Among other things, it would block any other organization from having a
community wide function in the park on the date they reserved.
He doesn’t think it is right.
Mr. Brown said that when Mr. Fusco came forward with the permit he
brought up the point that in general in most public land situations whether it
be federal or state land, for anyone to economically gain from the use of public
lands there is usually some permitting process and some fee charged so that the
taxpayers that are footing that bill are getting something in return.
He doesn’t have a problem with anybody using the park; he thinks
everyone should be allowed to do so. There
should be some structure in place so they reserve it or whatever, so they
don’t have conflicts. Whatever
the group whether religious or non-profit if they are going to use the land for
personal gain the town and the taxpayer should benefit in some way too.
Mr. Torrey said that it was discussed at town meeting a couple of years
ago and it was soundly voted down.
Mr. McKernon said that he is constantly trying to move business into town
one way or another and any kind of action that happens in the park is positive,
as far as he is concerned.
Ms. Saunders asked if it were for Muslims that would be ok?
Mr. McKernon said the town would be in the news.
Mr. Brown agreed that often times any news is good news, because it
brings attention to whatever is going on.
Mr. Barna asked what exactly the church is trying to do, hold out cans or
sell something?
Ms. Saunders said they want to have a chicken BBQ.
Those in favor of allowing the church the use of the park: Torrey,
McKernon Brown.
Opposed: Baker &
Saunders. The motion passed.
9)
Discussion of Encumbrances, Deferrals & Reserved Funds
Mr. Balch said that they had most of these, but has added two more.
The Listers have a front end to the GIS computer system that makes it
easy to use and is really worthwhile and he thinks they should be allowed to do
that as it makes it far more useable. The
encumbered amount is $2805.00. He
said that Mr. Dick has his request for excess funds in the revenue account moved
over every year and asked that it be done again this year.
Motion by Baker/Torrey to approve the requests from the Listers,
Town Clerk and Public Works in the amounts that they recommended for
encumbrances.
Mr. Baker said that it is getting close to the parade and traditionally
they have line markings in place so the town looks good for its 8,000 visitors,
is that going to happen.
Mr. Rounds said that he received a called today and the person should be
here tomorrow or the day after.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Balch said that recreation is in three categories the first is not
something for them to act upon. The
expenses are going to occur in another year; they’ve collected the money so
they defer it over to the next year. He,
Denise and the auditors asked Nancy to do that at year end and is necessary so
the books can be straightened out. The
other two are basically the funds that the board has been deferring for many
years and finally they are reaching a conclusion on the spending of them.
He thinks it is reasonable that they be deferred this last year.
Motion by Torrey/McKernon to approve the request of the recreation
department in the amounts recommended for deferral and encumbrance.
Mr. Baker asked if the $6515.00 to be encumbered under recreation
dovetail with the $9,250.00 in the public works budget.
Mr. Rounds said that what he has in his budget is for paving and what
Nancy has in hers is for the surfacing after; the sealer and lines.
It’s two separate things.
The motion passed unanimously.
10)
Consider Town Office Space Needs
Mr. McKernon said that the laundry building had been offered to the town
prior to the proposal of Schecks. He
has always thought that the Scheck property would make an excellent spot for the
town office and police. He has
always thought that the existing town office would be far better serving the
town as a store of some sort. There
is other space in town that his company owns that is up for sale.
It can be any number of things; it could be used as the Post Office, deli
or anything that storekeepers would see fit, thus giving the town a center with
store keeps in the town proper and the town offices at Schecks.
He has talked to Tom Scheck and he indicated that he had no intentions of
waiting two and a half years for the town to sit around and make up its mind as
to whether or not they want to buy it. If
this Board is going to move forward with something of that sort they should move
fairly quickly. He also
wanted to know how much the last vote cost the town.
Mr. Balch said the vote itself was roughly $1500.00, plus there was the
mailing and the environmental.
Mr. McKernon would suggest taking a different tact, instead of spending
money that is not going to be used, that the Board put a vote to the town as to
whether or not they want it as a town office, then do the study after.
