[0:14] I hereby call to order the annual

[0:17] meeting of the town of Waterberry.

[0:21] The inhabitants of the town of

[0:23] Waterberry who are legal voters of the

[0:25] town have been notified and warmed to

[0:28] meet and conduct business in the

[0:30] Brookside Primary School gym at 47 Sto

[0:34] Street at 9:00 in the afternoon on March

[0:36] 3rd, 2026.

[0:39] Please rise to say the Pledge of

[0:41] Allegiance.

[0:45] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[0:48] United States of America and to the

[0:51] republic for which it stands, one nation

[0:54] under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:57] justice for all. You may be seated.

[1:05] The first article on the warning is to

[1:07] elect a moderator for the meeting.

[1:09] Article one, which is on page one of the

[1:11] town report. to elect a moderator to

[1:13] preside at the meetings of the town

[1:16] whose term of office shall be for the

[1:18] ensuing year. What is your pleasure with

[1:20] respect to article one? Mr. Clap.

[1:23] >> Madam moderator, I nominate Rebecca

[1:25] Ellis as moderator.

[1:30] » Are there further nominations for this

[1:32] office?

[1:35] » Seeing no further nominations, the town

[1:38] clerk shall pass one ballot for Rebecca

[1:40] Ellis. and thank you for electing me as

[1:42] your moderator.

[1:48] So today's meeting will be run following

[1:51] Robert's rules of order. So I'm going to

[1:53] start by giving you a quick overview of

[1:55] the rules. The purpose of the rules is

[1:58] to make sure town meeting is orderly and

[2:01] everyone gets a chance to speak and

[2:02] participate. My job is to help you

[2:05] understand the rules. So, if you ever

[2:06] have a question, please feel free to

[2:09] interrupt and say, "I have a question or

[2:12] come to order," and I will help you out.

[2:15] If you wish to speak, please go to the

[2:18] microphone, which is located up here in

[2:20] the front. In in order to speak, you

[2:23] must be recognized by me, the moderator.

[2:26] Speeches and remarks are limited to five

[2:28] minutes. A voter will not be recognized

[2:31] a second time on a particular article or

[2:34] amendment until all other voters who

[2:36] wish to speak have done so before you

[2:39] speak. Please clearly state your name.

[2:42] All motions and remarks should be

[2:43] addressed to me the moderator in front

[2:46] of the room and all articles must be

[2:49] moved, seconded and restated by the

[2:51] moderator before debate may begin.

[2:55] Discussion on motions must be germanine

[2:57] to the issue. Germaine means relevant or

[2:59] pertinent. If the discussion is not

[3:01] gerine, anyone in the body may call for

[3:04] a point of order.

[3:07] Now, articles may be amended and

[3:09] amendments may be amended and amendments

[3:12] must also be germanine to the main

[3:14] motion.

[3:15] Debate may be cut off by a motion and a

[3:18] twothirds vote. The motion is

[3:20] non-debatable.

[3:22] You must wait your turn and be

[3:23] recognized by the moderator to call the

[3:25] question. You cannot shout out close the

[3:28] bait.

[3:30] Votes are usually by voice vote and in

[3:33] announcing a vote I will say the eyes or

[3:36] nose appear to have it and then there

[3:39] will be a long silence

[3:42] before I announce the vote and the

[3:44] silence gets gives you a chance to call

[3:47] for a division of the house. A division

[3:50] of the house means people must raise

[3:52] their hands or stand to vote. The

[3:55] moderator or the public may call for a

[3:58] division of the house if either I or the

[4:00] body is unsure of the outcome of a voice

[4:03] vote.

[4:04] All you need to say is madam moderator

[4:07] division of the house.

[4:09] You may also request a paper ballot and

[4:11] seven voters are needed to request a

[4:13] paper ballot.

[4:17] Now, as my predecessor um also told this

[4:21] body, please don't show your approval or

[4:23] disapproval after someone speaks. And

[4:27] while none of you would of course boo or

[4:29] kiss a speaker, it can be just as

[4:32] intimidating to follow someone who

[4:34] received a round of applause.

[4:39] A motion to reconsider must be made

[4:42] before discussion begins on the next

[4:44] article. The person who brings the

[4:46] motion to reconsider must have voted on

[4:49] the prevailing side of the motion. A

[4:52] motion to reconsider cannot be brought

[4:54] once discussion begins on the next

[4:56] article.

[4:58] The role of the moderator is to explain

[5:01] procedural questions and ensure fair and

[5:03] civil debate. The moderator's decisions

[5:06] may be appealed by a motion to object.

[5:08] The motion is debatable and requires

[5:10] majority vote and I will not be offended

[5:13] if you overrule me at any time. This is

[5:16] your meeting and you are ruled in the

[5:17] end. If there is something you would

[5:20] like to do but you don't know the

[5:22] correct procedure, request to be

[5:23] recognized and I will help you out. And

[5:26] if you are feeling confused and don't

[5:28] know how to say something or don't know

[5:29] what we're voting on, you can just join

[5:31] shout out point of order or objection.

[5:35] I'll then give you a chance to explain

[5:36] and if needed, I'll help you phrase your

[5:38] objection.

[5:40] Please be patient and respectful. Let

[5:42] others state your opinions and don't be

[5:44] hasty about wanting to limit debate.

[5:48] The legislature has changed the law with

[5:50] respect to discussion of Australian

[5:52] ballot items. It is now permissible to

[5:54] discuss Australian ballot matters except

[5:56] for the election of officers.

[5:59] Finally, only Waterbury residents may

[6:01] vote. Um, non-residents may not speak

[6:04] without unanimous consent or a motion to

[6:06] suspend the rules.

[6:09] Please note that the warning contains 30

[6:11] numbered articles and we will take some

[6:13] short recesses during the meeting to

[6:16] hear from our legislators and

[6:18] presentation of the Keith Wallace Award.

[6:21] No binding action can take place unless

[6:23] it is warned.

[6:27] And finally, um, please note the select

[6:29] board is here to answer your questions

[6:31] as our acting town manager, Bill

[6:33] Woodruff, and interim town treasurer,

[6:35] Bill Shepla. I would also like to thank

[6:38] her petravich for um stepping in today

[6:41] to take notes.

[6:43] And two announcements that I'll try to

[6:45] make regularly throughout the morning

[6:47] are we have lunch at noon which will be

[6:50] served by the senior center and it's by

[6:52] donations and so your donations will

[6:55] support the senior center

[6:58] and the children's room is open

[7:00] downstairs. There's not childare this

[7:02] year but the children's room is open

[7:03] should any of you need a break for your

[7:06] children.

[7:10] Uh so quickly to I will introduce the um

[7:13] select board. Alyssa Johnson is chair,

[7:16] Kain Sweeney vice chair, Roger Clap,

[7:19] Michael Bard, and Tore Parabella.

[7:30] Articles 2, three, and four are

[7:32] Australian ballot items for the election

[7:34] of various town and school officials in

[7:36] Proond. You can get your Australian

[7:39] ballot and your printed ballot at the

[7:41] entrance to the gym. And as I said

[7:43] previously, Vermont law does not allow

[7:45] discussion at time of candidates who are

[7:47] running for positions on Australian

[7:49] ballot, including writing candidates. So

[7:52] we will therefore move to article five.

[7:57] Again, we're starting on page one of the

[7:59] town report where you will find the

[8:01] warning.

[8:03] Article five is to act upon the reports

[8:06] of the several town officers with the

[8:08] exception of claims for free

[8:09] compensation during 2025.

[8:12] What is your pleasure with respect to

[8:14] article 5? Mr. Bard,

[8:22] I move to accept the report of several

[8:25] town offices officers as printed in the

[8:28] annual report. the exception of claims

[8:31] for compensation by officer

[8:40] report.

[8:44] » The motion has been made by Mr. Bar. Is

[8:46] there a second?

