TranscriptSelect Board Meeting ~ December 9, 2025

Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] order here on the 9th of December at 6:30. We have a quorum. We begin with the pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All righty. Um, call the order at 6:30. We have a quorum. Do we have any amendments to the agenda? public comment? Yeah. Julia, do I come up here? Uh, you can sit anywhere. Sit here as long as the camera should be able to hear you. Just let us know who you are and where you're from.

Yeah, Juliet Paplinger. Um, 136 here in Durham. I'm here uh just to express my support for the speed study and I think you're going to be talking about it today. Um, the accident that happened, the fatality was horrible. I live on 136. I live pretty close to where um that person died. Um, it's it's horrible. The traffic there is horrible. I have to take my trash across the street. Um, and it's very very dangerous. And I actually just learned yesterday that we aren't supposed to be crossing the street for trash reasons. So that's a whole another topic, but um, super dangerous in that. So I'm in the 50 No. Yeah. 50 mile per hour zone and then it changes to 40. So super super big supporter here of that speed. Amazing. That's it.

Thank you. Thanks, Juliet. We appreciate that. Before Juliet leaves, if I may, Mr. Chair, I'd like to thank her. She is the vice chair of the planning board and the chair of the I won't call it the garbage committee, the solid woods committee. [laughter]

Yeah. And I'm not leaving actually. I'm Oh, perfect. Thanks. Well, thank you, Juliet. We appreciate that you're involved at many levels and even with public comment. It's really important. All right. Uh, do I have a motion to approve the meeting minutes from November 18th?

So moved. All right. Do I have a second? All right. Uh, any uh discussion on the motion? Any questions? All in favor? Any opposition? Seeing none. All right. Uh, old business. So, you might have all seen on the um email that our HR consultant is

sick. And so, I actually appreciate that people don't show up and get me sick when they're sick, right? And so that's appreciative even though it's a tough scheduling. Um, you know, I did want to keep all this stuff on the agenda, too, so we could at least have some discussion about it. We could uh save our questions and maybe email them to Betsy if we if we have any or so she can next time she comes kind of be up to speed. Uh, I think Jerry and I can explain pretty many elements of of what we need to discuss so we can at least uh get the ball rolling. So Jerry, do you want to start us here with the uh beginning of the discussion?

The we get the retirement plans. Okay. Uh cash in lie of health insurance. We've already talked about that. So we don't need to talk about it again. That's just kind of in the in the back of our minds and then the wage table. So

okay. So yeah, I will. Thank you. So what you have in front of us, so let me back up first. So the reason why we're discussing this is that again the employment the policy employee manual is open and that's full of policies. You are the policy developers. Okay. And we implement the policy. So a lot of you probably wouldn't know what was in this employee handbook unless I brought it to your attention and what it really means. Okay? So that's why we're looking at this. So what you're looking at right here is retirement, our retirement plan. Okay. And 24, this is the contributions that the employer made, not employee contributions. 2025, although it really should say 2026, [clears throat] this is where we are to date. So the policy discussion that you have to have or you don't have to have it but why I'm bringing it to your attention is the retirement plan that you all are on now through MMA.

Well, not we're not on but the staff are on the staff are on um they get no colas after retirement. So they also have a plan where they would get colas at retirement. So keep in mind that their retirement is their social security because they do not pay into social security. So if you have employees that work there for many years, when they retire, they get no coolers. So you know, is that the way you want to keep it? So I'm just making you aware of it. If you like it, you don't have to change it. But this is the first time I've heard of an employer, and I'm sure they're out there, that don't offer retirement plans that don't have COLA associated with them. Now, that's different than like a uh a Roth retirement account or an IRA. This is their retirement period,

not a count that they set up on their own, which we have. We have a 457 plan that they can opt into where the employer contributes nothing. It's just all on that. So that's a policy. It's an AC and an A. The difference between the two,

what do you see when you say AC versus A? Sorry. I think ones I'm not Oh, those are the two different plans. AC the two different plans. So the difference between them varies year by year, but it only varies between like one and 2%.

That's of the employer cost. Yes. Okay. and and and you know like and that cost is also going to get passed on to the employee. So the whole cost Yeah. because it it increases it but allows them to close. Now Betsy could probably explain it a little bit better because she deals with this stuff all the time. But that's the gist of this. So the policy discussion is do you want to offer retirement with colas or not?

Mhm. Or do you want to keep it the same? Does anyone have any questions? I have some questions, but I want to let other folks go first. So, does anyone have any questions for Jerry? So, you said the increase to the taxpayer is going to be 1 to 2% of

over the plan that doesn't. Okay. So, so for this number 2025, the employer contributions to date is 59,61. So, you're talking 1 to 2% above that. Yeah. Yep. The whole plan. The whole thing. So one and two% above the whole thing which is going to increase your cost and the employees cost.

It's not just a cost pass to the employer. It's a cost. It's it's the whole plan, right? Just like insurance is an 8020 when it goes up. We still pay 8020 but everybody pays. So it go ahead John. Well, I just sort of to uh help the understand this I don't need to answer tonight, but so our in the 2025 data, it's roughly $60,000. So the increase over that would be $600 at 1%

1,200 at 2%. I'm talking about the towns and then the employees are going to have I don't want to get into like what it equates to, okay? I just want to let you know that the difference between the two plans can be anywhere between one and two. This coming year it's 1.2%.

Mhm. I'm I don't want to get into like that's what this is going to be and that's going to be because I don't want to be held accountable to that number sometime down the road some point in time. I think it would be good to know what we're adding to the

the cost of the program. Well, so real quick, this this figure right here 59601 is to date, not the total year. That's right. And so 24 was $70,477.78. which is a little less than employee. Good. Um, and so it sounds to me like it would be a 1 to 2% increase on the employer contribution

cost, but that cost might be different this year. I'm just trying to get a ballpark because if they I like the idea, but what's it going to cost? It's is and every year it's going to be different. No, I understand. Yeah.

But but every year it doesn't go much above 2%. Is that what you're saying? Just to clarify. Right. They said that's what the difference was. And like, you know, you can't I mean, you can get into those into the weeds of those numbers, but it will depend on how many employees you have. Like this year, we don't have we didn't have a lot of public uh public works employees. So, that changes it drastically because they weren't paying into the system. And so, that overall number down here is is a lot different.

Oh, thank you, Jeff. So, that's lower. Yeah. No, I mean I'm just trying to get a ballpark figure to say, you know, 700,000 or 1,500 bucks. So, I think it'd be a good It's not $7,000 to the town or $70,000 to the town. It's

roughly, you know, under under $200,000 given historical numbers. Mhm. And so one thing I do want to clarify for anyone watching or even if the board members aren't aware, um unlike you know private retirement funds, the uh town

staff are on a fixed uh p fixed benefit pension. I don't know exactly how that number is crafted or calculated for the town staff. Know a lot of pensions is your best three years divided by uh and you get 50% of that. So your average best three years, 50% of that is what you get without a cost of living adjustment. That number would never change. Um, so that's why I think uh the

HR or Betsy had brought this to us as something to discuss because you know one thing I know Josh you had mentioned a while back is when we're going through all these policies and thinking about employment at the time there's a lot of different places where we can make assess the uh the total benefits package you know and I think that this is an important place to talk about um

the municipal government. Like Jerry said, once you are in the pension system, you no longer are paying into social security. So, it becomes your only uh source of retirement. Unlike um you know, social security that is supposed to get cost of living adjustments or things like a 401k which are tied to market performance, they're stuck with one number the rest of their uh their retirement. So, for me, you know, and we don't have to have a vote on this tonight. This is just talking about the process. I'm strongly in favor of this um right off the bat because I think that that cost of living adjustment is an important component of a retirement. So um I would have a little bit more questions for Betsy that I can, you know, craft. Mostly I'm wondering just out of curiosity for my own edification how the the how the fixed benefit number is calculated. Um, are we a 25 years plus a minimum retirement age uh policy or is it just

25 years of of service? Those are sort of five years vested. Yeah. But to get the full pension, usually you have to meet the minimum uh a 25 year mark. In in some pensions, you also have to be 65. So, I'm just curious about those sorts of details. Um, not that it's a a deal breaker either way for I'm just kind of curious and I can email you those questions to ask Betsy.

Okay, that'd be great. Yeah. And if we don't get them from Betsy, we'll talk to MMA. Y the main trust actually. Is it through main pers or MMA? Main pur is so it's really the same thing that yarn. Yeah. Probably. Yeah. If you're into the main state,

I remember watching a training video on it. And and staff have don't have to opt in to the pension. Yeah. Yes, some places you can choose not to opt in, but I thought I recall that you have to here, right? Because we didn't sign a 218 agreement. So, um, without that, they would have an option to pay into social security and they could have both, but that's not the case here right now.

And so, my other question for Betsy would be, how does this impact people who are already vested under a plan that doesn't have a COLA? How is that going to impact their retirement if we then switch now? Do they get caught up or does it have not

will start from that period that they're on. So the first number that or years they have in retirement will stay with no colar and it'll be moving. So it'll be a little bit more complex um for them to figure out. Yeah. But in theory if they stick around for full career and get a new top three.

Yeah. I'm just doing some math out loud. Anyways, but do we have any other questions for Jerry? I I to me this is a better idea of employee retention than I think some of the other options we've discussed. Yeah. Uh I think it's more feasible for the town. I think uh it's going to have benefit more people. Um, and you know what I would like to see is, you know, when you're putting the budget together is the number with this, without this. Um, just to cuz just just so we can say we I mean just we need to see it because there's two different ways to calculate it.

Okay. With with this, right? Unless you're trying to opt in right now. No, we won't none of this will take a place until after July 1st. Right. Mhm. Right. So, okay. I mean, I think I think we need to do our due diligence and see the numbers.

Can I ask a question? Would the numbers change your policy decision? It depends on I mean it could. Okay. So, so for me it wouldn't change my vote at 1 to 2% difference and for this for when I'm thinking about the what I think is important need that's not going to change my vote. So I don't need to see that number but if we are have additional discussions about total compensation and stuff that's something that we could maybe before the budget at least get a just that line of hey this is what it looked like based off current projections and stuff. I do I just want to just I mean don't fall out of your chair. I'm going to agree with you but like

at this point chances are yes we are all going to agree with it but doing the due diligence and I'm sorry for the extra leg of work showing the town that we are actually looking at the numbers it just makes common sense to say that okay we are looking at every single thing and making sure that this is the right move no matter And if people want to see that number, it's fine. I was just saying when Jerry asked if it would make change your mind. I'm saying for me it wouldn't, but if we want to see that, that's totally fine.

Yeah, I get that. And in the grand scheme of things is a drop in the bucket for the budget. But still, I think for me to say yes to something that's going to be an ongoing increase. So, it's going to increase one 1.2% this year, and then it's going to be another 1 to 2% on top of that next year, and then on the next year, and the next year, and the next year, the next year, and the next year.