Rather than spend money first only to find out the people aren’t
interested in the location. Maybe
the town doesn’t want to move on anything.
Mr. Baker said that Mr. McKernon is on the right rack.
There are two elections coming up the first Tuesday in September and
November and are paid for by the State. So the cost of the town polling the
voters is just the cost of printing some papers.
He thinks we could learn from Springfield who just had a non-binding vote
on the five primary recommendations for the use of the $3,000,000.00 from the
State and they also had a 6th option which was none of the above.
He thinks that they have a responsibility as stewards for the taxpayer to
take a hard look at this. He not
only agrees with Mr. McKernon tonight, but he also agrees with Mr.
Farnsworth’s editorial in last weeks paper.
He doesn’t think they as a Board have done a good enough job educating
the people to the need and then educating themselves as to what they believe is
realistic outcome.
Ms. Brown said that the Space Needs Committee was a committee of seven
and seven of them voted in favor of Schecks being presented to the Board.
They all thought it was good structure, good location the cost was the
inhibiting factor, but everything else made it a very good choice.
Ms. Saunders asked if in their proposal had they included the Police
Department and kicked out the Post Office?
Ms. Brown said that what they were thinking was at least leave the police
where there are until the lease of the Post Office was up in approximately 2 ½
years. Move the town office in now
and then the police later. It would
give the town some income to pay for some repairs to the police office.
Mr. Brown said that the only thorn in the side of that proposal is that
in 2 ½ years they would be in the same dilemma that Pittsford and other
communities are going through with the Post Office moving out of town. He thinks
the post office is more important for people to access than the town office.
More people go to the post office than they do the town office.
If this vote that is proposed is just a consensus vote, he thinks they
should list some option one of which being do they want to spend money on fixing
up what we presently own, which is the town office building, there is a basement
in the town hall and everyone has pretty much said that they want to see that
building used.
Ms Saunders asked Mr. McKernon if he were suggesting a vote or a poll.
Mr. McKernon said that the townspeople have been given three options; the
present offices for a chunk of money and that went down.
Then the others then and the last one was the least expensive but the
voters don’t want it out of town. He
would like to find out now if the voters are willing to spend any money at all.
Maybe they are saying for them to stay right where they are.
Ms. Saunders said that if they stay right where they are it’s going to
cost a lot of money.
Mr. Balch said that there are health and safety issues, which they have
been avoiding because they have been consistently working towards a solution.
In the long run if there is no other solution they must address those
health and safety issues. Then
it becomes a choice of the voters whether they want those to be just a one line
item expense maybe in two years of budget or do they want it to be capitalized.
It could be either.
Mr. Baker said that back in 1993 there was a special town meeting and
after that meeting a poll was taken of 458 voters and they were given 8 choices
including do nothing and they were asked to rank them.
Only 29% of the people polled felt that renovating the existing space to
bring it up to code was their choice, either 1st, 2nd or 3rd
and 58% wanted to renovate the town hall to reuse.
As Mr. McKernon has said the present structure was built 180 years ago
and no matter how much money they put into it, it still won’t be suitable for
their needs.
Mr. Torrey said that he likes this idea but feels they need to have
dollar figures as well.
Mr. Baker said that in the information leading up to it they would need
to have at least a range.
Mr. Torrey said that it would be hard to make a decision not knowing how
much it’s going to cost.
Mr. Balch said they have an architect study on the town hall, town office
and Schecks, so they can get numbers.
Mr. Torrey asked if the study on the town hall was turning that into
office space?
Mr. Balch said in 1993 there was.
Mr. Torrey asked if there were provisions in it for parking?
Mr. Balch said no.
Ms. Saunders said that in 1993 it was a million dollars.
Mr. McKernon said that he understands what Mr. Scheck is saying; hanging
around for 2 ½ years is crazy. This
Board has to find out what his best price is that he will sell to the town and
put it out to the voters.
Ms. Saunders asked if they should have just the one option or should they
have more for them to pick from. If
it is not a binding vote it would be the opportunity to find out what they want.