[8:49] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[8:51] The motion is to accept the reports of

[8:53] the several town officers as printed in

[8:55] the annual report with the exception of

[8:57] claims for fees or compensation by town

[8:58] officers for services rendered during

[9:00] 2025. Mr. Barter, would you like to

[9:03] speak to the motion?

[9:05] >> Um, as I said, there are many town

[9:09] reports that are available in the annual

[9:12] report. If you could uh please refer to

[9:15] those. If you do have any questions, I

[9:18] or any of the select board members will

[9:20] be

[9:21] would be glad to ensure

[9:26] » would anyone like to speak to the time

[9:28] reports

[9:37] » this is

[9:39] just a reminder to people this is really

[9:42] the time when if you have questions

[9:44] about last year's public you should ask

[9:46] it when we get to the budget typically

[9:50] that's

[9:51] what student proposed for 2026. So if

[9:54] you have questions about the 2025

[9:56] budget, this is really the time to ask.

[10:07] » Madam moderator, my name is John Mal. I

[10:11] live in Waterberry Center and it is with

[10:14] great pleasure I get the opportunity to

[10:16] kick things off.

[10:19] uh for a few moments. I was warned not

[10:22] to make it more than five minutes, so I

[10:24] will be good about that. Uh just want to

[10:27] give a quick read back of last year, we

[10:31] had our hazardous waste collections. And

[10:34] of the 429 households that participated,

[10:38] 45% of them came from the town of

[10:41] Warbury,

[10:42] 194 folks that were getting rid of their

[10:44] bad stuff. Uh this year we're going to

[10:47] be teaming with the Central Vermont

[10:50] Solid Waste District at their Eco Depot

[10:53] for uh anytime that you need to uh make

[10:56] an appointment to go up here for

[10:59] household hazardous waste uh disposal.

[11:02] Plus, we will be having a collection at

[11:05] the Cross Middle School in the fall.

[11:09] We're still working on the uh contract

[11:11] for that, but maybe they'll be coming

[11:13] out uh early uh early this uh spring. We

[11:18] also collected 35 plus tons tons of

[11:23] textiles at several sites around the May

[11:27] River Resource Management Alliance uh

[11:30] communities. We continue to increase the

[11:33] amount of those things that are then be

[11:36] able to be reused and uh repurposed. We

[11:40] also collected over 245 tons of food

[11:44] scraps through folks like the plus we

[11:48] also have our composting program and we

[11:51] will be doing a composting workshop

[11:54] again uh later on this spring. So look

[11:57] out on front porch forum uh for that

[12:00] information. Uh we collected again over

[12:04] 15 tons of e-waste. I don't know why

[12:07] people continue to generate all this

[12:10] stuff. You know, we we we we have to

[12:13] kind of get more into uh reducing the

[12:16] amount of uh waste that we're

[12:18] generating. And over seven tons of tires

[12:22] were collecting. Now, I will like to

[12:25] turn this over to one of my associates,

[12:29] Lisa. If you could come up here and

[12:32] continue in the in the way of solid

[12:35] weights.

[12:40] » Good morning. Um, my name's Lisa Scalod

[12:42] and most of you know me as the editor at

[12:44] Waterberry Roundabout. Um, but long

[12:46] before the roundabout came to be, um,

[12:49] I've been Waterberry's readout

[12:50] coordinator. So, just for a minute, I'm

[12:52] going to wear that hat just to let folks

[12:54] know. Um, Greenup Day is always the

[12:55] first Saturday in May. Um, it'll be

[12:58] Saturday, May 2nd this year. Um, so put

[13:01] that on your calendar. If you already

[13:02] are a Greenup helper and you pick up,

[13:04] you do don't need to do anything. You'll

[13:06] get the emails from me. You'll get the

[13:08] information in about a month or so. If

[13:09] you have not helped out with Greenup in

[13:11] the past, um, I'm going to have a little

[13:13] list here. I'll throw it on the table.

[13:14] If you want to add your name to this,

[13:16] give me your um, email and your name.

[13:18] I'll add you to the email list. I

[13:19] promise not to spam you with much um

[13:21] emails between now and greenup day. Um

[13:24] greening up and we have a sign up for

[13:26] green up that is uh appreciated but not

[13:28] required. It helps so that people know

[13:30] where everyone's going to clean up and

[13:32] we can all spread out. Um I'm also um

[13:34] looking for a group to pick up and

[13:36] recycle and redeem and keep the money

[13:38] for all the five and 15 cent uh 10 cent

[13:41] 15 cent whatever they are the returnable

[13:43] bottles and cans. If you'd like to do

[13:45] that, let me know that. Um, and I'm also

[13:47] looking to see if there's anyone who's

[13:49] interested in helping to be an assistant

[13:51] coordinator to help me with sort of the

[13:53] greenup creep that is starting to happen

[13:55] where it's sort of a good thing and a

[13:57] challenge because more people want to

[13:58] get involved um in doing green up a

[14:00] little bit ahead of green up these days.

[14:02] So to have a little bit more uh

[14:05] bandwidth to help with organizing and

[14:07] coordinating in the runup to green up.

[14:08] So May 2nd, put on your calendars and

[14:11] we'll clean up. Last year we cleaned up

[14:12] over two tons of trash. Um, which is

[14:14] sad, but it's also great that so many

[14:16] people came and pitched in and did that.

[14:18] So, looking forward to it. Thanks every

[14:24] further discussion on article 5.

[14:30] is to accept

[14:32] the reports of the town officers with

[14:35] the exception of claims for fees or

[14:36] compensation during 2025.

[14:40] I have a question about um

[14:42] >> Can you state your name?

[14:43] >> My name is Kathy Grace, South Main

[14:45] Street. I have a question about the

[14:48] articles um where we appropriate sums of

[14:52] money for at the end of the county every

[14:54] year. And I have two questions. one is I

[14:58] would like the select board to publicly

[15:01] explain their policy for when um some

[15:05] people get put in the actual budget and

[15:07] at what time and when they don't. Um

[15:10] also I noticed that there's a dispar

[15:13] disparity about the people who are

[15:15] asking for money. Some people actually

[15:17] put in their financials, other people

[15:20] did not. And we have no way of

[15:23] questioning their financials and um

[15:29] » it's it's for this year there are

[15:31] articles um

[15:34] this this year they're articles 16 and

[15:36] 17. But I just wanted to get a clear

[15:39] picture of the policy for this because

[15:42] it looks like some people put in their

[15:44] budget, some people don't. I also

[15:46] understand that some people who got

[15:47] money didn't even pick it up last year.

[15:49] Are you able to tell us who didn't pick

[15:52] it up at this time in the 2025 budget?

[15:55] There's just a lot of questions. It's a

[15:56] grow. I bring it up every year. There's

[15:58] a growing list, but I wonder what the

[16:01] expectations are.

[16:04] So um because article five is really

[16:08] focused on last year's reports and

[16:11] budget um if there is somebody from the

[16:15] select board who would like to address

[16:17] the last year's um special articles um

[16:22] we can do that and then when we discuss

[16:24] next year's special articles um starting

[16:26] at article 16 to 30 we can return to

[16:31] your

[16:34] Mr. Bard.