Wow. Eventually it gets closer to the seven $10,000 increase over the course of years, right? So will it cumulative increase? Yes. But not so so will it will it necessarily affect my decision? No. But I think I have an obligation to the taxpayers to say I want to see it this year and

okay, let me just explain though the numbers will change. So, I could give you the numbers for this budget, but next year could be completely different and it could be different from the time July 1st gets here to the number that I give you during budget season. So,

and not by much. But I think what's important to me is that it's 700 what I forget what was to 2,000 versus 7,000. I mean, well, that that's not going to be the difference though. I mean, but I mean, at least we can say that. So, somebody says, "Well, wait a minute. you're increasing, but it's it's I mean, this is it looks to me like a total of 15. Let's just run it up to $2,00

which is pay four people an extra $2,000 each. So, to me, this is this is a very good benefit for employees at a much cheaper cost than some of the others we've looked at. So just keep in mind you're you're [clears throat] looking at the taxes. So you're looking at your constituents, but you're also an employer after for your staff.

I was going to ask Deb, did you have you have to balance that? Did you have anything you had that I'll try and crunch the numbers? I'll get somebody to do it cuz I I'm not, you know, a ROM level. ROMs are normally 40% plus or minus, but I think a ballpark number on a on a piece of paper. We we should have that. We should be able to explain that.

I'm actually in favor of this as well. I think it's important for us, you know, when we think about goals and objectives for our select board. We need to take care of our employees, right? and for the minimal amount of impact that this may have on the finance line. Um, it's

we also need to cons I hear what we're saying, but we also need to consider the people who voted for us and the constituents. I mean, understand that we we want to do good things for employees because we got a good bunch of people,

but we need to at least say we had the information to make the decision. Agree. Agreed. Definitely. I agree. a good way to just a good thing to keep in mind here. Um, you know, so I think what we got to do here is just have Jerry when he's working on his budget for uh him and Mark and the department heads are all sitting down and figuring out what uh personnel budget's going to be. Um, it sounds like once you have that number, but even before we get our packets, it could just be a heads up because I'd like to vote on this policy before the packet gets created, the budget packet gets created. And when you're in those preliminary parts, it's just, hey, here was our contribution at this current level. It's an increase of 1.2%. So when I look at last year, if we had voted on this in 2023 to go into our 2024 budget, we're talking $1,500 difference for the staff. And yeah, that extrapolates because then

this year it's $1,500 different than what it would have been. And any sort of percentage increase anywhere is going to be extrapolated over the the indefinitely. Um, the number I'm kicking around in my head, like you said, John, is this seems to have about a a fiscal impact of about $2,000 annually

this year. Uh and and for me the thought there is it this seems like a really good bang for the buck because I it whether there's a cost of living adjustment as part of a pension when for me would be an important decision for where I work especially if I can do the same job down the road and and get that. Uh and so that's a pretty big uh I think return on investment in terms of retention stuff for us and that's where my mind's going with this. Um, and when I think about, you know, fiscally responsible things, I think this is one of our best buys for our bucks for a retention uh, lever personally. And so, we don't have to vote on this tonight and we can get additional information, but I think it's a good to have this conversation much like we had the the cash and loot conversation. So,

I'll pull it off. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I I don't disagree with you, but the reason I want to see more is because you're saying it's capped at 1 to 2%. Is that in writing or is that is that histo what it's historically been? I don't know that stuff. And so that's that's that's the reason.

Okay. Fine. Yep. Y but I think somebody does whether it be Betsy or the the fund they say our annual increase over time has been 1% 3%. It's 1%. It's 1.2 this coming year. Even better seems so low for such difference of a benefit. I think part of that is because the money in your pension system is invested, but so on the years that it's doing better then then and you're not getting any of that benefit. They can backfill where they need. So the p the benefit of the pension is that we're you're not going to have the boom and bust style cycle. You're going to be consistent, but I would be willing to bet that the pension managers come out a little ahead enough to make it work that way. So

without losing a lot of money unless they're betting on Bitcoin. And then uh there's uh other mechanisms to build liquidity in pensions too that aren't always available to market driven accounts. So um cool. So if people could

summarize to Jerry any questions they have tonight via email one-on-one to him just so it's in writing that I think that'd be helpful. Um, and so my hope is we're going to go through all these things and talk about them individually like we talked about the one last meeting and this one this couple this meeting and then once we have all those bits and pieces we can sit down and say yay or nay kind of on a slate of these so we can have all of those numbers in mind. So um I don't feel the need to

talk about cash and loo again because I I got all my questions answered last time. Are we are folks good for us to just move into a discussion on the wage table or does anyone have additional questions about cash and l wage table Jerry?

Yeah. So this wage table that and I put together was about as fast as we could come up with. Uh so basic did you guys look at it and read the notes and everything so you understand how it works? Yep. All right. So basically each step is 4%.

What we do is we look at the first year of uh employment for the most part here and these are the starting wages and every every uh step it's 4%. When they get so when they get the 4% year after year they do not get a colar on top of it. that is their annual increase. Once their wage gets above the step eight, then it's going to be colas after that point. But that'll be up to you folks to decide what that colar adjustment is. Um,

so this is and these are still relatively lower than your uh competitors, but uh when you look at what other folks are paying, I I just don't know what your appetite is for a starting agent, what you're willing to pay. Um, so this this is about as good as it get. You can change we can change it. You don't have to adopt it. We'll just have to figure out how we go from there. But this gives everybody where we're at. It's easier to budget. We know what to anticipate, especially after this year because there needs to be some adjustments made with your with some of the pay in this. [snorts] I mean, for instance, public works especially. So, if you look at these public works uh starting pay, I had to bring um the pay up to that $25

an hour just to get people here. Mhm. And we have people at public works that have been here eight and 10 years that aren't even close to the 8 to 10 year mark. Mhm. So, that's where we're at with with with the pay. Um, and I was going to make it part of my manager's report, but I'll tell you right now, the last person that we hired at public works has already given us two weeks notice.

The one you just that we just just hired. Yep. Doesn't want to do it. So, so now we're down an employee again. So, right before snow season. So, it's difficult. Okay. So, I think, you know, the starting wage here is okay. I I really do because when I look up on MMA and I look at the starting wages for truck drivers, laborers, pot trucks, it's it's right in that ballpark. I mean, it could be another dollar or so, but uh it's it's where your employees are now are significantly paid less for the experience in the years that they've been been here.

So, I just share that with you. I mean, I don't And then over here to the right, each step, you know, one one. So like if you look at down at public works the truck driver labor at year one that's his annual salary two annual salary. So that's how you can see what the annual salaries are based on

years of experience. So that's how a wage table works. It's whether you want to adopt the economy. That's the policy discussion. So for me, I think wage tables are really valuable because it there's a reason why most government agencies have wage tables. Um it's transparency for the staff, transparency for the taxpayers, and um it helps us plan. And I think one big thing that this board has been really big on and Jerry has been really big on is trying to better extrapolate expenses. So like things like the capital improvement of like laying it out like this is what it's going to be every year. um you know trying to get better with those sorts of things. So the without even mentioning the numbers I really like a wage table and I will just say I think I really appreciate Jerry the amount of work you and Betsy put into this because this is a lot to come up with. So uh does anyone have any questions for Jerry about the concept of

a wage table or or any of these um any of these figures or anything that they might want to see uh for more information? I have I have a comment and a question. I also am in favor of wage tables. I think it is the right thing to do. Um, if this were to be implemented, would all the employees today be reviewed on their year and some get a substantial increase? Um,

no. If once they No, these are annual increases based on s their their um years of service, right? This doesn't get these these are not tied to reviews, right? But if I'm an employee and I've been here for five years and I'm making less than the number in the five column,

will I get an increase to match this number on the wage table when if this is implemented? Yes. And some people are going to have to see this is where it gets tricky and that's why I don't want you all getting into the weeds of it. Okay. um someone on public works, they're already off the table

in terms of their number of experience. Yeah. For their but not the wage. In terms of their experience, they're off the table. Yeah. They're they have more than eight years of experience and they have more eight years of working for Durham.

Mhm. So they would be even off the table. So there is absolutely no way I can bring them up to like the eight level or off the table because my head would be hunted and so would yours because it would be significantly increased and I don't think you want to go that high. I think you just want to look at this as a policy discussion and then I will work with my employees and you will see their full-time wages and the full-time wages benefit long full-time wages line in the budget

that will reflect where they land and where I think we can put them. Yeah. Because without without increasing the budget like way too much because that's how significantly Okay. So then the answer is no, right? You're not just going to arbitrarily take each person based on their years of service and plug their wage in based on the table. You're going to have a

So my my some will some will be there, but some others won't. It's not a it's not a black and white. So So you're saying that when we adopt if we were to adopt this the fir it's not saying all right the new policy is just tell me how many years you've been here and that's the number you start at. There is going to be some element of moving forward. We have this wage table, but I know you've been here for seven years, but you might be starting at three, taking into consideration your current salary, the new wage table, all those sorts of things.

Yeah. because it'd be a scary number if everyone just started at exactly the year that this wage table reflects because I think this wage table also from what you're saying makes some of the necessary adjustments to get the whole classification into a better uh more competitive but kind of middle of the rung compensation.

Yeah, we want to be careful. It's it's it's difficult here because everybody knows who's in these positions but you can't talk about these people. So it's it's uh you know let's be careful how we talk about it that's all. So a question though also because of cost of living and how that will necessarily affect it down the line in is there

is there room for not manipulation but is there room for like are there other things that can be taken into consideration such as cost of living to increase I mean can we revisit it? I can answer that. Jerry, I thought about this a lot and so I think about as someone who sits in a wage table job. Um,

with these being 4%, you know, on a good year, most years we would expect a 3% roughly cost of living adjustment. So, this should capture your COLA and give you just a little maybe 1% more purchasing power. And I think what with the wage tables what normally happens is they sit static for a while and then periodically the administration that oversees them says maybe it's time to reevaluate that. So at least in the state side it's that's when our like union would say hey the wage table's no longer relevant. You're only bringing us up 3% a year and inflation's been 5% a year for the last 3 years. So I think that if we were to adopt something like this, one of the policies would be subject to periodic review from the select board because if we adopt this and for the next four years it's 6% inflation. Yeah.

Oh, it says that it's very slow. Well, it's hard because this is a big but it's also important that we say it out loud here. I think it's a really good because I didn't see it. Thank you either. Um, but like if we get three years down the road and everything still looks hunky dory, it's like nope, no need to to adjust it. You know,

really small print. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. And I, you know, and I just want to make a point that some people may think, especially for the folks at home, that these like are mayor increases and they're and they're not like or they're not based on reviews. Um, I just want everybody to know if there's a problem with somebody's work performance that gets addressed long before it's time to give them a annual raise. We deal with it at the time and we document it and we keep documenting it and if they continue to have per performance, there's ways that we deal with it. We don't use money to leverage their performance. Mhm.

Okay. Eric, um, any other questions? Yeah, I do. Sorry. So, if I understand this, what if this is adopted, Jerry will then say, Joel, you're a five, Sally, you're a six, whatever it may be. Um, are the moves to the next step annual? Is that just an automatic? You put in another year. So we won't be dealing. So what we're going to have is cost of living plus or or minus depending what the cost of living is. But every year is going to be a 4% if you follow this. Every year of service is going to add 4% to your salary.