Mr. McKernon said that it would have to be binding vote for Mr. Scheck
because that property is not going to hang around.
Ms. Saunders said that what he was suggesting is a bond vote to purchase
that property.
Mr. McKernon said yes.
Mr. Baker said that if there is a non-binding vote in September they
would then have eight weeks to go forward, because they might come in September
and tell them they are not interested in the Otter Valley Grocery property.
Mr. McKernon said that in between now and the time the town finally has
the cash, that building could be gone. That’s
an issue. It’s on the market and it is a very good location for
anything.
Ms. Saunders said that she thinks in the non-binding vote there needs to
be an estimate as to the renovations, which they have from the architect study.
Mr. McKernon said that putting the cost of the building and the estimated
cost of remodeling for the police and town office, that’s what should be on
it. He feels that the downtown from
the town office to the Brandon Inn should all be for businesses.
If the post office were downtown and he doesn’t care where, whether
it’s his property, which is for sale, or another location.
As long as it is downtown where businesses will be helped by people
coming on a daily basis to pick up their mail.
Mr. Mazza said that he was directly involved in two proposals and having
been defeated in both. He supported
the high school being utilized and that was rejected.
He agrees with Mr. Baker that until you get the townspeople involved in a
supportive roll you’re not going to get any place.
In the mean time, Rome is burning. The
fire department was able to build their building, the rescue squad built theirs
and the medical center built their building, he thinks they need to have a
number of proposals. They should
get the best possible price for the certain properties and state it in the
proposal and then send it out to the people.
Until they do that they are just treading water.
Mr. Baker said that Mr. McKernon is suggesting a single vote on one
building and he is suggesting the non-binding in September and a binding one in
November.
Mr. Farnsworth said that they could get an affirmative vote in September
and then taking a binder on the Scheck property for the September to November so
the exposure period for risk on losing that is minimal.
Mr. McKernon said that if they vote in September on the Scheck property
and it is positive, when would Tom see his money?
Mr. Baker said sometime after the formal vote in November.
He said he needs to sleep on this a bit.
Mr. McKernon is talking about a property in September, which he might go
along with, but he is afraid that if they do that without a thorough educational
process there’s a risk of not knowing any more than they do today when it’s
all said and done.
Ms. Saunders asked his suggestion.
Mr. Baker said having one or more properties in September as a
non-binding resolution. If they say yes they like this one, then they proceed on the
preferred choice, and then have a bond vote in November.
Ms. Saunders said that she agrees that they would be giving them a
choice, but doesn’t see the educational part of that.
Mr. Baker said that is something they all need to work on.
Ms. Saunders said that for the last votes they spent a lot of time trying
to do just that.
Mr. McKernon said that his concern, having been there waiting, twiddling
his thumbs, with his property he had an agreement to hold the building off the
market until the vote, but with Tom Scheck, the first person through the door
with cash has got it. So if they as a board are going to dilly-dally, he worries
about it.
Mr. Baker said that he certainly doesn’t want to dilly-dally, and he
also doesn’t want to reveal everything at this session on things that ought to
be discussed in executive session, but he thinks the first person through the
door with a realistic offer on the old high school will own it.
Just because they ask a certain amount of money doesn’t mean they
won’t come down after some negotiations.
There is parking there as well.
Ms. Saunders agreed that there was parking, but there is also a very
large building that they would be using only a small portion of.
What does he propose be done with the rest of it?
Mr. Baker said that there was a hearing at the last meeting about a
community center and one of the things they heard was the lack of gym space.
Here is a potential opportunity to buy the old school that could be a
multi-generational center with gym space in it, there could be all kinds of uses
including town offices. They’ve
been looking at these issues one at a time, maybe they need to step back and
take a look at the whole big picture.
Mr. McKernon said lets consider tonight, offering the two properties once
prices have been negotiated and offer both properties as non-binding.
Mr. Baker said that another potential use for the old school is for
housing.