[16:37] >> Thank you, uh, madam moderator. Uh, just

[16:40] to answer Kathy's questions, um,

[16:45] especially the ones that were approved,

[16:50] unless we have a report from them, we

[16:52] will not disperse money for them. So

[16:56] that is a little bit, you know, it's

[16:58] kind of unfortunate that if we've voted

[17:00] for something and people don't submit a

[17:04] report, they don't get the money. Uh so

[17:07] that's um answers that question as to

[17:12] you know there has been some concern

[17:14] over future budgets but that's where you

[17:18] we would discuss that at um the

[17:22] individual special articles uh for for

[17:24] this coming year but any past ones you

[17:27] know we wouldn't pay anyone and this is

[17:31] something I learned at a recent select

[17:33] board meeting that I was concerned about

[17:36] the creep of the number of special

[17:38] articles, which I think a lot of

[17:40] residents are, but if they get the

[17:43] appropriate number of votes, uh, vote

[17:46] signatures on a petition by state law,

[17:50] we're required to put them on the

[17:52] warrant. I hope that answers your

[17:54] question. Are they you said they have

[17:56] >> so if you want to ask further questions

[17:59] um we need to wait for other people to

[18:02] >> clarify that clarify something because I

[18:04] asked if they had to submit financial

[18:06] reports you just said they had to submit

[18:08] reports

[18:10] >> all right um for that we'll let you

[18:13] answer that um point of order

[18:16] >> they do have to submit a a report it's

[18:19] not a a detailed we can if we have any

[18:22] questions we could ask for a You know,

[18:25] all nonprofits submit 990 reports. We

[18:28] could always look at a 990 report

[18:31] online. Anyone, any any resident of the

[18:34] state of Vermont, I don't even think you

[18:36] have to be a resident, can look under

[18:38] 990s and look at any nonprofit as to

[18:41] what their um financial statuses.

[18:48] » Are there further questions about

[18:50] article five?

[18:54] Madam moderator, is this an appropriate

[18:56] time to report on who we paid in 2025 or

[19:00] should we wait to answer Mrs. Grace's

[19:03] question? Yes, if it's about the 2025

[19:06] budget,

[19:06] >> I just want to note that the special

[19:08] articles in 2025

[19:11] um after town meeting, as has been

[19:14] talked about, we did work last year when

[19:16] Karen was serving as clerk to notify

[19:18] those organizations after town meeting

[19:21] if their funding was approved. As was

[19:23] noted, we said we needed to receive an

[19:25] invoice in order to pay them. We did

[19:28] receive invoices for and pay all of the

[19:30] special articles from 2025 town meeting.

[19:33] And I'm happy to speak to the

[19:35] formulation of the warning and how

[19:37] things are clustered whenever it's

[19:39] appropriate.

[19:49] » All I wanted to ask people was

[19:51] >> introduce yourself please.

[19:52] >> Christians, I'm sorry. Uh all I wanted

[19:55] to ask people when they come up to the

[19:56] mic if you could speak up to the mic.

[19:58] I'm sitting here in the back uh third of

[20:00] the bleachers there and I asked the

[20:02] folks in behind me if they could hear

[20:04] what Kathy was saying and they could

[20:06] not. So if you could just step closer to

[20:09] the mic, we'd all appreciate it. Thank

[20:12] you. And if anyone can't hear, you can

[20:15] interrupt and raise your hand and say

[20:17] point of personal privilege. I can't

[20:19] hear or there's a fire or there's cold

[20:23] air coming through the windows. So

[20:25] things like that you can just interrupt

[20:27] and let us know and that's helpful to

[20:28] know that you can't hear. These

[20:30] microphones are a little tricky.

[20:33] Further questions about article 5, the

[20:36] reports for 2025.

[20:41] Uh hearing no further discussion, we

[20:43] will proceed to vote on article 5. The

[20:45] motion is to accept the reports of the

[20:47] several town officers as printed in the

[20:49] annual report with the exception of

[20:51] claims for fees or compensation by town

[20:53] officers for services rendered during

[20:56] 2025. If you vote I, it means you accept

[20:59] the reports of the town officers. If you

[21:00] vote no, it means you reject the votes

[21:03] of the town officers. All those in

[21:05] favor, please say I.

[21:07] >> I.

[21:08] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[21:12] The eyes appear to have it.

[21:15] The eyes do have it and you have passed

[21:17] article five.

[21:20] Article six to act with respect to

[21:23] claims of town officers for their

[21:25] services during 2025.

[21:28] What is your pleasure with respect to

[21:29] article six? Mr. Flanders,

[21:33] would you like to come up to the

[21:34] microphone?

[21:47] Thank you, madame moderator. Uh, skip

[21:50] planners of library. I move that the

[21:53] claims of the town officers for their

[21:56] services to $225

[21:59] be as follows. Select board chair

[22:02] $2,500.

[22:04] Vice chair $2,500.

[22:08] and other select board members $2,250

[22:12] each and listeners $750

[22:16] each.

[22:20] Is there a second?

[22:24] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[22:27] The motion is to pay the claims of the

[22:29] town officers for their services

[22:31] rendered during 2025

[22:33] for select board chair $2,500.

[22:37] Vice Chair, $2,500.

[22:40] Other select board members, $2,250.

[22:46] » And for the listers, $750 each.

[22:51] >> Mr. Flanders, would you like to speak to

[22:53] your motion?

[22:54] >> Yes, I would.

[22:56] Um, I'd like to speak to this motion in

[22:59] the way I arrived at these uh numbers.

[23:02] And uh I to

[23:06] served under the manager uh Bill

[23:09] Shefflck for many years and how he looks

[23:11] at figures many different ways to arrive

[23:14] at what we should do. I reviewed the pay

[23:18] of the select board over the years and I

[23:20] learned that the last time the select

[23:23] board pay was raised was a motion by

[23:26] manager Bill Shipler in 2013 for the

[23:30] 2012 pay. It went from $1,000 to $1,200

[23:36] for the uh sweatboard people and for the

[23:40] chair and vice chair to $1,450.

[23:47] I started looking at the ratio of the

[23:49] select board pay to the total budget

[23:52] that the town had passed. And I looked

[23:55] at uh 9 years between 1965 and 2025.

[24:02] And to my surprise, the highest ratio of

[24:05] select board pay to the town budget was

[24:09] in 1965.

[24:12] That select board was paid $250

[24:16] and had a budget of $383,000.

[24:22] If we applied that same ratio to today's

[24:25] budget, the select board pay would be

[24:28] $4,319.

[24:31] I floated that number to one of the

[24:34] select board members and they thought

[24:36] the pay was that was too high.

[24:39] In 1965 to 2009,

[24:44] the pay for the select board went from

[24:46] $250

[24:48] to $500 over a period of 44 years. That

[24:53] budget in 2009 was $3,488,000.

[24:58] I also applied the ratio of the pay of

[25:02] the budget in 2012 when it was raised to

[25:07] uh 1450.

[25:09] and they had a budget of $3,612

[25:14] million at that time. And if you applied

[25:17] that same ratio in 2012

[25:21] to today's budget, you arrive at pay of

[25:25] $2,656.

[25:29] I then looked at the uh inflation index,

[25:32] the CPI

[25:35] from 1965

[25:37] to 2026,

[25:39] applying it to that $250 pay.

[25:44] Surprisingly, when you apply inflation

[25:48] to that $250 pay, it comes out to be

[25:52] $2,581.

[25:56] So these two methods,

[25:59] the ratio of the budget and inflation, I

[26:02] came up with appropriate pay I thought

[26:04] for the chair and vice chair to be

[26:07] $2,500

[26:10] and the other select board members to be

[26:13] $2,250.

[26:16] And if you looked at just the inflation,

[26:20] the select board members are paid the

[26:23] same as that select board in 1965.

[26:28] I believe the increase in pay is

[26:30] recognition of the importance of the

[26:33] work of a select board in overseeing the

[26:36] welfare and business of our community.

[26:39] We owe the select board a vote of

[26:41] appreciation for the job being done.

[26:45] >> Thank you, Mr. Flanders. Is there a

[26:47] discussion? And if you have um questions

[26:50] for Mr. Flanders, your question should

[26:52] be directed to me and then I will ask

[26:54] Mr. Flanders if he wishes to be

[26:57] interrogated and answer those questions.

[26:59] So if you have a question or a comment,

[27:02] please come up to the microphone.

[27:12] » Hi, Evan Carl Hoffman of Butler Street.