Mhm. Or so it could be more, could be less if Well, if we follow this, it's only 4%. unless we make uh until people get to step eight and then after that it would be a cost of living adjustment and we would still have to approve that cola annually. So, um if if we go get to our budget next year and there's no one who's moving past eight, Jerry doesn't have to ask us what we're approving for COLA. But if it's like, all right, we've got enough people, we've got people who are moving past eight into year nine. What's the cola that you are all adopting?

Cola is not a concern till you go past level eight. Yes, correct. And you're guaranteed at least a 4% increase annually for the first eight steps. Yes. Eight steps. Yeah. Okay. And depending on the financial situation of times, I mean, we see this in other state agencies, sometimes there is no cola. If money's really tight and you know, the the top end people might not get a cost of living adjustment because you're saying you're already kind of max out at your wage. It's the we're in a budgetary period where we can't do colas, you know, and we've talked about that before. We don't want to be there. But that that means like I think what I I like about this is like there's there's still that flexibility um for people after they've been here for a long time. But I really like the idea of being able to press a button right now and extrapolate if it's all the same people working here next year

as this year. We know what77's going to look like. We know what 28's going to look like. We know what 29's going to look like. And Joe, I want to just um expand on that what you just said a little bit ago. Um there does come a point in time when a position taps out. I mean, they're at their max pay, right? So, if they're not getting a call and they're not happy about it, they can go get another job.

Mhm. Right. I mean, that's just the way the way we have to look at it. I mean, you just can't keep giving when they're maxed out like this. You just can't keep giving colas and colas and colas because that position will be way overpaid of what

it normally pays. So, so really you have to manage it. It's just not okay now we have this and it's just okay everything is just you got to you got to manage it. You got to manage each employee. I think that's important to point out because one thing that makes us different as a municipal or government employees like you say it all the time. We're not building widgets. We're not selling products. It's not like at year nine you're such a better salesperson that you're generating enough income to take a get a salary increase. Like certain point in time you're doing the job and if you want a pay increase you you either need to get promoted into a new role or look for a different role because that's what the job pays. It's it's the same thing as with our a lot our EMS and stuff like that. So,

but what this does do, if I understand it, is it takes away the flexibility to hold down uh budgets or or payroll because it's an automatic, you know, if the policy is every year you get 4% no matter what shape the town's in.

That's takes away that flexibility. After year eight, you have the flexibility. Prior to year eight, there is no. So if the town's bud income budget goes to heck in a hand basket, we're still going to keep paying 4%. We're not going to

It does develop a bit of a fixed cost, right? Yeah. Or fixed fixed increase. Yeah. Yeah. I wouldn't go after wages and benefits to to make up that difference. I would go after your paving budget. I would go after other things where because otherwise you're not sending a very good message to your employees at all where

I understand but I'll go back to we still have to there are other the point is hopefully we never have to get there but if we are if we suddenly become a town across the river uh this takes away that flexibility and god forbid you know that we ever lose a million dollars in our budget but uh it does take that away.

Yeah and I understand that. Um, absolutely. You know, it's a fixed rate and so, you know, it's it's a fixed cost. There's pluses and minuses of fixed cost. You know what it is, but at the same time, it's like enrolling a contract. You're in it, you know. Um, and and that's just I it's for at least the read for me, the benefits of the wage table outweigh the cost of the wage table. But I think that's a really good point to bring up is that it does put you in a a fixed annual uh change until people start getting getting maxed out. Um, at the same time, it's a recruitment tool, too, though, because there is something to be said about when you start a job, you you know exactly what your compensation's going to look like moving forward, as long as you're uh, you know, not getting fired for doing a bad job,

right? Yeah. So, but those are good good points to bring up, John. So, there's never really performance-based increases. It's just a straight out if you perform level of if if so you you can't do both. I mean, you could you could do 2% and then we could do their performance appraisal, but I'm not going to hold back their pay based on a performance appraisal because I will adjust.

I don't roll that way. But maybe that's the way they did it down at BMW. I don't know. I'm not going to leverage their pay on their performance. If they're not performing, I will deal with it before their performance appraisal. I'm not going to say, "Well, you're not performing, so I'm not going to give you a raise." I'm going to say, "You're not performing, so we're going to document this. And if you don't do better, we're going to also document it." And of course, as you know, public employees are different. They're not like private. You just can't let them go. There has to be documented reasons why, right? So that's how this works here. I

that's how I I'm just asking. I know and I know but I just want to make it clear. I don't want anyone to think that these are based on any kind of merit whatsoever. It's years of service. I'll deal with their performance a different way.

What I'm hearing is you're saying that if there's a performance issue, you'll address and get the person up to performance prior. We'll work on that. Exactly. It's a good question. And I think as you know there's been two employees that no longer work here because of performance. So

it that works. Mhm. State statewise there are no bonuses. Correct. Correct. Okay. Sorry. Never been a state employee. [snorts] Never I don't I don't even know if that word bonus is anywhere in my employee handbook at the state.

Okay. [laughter] I could get I think I could get fired for googling that. No kidding. Um no. Uh I think that this moves us more into a model similar to like what we see at like state and federal uh and county levels for compensation.

Um and so uh I'm very comfortable with this model because I'm familiar with this model and so I could have some blinders up on it admittedly. So I really appreciate people asking questions that I'm probably not thinking about. Um and I know you Jerry come from a municipal and state background as well. Um and it's definitely different than than the private side. So it's it's good to uh have these discussions.

Yeah. Uh it's been somewhat difficult having come in after one town manager here for nine months and adjusted wages. Then you had an interim town manager come in for six months and adjusted wages. And it's all different. It's been all over the place. It hasn't been equitable. been very difficult for me to kind of like look and say,

you know, is this really fair based on skills and abilities and that sort of thing, but [snorts] and this really helps just put everybody on the same kind of playing field, if you will. Of course, it'll be up to me to decide, okay, this is where I think you're going to land, but um like I said before, you've got you've got employees in town that have only been here four and five years and that might be appropriate. You got employees that have been here 10 and 12 years where that they're not going to be able to jump all the way up to eight. I'm just going to have to explain to them,

right? Look, you you're getting a significant raise as it is. The select board and myself would love to be able to get you way up, but we want to protect our jobs, too, right? Just things have to be stepact stepwise. So you're basically going to give each employee a start year number.

Exactly. Based on their skill set. Yes. In their Yeah. In their years. And I think that this falls like when I started when I started the state, I didn't start at the first grade because I had prior experience from a consulting world. And they said, well, we don't count all those years because the job was toled a little different. And have a discussion as to, okay, we can start you at this step

because of your experience. And there's the same way with us, right? new employees you can say based on what right because you have lateral transfers already in the book so but when you have a promotion let me talk about how promotions work so when you have a when somebody promotes so the best example I have is how it works so the foreman gets promoted uh so the foreman retires and then Calvin promotes somebody in house to the foreman position y

what we'll do is look at where that employee pause, see what his pay rate was, go down to the former pos position, see what step that is, where it's the closest, and then give him that next step. Yeah, I'll use an example here because this is this is a good to think. So, if someone's a truck driver, laborer, and under this wage table, they're at step five, they're making $29.25 an hour. If they get promoted to foreman, step one of foreman is only $27 an hour. So if they were had to move all the way back to step one, they would actually be getting a paid decrease.

But if step five is 2925 at truck driver laborer, you look in step three at foreman is 2920, that person would probably start at step four. So it's 30 37. And so your promotion doesn't cause you to be a decrease in wage. So you get the

you get the first number that match exceeds your salary at the step. And because that's a pretty standard policy. Yeah. And I think with the state from it was when I was there if you got promoted they gave you a 4% and and then where you landed on that as you is

yeah I think it depends with the state on your bargaining unit but um I know that the policy I I took yeah I took a look at a just the policy for comparison and you you don't get a decrease in pay if you get a promotion because there's a hierarchy on the tables to say like you've gone from resource to senior scientist just you even though you're Yeah. So,

okay. [snorts] As long as it's spelled out in the handbook, I think that that's the important thing is that it's written out somewhere that says like in the event of a promotion, here's how we handle it. Well, yeah. I mean, when you start getting into all the nuances of these,

even if it just says in the event of a promotion, your wage will not be less than your prior position. I mean, I think that the handbook should probably just say referencing the current wage table rather than just getting into specifics because then

that's what that's what I'm sorry I might have worded it improperly. That's I'm not saying it goes case by case. It just says the way the handbook would indicate that you know in the event of a promotion your wage would be referencing the wage table but not to be less than your current wage. So you don't want to

or however that's Yeah. You don't want to promote an 8-year truck driver to foreman and give them a $9 an hour decrease in pay. Yeah, I I think that's something to talk to Betsy about in terms of wording. I'm sure she has language for something like that.

Yeah. Yeah. John, did you have another I guess the two concerns I have is is what's concern the one I mentioned earlier about lack of flexibility. Is 4% the right number or should it be something that we consider if inflation is at 2%. Should we have some flexibility to say, "Okay, you got another year, so you're going to get 3% or whatever it's going to be." These questions I need to to think through before I vote on it. And then the other one is I to get a feel for, you know, what the overall this is going [snorts] to do to us. And I think that comes up in the budget process,

but it could be a whole boatload of money and that may so it may kill it in the budget process in my mind. So those are my concerns. Yeah. That we don't expect. Oh, yeah. But I I see what you're saying because what Jerry's saying, what I think I heard you say was if we accept a wage table, you're going to bring us a budget number and say this reflects the wage table being changed and I went through and got all the people where they need to. And if we go, Jerry, that's way too much of an increase. We can't deal with that. You need to re-evaluate that.

It's your discretion to figure that out at that point. Or and and we might say like that's and you might say this is the bare minimum and we can have that policy discussion then. But is that how you anticipate should we adopt a wage table? You're going to go through and do this because I think I don't think you're asking for this, but it would be very I think inappropriate if we were going through and saying you need to sit down and tell us where you put each individual person. That's not and I know you're not asking that. So I don't don't think that. But

I'm just wrapping my head around your point because I think it's a good a good point. Like what's that first going to get us? Yeah. What's and it may be there. We like the wage table but it's too much. Mhm. Uh or uh we don't have the you know it's not 4% every year, it's 3% or whatever it's going to be.

So just to carry on that in terms of other towns because this you were saying that this is very much on par with how other towns are know what not necessarily no I was asked to put together a wage table. So this is the wage they

based on increase per year with the 4% is that standard across it is at the state. So I don't know what other towns do for for those types of increases. And I will say if you adopt this and then in midstream say well we don't like 4% we like 3%.

That could that could actually make somebody jump up even more because now they're making more than what's in their year. And then we're gonna they're not they're not going to make less then it's going to go to the next year. So that like the state mid contract Joey ain't gonna say well we're going to change the steps to 3% and not four.