Mr. McKernon said that would be putting about 4 million dollars into the
building. He’s not saying it’s
not worth it and he’s not saying they can’t get the funds from a lot of
different areas.
Ms. Saunders said that one of her concerns has always been that if they
purchase, and she thinks it’s a great idea.
They need these recreational spaces and town office and it would be
wonderful to have them under one building, but to go beyond that and to have any
space that they would be developing for any other reason unless they are going
to increase town staff beyond Mr. Racine and Mr. Rounds, they aren’t going to
have the staffing to deal with that kind of a project.
Mr. Barna said that the historical society has been given a building for
a museum which is a good headquarters for them but totally inadequate for a
museum. In St. Albans they have a
marvelous historical society museum, which occupies an entire three-story
school. This might be one addition to the space.
Mr. Racine said that if they have a non-binding vote in September, he’s
wondering if they should have some form of vehicle that informs the voters of
their plans in detail, so they can make an informed decision.
He feels this is necessary.
Ms. Saunders said they have done that for every proposal that has come
forward. Unfortunately small
numbers of people attend the informational meetings and even fewer people read
what is sent them. She has had some
other ideas to get the information out there such as some type of focus group
discussion to go to the various industries in town in their workspace and
address these issues.
Mr. Rounds asked if there was a possibility to have a referendum with two
or three choices on it and depending on which one comes out number one, then
negotiate a purchase and sale agreement on that property pending a bond vote in
November.
Ms. Saunders thinks that is the intent.
Mr. Torrey said that he is so confused over this whole thing.
There was a guy here one night telling them that the only way to go is
new and accused the board of wasting his time for serving on the Space Needs
Committee and a guy next to him was trying to sell them some property.
He said that it’s getting too confusing.
Ms. Saunders said they would put it on the next agenda and it would be
helpful if Mr. Baker and Mr. McKernon could have some samples or something to
work with.
Mr. Torrey said that they need some dollars figures as well.
Mr. Brown said that Mr. Farnsworth’s editorial was right on. It’s not
going to be this board that is going to sell this.
There has got to be some group out there that is going to get people
excited, whether it’s the Chamber of Commerce or someone else.
It’s the only way it’s going to happen because right now there are so
many small groups with so many issues. Everyone
has there own little reason why they voted no.
Until they can get a big group to charge ahead, it’s not going to
happen.
Mr. McKernon said that Mr. Brown is right on that.
There were a lot of votes on this last one that were voting not the issue
but voting personality or whatever, but not the issue.
The issue is spending $400,000.00 on a derelict building.
Ms. Saunders thought it was interesting that there was a truck at the
polls encouraging people to vote no, to keep it downtown.
However that individual had encouraged people to vote no when they had
downtown issues. So there seems to
be some conflict or change in people’s minds.
Mr. Baker said that he doesn’t understand the confusion.
They want the offices downtown, they want to own it not have a
condominium and they don’t want to spend anything on it!
Mr. McKernon said that he wants to put something to rest.
People were concerned that the McKernon Group was making so much money on
this. He wants everyone to know
that the McKernon Group won’t be bidding on any of these new proposals,
they’re doing fine where they are and won’t be refurbishing anything.
He’s willing as a board member to help wherever he can for free.
Mr. Mazza said that it has been frustrating for the Board as well as the
public, but has the Board ever sat down at a special meeting with nothing else
on the agenda and discussed this in depth?
They’ve had so many proposals now that he can’t believe the
townspeople would not support a municipal building.
Anyone who has been in that building with any common sense at all knows
that we need a new building. He
strongly suggests that the Board start fresh with a special meeting to discuss
this issue.
Ms. Saunders said the Board didn’t, but that’s why the Space Needs
Committee was appointed and they did do that.
The tried to stay out of it so it wouldn’t look like a favorite of the
Board or a Board project. They wanted more public input.
Mr. Mazza has a great deal of respect for this Board and he feels this is
one of their responsibilities.
Mr. McKernon said he has had to keep his mouth shut for 2 ½ years
because he had a conflict and he salutes what Mr. Mazza is saying.