[27:15] Uh, I want to thank Mr. Flanders for

[27:17] making this motion because I was

[27:18] planning to do something similar. I have

[27:20] a lovely graph here I wish I had on the

[27:22] poster so I could show you all of the

[27:24] select court pay adjusted for inflation

[27:27] over the past 65 years. And it is pretty

[27:30] remarkable how much has dropped in that

[27:32] period of time. Uh, I mostly agree with

[27:37] his numbers, but I believe the select

[27:39] board chair has a lot of additional

[27:42] duties beyond the regular members of the

[27:44] select board. And with that in mind, I

[27:46] would like to move that the pay for the

[27:48] chair be $5,000.

[27:52] » All right. So, are you making a motion

[27:53] to amend the motion?

[27:55] >> Yes.

[27:56] >> Um, so the motion to amend is to um

[28:03] strike $2,500

[28:07] from the motion and to replace it with

[28:10] $5,000.

[28:12] Is there discussion on this motion to

[28:15] amend?

[28:19] » Sorry, for the V for the chair. Is that

[28:21] correct?

[28:22] >> Yes, that's correct.

[28:23] >> Okay. So, the motion to amend is to

[28:25] strike $2,500

[28:27] and replace with $5,000 for the chair's

[28:31] compensation.

[28:34] Is there discussion on the motion to

[28:36] amend? And once we vote on the motion to

[28:38] amend, we'll go back to the motion.

[28:42] >> Oh, sorry. Yes. Is there a second on the

[28:44] motion to amend? Thank you.

[28:48] Mr. Bar,

[28:51] >> thank you, madam moderator. Uh, I was

[28:55] going to comment on the general motion.

[28:57] I'm definitely opposed to the increase.

[29:02] I know having been chair of the select

[29:05] board, it is a lot of work, but

[29:08] ultimately I look at this board as being

[29:10] a volunteer board. It's um

[29:15] we don't I know I don't do it for the

[29:17] money. I know the first year I was on

[29:18] the select board 7 years ago, I wanted

[29:21] to donate my pay back to to the town. Uh

[29:25] I'm not going to say who who refused

[29:27] that, but it it's someone in my family.

[29:30] And uh I get I'm concerned overall as much

[29:38] as it took me back that the large

[29:42] increase. I'm not saying that the select

[29:44] board doesn't deserve,

[29:47] you know, an increase, but we are still

[29:50] a volunteer board. We're we're looking

[29:53] for an increase in our tax rate. And to

[29:57] me, I would just assume keep our our

[30:02] dollar amounts flat to help the town. I

[30:07] don't think any of these people do the

[30:10] job because of any kind of a stipen. To

[30:13] me, I look at as I tell my 105year-old

[30:16] mother-in-law, do you get money from

[30:18] that town job? And I said, yeah, it

[30:20] probably works out to maybe maybe 25

[30:23] cents an hour. And I don't think any of

[30:26] us, we're volunteers and I get concerned

[30:30] with our town budget increasing. Do we

[30:34] want to see these increases? And I I

[30:36] don't think we're going to lose

[30:39] very any people who want to serve the town uh by increasing the amount of

[30:46] pay. My opinion. Thank you.

[30:50] >> Thank you. Is there further discussion?

[30:52] If you'd like to um make a comment,

[30:55] please come up to the microphone so

[30:56] people can hear you.

[31:01] » Hello, I'm Karen Miller, Waterberry

[31:02] Center and um I was a past life board

[31:05] member. I agree with everything that was

[31:08] said. It is really a a service to the

[31:11] community and you know you you do a lot

[31:14] of work and the pay is you know that

[31:17] that's not what's motivating. And so

[31:20] when they, you know, 5,000 was

[31:21] mentioned, I was actually shocked

[31:23] because that that's uh I just think it's

[31:25] an unnecessary expenditure and people do

[31:28] this because they love the community and

[31:30] they want to serve the community and

[31:32] it's nice to have a little bit of money

[31:34] um you know, pay your gas, get there,

[31:36] whatnot, but it's really not the goal of

[31:39] why we do what we do. Thank you.

[31:46] » Good morning. I'm Danny Kelman. Um, I

[31:48] also had the privilege of serving on the

[31:50] select board. Um, I did have a full-time

[31:52] job and a part-time job when I was

[31:54] serving and then had to reduce that

[31:56] part-time job because of the hours um, I

[31:58] put in serving as vice chair. Um, and

[32:01] yes, we don't do it quote for the money.

[32:04] Um, but what a privilege it is to say

[32:05] that. What a privilege it is to say I

[32:08] have enough money that I get to spend my

[32:09] time volunteering. And of course, we

[32:11] want that. But I also want to recognize

[32:13] um, there aren't a lot of candidates on

[32:15] the ballot. There's in fact a lot of

[32:17] people going around begging their

[32:18] friends and neighbors. I texted everyone

[32:20] I knew, "Do you have time? Do you have

[32:23] the availability? Do you have the

[32:25] capacity to put in these hours?" Select

[32:27] board members do not show up. Most

[32:29] select board members do not show up on a

[32:31] Monday for two and a half hours and then

[32:33] that's all they do twice a month. Um,

[32:35] they put in a lot of time, a lot of

[32:37] effort, a lot of outreach. It is

[32:39] emotionally draining to sit in front of

[32:41] a room and have your neighbors tell you

[32:43] sometimes really positive things and

[32:45] sometimes all the things you're doing

[32:46] wrong. And that's the job. And they

[32:48] wouldn't be there if they didn't love

[32:49] it. And also um let's remember that the

[32:53] select board chair puts in I don't know

[32:56] the hours a week are a lot. I don't want

[32:58] to put words in somebody's mouth, but

[32:59] it's really high. It's highlevel work.

[33:02] It's budgeting. Um it's communication

[33:04] skills. It's people skills. So I'm not

[33:07] very concise. I know that. But um I

[33:10] whether 5,000 is the number or not, I'd

[33:12] love for us to get out of the mindset of

[33:14] like money is only because we're greedy.

[33:16] Money is because we have to live in this

[33:19] world. And if we want folks to be on

[33:21] that ballot and not have to desperately

[33:22] run right in candidates, this might be

[33:25] one way that other folks that aren't

[33:27] either retired or wealthy or have

[33:29] multiple incomes can serve their

[33:30] community in the way they'd love to.

[33:34] >> Is there further discussion, Mr. Cheva?

[33:41] Bill Shep. Um, I I support the I support

[33:45] the motion and I frankly support the

[33:48] amendment. I would remind all of us that

[33:52] the claims of the officers is something

[33:55] that we vote on every year. It doesn't

[33:58] mean just because we do this now that we

[34:01] have to uh keep the same money forever.

[34:04] It typically works that way and you know

[34:06] 10 15 30 years go by before we give them

[34:09] a raise. Um you know in in the select

[34:13] board report uh Alyssa Johnson I think

[34:16] wrote it uh you know there were there

[34:18] were 34 select board meetings uh this

[34:21] year special and regular meetings. If

[34:24] you divide $5,000 by 34 meetings for the

[34:28] chair that's $147 a meeting. Uh when I

[34:33] was on the BLCT Health Trust Board for

[34:36] 20 years, um I got $100 a meeting for uh

[34:42] probably the first 15 years that I did

[34:44] that job. And then I got $150 a meeting

[34:47] for the last uh five years or so that I

[34:51] did that job. Um I agree with what Dandy

[34:55] said. Uh, if you look at this board, and

[34:59] I can say this because I'm well, I guess

[35:02] I'm one of 5,000 employees, but I think

[35:05] only one of those people up on the on

[35:08] the dis uh who serves on the select

[35:11] board right now has children. And, uh,

[35:14] the one who has children, they're grown

[35:16] now. They don't have to worry about

[35:18] child care. Uh, there's, uh, single

[35:22] young people up there. um they have

[35:24] other jobs. There's a lot of things that

[35:26] they have to do. Um

[35:29] and uh if you have to hire a babysitter

[35:32] to go to a select board meeting, uh

[35:35] you're going to you're going to you're

[35:37] going to pay a lot of that money. So, I

[35:40] would just remind you this isn't

[35:42] necessarily forever. This was a

[35:44] tumultuous year for our town. Um, and

[35:49] there's I'm not pointing any fingers for blame, but you know, about a third

[35:55] of the staff resigned this year. Uh, we

[35:59] lost the municipal manager. Uh, the

[36:01] select board uh had to do many things

[36:05] that are kind of outside of what would

[36:08] happen normally. So, for this year, I

[36:11] think $5,000 for the chair and and the

[36:14] other amounts that that Skip recited for

[36:17] the rest of the board, including the

[36:19] vice chair, is is appropriate. And next

[36:23] year, we can think about this again. So,

[36:25] I would encourage you to approve the uh

[36:28] the amended motion.