Mhm. That so you gota you got to keep that in I mean yeah I understand what you're saying. I but I do I I understand what you're saying about like oh if we were to change it mid thing but I think John's point is there is a discussion to be had is is when we adopt the wage table is 4% the right number to adopt and I think that's what we wanted to have that conversation we don't want to say yeah Jerry we're good with 4% and then you give us the number and say h we want to change that to 2%.

You know that's that's a different situation but I think you're saying we might need to have a more robust discussion maybe when Betsy does come here like where's that 4% figure come from? My concern this 4% figure comes from this is what the state does and that's what I'm familiar with.

So you can ask Betsy Betsy is going to look at you that you are significantly paying lower even with this wage table than your surrounding communities. I I can share with you what those numbers are for certain positions if you like. I'll send it to you on the email. But

um No, that was my question. That was how in terms of what other towns are paying. Yes. So we are okay. You're still significantly low with these ranking act. And that's a discussion too is that you know you ask yourself on a standard distribution of wage for each one of these. Where does Durham want to sit? Do we want to sit in the middle? Do we want to sit a standard deviation below? A standard deviation above? And that's where I think what you're telling me is this is a wage table that is still a little bit shy of the middle of the pack.

So I'll speak for myself. I'd love us to be at the top, but there's a fiscal impact. Oh, absolutely. And so I mean this this whole conversation to me is meaningless without seeing what the budget would look like. Uh because yes, I think a wage table is a great idea. I think, but I'm not going to vote for it if it's going to add $50,000, $100,000 to the budget. I'm not going to support it.

You could very well add 50 because you're that far significantly low, right? And and so to to me, we need to see the numbers and and and I'd look at options on getting to those numbers maybe. I know this might be a pain.

No, no, no. Let's just walk right through this. So, I'm going to give you a full Let's Let's just walk right through how it's going to work. I'm going to give you a full-time wages line. It's not going to be 3% more. It's going to be a wage adjustment. It's going to be a lot more. So, when you see that, what's I guess I'll ask you then, what's your next question? Do you want to see where everybody lands that brought that number to that number or are you okay with a wage adjustment? Because now you cuz if we start talking about individual wages, we're going to need to go into executive session to do that. I

I'd be talking to you about how do we get to these numbers over a period of years and not in one year. That's what I'd be talking about. I like the idea, but if we're going to be affecting the individual taxpayers, like h how much? and and and those are questions that I think need to be answered uh as part of our due diligence,

right? And I think you'll see that in the budget because you'll see what was last year and you'll see what it is this year. But what if you say reduce it, then I can go back and then it's going to either be reducing the percentage. So we'll have to talk about the wage table again if you adopt it or something. But what I'm hearing you say when you say you're earlier you talked about how if you just adopted this wage table and put everyone exactly where what their current years are that that would be a huge amount and you're saying I'm already going to go through and bring people down to so just cuz you've been here for 10 years you're not starting at eight.

Exactly. So you're going through and suggesting that you work with the department heads to figure out this is our new wage table. Don't think your your current years of service equate out here. For some people, you're going to be an eight-year employee at five, but some people might be an eight-year employee at three. That's you're going to do that. So, you're saying we're not going to take that first huge bite to get everyone caught up. We're saying the first huge bite to get everyone caught up is way too much. So, you're trying to figure out where you can get people closer. And so, you're saying that that number you're showing us is that step-wise approach of let's get started here. Is that correct?

Yes. Okay. And so then if that number comes to us on the budget in the budget cycle and we say Sherry that's still too much what can we tighten up that's a different conversation at that point right so then we would approve the wage table after we see the budget number because once we approve the wage table we're locked in. Well, I think once we would approve the wage table, we're saying, um, hey, this is, uh, where you're at now. And what we would be doing after approving the wage table, if we didn't like that number, it would be Jerry coming and saying, "All right, maybe I got to go through and move everyone down one more year because that might be the best best bite we can get."

So that's a So now you're playing with alliance. What if I delivered you a budget that's only 3% and and it's still right where we wanted it to be? That's I think a discussion for the board to have. If you said that that budget, the total number of the budget is still good and but the wage number is more than 3% or whatever. I think that's a vote for everyone to have at that point. But these I think these are good questions.

My point is is you're you're you're keying on one line and you got a whole budget and you have a budget increase by a certain percentage. So if that percentage is only 3% you you know what I mean going line by line is well I disagree because I think uh as you said earlier it becomes our decision do we want to cut paving you know because we're you know four miles a year it is how important is that or how important is you know there's only three or four things that really if you it's salaries which is what we're talking about here we're it's paving it's the amount of money we're putting into reserves and it's something else that I can't think of right now, but those are the only four things that really impact the budget. We can sit here and talk about how many tools the fire department or public works buys, but those are the four big things. And so we have to decide here's here's payroll

and I understand that defense of the great employees we have, but there are other things. How much do we want to put in reserves? Because our fire trucks and our dump trucks are, you know, hanging in there, but they're going to run out of of lifespan. And I know you've worked on the CIP, so how much money are we going to put into uh the reserves to pay off fire trucks? That's all part of the the budget. I'm not worried about how many tools the public works buys or how many pencils the town hall buys, but it's those four or five things. And this is this is something that has a huge pack on a budget. And I'll just throw this out there because it's it's kind of been my focus. We're going to have some really strange years budget-wise in the next few years.

This revaluation in my mind, I don't believe the one-third pay more, one-third pay the same, and one-third pay more. My concern is damn near everybody's going to pay more. Uh, and so that's we got to think about that on on where we're going. You know, we have to be thinking about that.

I think that's important to think about, but at the same time, the reevaluation doesn't affect our budget. it affects how the distribution of the expense is sent across town. So just because we gain valuation doesn't mean we increased our town spending per person. It just it just shifts the burden, you know, and so that I do think we got to be a little bit careful when we think about that because um if the town's valuation doubles, we don't double our budget.

No. No. But I I think if if we raise the taxes a certain amount, then we're going to have good employees who are not going to be able to service people because we're not going to have people in the town paying their taxes because they can't afford it. And so to me, this is

I I think we just need to watch our budget, you know, and really and I appreciate Jerry has done a great job on this. I'm not saying it's not, but those are my questions. In a time when when our whole budget process is, you know, people are pushing back on on taxes and budgets, if the school board is 8% and the county is 12.6%. Those are big, you know, huge numbers.

Yeah. I will say though, making adjustments prior, in my opinion, making adjustments prior to reval is the time we want to do it because if we do anything major during reval, it gets very confusing for people. I don't think we have time to do this.

And I also think when you talk when we talk about expenses in the school in the town, there's a lot of fixed expenses and really our wiggle room is do we want to not fund capital and do we want to stop paving roads. Those are the two places we can take money. Uh but there's also expense of like the impact if we don't make the necessary adjustments. So we don't have a contingency budget. If we lose this town staff person, the expense of getting that person back and getting them to the level of experience they have right now, that's an un that's an expense we don't have an estimate for. My experience has always been losing people is more expensive than keeping people, especially when you think about the the institutional knowledge that goes away in a town like Durham when someone leaves. And so that's one of the things that I think the wage table's important. And in my mind, I'm deferring to Jerry and our

department head's expertise here to say, bring bring us a number that brings us as close to something competitive that you think we can still stomach, you know, and that's where I think that that's what we're asking, what I'm asking,

which I think you say he's delivering. I know you guys I know that you're not familiar to the conversation that Betsy and I have, but when we put in more competitive wages in here, I tell there is absolutely no way that's going to fly. It just isn't going to fly. We have to come down on it.

So, it's already down. So, that those are the conversations that we have. So, don't think that we this is high in any stretch. You're telling us that you brought this down. I think the question on the table here is should is it reasonable for the select board to expect like what is our current payroll if you evaluate each person and put them in their rate that you think they are what is that number you know and then it's 4% increase from there and then we can we can look at a five or six or even a 10year um possible

hike in in this budget line and when we're making decisions like this I I think that information is important. Even if you end up moving money from one area to another to kind of bring the total at a 3% or 3.5% increase, I think we should understand the impact of where the this wage table would take us

in growth over year after year. And I think it's that easy. You got to do it anyway. See, the problem with growth year over year over year, you don't know who you're going to have for employees year over year over year. That's true. You can only go so far. You You can only go so far. But if you took your current payroll, all the people we have, plugged them into where you think this is, that's your delta of what's it's going to cost us to

to And that's and that's what you'll see on the budget when I present it. Yes. I I will say I do think Yes. Okay. I will say I do think that right now what we're kind of doing is we're diving really deep into the weeds of how Jerry presents one line of the budget. So, like we're not if we were to do this to something else, we're having Calvin in here and we're saying, "Well, let's calculate how many tons of sand we really think you need. We could probably get by with less sand if we talked about sanding in a different regime."

That's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying at all is the budget. We have to look at everything on the budget. Yeah. But what I'm saying is right now that we have to change a policy without knowing what the fiscal impact is going to be. And and in my opinion, that is reckless. And

so if we vote on this tonight, that does not set the budget. We still vote on the budget. We're giving Jerry some guided into it. If we have a policy, how are we not going to follow the policy? Is my it nothing is nothing is policy until the town meeting in July 1st. So we're saying that this is a policy that we want to adopt during the planning process. If Jerry brings us a number and we vote against that number and we are this the the the administrative authority, we could just say we want this admin budget decreased 5%. Now Jerry might say I can't do it. I'm out of here. But we still this does any vote on this does not lock in the number. We're saying we have hired Jerry. We are asking Jerry to bring us up to a wage that we think is competitive without being egregious and then piece meal away. And he's saying this is the table I want to work off of. I just got to go through and make those adjustments and

bring you the number. And I feel like he's bringing us that number. Say different is it would everything you said and at the end said that we can afford. Mhm. And I think that's the question is you know what what can we afford on a on a budget? What is the rush to approve this?

Oh, I'm not saying we're approving it tonight. I'm just I think these are important things, but I think, you know, when we look at the process, come come January, Jerry's going to start working on his budget. And so, when we say what we can afford, we're telling Jerry, if we were to vote on this, we're saying, "Sure, work off of this table and bring us a budget." And then we look at the budget. And if we don't like what we're looking at, that's when we start saying, "All right, we need to make some cuts here, or we need to make some changes." And we might say,

we might say, "All right, Jerry's brought us a municipal budget that's increased 3%. Well, we need to get that down to 0%." Now, we start talking about the cuts. Is it more important for us as a board to to say, "Jerry, you're going to need to adjust wage tables in your budget, or is it more important for us as a board to say, let's skip, you know, paving and only seal?" And I think that there's still that time to have that. What I'm hearing Jerry tell us is just this is the wage table I would like to use during the planning process of the budget and then bring you a number based off of this and he's telling us this is already me reigning it in from the top end you know and so I put in the trust in him to say bring me a number based off of this now we don't have to vote on this tonight but that's just my thought process on it so

I I mean I agree with everything because you know the budget is as long as we're not locked into a policy. Yeah. You know, when we first see that budget if we're not locked into you have to do this and you have to give these raises and you have to do all these other things. If if the budget is prepared using that wage table

and the numbers are good, we're good. If if they're too high, then you're right. That's but we can say okay we really like the wage table so we're going to stick with that or we can say because we owe it to have good roads we owe it to be able to buy fire trucks so setting a policy we shouldn't set a policy to say we're going to buy our firet truck every year right

because we don't know the and I don't think voting on or giving Jerry guidance to use this during the budget process is voting on it because we're not locking these policies in right now I mean right now I think Jerry's saying before I go through the time and effort of picking. All right, labor is going to be at four, CEO is going to be at three. Is it is this something you guys or you all, sorry, want me to work off of? And for me, that's a that's a yes. But we don't have to make that tonight. But we do need to have that conversation

real early in January for for sure. I think we've all said yes, but you know, when I see us voting on a policy, I see us voting on a policy and this is what we're going to push. So, if you're and and frankly before I support it, I would want to see the numbers, which is,

you know, if that's going to wait till uh we finalize the budget and that's what it ends up with, fine. But um and that's that's correct. But I just I just I guess what I'm asking, can I just use this for a baseline? Yeah,

that's this is what I will use for a baseline so we can get it equitable. And if it's too much, we'll have to discuss how much you want to go down and then I'll have to distribute that evenly somehow. That would be work that I I'll just have to do.