He has the experience to give the Board or the town some direction,
whether they wish to take the direction or not.
He doesn’t have a business involvement in it and is here to help.
Ms. Saunders said it will be on the next agenda and they will spend some
time on it.
Mr. McKernon asked how much time do they have to come up with a decision
for this vote, there is a period isn’t there?
Mr. Balch said that if it’s non-binding it’s just a matter of getting
things printed up. He will check with Bill on that in case there is a clearance
needed from the State.
11)
Old/Other Business
Mr. Baker said that on May 13th he mentioned that per Vermont
Statutes they should have replaced the vacancy for auditor.
He hasn’t seen it advertised.
Mr. Balch and Mr. Torrey said that it was in one of the local papers.
Mr. Baker said that he would like to hear from Mr. Racine or someone in
the near future about the timeline for Brandon to become a designated downtown.
Also in a meting in January he mentioned that the lower end of Carver
Street form the Church down is in very poor condition.
The fire district voted to have a new water main on the lower end of the
street it might make sense to coordinate some repairs with that.
He would like to hear a little about that at some point in time.
He asked Mr. Brown when the revised land use map could be expected.
Mr. Brown said that they meet the third Monday of every month so it will
be on the agenda for the 15th and that’s all he knows right now.
Mr. Balch said that they had a note in their packets regarding
implementing charges for computer disposal at the transfer station.
The town would like to adopt these changes with the Board’s permission.
Mr. Baker said that the note in their packet doesn’t match what was in
the Rutland herald a week ago. He
said that 5 cents a pound is not a Rutland County Solid Waste District charge,
they charge so much per component and so much per a whole system.
He thinks they ought to charge exactly what RCSWD would charge the town.
Motion by Baker/Brown to adopt the same charge that the Rutland
County Solid Waste District charges for computer systems and components.
Passed unanimously.
Mr. Balch said that the fuel bids have come in and Mr. Rounds is
recommending that Keith’s fixed price be adopted.
Mr. Baker asked if there was a balance remaining from this year.
Mr. Balch said there was and if they were to go with Keith they would get
that balance paid back to. Keith’s
does not currently have the bid; Whelden currently has it and would give the
town the money.
Mr. Baker asked if the bid from Keith was based on payment up front?
Mr. Balch said it is half and half.
Mr. Rounds said the same scenario as last year.
Motion by Baker/Torrey to buy the diesel to include the 3% from
the winter additive and the #2 heating fuel oil from Keith’s at the rates of
93 and 86 cents respectively. Passed
unanimously.
Mr. Brown said that there was a memo from Anna Scheck in their packets
regarding wheelchair ramps and he wanted to comment on it.
He said that the charge was for the Planning Commission to look into the
issue of wheelchair ramps and variances and the whole scenario.
Presently the way the Planning Commission read it is, and there has only
been one case where it has been an issue, that anything that does not meet a set
back has to have a variance and in this case the ramp was too close to the
neighbors property so it didn’t meet setback requirements so
they
had to have a variance which they were given.
In his discussion with Mr. Balch, it’s quite understandable that if
someone needs a ramp they don’t want to wait 30 days for it because they need
to start building right away. The
assumption was they could allow the Code Enforcement Officer to give approval
for this ramp with the understanding that it still needs to go before the board
for a variance for whatever condition. They
were striving for an interpretation of whether that is in fact legal.
If something requires a variance that only the Zoning Board can give, is
giving the authority to someone else legal.
Or they could put in the land use ordinance that handicap accessible
ramps are exempt from land use ordinances, but they aren’t sure if that can
legally be done.
Mr. Torrey said that is the right direction, but he would suggest putting
it on residential and not commercial.
Mrs. Scheck said that if it is put under review when someone fills out an
application they don’t have to wait 15 days, but there is documentation in
that file that it was reviewed. If
they just remove it then there is nothing in file that the addition is even on
the house.
Ms. Saunders doesn’t understand how someone can convert a whole piece
of their house into an apartment for a handicapped or elderly person by state
law without a permit, but a wheelchair access ramp has to go through all of
this.