[36:33] So, the motion to amend is to strike

[36:36] $2,500 and replace with $5,000 for the

[36:39] chair's compensation. Is there further

[36:41] discussion?

[36:44] » I wasn't here for the rules at the

[36:46] beginning. Madam Chair, I make a

[36:48] comment.

[36:50] >> Yes, you may. And if you'd like, I can

[36:51] repeat the motion, the original motion,

[36:54] and then the motion to amend if you

[36:55] would like. Madam Chair, I have a

[36:57] recognized bias as I I volunteered for

[37:00] the army and I volunteered at no

[37:02] airplane. Both volunteers um privates

[37:05] are not paid a lot of money. Um they do

[37:07] it without a selfless service. I'm not

[37:10] um advocating that the race does not

[37:12] happen. I'm just point

[37:15] >> of order. What is your point of order?

[37:21] » And also for the body, please introduce

[37:24] yourself and speak in hear me now.

[37:27] >> I could use my army voice, but you don't

[37:29] want to hear that.

[37:31] >> So, Madam Chair, my only comment is I do

[37:34] not

[37:37] >> I do apologize. My name is Tom G. I

[37:39] thought I was a known entity. I know

[37:41] everybody on this board knows me. Some

[37:42] of you do not, but I do regularly

[37:44] attend. I usually watch the video. I

[37:47] would advocate you do that. I would also

[37:49] advocate you be in the budget meetings

[37:51] because they're very good. And I think

[37:52] this board has done an exceptional job

[37:54] on many items. I'm I'm not at all saying

[37:57] we shouldn't give a raise. Um but I

[38:00] think it should be something

[38:02] commensurate with an understanding that

[38:04] when you when you run for this position,

[38:07] you do so out of selfless service. When

[38:09] you volunteer for anything, you do so

[38:11] out of selfless service. I'm concerned

[38:13] that right now we talk a lot about

[38:16] affordability. $5,000 is not going to

[38:18] break one individual. I get it. Uh but

[38:21] the pattern is a little bit precarious

[38:25] if we tie service to a dollar figure.

[38:28] That's my only point. I I absolutely

[38:30] respect everybody on the board. I do

[38:32] believe the chair should make more. I

[38:34] think there's decisions that can be made

[38:36] in the future as Mr. Sheplock has said.

[38:39] Um but for clarity, would that be

[38:41] amending to pay the previous board or

[38:45] the one to be elected?

[38:48] So the article is to um act with respect

[38:52] to claims of town officers for their

[38:54] services during 2025. So this is for

[38:57] past year's services and the motion um

[39:01] from Mr. Flanders was to pay the claims

[39:05] of the town officers for their services

[39:07] rendered during 2025. Select board chair

[39:11] $2500, vice chair $2,500, other select

[39:15] board members $2,250,

[39:18] and listers $750 each. And we now have a

[39:22] motion to amend that motion that was

[39:24] brought by Mr. Hoffman to strike $2,500

[39:27] replaced with $5,000 for the chair's

[39:30] compensation. So, we're now discussing

[39:32] the motion to amend. So, it's just the

[39:35] last part. strike $2,500 replace with

[39:38] $5,000 for the chair's compensation. Is

[39:40] there further discussion on the motion

[39:42] to amend?

[39:48] So, um, seeing no further discussion,

[39:51] we'll vote on the motion to amend and

[39:52] then we'll go back to the main motion.

[39:55] So, the motion to amend is to strike

[39:57] $2,500 and replace with $5,000 for the

[40:01] chair's compensation. All those in

[40:03] favor, please say I. I

[40:06] >> All those opposed, please say no.

[40:13] » Um

[40:14] I am uncertain as to the outcome of that

[40:16] vote. So I'm going to ask for a division

[40:19] of the house, which means you'll raise

[40:21] your hands and I will need the board of

[40:23] civil authority to help with that.

[40:36] Is the board of civil authority prepared

[40:38] to count votes?

[40:42] » Okay. And

[40:44] John is going to count that half and

[40:47] Carla is going to count that half. So,

[40:51] um,

[40:53] I'm going to ask you to raise your hands

[40:54] and please keep your hands raised until

[40:57] they come up to me with their count for

[40:59] each part of the vote. So, those in

[41:02] favor of the motion to amend, the motion

[41:04] to amend is to strike the $2,500

[41:07] replaced with $5,000 for the chair's

[41:09] compensation. All those in favor, please

[41:12] raise your hand.

[41:43] Thank you.

[41:49] » All those opposed, please raise your

[41:51] hand.

[42:39] So the results are the eyes have 67

[42:42] votes, the nose has 52 votes. So, the

[42:46] motion passes.

[42:49] So, you have um replaced $2,500 with

[42:53] $5,000. So, we'll now go back to the

[42:55] main motion.

[42:59] is to pay the claims of

[43:01] the town officers for their services

[43:03] rendered during 2025.

[43:05] Select board chair $5,000. Vice chair

[43:09] $2,500.

[43:10] Other select board members $2,250

[43:14] each. Listers $750 each. Is there

[43:17] further discussion on the main motion?

[43:25] Seeing no further discussion, um we'll

[43:28] now vote on the main motion which is

[43:30] again to pay the claims of the town

[43:33] officers for their services rendered

[43:34] during 2025. Select board chair 5,000

[43:37] vice chair 2500 at their select board

[43:40] members 2250 each listers $750 each. All

[43:44] those in favor please say I.

[43:46] >> I.

[43:47] >> Those opposed please say no.

[43:54] The eyes appear to have it.

[43:58] The eyes do have it. And you have passed

[44:00] article six.

[44:04] I'd like to make one last comment as

[44:06] long as you're speaking about the select

[44:09] board.

[44:12] » Do you have a point of personal

[44:14] privilege?

[44:15] >> Um I'm not sure I follow it. It's about

[44:19] appreciation for the board for the work

[44:22] that

[44:23] >> Yeah, actually let's take a short break

[44:25] for um some awards and appreciation that

[44:29] will be um led by Mr. Flanders and um I

[44:34] give the floor to you. Um hearing no

[44:36] objection, I'll give the floor to Mr.

[44:38] Flanders.

[44:39] >> Briefly before we get to the Wallace

[44:46] award, as I said earlier when I made the

[44:49] motion, we owe the uh sweatboard a vote

[44:53] of appreciation. And I would also like

[44:56] to at this time take an opportunity to

[45:00] recognize and extend our appreciation

[45:03] for the service of Alyssa Johnson for

[45:06] her outstanding leadership in Waterbury

[45:09] and the dedication of the town report to

[45:12] her. as we hear so often in uh listening

[45:16] to uh athletics and sports about an

[45:19] outstanding player being referred to as

[45:22] a generational

[45:24] talent. I believe in Alyssa Johnson has

[45:29] a generational public servant and a

[45:32] thank you to Alyssa from all of us for

[45:35] our service.

[45:39] HEAT. HEAT.

[46:09] Madam moderator says I could respond.