I think we just talked in a really big circle in a way that we all kind of agree, but we had to get to their different different ways. And I think that that was helpful though for me. Mhm. It it being in a municipality and working with them as long as I have, in most cases, they [clears throat] don't go line by line. They're only really concerned about the budget impact.

Mhm. That's and I see you. Right. So, if it's too much of a impact, keeping where we are, it's like, okay, what do we cut? Typically, those are services, right? they're not people because we don't have really enough people to provide the services that we really need because like I said in another meeting is that you know you had an application in front of you that really wasn't filled out correctly but there was really no time for that person to call them and say you know this you you really need to do this this and this so we brought it to you when it wasn't really complete

that's that's the level of service that you're at right now where it feels [clears throat] as though we're not keeping up in in in the office. You may all think it's great because, you know, you go in and you register your vehicle and they're very nice and they provide customer service.

What you all don't see is what goes on on the inside and the things that get dropped and the things that fall through the cracks. You don't see that, right? But we see it. And not only do we see it, we feel it, right? But that's one part of the the town's function. And I I agree they do a very good job,

but we also have to maintain roads. We have to maintain the fire department. That's the there's a lot of stuff. And I'm not saying I think I'm going to quit beating the dead horse, which I think we're fine with building I'm fine with building the budget using that wave scale with the recognition that if if you know you come in and say we're going to cut the paving budget from 400 to 100,000, I may not be in favor. And and I think that one thing that we clarified halfway through this conversation is that giving Jared the green light to work off of this is not locking us in for a for not locking our budget in. Now we might see our full budget and say this looks good to the select board or we might see the whole budget and say we need to make cuts and that's when we start looking at department to department and that's where the policy discussion of is it more important for us to adopt the wages that Jerry

recommends or is it more important for us to um you know increase the use of fund balance or decrease the use of fund balance or seal instead of pave roads. Stackpole road is on the uh the list for paving so we got to start thinking about that one too, you know. my truck, you know, my truck will make it over it. So,

so, so, but these are the things that I think I'm comfortable in giving Jerry guidance tonight based off our conversation to work off of this, understanding that come budget cycle, once we look at the total fiscal impact, we're going to we will then have to evaluate what we always do and what causes that there. So, um, are folks comfortable with Jerry working off of this table to give us bring us that first number? Understanding that our discussion tonight does not approve or lock in any wage table. It's just saying let's work off of this and see where we're at.

Yes, I'm I'm good. Cool. Works for me. Jerry, folks. Nice job, Bill. Yeah, this is this employee handbook is a massive lift when you're working off of zero, you know, and building something new. All right. Um, any other old business before we move along to new business? All right, new business. Uh, Jerry, we've got a discussion here, uh, discussion on legitimizing planner position. Do you want to speed on that?

Yeah. So the the planner is not mentioned anywhere in the ordinance. Mhm. So for the last five, six, seven years, the planner has been working with the planning board and the ordinance. Uh did you all read the ordinance?

Mhm. Yeah. So um the ordinance references the code officer to work with the planning board and that's not what we're practicing right now. Yeah. With the with the not our practice now. So, I just want to and George didn't want to be the one to legitimize it. He He didn't even ask me. I said to him, I would like to get the planner legitimized in the ordinance so

it reflects our current practice. So, that would be the update. I just want you to be aware that there'll be public participation on that and the whole town meeting vote. I just want you to realize we're moving in that direction.

Quick question about this, D. So the the question that George and I talk about or I talk about George and that I won't talk about with you folks is George is not going to be around forever. So that the town will have to decide with the help of my recommendation is do we continue to have our own planner or do we outsource it to someone else to work with the planning?

So that's something we're going to have to think about at some point. And I would think about it right now because George is still here. I think I'd rather just have George be a lifetime appointment. But this just makes it so it legitimizes the role that he has. And

yeah, because when it references the code officer and they're it just isn't correct. So that's all that is. You don't really need to vote on it right now. Yeah. Just I'm just bringing the only question I had is there's some some strike marks in here that aren't highlighted. What are those from? I can answer that one quickly. It came It came up through the planning board. Uh the other things it does is now we now we sorry the town requires 10 copies of everything

which we don't use. And so it was expensive to the applicant to have to do that. And uh the other thing that changed to give George more time was they were required to submit it no later than two weeks before the planning board meeting. This would move it to three weeks.

21 days. Yeah. 21. So, uh, that those are the other change. I mean, they're minor changes. Yeah. Yeah. Um, this seems like a no-brainer to me. This, uh, was written long before we had a planner working and as the increase in, uh, workload came in and we hired a part-time planner, it was just a sign that the planner would take over some of these duties and this just codifies it. Uh, a policy that's been in practice for a while. So, I don't need to talk about this anymore. If anyone has any questions for Jerry. Other than that, [clears throat] I'm good moving along.

Speed study. Jerry. Yeah. So, in light of the tra tragic uh fatality on Royals Road, I'm happy to request a speed study with the DOT. I [snorts] need authorization. I need It's better to have a vote by the elected officials to do that. I think did you all read this?

You all understand? Yeah, it's gonna take some time. May not necessarily happen. May not make it. We don't have a lot of data to give them to share. It's an engineering study. Um We have received there's been a lot of formal and informal requests to do this and um you know

it's a tragedy and anything we can do to figure out if something like this can be avoided. I think that I think the speed study is step one of looking into mitigation efforts for uh this because we're seeing more and more traffic on our big roads 126 125 136 route 9 and I

think this is a really good idea. Okay. Can we just go down a speed study request application must include the following just so you're aware of what needs to happen in them. So why is the speed study necessary? I can I can say there was a fatal.

Mhm. Okay. But but keep in mind though and I'm not trying to be insensitive. If you lower a speed limit to 40 and then a pedestrian gets hit at 40 miles an hour with no signs of any brakes, it's probably going to be a fatal.

Okay. So, I'm just I'm just bring I'm not trying to be insensitive. So, just hold on. Is it uncomfortable or unsafe to travel at the ex existing speed limit? So, I would encourage you to go traveling at the existing speed limit and and say, is it uncomfortable? Calvin and I did it. We didn't think it was uncomfortable.

But we have had people in town reach out and specifically say, I feel uncomfortable with the speed. It would it would be nice to have that. I don't think that's what they said. I think what they said is it's unsafe for pedestrians and there are pedestrians walking in that area,

which is why Well, I'll let you finish, but I don't think that's what they said. Okay. How often is traffic occur exceed the posted speed limit? Without any law enforcement, we have no data, so I can't provide anything there. Request should not be based on a goal of traffic coming unless other traffic coming plans are implemented before the study has requested.

I don't think that's happened. So, we can do the request, but I don't know how I'm going to fill out this application with a straight face and answer these questions to warrant the study. So, my review of this said the exact same thing. So, uh you know, Joe said this is step one. I think this is not step one. Step one was the town voted down uh uh the uh having dedicated

law enforcement. Uh I I agree with you traveling 50 miles an hour in that road. I think if I were, you know, if you're walking, yeah, I think it's uncomfortable, but I think what they're looking at is driving. And I don't think it's uncomfortable driving at 50 mph.

They're looking at the engineering on the road. They're looking at the width. They're looking at the distance of the houses from the road. All kinds of different stuff are going to come in. I understand that. But there has been nine accidents there this year on that section of road. Like that's a high accident right from where the incident happened to the the intersection.

Well, that's one thing we could. So that was in the news report. Um, and so like that's where whether I feel uncomfortable or not, there's definitely it's a it's an inflection point in my mind. Was that was that like regular channel news?

Yeah, it was like we need to be careful. So at least maybe that could be something we can So what that's doing is isn't that the traffic calming, right? And that's what you're not supposed to use the study for is for traffic calming, right? Isn't that that's what traffic calming is,

right? I thought traffic calming would be like reducing the the number of I I don't know the terminology traffic is to calm the is to calm the traffic down [clears throat] and get into like sometimes you'll see where they'll they'll pinch the road so when you have a wide road it's it's go but when you pinch the road down people will tend to slow down because it's it's thinner so

or put put those uh speed signs up that you know hey you're five over or something like they have three of them on and they just did that counting in freeboard Yeah, they made everybody stop in front of um LLB and then Low Street

all three-way stop. They took away, but they they had a temporary stoplight there. So, I just caution you to when you vote that I don't know how I'm going to answer these questions in in their letter and say based on this, I don't have anything.

have we what has been done not what we have been done but what has been done to date if anything to improve the situation we put some temporary speed signs up have has anyone done anything we've got a lot of um concerns coming from the residents about this and you know clearly but Have we done anything? Has anything been done to calm the traffic, I guess, or to calm this meeting?

We wouldn't do DOT, right? We would, but have we from a governing perspective notified DOT with some write up that says this is what we want. We want four speed signs. We want this. We want that. Have Have we or do we have no we have any obligation jurisdiction?

Yeah. We don't have authority to tell them they have to put more signs. I know, but can't we have we or can't we as a town raise the officially raise the concern on paper and ask for certain things? I mean, I don't know. I'm just

in my mind filling this out or starting this process is starting that and saying, "Hey, we're working on this. We want to submit it." And if they say, "Well, this doesn't meet the mustard, but this is a different intervention that we can take." And to me, this seems like starting a process with them cuz if if if this is not a if this is a DOT road, like how do we start the calming process without going through the speed study? No.

Right. So, I mean, in my mind, it's like a you fill out this the best you can. Someone at DOT gets it and says, "Well, no, you're not quite at that level, but we could recommend you do this instead." And so, I don't know if that's the actual process. Um,

what's I'm sorry. So, in my mind, if if they're saying here's the brief narrative of why this is happening and I mean words like comfortable and unsafe, those are pretty subjective. Um, I mean, we are having people who say that they I've seen people on like the informal forum say, you know, they don't feel safe driving down the road because there's so many houses and people don't feel safe getting their mail or putting their trash.