Mr. Brown said that it doesn’t unless it doesn’t meet the setback.
Ms. Saunders understands that, but in the instance of the apartment for
these people.
Mr. Brown said that Brandon ordinances don’t address any interior work
on a house; there is no building code.
Ms. Saunders said that they do have a rental code and it is exempt from
the rental code.
Mr. Brown said that the simple thing is to exempt those things. What
happens when you get a variance is that it’s conditional that when it is no
longer needed it has to be removed, because it is infringing on the neighbor.
He said that he’s not going to champion this cause one way or the
other.
Mr. Baker said that the most common sense thing to do is to allow the
Code Enforcement Officer upon receipt of an application, grant a conditional
improvement. That way there is
documentation in file and one of the conditions ought to be that the ramp is
removed when no longer needed.
Mr. Brown said that it works except that the only one that can give a
variance is the Zoning Board, but he has to look into this further.
Ms. Saunders said to put this to next meeting after Mr. Brown has
researched it more.
Mr. Balch said that another thing that he would like to see happen as
part of the process is that we give people guidelines on how to build a safe
ramp, not that they are going to inspect it.
He has seen some pretty dangerous ramps built.
Mr. Baker said that he went through the last few papers since May 13th
and didn’t see the ad for auditor. Obviously
if it was advertised they didn’t get a big turn out.
Now
that Mr. Racine has been hired as Administrative Assistant and was appointed as
Code Enforcement Officer, there is a vacancy on the Zoning Board of Adjustment,
so they should advertise for that as well.
Mr. Balch said that he is in the middle of some cases and the Zoning
Board would like to have his participation through the completion of those
cases.
Mr. Baker said that the risk is that it jeopardizes the outcome in the
event that one or more of the parties question his participation in the case.
Mr. Balch has not found anything in the statutes that indicates this is
not right. He will call the
Secretary of State.
Mr. Baker said that two residents have asked him about Richmond Road
between Peter Breen’s house to Town Farm Road.
It is terribly rough and needs to be looked at.
Mr. Rounds said that it is scheduled to be taken care of tomorrow.
Mr. Brown asked if that should have been handled by him asking Bruce that
in the office earlier in the day? Is
it appropriate to bring simple things like this up at these meetings?
Mr. Baker said that Mr. Rounds has been on vacation for two weeks.
He asked Mr. Brown when they are going to get the tower ordinance?
Mr. Brown said that it was approved by the Planning Commission and
doesn’t know what the procedure is.
Mr. Baker said that they can adopt the ordinance and then the chewing
period starts in case someone wants to have a hearing.
Mr. Balch will check into it.
Mr. McKernon wanted to make sure they all had his memo in their packets
regarding what Janet Mondlak had alluded to at the last meeting.
They all have the answer in his memo.
Mr. Rounds said that he contacted AOT today regarding the bids for
Sanderson Bridge. Bids were supposed to go out the 14th didn’t go
out until the 21st and the low bidder is from Morrisville at
$827,740.90 which may save the town some $18,613.00.
12)
Adjournment – Motion by Torrey/McKernon to adjourn at 9:10 p.m.
Passed unanimously.
Respectfully
Submitted:
Luanne
J. Merkert
Recording
Clerk
Brandon Board of Sewer Commissioners Meeting – June 24,
2002
NOTE:
These are unapproved minutes, subject to amendment and/or approval at the
subsequent board meeting.
Attendance:
Lynn Saunders, Chair, Ken Torrey, Vice Chair, Jack McKernon, Bruce Brown
and Richard Baker.
Also in attendance:
Michael Balch, Roy Newton, Frank Farnsworth, Frank Mazza, Steve Cijka, Mei Mei
Brown, Bette Moffett, Terry Kline, Bill Hatch, Ed Barna, Anna Scheck, Bruce
Rounds and Bob Kilpeck.
1)
Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair, Lynn
Saunders.