[46:11] I'll just say I had no idea what was

[46:14] going to happen at town meeting and this

[46:15] will be the first thing I had no idea

[46:17] was going to happen. Um and whether you

[46:21] voted no or yes, I just want to say

[46:23] thank you. I had no idea either of these

[46:25] motions that were going to be made and

[46:27] would just say while I'm grateful for

[46:28] the recognition, I want to emphasize

[46:30] that I think this is a team sport and

[46:32] far more important to me than any of the

[46:34] things is that this doesn't happen

[46:36] without a full board of select board and

[46:37] without our municipal staff and without

[46:40] volunteers and all of the residents. So,

[46:42] thank you all for being here. Thank you

[46:44] for this generous recognition, but

[46:46] really thank you to the full board and

[46:48] to all of you.

[46:56] And we'll now proceed to the

[46:58] presentation of the Keith Wallace Award.

[47:05] Thank you, Madam Chair. And I have uh

[47:07] Roger Clap here with me to uh make a

[47:10] presentation of the Keith the Lawless

[47:14] Award. Um, and I look forward to this at

[47:18] every town meeting to recognize one of

[47:20] our citizens for their community

[47:23] service. And for those of you who are

[47:26] new to town meeting, a brief uh history

[47:30] of the board that Keith Wallace was a

[47:32] longtime resident and served as our town

[47:35] moderator for 34 years. He also served

[47:39] 19 years on the select board

[47:43] and in excuse me

[47:46] and in the Washington County uh as a

[47:48] Washington county senator in the

[47:51] legislature.

[47:53] Keith retired as moderator in 1994 and

[47:57] died in 1995.

[48:00] Excuse me.

[48:04] Um Keith's family came to the town and

[48:08] asked if an award could be presented at

[48:10] town meeting in honor of uh Keith's

[48:14] service to his community and this we've

[48:16] done for 31 years and we've honored 40

[48:20] people. This year's Wallace Award

[48:23] recipient has spent 25 years serving

[48:27] Waterberry area residents and visitors

[48:31] in their times of greatest need. This

[48:35] year's recipient is Peter Cogy. like

[48:38] that.

[48:51] HEAT.

[49:23] Uh Pete A. Wallace Memorial Community

[49:25] Service Award. The residents of

[49:28] Waterbury honor Peter Flogger in

[49:30] appreciation of outstanding service

[49:33] to improving our community. Presented at

[49:36] Waterbury Town meeting March 3rd, 2026.

[49:49] » It's not your time to speak.

[49:54] We tried to surprise Peter today, but we

[49:57] weren't able to do that. We thought if

[50:00] we told him, he might bring a big sermon

[50:03] to

[50:07] Peter grew up in Michigan and went to

[50:10] seminary in Chicago and served at church

[50:13] in Yag Maine before he came to the

[50:16] library congregational church in the

[50:19] year 2000.

[50:21] Since then, Peter has worked with the

[50:24] church on massive renovation, led his

[50:27] community on conser conversations about

[50:32] open and firmly worship and recently

[50:35] worked with his community on making the

[50:37] Waterbury Community Congregational

[50:40] Church sanctuary church as a safe place

[50:44] for immigrants who are fearing being

[50:47] detained illegally by ICE.

[50:50] Peter has involved with the Barnberry

[50:52] area food shelf since he arrived and

[50:55] he's been the director of the Good

[50:57] Neighbor Fund for nearly that long. This

[51:01] service is on a volunteer basis and is

[51:04] part of his calling to bring assistance

[51:06] to those in need when they need it. The

[51:10] Good Neighbor Fund for those who don't

[51:13] know is a strange gift attached gifts

[51:17] during tough times.

[51:19] The annual report for the good neighbors

[51:22] fund averages $20,000 a year given to

[51:27] residents of library ducksbury mult

[51:35] support increases during times of crisis

[51:38] including the tropical storm Irene when

[51:41] a total of over $350,000

[51:45] was distributed to those in need of help

[51:48] various expenses including heat,

[51:51] electricity, food, and replacement of

[51:54] housing goods. Peter also led efforts to

[51:58] open the church as a Red Cross shelter

[52:01] in immediate aftermath of Irene,

[52:04] allowing the church to provide

[52:06] assistance to residents of Kirby House

[52:09] when their home was flooded.

[52:12] He is a faith leader, a community leader

[52:15] who volunteers his strength and vision

[52:19] in those to those of need. A truly

[52:22] Christian value that aligns with the

[52:24] values of our committee and hope and

[52:27] desire to take care of our neighbors

[52:30] when they are in need. When Peter became

[52:33] the pastor's library, I don't know if

[52:37] anyone told him that it also included

[52:40] being the town service officer of the

[52:42] liability.

[52:44] And Peter did the job faithfully as the

[52:47] service officer for 17 years until it

[52:51] was abolished by the legislature.

[52:53] And even though it's abolished, Peter

[52:56] has continued performing to do

[53:00] over the years, excuse me, I've had the

[53:04] opportunity to work with Peter on

[53:06] funerals, sending people who need

[53:08] assistance to the good neighbor and the

[53:12] library who shall help with comment.

[53:15] I also have one special occasion to work

[53:18] with Peter on event honoring Edward Fra.

[53:24] the namesake of an Edward Ferrari

[53:26] utility history.

[53:29] Edward was a businessman in library. He

[53:32] was a public servant serving as a

[53:35] village trustee. He was a fireman, a

[53:38] policeman, and a water commission.

[53:42] He died at village meeting in 1904.

[53:46] He was elected village president and a

[53:49] water commission in October of that

[53:52] year.

[53:53] He died in a cave-in at the head of

[53:55] Ellen Street while installing a sewer

[53:58] line.

[53:59] The utility district wanted to honor

[54:01] that service with a blast plaque placed

[54:06] on his gravestone hope cemetery.

[54:10] For that dedication, I asked Peter to do

[54:12] the benediction and he graciously said

[54:16] yes, for which I was grateful.

[54:19] For that benediction, Peter wrote a very

[54:22] thoughtful benediction on the community

[54:25] service of Everett Farac

[54:28] with a few modifications and at the risk

[54:31] of being accused of plagiarism.

[54:35] I'm going to read this benediction in

[54:37] recognition of the community service of

[54:40] Peter Fog to the residents of Water Bird

[54:43] and surrounding communities.

[54:46] I would like you to listen closely to

[54:49] the words of this benediction that Peter prepared.

[54:57] A benediction

[54:58] you will no doubt know is literally a

[55:01] good word. It is the compound Latin word

[55:05] consisting of ben good and discern to

[55:10] speak. It is clear that I am speaking.

[55:14] What is always less clear when anyone

[55:17] speaks least of all a clergy person is a

[55:22] good part. I don't know why he added

[55:25] clergy person but

[55:28] maybe it was different for Mr. Ferrar.

[55:32] His obituary said that he always had a

[55:35] good word for all and his next breath it

[55:38] was said that his willing hands were

[55:41] always ready to help. That seems to me

[55:45] the important a good word and willing

[55:49] hands.

[55:50] The great German philosopher Emmanuel K

[55:55] famously wrote that the only good thing

[55:58] without qualifications is a good will.

[56:03] What he meant by that exactly has been

[56:05] debated through the ages. What can't

[56:09] seem to be opening the door to

[56:11] understanding the good

[56:14] in a way forgotten by many philosophers

[56:17] and theologians since. opening the door

[56:21] in the direction we want it open. When

[56:24] we speak of Peter like

[56:27] when we speak of people like Peter

[56:30] Potty,

[56:31] which is to say that you cannot claim

[56:35] that his good will, which resulted in

[56:38] the betterment of the lives of his

[56:40] neighbor, no matter who they were or

[56:43] where they live, could be anything but

[56:46] good.

[56:48] In other words, one could all

[56:51] unqualifiably say that Peter's

[56:53] dedication to service was a choice

[56:58] driven by a valid understanding of the

[57:00] best among possible choices for him. So

[57:04] what is good is properly tied to what is

[57:07] spoken and what is spoken is worthless

[57:11] unless it is done.