But even for the drivers, I've heard people say they don't feel safe because they're worried about because they can't see people because it's so dark. So I I I don't know if we need to get screenshots of those statements or whatever. And so in my mind, is it ne why is it necessary? There was a fatal accident. Are people complaining about it being unsafe? Yes. I don't know how you uh quantify unsafe feelings because that varies greatly from a 16-year-old driver to a 90-year-old driver.

Uh how often is traffic currently exceeding the speed limit? We can't get that answer without enforcement and we don't have enforcement. So maybe DOT says we need to work on getting you a detail to get that enforcement data before you can move forward. Um request should not be based on a goal of traffic calming unless otherwise other traffic calming plants have been implemented if this is a DOT road like how do we implement those without we don't and so is there a way we request calming without filling this out and getting told that this doesn't meet the muster and then they want to go with a calming option

down in some way I have to read it again. I've read it a couple times, but don't they talk about there might be some other alternatives that they'd be willing to talk to us about? Mhm. I think that's Yeah, I I think that's what

I I think step one we've tried. Step two is we see if DOT will give us grants or Jerry says there's money in the budget for us to hire the sheriff's department to do uh targeted enforcement at certain times of days. Uh we let them choose. Uh

I I mean would I be upset that speed limit is lowered to 40? No. Do I think it should be? You know uh you know they have their ways of doing it and you know that's how they do it. But I think there are things that we can do without filing. I I think asking for this speed study we don't meet requirements. There are other things we can do that would bolster this request. in the future if we if we could meet it uh and would also draw attention to it.

What things? So I don't see we do targeted enforcement which is what the sheriff's department offered us. So right if we we put in a budget for this year to hire a temp a police officer for next year and do a study after July of 26

or Jerry finds money. We're talking about fiscal notes finding a budget. I mean we saw the price of that you know the budget this year. Why can't we do both? because I don't think we meet the requirements of this. I mean, you can do it, but I don't think we meet the requirements of it.

I think it's a real challenge because somewhere it says uh it says very specifically that speeding is not a reason to change something. They do say you're enforcing it. They do say they prioritize based off high crash location or segments, areas with a documented crash history, potential safety issues, volume, high volume of vulnerable users. And so when I read that, it's like there's been we there's at least a claim that there's nine accidents there. They've happened in the last year. There's a safety issue because we had a fatality. When you have people who are in their 80s who need to walk across the road to get mail on a road that's 50 mph, that's a vulnerable user. When you have children that and family members have to move their trash across that, that's vulnerable. Um, I I do think that there while we might not be a perfect like 100% you hit everything, I think that there's enough here for in time

since the study was done. I think that there's enough here to at least make the request and get feedback. And if they say we can't do this until we get this other information, we then need to go through that because if they say you need to do a speed study, we can't do a speed study now. We don't have the money. So, while we're waiting to get back the information, we we need to do a speed study. Maybe that comes back in the budget process and we say, "Okay, is there a way to budget for this? It's going to be a huge fis fiscal note." But,

you know, I don't know. Why can't we ask Jerry to reach out and see what can we do? How can you help us? They have grants. They have funds that can help. Uh as opposed to filing something. Yeah. I recall that being a dead end when we brought the sheriff in [snorts] last time about like there's not like

I'm not talking about the sheriff. talking about DOT, they do they do grants all the time. That's how they get uh you know the OUI checkpoint and stuff like that of these grants. I mean I So if it's if if it's so but this is what this is seems like a ancestral comment here. In order to do a speed study you have to have recently got a speed limit info. So you need to have done a speed study to request a speed study. How do you do that? Like if a requirement of us doing a speed study is we need to know how often traffic is currently being exceeding that, how do we measure how often traffic is exceeding it if we don't have access to a speed study? Is there a passive measurement?

Well, we don't have enforcement. And we ask the county and they say we do our best to come down, but we have 14 other towns and we can't get there often enough. But we do know that something's happened that caused nine accidents. Maybe it's not speed. Maybe there's a discussion we said about public about lighting or uh outreach and education on mail or can we move mailboxes all to one side or trash all to one side. I don't know. But it just I feel like we are getting a lot of questions from people to ask for this and we have to at least do our best to ask for it and go down that process even if they kick it back and say sorry figure something else out. Personally, I agree with you.

I I just look at these questions just like John and Julia looks at planning board questions. Well, you didn't give us this, you didn't give us that, you didn't give us this, you didn't give us that. So, until you come back with us with this information,

I get it. But the difference is when they someone comes in and they don't have that, they can be get feedback as to what that they're looking for because right here, what do they give any criteria of what they're looking for when they say how often is traffic currently exceeding this post supposed posted speed limit? Like are they saying please submit the traffic report from the county? Um are they saying please let us know what your passive measuring devices are? Like those are things that like some of these things that they're asking for are really hard for us to get.

I I see I hear what you're saying. I think in a lot of towns especially with population that we have there's police enforcement. So it's readily available right here in your town. Yeah, I get that. You know what I'm saying? I think that's this is just like a one-sizefits-all and we're unique in the sense of the population we have of law enforcement.

Um, have we though reached out to DOT to find out if they have concern? They keep track of traffic accidents and stuff just like when the guy came and we added the four-way stop sign because of the safety risk there. I mean, they know this road is is a problem area.

Yeah. Oh, and what their plans may be. Okay. Yeah. So, I'll back up. My prior life was was doing training for municipalities and one of the classes we taught was uh sign stripes and speed limits where we brought the traffic engineers to these trainings to talk about how we do these sort of things.

[clears throat] They're looking at that road from an engineering standpoint only. That's what they do. That they they set the speed limits. How they would do it. Did y'all look at the video when I sent that email and go in there and see how they do it. They'll set at the side of the road and they will clock every car that goes by and they're going to go with the 80%. A lot of times towns will request speed limits because they think it's too fast. It actually goes up.

It doesn't go down like they thought that it was. So you just need to be really careful and understand the criteria of what you're asking for. Yeah, you're happy. You you can request it. There's nothing there's no harm in doing that

other than for someone like me to put my name on it kind of knowing how it works. I can see them saying Jerry, you know how this works. Blame us Joe signed. So well there is that. But then it feels like we can blame you, but what about my credibility that I'm explaining to you guys? Where's that lie?

I I understand that, but I'm I'm saying that we have an immense amount of public pressure right now to pursue some sort of safety action on this. And if this isn't the safety action, I we got to see another safety action because

people are asking for this. And I don't know how we get to the minimum expectations for this without h with with the services that we have available to us. And I have to believe somewhere a rural town with no police officer has been able to get a speed study done because of fatalities and accidents. I have to believe that. Can we call the question?

Yeah. Speed only can only be requested by the municipality, not Yeah. Well, that and that's what I mean. I I I just think for me, I'd like to see us at least inquire more and ask if we meet the minimum and if not, if there's any waiver that can be filled out for municipalities that don't have certain services and aren't able to get these sorts of things. Um, or if they have any recommendations if we don't meet this to take a different action. So does anyone else have any input?

I think you know the people would like you know there's enough people who want something done. I'm not sure what that is. Is it possible to meet with uh somebody from MDOT in advance and just say and I mean I'm more than willing to go in ple ignorance and just uh say hey how do we get this we looked at this you is there a possibility how can we do this? What are the things we need to do? And if he comes back and says, "Get the sheriff to patrol it for 10 days and tell us what it's like or whatever it may be." But kind of agree with Josh, we we have to we are nine accidents, one of them a fatality enough in MD dots in a bureaucracy's mind.

Let's be clear if they base it on 85th percentile of the speeds. We all know how fast people travel on this road and on my road and on this road. uh this can raise it because you know my mother always told me that they set the speed limits at 15 mph or less than the safest speed based on the cars available. Uh and uh you know I would not be shocked if if this happens and the speed goes up a little. Uh and so I I agree there are other options and other things and conversations that should be had before we start doing this.

Okay. But I would also call the question so we can But what would those other options be? We have to call the DOT in and talk to them about it. I have them show up and just like they talked about the four-way stop. Just could you send someone to December 20, which is unlikely or January, whatever it is, and talk to us about how can we fix this road, fix this issue. I

mean, the difference with the intersection, they came to us and said, "We're fixing it. Just so you know, we want to let you know." You know, so they were driving it at that point. Um, and I, you know, I've called for roadway cuts and some other stuff. They'll come. It's not tomorrow, but they will fairly quickly come and somebody could say, you know, look at he meet with Jerry and I'm happy to do it or whatever. All of us sit down and say, "Here's what we got. Here's what's happened. What can we do?"

So, Jared, is there someone at DOT you can call and say, "My board's pressuring me to apply for this. I don't think we meet the standards. Can you come in and talk through it with them?" If if you want to request it, vote on it and I'll run it through the proper appropriate people.

Yeah, that's all it is. I've [clears throat] just cautioned that it may not happen and it's going to take a year or better for the actual study. But can we just get him to because he may come and say you have no chance and I'll come and tell you that and save myself the effort or she whatever it may be.

I would rather go through the request. I Yeah, I'd say request it and we can explore other options at the same time. I mean, because what comes to my mind is, is there a discussion we can have with Cassella about getting trash on so people can have it on their driveway side? Is there a discussion we can have about moving uh uh um mailboxes? Like, I

think that request this if they kick it back to us, we can we can deal with it then. And I hope that if they kick it back, they say, "Here's where your application's weak and what you need to to do because we just don't have any funds available to do anything other than request this." And I just think we are getting so much requests to do this. So I would like to make a motion that we have Jerry fill out the paperwork to request a speed study. Do I have a second?

No, during it's we're outside of public comment, but All right. See, no second. I I I'm going to second because we need to do something if there I mean I just plugged in chat GPT. There's all kinds of information here and contact numbers and other options.

Oh, I have all the contact besides study. All right, so we have a second. Um I have motion De second. Is there any other discussion on the motion? I feel like we got to do something and I would rather start this process even if they kick back that we're not meeting certain requirements. I

I just want to be clear. I'm going to speak for you for a second, John. I don't think we're saying don't do anything. I think we're saying this is not the thing that we would do. So, I just want to clarify that statement.

I I understand that and my motion is saying this is the thing I would do and I want us to vote on it and if we vote it down then we will go a different direction. Why can't we just have what Jerry was saying before that reaching out and just trying to have somebody come in to have a conversation? We are doing something. We're not basically throwing a whole bunch of information that's going to take over a year and not even do anything worthwhile. Why can't we just request that we reach out and have them come in so at least we can have a conversation? So, I see it I don't see it as a or I see it as an and. We start the process of filling out the application at the same time we we request someone to come in and talk with us about the application we're filling out so we can figure out if we're going down the right road.

So, why can't we just wait to fill out the application till we have that conversation? I'm feeling pressure from the community to begin the application process because people are really upset about this and that's why I want to bring it to emotion. That's that's just my logic on it. So

if we are having somebody from DOT come in to have that conversation, is that not starting the process? I think it is a starting the process, but if it's is I don't think that I think that if we send someone an invite and say, can you please come to a meeting? If we get someone here by February, that'd be surprising. So I'd rather just begin the process of gathering this information, even confirming how many accidents have been there, figuring out when our last speed study was done, and just start working on it personally. And I understand that if we don't do that, we just say, "All right, we're going to invite someone to talk to about that is still beginning a process." I'm just suggesting we begin it this way. And so people are feel feel free to vote against it.