2)
Discussion of Wastewater Budget for FY02/03
Mr. Balch said that they just got the volume numbers for the second half
so they just know what the revenue was as of last Tuesday.
They learned what the revenue was for the second half of the fiscal year
so they were better able to see where they were at and where they were headed. He said that it looks like they will come out within
$5,000.00 of income and revenue being in balance, which is something that
hasn’t occurred in several years; that’s the good news.
The new budget has one less employee in it, so that has reduced expenses
from three employees to two. Still,
to meet what they believe to be the minimum budget, they will need a 50cent
increase from $6.26 to $6.76 in order to fund this budget.
Mr. Baker said that he just doesn’t understand this.
They were promised years ago as the Training School was brought on line,
that the income stream from the new users would offset increases in operating
cost and that they would be able to hold the rate steady, if not drop it. He doesn’t understand why they are looking at another
increase in the rate.
Mr. Balch said that the volume level for the past three years has had no
increase in use.
Mr. McKernon said to look around the grounds there; it’s still not
full.
Mrs. Saunders said that the facility is old and they are working on
upgrading it, so that cost is going up, but the revenue stream is not keeping up
even with the new amount of gallons coming from the Training School.
Mr. Balch said that the volume for the past three years within six
percent has been constant, this year they are up a little bit from last year.
One of the things that has been worked on is Steve has worked on a 20
year plan and they did an estimate on what the cost would be to address the
requirements in the 20 year plan. They
have some pumps that are ancient, some that aren’t OSHA approved and must be
replaced and there’s one or two that are system critical that are 25 to 30
years old and they don’t have backups for them.
There are things that need to be done now and there are things that
should be done in order to comply with what ANR would like.
He said that Mr. Cijka has done a rough estimate of that and the cost to
bring everything that has been identified by the engineers or by ANR up to speed
would be about 1.2 million dollars. If
they were to fund that in the open market it would add about $3.00 to the rate.
Even if they got a zero interest rate loan from the environmental
revolving loan fund, it would still be about $1.50 added to the rate.
Obviously that would be catastrophic.
As catastrophic as that is, there is one town in the state that is at
$10.50; we’re in the pack, but at the high end of the pack.
We’re within the standard deviation of the mean, but near the cusp of
it.
Mr. Baker asked if the budget is $6,000.00 less than last year, why is
there a need for the 50 cent increase in the rate?
Mr. Balch said that it is because the spending was significantly less
than the budget, if it weren’t they would have been in the red. The revenue
was significantly less, because the volume was less than predicted.
Mr. Baker asked what the projected revenue was based on new information
that Mr. Balch says he got last week and not based on something that was
estimated a year ago. All they have
is a budget on the revenue and expenditures, no actuals and here it is 6 days
from the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. Balch said again that they just got the numbers last Tuesday.
He said that $393,000.00 was revenue and expenses are $5,000.00 less.
Mr. Baker said that is close to what is budgeted.
They were able to budget $393,000.00 in revenues and they are going to
obtain almost that in revenues and $6.26 per 1000 gallons and the budget for
next year is $386,200.00, why do they need an increase of 50 cents?
Mr. Balch apologized saying that he gave him the wrong figure and
didn’t have the correct one with him. The
revenue and expense are $5,000.00
apart, he originally thought they were significantly under budget and is
something that happens every year. The
capital expenses don’t hit the income statement so when you get to the end of
the year they have to be journalized over after year-end.
He thought he brought the folder with the correct numbers, but apparently
grabbed the wrong one, therefore can’t give them how the budget numbers worked
out. He said that they are significantly under budget.
Mr. McKernon asked what the sewer capacity is at this point.
Mr. Balch said that it is 700,000 gallons a day and they are at roughly
50% of capacity.
Mr. McKernon said that if they had businesses coming into the area it
could handle it.
Mr. Baker said that he thinks that Mr. Cijka is doing a great job at the
sewer plant. He recognizes that one
of the consequences of putting meters on water lines was that people stopped
using water extravagantly and that makes less input to the system.