[57:13] Let me offer to you the example of

[57:15] Albert Schweitzer.

[57:18] One of those rare clergymen who are in

[57:20] the early 20th century hung up his robes

[57:25] and journeyed to Africa to be with a

[57:27] people with whom he long felt a deep

[57:31] connection and to serve them as a

[57:34] medical doctor.

[57:37] As we leave this place where we've given

[57:40] recognition to a man who has spent a

[57:43] quarter century serving us, may

[57:46] Schwitzer's words go with us.

[57:50] I don't know what your destiny will be,

[57:53] but one thing I do know, the only ones

[57:57] among you who will be really happy are

[58:00] those who have sought and found how to

[58:03] serve. Thank you, Peter. And now may we

[58:07] all go in peace the message of Peter P.

[58:21] I just said I'm told Skip I'm sorry you

[58:24] had to read that. I'm sorry you had to

[58:25] listen to that. Uh,

[58:28] I simply mean to say that that we all

[58:30] are tasked to do our best and I'm

[58:33] privileged to be able to do that in this

[58:35] community and will continue to do that

[58:37] as well as I can for the years that I

[58:40] have. Uh, what I do is in large part

[58:44] simply being a conduit of your good

[58:47] graces.

[58:49] The only thing that Skip got wrong is

[58:51] that the $20,000 that he mentioned in

[58:53] terms of our annual expenditure is a

[58:55] little low. I just uh submitted a grant

[58:59] report to somebody. We gave $77,000 in

[59:02] 25 and 10 and some odd thousand in in

[59:06] 24. So um thank you uh from the bottom

[59:10] of my heart for all of your your

[59:12] goodwill.

[59:19] Well, my wife is with Eron Mui is at the

[59:22] table as a justice of the peace. My

[59:25] daughter is working at Redhead Cafe and

[59:28] my other daughter's at school. So, I'm

[59:30] not sure.

[59:32] >> Where is she? Is she here?

[59:35] >> She's there.

[1:00:04] I have one last thing

[1:00:07] >> new for this year.

[1:00:13] One last thing that's new for this year.

[1:00:16] One of the four recipients of the Keith

[1:00:19] Wallace Award has long said, "Why give

[1:00:23] them a plaque that they throw in a

[1:00:25] drawer and never look at again? Why

[1:00:29] don't you give them a certificate and

[1:00:31] allow them to make a uh the cost of the

[1:00:34] plaque to a charity of their choice?"

[1:00:37] The select board this year has agreed

[1:00:41] that the cost of the plaque, which is

[1:00:43] about $150,

[1:00:46] you can let us know whether you would

[1:00:47] like us to buy you a plaque to put in

[1:00:50] the door

[1:00:55] or you would like us to write a check to

[1:00:58] a charity of your choice for $150. So,

[1:01:02] you can let us know what your

[1:01:04] preferences would be.

[1:01:18] Okay, now we will return to the orders

[1:01:20] of the day. Thank you, Skip. That was

[1:01:23] wonderful.

[1:01:24] Article seven. This is not as much fun

[1:01:28] as this the Keith Wallace award, but

[1:01:30] article seven. Shall the tax warrant on

[1:01:33] real property be dated July 1st, 2026

[1:01:36] and the taxes be due in two installments

[1:01:39] with the first installment due and

[1:01:41] payable on August 14th, 2026 and the

[1:01:43] second installment due and payable on

[1:01:45] November 6th, 2026. What is your

[1:01:48] pleasure with respect to article 7? Miss

[1:01:50] Harvella,

[1:01:52] >> I move that the tax warrant on real

[1:01:55] property be dated July 1st, 2026 and the

[1:01:58] taxes be due in two installments with

[1:02:01] the first installment due and payable on

[1:02:03] August 14th, 2026 and the second

[1:02:06] installment due and payable on November

[1:02:08] 6th, 2026.

[1:02:11] Moved by Miss Taraveella. Is there a

[1:02:13] second?

[1:02:15] >> The motion has been moved and seconded.

[1:02:19] Miss Taraveella has moved that the tax

[1:02:21] warrant on real property be dated July

[1:02:23] 1st, 2026 and the taxes be due in two

[1:02:26] installments with the first installment

[1:02:27] due and payable on August 14th, 2026 and

[1:02:30] the second installment due and payable

[1:02:31] on nove on November 6, 2026. Miss

[1:02:34] Taravella, would you like to speak to

[1:02:35] the motion?

[1:02:37] >> No, thank you. All right.

[1:02:43] Is there any discussion?

[1:02:48] Hearing no discussion, we will proceed

[1:02:49] to a vote on article 6 uh sorry, article

[1:02:52] 7. It has been moved that the tax

[1:02:55] warrant on real property be dated July

[1:02:57] 1st, 2026 and the taxes be due in two

[1:03:00] installments with the first installment

[1:03:01] due and payable on August 14th, 2026 and

[1:03:04] the second installment due and payable

[1:03:05] on November 6th, 2026. All those in

[1:03:08] favor, please say I. I.

[1:03:10] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[1:03:13] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[1:03:16] have it. And you have passed article 7.

[1:03:20] Article 8. Shall each tax installment be

[1:03:23] paid in hand at the municipal office by

[1:03:25] 4:30 p.m. on the due date without

[1:03:27] discount and interest be charged at the

[1:03:29] maximum allowed by statute not to exceed

[1:03:31] 1 and 12% per month or portion thereof

[1:03:34] on each installment and a late penalty

[1:03:36] of 8% be charged as allowed by statute

[1:03:38] on taxes not paid when due. What is your

[1:03:41] pleasure with respect to article 8, Mr.

[1:03:44] Bar?

[1:03:48] Madame moderator, I move that each tax

[1:03:51] installment shall be paid in hand at the

[1:03:54] municipal office by 4:30 p.m. on the due

[1:03:57] date without discount and that interest

[1:04:00] be charged at the maximum allowed by

[1:04:02] statutes not to exceed 1 and 12% per

[1:04:06] month or portion thereof on each

[1:04:09] installment and a late penalty of 8% be

[1:04:13] charged as allowed by statute on

[1:04:18] taxes not paid when due

[1:04:21] >> moved by Mr. Bard. Is there a second?

[1:04:25] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[1:04:27] And if there's no objection, I will not

[1:04:29] restate the motion. Mr. Bard, would you

[1:04:32] like to speak to the article just

[1:04:35] briefly? Um, we I think extended in the

[1:04:39] last year or two it to 5:00. Uh, we

[1:04:43] weren't getting any payments that late

[1:04:46] to make municipal staff stay when there

[1:04:48] wasn't uh payments being being made. Uh,

[1:04:52] we moved it back to 4:30. Thank you. Is

[1:04:56] there further discussion on article 8?

[1:05:03] Seeing I'm hearing no further

[1:05:05] discussion, we will proceed to a vote on

[1:05:07] article 8, it has been moved that each

[1:05:08] tax installment shall be paid in hand at

[1:05:11] the municipal office by 4:30 p.m. on the

[1:05:13] due date without discount if that

[1:05:15] interest be charged at the maximum

[1:05:17] allowed by statute not to exceed 1 and

[1:05:19] 12% per month or portion thereof on each

[1:05:21] installment and a late penalty of 8% be

[1:05:24] charged as allowed by statute on taxes

[1:05:26] not paid when due. All those in favor,

[1:05:28] please say I. I.

[1:05:31] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[1:05:34] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[1:05:37] have it. And you have passed article 8.

[1:05:41] Article nine. Shall the voters of the

[1:05:43] town of Waterbury adopt the proposed

[1:05:46] operating and capital budgets which

[1:05:48] contain $6,567,486

[1:05:53] in expenses of which $4,585,774

[1:05:59] is to be raised by property taxes and

[1:06:02] $1,981,712

[1:06:06] is to be funded by anticipated nonpropy

[1:06:09] tax revenues. What is your pleasure with

[1:06:11] respect to article 9, Miss Johnson?