Well, my last comment is I feel like when you read through this and Jerry's experience, it's not going to work. And and so we're sending something off that probably has very little if any chance. you know, maybe the recent, you know, again, don't mean to be insensitive, but the fatality may make them more likely to change it, but and then again, maybe not. I mean, I I just I'd like to to see if is there something else after talking to them, would you support this? How the hell do we fill it out so you will support it? What do we need to do? And if he comes, they come back and say, "Well, have the sheriff out there for 10 days and tell us what the speed limit is." Then,

which I totally get, but we don't have the ability to have the sheriff out there for 10 days. Well, could we direct Jerry to Can I just respond to that for a second? Because I just sent him a text message and they have grants for targeted enforcement and I'm now asking him how hard it would be to get that target enforcement in Durham. So, there are other things that took me 5 seconds to do while we're sitting here.

You're also work assistant DA. you have a little bit different access to the sheriff than other but that's what I'm talking about is other options and and so that's why I think having these other options and exploring them it's better than this application that our town manager who's been in the field and is experienced in it doesn't think is the best option but I also think we should just vote on this and move on to other things

and then it could go it actually doing something like that it could have impact faster positive impact faster if we if it's a Z out Have or have you Jerry contact DOT and to just discuss it with them and report back to us what what what they think our options are for

ahead. So in the 12 years that uh I worked at DOT, we would do these sign stripes and speed limits every 3 years. We travel the state from Kery to Fort Kent to Bethl to Callus. We probably train 2500 people. And this it's you know what the traffic engineer would say if I had a conversation with a traffic engineer right now and I told him that just we want to request a speed limit. He would say okay Jerry so if we lower the speed limit to 40 and I've already said it tonight and a pedestrian gets hit with no signs of breaks before it gets hit. Do you think there'll be uh

Yeah, but that's not the only thing that causes people like if the speed limit is lowered to 40, your visual acuity to be able to detect the rate at which someone's coming to you is different and you might actually have enough time to pause as you see the car come over the hill as opposed to 50. So, it's not just Yeah, we the speed limit could be 25 and if someone goes through there at 50 m hour and ignores the speed limit and hits someone anyways, they're still going to die. If you get hit at 25 m hour, you're still hurt. But I think that there's other reasons to look into it and that's just why I think that it's worth worth the the route going.

I was more looking at what do what what is their suggestion for our next steps. We're apprehensive about a speed study. That that discussion hasn't happened. Mhm. Because the the request was for a speed study. So I think what Deb's question is is if you ask somebody right now what at DOT this is what people are comp are are concerned what should we do

what would DOT say okay I can ask that but so and at this point we have a motion to move forward with a speed study request we have had discussion uh all in favor of approving the request all right I second it that's you don't have to justify your vote any opposition

oh yeah So, I don't know which way you voted there. Did you vote in favor? I voted in favor. Okay. But I'd rather see you. So, I need I need the final votes here. Well, she's thinking I just don't think it it'll pass unless we get enough information to do it. And I think grants and other things. I know we need to do something

and I think what what has been mentioned are things that we can get started, have the conversation with MDOT to make sure that whatever we submit will pass or will get approved. I we do need to get the vote. We we are in the voting stage of the motion. So I do need to get

Can we push the So we're in the voting stage. We already finished discussion. Okay. So we will pass it and move along. The thing I want to remind people is this doesn't mean the application gets filed tomorrow. Jerry, I think it's important that you bring information to us as you're working on it. And if you get a dead on arrival feeling from it while you're working on it,

then what will happen is we'll request it. We're approving that you begin the process, right? And so what I'll do is I'll request it, they'll get it, and then it'll sit there until it they get to it. So read this on how it works and when it's priority and all that. So and in the meantime, I can call up

the traffic engineer and and that's right. This isn't but this isn't an or this is a we can do it and right but I might call the traffic engineer give them our current state and ask their advice on what we should do next even though we voted to move ahead with the traffic study. But if he says like if the current situation is we could explore some grants for targeted enforcement, you know, get their opinion and

would you be more comfortable with me asking and me telling you or just bringing them in here and you all can hear it right from him. Bring them in here for me. That's what I thought. But I I think that we're working on I like that we're working on it in the interimm. I mean this isn't a wake up tomorrow click request speed study. there's going to be data finding and gathering as it is. So,

we're still talking about this. Uh, has anyone given a thought about whether or not you apply once and can you apply it 50 times for the same thing or is there a wait period? Uh, what happens if it's rejected justification?

What what happens if it's rejected for not having the right justification? Uh, so I that that's I mean that's we'll just request. It's nothing to request and then I it just shows that the select orders reacting to the community concerns.

But if we were willing to fix it and they say no and then next year we come in and say we really want to fix it and they say we told you no last year. I think this is what Josh was getting. I think that if they were to reach out and say you have an incomplete application come back and give us other information. That's a different scenario than if they say since you have an incomplete application you're not allowed to apply again. And so

what's their answer going to be though? I don't think that that's going to be the the process. And so I'd rather us make a motion forward and we work with it as we go along than sit here and then maybe in three we three three meetings talk about potentially applying for a grant that we might get in 12 months to possibly have someone come do a speed study and then everyone slows down because they see the sheriff because there's one sheriff in town and we put on all things Durham. Hey, there's a speed study being done by the sheriff right now in front of Juliet's house. So

he's Yes. All right. um discussion on unemployment insurance. Jerry? Yes. So, did you all look at this and read it? Yeah. Okay. So, the assessment, for unemployment. This is [clears throat] the first time I've seen something like this since I've been here. So, what the town of Durham is is what they call direct reimbursement. So when somebody goes on unemployment, that's when we get dinged. Okay? So it doesn't have to be one of our full-time employees. It can be a part-time employee. And in this case, it was a part-time employee. And that's why the claimant name is I whiteed out because I didn't want that on there.

Sure. So [clears throat] when they go on unemployment, what they do is they report all of their wages. And because they make wages here, we have to pay our fair share percentage of whatever that is. I don't need any action from you folks. Why I brought this in? Because once again, I don't have a line to pay this out of.

So therefore, this is like the second or third time where I've said this is why you need contingency. There will be a contingency line in the budget for general government. Period. Because this is the stuff that stresses out a manager

is when we don't do proper budgeting, then it's my problem. Because you hire me to manage that budget and I don't have the tools to do it. Understand? Does everyone understand why there's a balance here? I didn't even know about the 2021. I mean, it's not a lot of interest, but that's not the point. Mhm.

The point is I don't have a line to pay the 758 and I can't and despite some people that are like well I'm going to do it that are on the budget committee my first year said you have more contingency than you think you did because you have line left over in the legal you have money left over in this line I can't pay

right an unemployment line in the legal line or the electricity line or the heat line So we need to do better. What took us from having a contingency line in the past just explain you were there that year when we had one and they wanted to pull it and

we agreed just keep the peaks. Yeah, pretty much. And the feedback we received in the past is well we believe you have enough fluffware in the elsewhere in the budget. So you can figure it out if you need it is what we just

or we've had people say there's no need for a contingency because everything's budgeted for. I can't I personally can't imagine anything that you would need a contingency for. And so those are the the the two things that I have seen as a re reason for not a contingency.

Response would be something like you haven't had employee you've been short employees so you have the money there spend it out of that. not thinking there are other you know and and I just want to just I think it was a tough decision I think when we pulled it

it was because you know it was this big to-do and it's fundamental budgeting period and there's also a concern that if we're given a contingency line we'll spend it erroneously that was the other thing that was the right and I just want to make I just want to even go on more the fire department has four how many how many

42 of them yeah have 42 part time employees. So at any time that they have their regular job, if they get laid off or whatever and they get unemployment, we're going to be a h on the hook for paying some of that unemployment.

It's a big exposure. So for the budget planning process, can we have all of this at the ready when we are presenting it just in terms of backup to back up why there's a contingency plan and why there's a we we we can Rebecca but I will say this at some point there has to be trust in what your manager is telling

I understand that and until there is otherwise I got to pull all this information it's so much more work but I think Rebecca's point is like So, like last time when and we're doing the the meeting a little bit differently, but last time, you know, when they're like, "Well, why would you need a contingency line?" I'm like, "Well, there's unexpected things." Well, I can't imagine what an unexpected thing would be. Even if we just have, well, here's three unexpected things that weren't budgeted for last year, and this is going to be year after year. You know, I think whether that makes the different changes the difference. But, I mean, I just note to myself. So, if I get that question on the town floor or from the budget committee or from someone moving forward, I'll say, well, you know, here's an example of an unexpected thing. And another thing is, you know, short-term disability and somebody needs to use a temp service to

back fill a job. Like, I think it's important to have those real life examples though, Rebecca. It may be it may it may be important, but another thing that's important is it's your budget. You let them know where the bear and the buckwheat is.

It's Yeah. Period. Works for me. All righty. Um, perfect. Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Jerry. It's important we see these things in the moment, too, and understand your frustration on them. Yeah. All right. We get to do a property abatement. So, I would take a motion to move into the board of assessors.

So, move. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Any discussion on the motion? All right. See none. All in favor? Any opposition? Passes unanimously. All right. Um, we just have a property abatement here. You get the details in the book here and get to the page.

Um, does anyone have any questions about the abatement for $63.80? I would make a motion that we approve it. Uh, do we have a second? I'll second. Do we have any discussion on the motion? All right. Seeing none, all in favor? Any opposition? Seeing none, passes unanimously. Do I have a motion to exit the board of assessors?

Motion by John. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second. Do we have any discussion or question? All right. Seeing none. All in favor? No. The planning board. Any opposition? All right. Passes. Jared, do you have any manager report?

Yeah. Thank you. I only got a couple things. I've already mentioned one. I'll just mention it again. Is that our public works employee that we just hired is giving his notice. He did give him two weeks and he will stick around for that two weeks.

[snorts] Uh we will try to fill that as soon as we can, but we won't post it again. This is like [snorts] number three or four that we've onboarded that haven't lasted and one didn't quite make the cut that reason given.

He just doesn't want to do it. Plowing is tough. And so that's a good question. So this particular person that we hired has never plowed before. Oh. And so we which is scary in and of itself because these trucks are They're $250 $300,000 pieces of equipment.

And you know, if you have never done it, there's and if you've never sat in one, if you've never been in the passenger seat, there's some dials, there's levers, you got a wing, you got a plow, it's like a freaking robot in there.