One thing that they have talked about several times when they get to this
point when they want to have a budget at the last minute at the end of June and
they have always said lets do it next year; he thinks this is the year.
He thinks it would be helpful to get the sewer plant into a cycle that
the revenues were in the same fiscal year as the rest of the town, rather than
having everything falling over in July. He
doesn’t know if this can be done this year, but it should be done one of these
years.
Mr. Balch said that they are at the mercy of the water district, because
that is where they get their data.
Mr. Baker said that he would encourage more than the 15 or 20 people that
come to the annual fire district meeting to do something about that.
His last question regarding the budget was the item that said redone
6-20-02 that was a jump from $750.00 to $11,271.00 on outside maintenance
buildings.
Mr. Balch said that is the green building.
Mr. Baker said that it wasn’t, it was the line above that.
Mr. Balch said that it is the green building.
Mr. Cijka said that outside maintenance of buildings and maintenance
supplies of buildings has to do with the green garage that needs to be
winterized and be able to use, because sometimes the garage that houses the
flushing machine and a lot of the small equipment is ready to fall down because
of the sill. The sill was put right
on a cement slab and has since sunk down and is rotting.
So they need to fix one building or the other.
That money for the outside maintenance of buildings was for contractors
to come in and do some of the things they can’t do or don’t have the time to
do especially now that they only have two men.
They put that off until conditions are more favorable.
Mr. Balch said that the original budget as Steve had requested it had a
$1.12 increase in it. It had about $40,000.00 for repairs to that building and they
felt they had to cut that back to something more in line with what could be
carried. That is the work that
needs to be done; it will just be done over a longer period of time.
Ms. Saunders asked if he was expecting action tonight?
Mr. Balch said he would like direction.
Do they want to get bills out? As
he said, they just got the meter readings on Tuesday so they are getting that
ready to go. He will put in an
e-mail tomorrow so they and the press will have what the revenue and expense was
for the prior year. If he recalls
correctly, it was close to $30,000.00 under the regular budget.
Mr. McKernon said that regarding what Mr. Baker said about getting this
budget in with the rest of the town; would there need to an 18 month budget at
one point.
Mr. Balch said that it’s a matter of cash flow that Richard is talking
about not budget. The way the
accounting works on this, it hits the town budget at year-end so it goes over
into next year, but it is held as an account receivable.
Anything that is received on it within 60 days is considered current
income, it’s backdated; that’s the way fiscal accounting works for a town.
From a financial point of view, it is in sync already; it’s just the
cash flows that go from year to year. It
makes it a little harder to do the accounting, but when the auditors come in
September that is one of the things they do. They prove to them that they have balanced it back to
year-end and all of the revenues of the first 60 days on the new fiscal year on
this year’s bills get backdated into it.
He said from Mr. Baker’s point of view, say they sent out bills of
$168,000.00 and maybe after 60 days 10,000.00 is still outstanding, that would
be delinquent and it would be that much less cash. They are considering that
they are getting paid for all of that. They
know what they got paid for the first billing, but they don’t know what it
will be for the second. It’s more
of a bookkeeping issue and cash flow. They
do end up needing to borrow money to fund these things.
Ms. Saunders asked if he had enough direction.
Mr. Balch said he needs to prove to the board that they need what he says
they do. He and Mr. Cijka are
convinced of it and he will e-mail them the numbers that he believes will
convince them of it. He will look
into the details regarding what kind of billings they are getting out of Park
Village and will put that in the e-mail as well.
Assuming that those numbers are correct, and he can assure them that in
the end they will agree they are correct, do they want to go forward with this
budget? They don’t want to
overspend their revenue. If this is the budget they are going to approve and this is
the budget that he and Mr. Cijka recommend, do they want to go forward with it
or do they want to change what they are doing.
The board was all in agreement to have Mr. Balch move forward with the
budget as presented.
3)
Adjournment – Motion by Torrey/McKernon to adjourn at 7:20 p.m.
Passed unanimously.
Respectfully
Submitted:
Luanne
J. Merkert
Recording
Clerk
| 