And you've got people that put up mailboxes that make it almost impossible not to get hit. So, they kind of they kind of deal with that. But I think more importantly what happens is this really stresses out your department head

because now he's responsible right so this just adds a lot more burden to your department head when this happens I and again I don't think necessarily that the starting wage is it I just don't think this particular person um liked it. The other issue that we think about is it would be awesome if we could poach some other employees from other towns. Other towns play pay more. So it's hard to poke somebody and have them come here for less. So it's those sort of things you got to consider

or we consider. So we'll do our best to try to fill it. The only other thing I got is we are having our Christmas holiday lunch on the 18th from 11:30 to 2. So you're more than welcome to stop by. And what's for lunch? Have a snack. I think there's going to be a spiral ham and a mac and cheese,

some desserts. Some desserts. So, feel free to stop by. And what what time is it? This is on uh December 18th. It will be right here in this room. Yeah. What time? 11:30 to 2. So, that's it. That's all I've got for you. So, thank you. Good discussion tonight. I I like spirited discussions because I will tell you if you if you don't have these spirited discussions from time to time,

you're not doing it right. So, um real so real quick for me met with the um the other town leadership with the school board last week. That was a really good meeting. um they have the same budgeting challenges that we have in terms of just cost of doing business is going up and the read I get from them is that the budget they're preparing is nothing new just the cost of doing business um uh and and costs that they can't avoid. So, they're working right now to figure out if there's any way they can cut any more of the nice to haves and and get a budget percentage change that is closer to the only need to haves. Um, but they're there's not a lot of fat to trim on it. And uh so they're they're doing their best and their budget process is already online and they are encouraging people to come and participate. Traditionally, they're getting two or three people per in the town of Durham that ever show up. So,

um, can you talk about where they're headed with the percentage and how they're Yeah. So, um, just pay just paying the exact same expenses next year with nothing new. 10% increase. And what? This is the No, this is the school budget.

Oh, the school budget. and uh they think that they can cut through attrition and other things maybe down to seven%. The absolute like bare bones goal would be closer to six but that starts getting into how do we make it work. So I think that for our budget planning process we should keep in our mind maybe a number of 7% increase or 8% increase on the school budget largely um just for them it's their majority of their budget's personnel and with IEPs and things like that they have had to bring additional different personnel in and so they uh that's just what it cost for the next year of of salaries and expenses. So, no new buildings, no capital improvement projects or anything like that. Um, and they're going to try to get that as lean as possible. So,

right. And, uh, the new child development services and it Yeah, there's another thing get it from the state. they still have to have a room to put them in and that sort of stuff. That's Rebecca, I'm sure you're aware of it because of the Rebecca's work on the committee, but there's a move to move early childhood development for third and fourth graders out of this control of the state into the local school districts,

three and four year olds, sorry, to the local school district. And there's supposed to be money that comes along with that, but there still needs to be space for people to bring those three and four year olds. And and just uh to piggyback on that, we RSU 5 already cater to the four year olds.

And so the threeyear-olds, so we're okay, but the three-year-olds will have to be within the next year or two. So we have to figure that out. So, this is one of those things that I think we'll find like GPCOG and MMA will be paying attention to that legislation as it's going through uh the going through Augusta and would be appropriate for people to and say, "Hey, this needs to come with a a pay for uh because it's not going to be able to be absorbed by the local uh municipalities if they have to pay for it." So, just to catch everyone up, essentially for certain uh uh developmental disorders or learning disabilities, uh public funded education can begin at 3 and four years old with the hope that early intervention will save uh special education cost through the the lifetime of that student in the school system. And so, it it probably is a return on investment that's positive, but it's still just shifting where that cost is

going to be carried. So, that's on the horizon. Um but uh just hoping to have more and more people participate in their budget process, you know, by the time we get on the budget floor. Everyone's, you know, upset about the number when we are uh really dealing with numbers that were kind of voted on and inherited elsewhere. But what I will say is looking at our new schedule and the school budget schedule, the school budget, the the school board will have finalized their budget numbers prior to us um finishing our budget process. So, we should have a final number from the school board to incorporate into our budget. Um, now that number won't have been approved by the time we're budgeting, but the school board will have voted on it. So, we'll have an ex should have an exact figure, which is a a big win for us this year. So, um, the other thing I was going to mention is tomorrow is the new elected officials thing with uh GP

COG. I don't know if any of you had um signed up to attend that. I will not be in attendance because uh I have a conflict. Um did you all get that invitation? I'm not going here. No worries. Um just wanted to make sure people were were aware it's occurring. So, and just to piggyback off of what Jerry says, I think that tonight was a really great example of um spirited but respectful debate where we were able to hear a lot of really good perspectives and, you know, um have important conversations and ask important questions. And I really like really like that we're we're we're moving that direction. So, all right, that's all I got. Josh, you got anything?

Nope. Deb? Uh yeah, I have a few things. Uh, first I just wanted to mention that, you know, on Facebook I see a lot of different towns and things that they're dealing with like they're hiring a communications director or their town manager just resigned and they got to go through a lot of things. And as I see these things, I internally say to myself how proud I feel to be part of the Durham government and the fact that I think we work hard to stay small and manageable and you know that presents its own set of challenges, but uh I'm just really proud of the work that we're doing. Um I think it was last meeting I mentioned that Jerry had requested the solid waste committee um to provide some insight with the Cassella automated process that's coming up. So, the Cassella representative attended the meeting last night and went through a bunch of questions and answers. Got a lot of good feedback and uh it resulted in a nice

email to you, Jerry, on what the solid waste committee is proposing. They're uh based on that meeting with Cassella, what they're suggesting that we bring to the select board. So, at some point, we'll need to get however that will work. You'll absorb that mail and figure out what you want to do there. I can explain, but I don't know if you can explain it now.

No, we don't need to explain. I just wanted the the committee to know that a a good meeting was held with the Cassella rep. Um I wasn't there because I was out on vacation, but uh the write up from Katherine was very good and I called or we talked today before the meeting. So um then just another note on the issue that we have a number of residents dealing with some real complicated issues with their banks as a result of the escrow business. I know we talked about that earlier. Um, I don't know if there's anything we can do, but there are some people who I think it's probably people who deal with national lenders versus some small town lenders that are seeing, you know, increases in their mortgage and uh, you know, the banks requesting and I got this from a a resident who sent me a note. Um, but it's nothing new from what we've seen in the email exchanges, but right now we're really not doing I don't know if we can

do anything to help them. I think the only one of the things that someone thought they might need is an estimated tax bill which I know Donna said she cannot provide but you know I don't know if we anticipated that some people would have such challenges with their mortgage escrow issues with the with the u

the way we just modified the the tax structure. So, we had talked uh when Donna was here, we had talked a little bit about possibly having a tutorial with residents, maybe hosting it at the Eureka Center. So, maybe there's something there to like a Q&A, not necessarily with Donna, but rather with someone else. most likely

have to pay. But I don't know if that's something that kind of could be. Yeah, I'm just confused because I know that there's a handful of people who are calling who have made complaints, but the vast majority of the lending companies have have figured it out. And I think there's a couple of instances of people not realizing that their mortgage payment had gone up because of insurance

and other things over. also not necessarily town related. Oh yeah. So what what what the complaints are is some people are saying my insurance my t my my mortgage company is not able is now charging me more in escrow because they're expecting my taxes to be more which I don't understand because the tax bill was a half year and it was actually less.

Yeah. And so I would have expected people to say oh they're they're decreased it and they're not right. So, I think that there are some people who are are I think there might be some legitimate issues, but I also think there are some people who have other issues and it just coincides with with this. So, I don't know what the answer is there. Um because other people have come into the town office to ask about that, right, Jerry?

Yeah, we've helped them out and it's just they're having an issue with their mortgage company not using the the higher mill rate and not the year mill rate. And so, we help them explain that. But it's I don't it seems like it's an issue between them.

Okay. Well, no, that's good. Well, maybe this resident hasn't come in and maybe they should come in and talk with you guys face to face. They talked to me. I have a letter that I'm sending to mortgage companies explaining the difference rate and the difference of the year. What's happening is I've been told from them their system just can't accommodate this. So

then they're really stuck. There's nothing the town can do. So, we are anyone that contacts me, I am sending them a letter or I'm having them have their mortgage company call me. Yeah. And I've advised people to go to the town office or call as well. So,

thank you for that. So, I'll share that as well. Maybe we could do though in the news blast that says like if you're having an issue with your with your um iss with your um mortgage lender, the town has a letter prepared that they can send if someone has

send it to you guys to. Yeah. But I'm just maybe it's some sort of communication outward saying, "Hey, if you're having an issue, please ask us." And I know that they've received plenty of other stuff. I know that they've received plenty of other things that say, "If you have issues, please help us." But

I mean, they could just call and you can lead a horse to water and you can't make them drink. I get that. What would be nice if there was people on that Facebook page that could say, "Well, have you gone to the town office first? Set up on it on F."

I I actually comments a little bit. I haven't looked through the comments. I dove into the comments a little bit, made the suggestion, breaking my rules. Yeah. Anyway, okay. Well, thank you for that. Okay, I'm done. Thank you for bringing it up then.

Uh, Rebecca, you got anything? Um, I was going to talk about the early childhood education, but you got it. So, no. Sorry, I didn't mean to steal your Oh, good. You probably could have said much more eloquently than I did. So,

fine. Next meeting is the 18th, so I can report whatever I have for our following select board meetings. Perfect. All good. Yeah, all good. The only thing I did want to quickly say is that our next meeting is December 23rd. That's not an issue for my personal schedule. Um, is that an issue for others? I was going to say um I wanted to put on that agenda more discussion around the um I meant to say this in our report, more discussion around the budget process because Josh and I had a really good meeting with the chair and vice chair of the budget committee. I was thinking because it is close to the holiday and I'm sure staff have besides Jerry have other things that they want to do, we could maybe just do a consent agenda and move into just a workshop to discuss the budget a little bit and so uh Jessica doesn't have to stick around on December 23rd. Is does that work for folks?

People cover for Yeah, we can Well, we we'll have Chief here still. I'll like pull the fire alarm or something. No, no Betsy on the 23rd. If she can make it, we would take her, but I don't know what her Oh, that's a lot to ask for her, I think.

Yeah. Well, I asked her if it was okay, but I didn't get a response cuz she's But I I put it out there. That's when the next meeting was. If you're available, that's great. If not, I think we still have time to make these decisions. It would probably be a

fairly long discussion. I think pretty intense. I think that question I think that question for Betsy would be great if people h have them, they write them, they send them to Jerry ahead of time and so then maybe in January Betsy can come in with answers of what we already want to ask. But I I mean

getting out early on the 23rd would be not terrible either. Yeah, I'm I'm getting cold this year, so it's not like I need to go open gifts or anything, but anything else? All right. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Moved by John. Do I have a second?

Second. Any discussion? All right. All in favor? Any opposition? Seeing none, it passes unanimously. Uh upcoming meetings, we have conservation commission on the 17th at uh 6:30. Select board the 23rd at 6:30. Planning board the January 10th at 6:30.

February December 10th. December 10th. Sorry. December 10th at 6:30. uh salt waste committee January 12th at 6:30 and select board again January 13th at 6:30 and do we have any need for an executive session? Seeing none, we have a motion to adjurnn.

So uh second all in favor any opposition? Seeing none unanimous. [clears throat] this because of the pling bullet Are we done? Yep. Hey, that's a dude.