[1:06:15] >> Madame moderator, I move that the town

[1:06:17] of Waterbury adopt the proposed

[1:06:19] operating and capital budgets which

[1:06:21] contain $6,567,486

[1:06:27] in expenses of which $4,585,774

[1:06:33] is to be raised by property taxes.

[1:06:35] and1,981,712

[1:06:40] is to be funded by anticipated nonpropy

[1:06:42] tax revenues. Moved by Miss Johnson. Is

[1:06:45] there a second?

[1:06:48] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[1:06:52] It has been moved that the town of

[1:06:54] Waterberry adopt the proposed operating

[1:06:56] and capital budgets which contain

[1:06:58] $6,567,486

[1:07:01] in expenses of which $4,585,774

[1:07:05] is to be raised by property taxes and

[1:07:08] $1,981,712

[1:07:10] is to be funded by anticipated non-propy

[1:07:13] tax revenues. Miss Johnson, would you

[1:07:15] like to speak to the motion?

[1:07:16] >> Yes, please. Um, first with regard to

[1:07:19] semantics, I would note that in my

[1:07:21] current three-year term on the select

[1:07:23] board, I think I have made the budget

[1:07:25] motion each year at town meeting. And I

[1:07:27] requested to make it the first year

[1:07:29] because it used to be quite long and

[1:07:32] flowery and uh said things about for the

[1:07:35] purposes of laying out roads and

[1:07:37] highways, this amount for the library,

[1:07:38] this amount. And I just want to

[1:07:40] acknowledge for folks who have been to

[1:07:41] town meeting for multiple years that

[1:07:43] we've evolved and continued to uh move

[1:07:45] forward with the structure of this. So

[1:07:47] last year's looked a little different

[1:07:48] and included an anticipated tax rate. Um

[1:07:52] our moderator uh our former municipal

[1:07:54] manager and myself met with the town

[1:07:56] attorney and went back and forth several

[1:07:58] times and on his advice, this motion as

[1:08:01] stated and this warning article is more

[1:08:03] in line with the practices in most towns

[1:08:06] and has received his review. Um, I would

[1:08:09] start with page 20 in our town report,

[1:08:12] um, which speaks to the anticipated

[1:08:14] property tax rate because we know that

[1:08:16] is an important consideration for folks

[1:08:18] in considering the municipal budget.

[1:08:22] Um,

[1:08:24] in short, assuming that our grand list

[1:08:27] increases 8% um, next year, uh, it's

[1:08:31] been about 1% over the past couple of

[1:08:33] years, um, this would result in a 2.7%

[1:08:36] increase in property taxes. Um, with the

[1:08:39] budget motion, as I stated, um, overall

[1:08:43] with regards to the budget, I would note

[1:08:45] that the items included in this is

[1:08:47] continuing town and municipal

[1:08:49] operations. Um, we went department by

[1:08:53] department through each of these. Um, I

[1:08:55] would also note that we have a

[1:08:56] collective bargaining agreement with a

[1:08:58] number of our town employees and this

[1:09:00] includes um appropriate staff and wages

[1:09:02] as um or salary and wages, excuse me, as

[1:09:06] negotiated in that. Um, and beyond that,

[1:09:08] I'm happy to send to questions.

[1:09:11] >> Is there um discussion on the budget on

[1:09:15] article 9?

[1:09:31] Bill Shapp again. Um, none of what I'm

[1:09:35] going to say is is going to change um

[1:09:39] the the tax rate that uh is shown on

[1:09:43] page 20. I think the uh 2.7%

[1:09:47] increase in the property taxes is in

[1:09:50] line with inflation that was the

[1:09:53] inflation rate for 2025 year-over-year

[1:09:56] at the end of December. And uh it it

[1:09:59] seems reasonable. I will say and I I've

[1:10:03] talked to the select board about some of

[1:10:05] my concerns already. Um it's very

[1:10:09] difficult in the format that the budget

[1:10:11] is presented to get to any of the

[1:10:15] numbers that are on page 20. Uh and it's unfortunate but it's the case. I I

[1:10:24] spent a lot of time with it and as um

[1:10:28] was stated earlier, I'm acting as the

[1:10:30] town treasurer now and I've been working

[1:10:32] uh the last several weeks and have come

[1:10:35] across some concerns. I would say that

[1:10:39] uh two of the things that um stand out

[1:10:43] to me about the budget and and they're

[1:10:45] minor, but I want to make sure that the

[1:10:47] next select board, whomever they might

[1:10:49] be, um will try to avoid these things.

[1:10:54] So, this the $6,500

[1:10:58] that was originally in the U select

[1:11:02] board's request for uh payment of the of

[1:11:07] the officers for the for the select

[1:11:09] board members and and then for the

[1:11:10] listeners. Um that $6,500

[1:11:15] appears in the general government budget

[1:11:17] already passed. Now, um, we we increased

[1:11:22] that that 6,500 shouldn't have been in the budgets on page 24 and following

[1:11:28] at all. The special articles that we're

[1:11:31] not going to get to until the end of the

[1:11:34] meeting, um, if you look on page 29,

[1:11:39] all of the special articles, which add

[1:11:41] up to $50,632,

[1:11:45] already show it. So, I don't know if

[1:11:49] when we vote on the special articles,

[1:11:51] are we doubling it up? Uh, if this is

[1:11:54] already included, it's it's just it's a

[1:11:57] bad presentation. And I I feel um badly

[1:12:02] about that. There's a few other things

[1:12:04] that I'll wait for when we get the

[1:12:05] special articles. What I have found, and

[1:12:09] I'm I'm stating this because I know

[1:12:10] there are people that go through the

[1:12:12] budget, they have questions, they've

[1:12:14] come to me, they've talked about it. Uh

[1:12:17] while there are these uh mistakes, if

[1:12:21] you will, or misrepresentations,

[1:12:25] I haven't seen anything that's to the

[1:12:27] degree that I would worry about the

[1:12:29] bottom line that they have presented for

[1:12:32] a budget for this year and for tax rate.

[1:12:35] But if any of you are concerned, it is

[1:12:38] difficult to follow the bouncing ball a

[1:12:40] little bit. Thank you.

[1:12:53] » Madam Chair, may I ask Mr. Sheffllock a

[1:12:55] few questions? And I think he's got the

[1:12:58] previous experience as a town manager. I

[1:13:00] think he'll have the most effective

[1:13:03] answer.

[1:13:04] >> Mr. supple. You agree to be

[1:13:06] interrogated.

[1:13:10] » I agree. I agree to be interrogated. I'm

[1:13:13] not sure I'll agree to answer.

[1:13:17] » So, and and I absolutely respect that

[1:13:20] walking is nonspace. As I referenced

[1:13:22] earlier with the flex board, I I I

[1:13:26] the learning is in the labor of building

[1:13:29] the budget and I would advocate that we

[1:13:31] don't just look at this day. So again,

[1:13:33] that's a plug to say when they build the

[1:13:35] budget, please, please, please be

[1:13:37] present. Um, Zoom is a wonderful thing.

[1:13:40] If you can do it, teams or be in the

[1:13:42] room. You're in the room, you're in the

[1:13:45] fight. When it gets to this, we're going

[1:13:48] yes or no. That's it. So the question

[1:13:52] after that long I tried to on the pilot

[1:13:55] fund specifically

[1:13:57] does that give you pause that the state

[1:14:02] we appear to be over 100k lower than

[1:14:05] pilot?

[1:14:09] » That's a better question probably for

[1:14:11] the select board. I I read u Tom Light's

[1:14:16] uh report. He does speak to that. Um the

[1:14:21] pilot payment evidently is uh the

[1:14:24] formula that the state currently uses um

[1:14:28] suggests Tom suggested is um

[1:14:33] is

[1:14:34] affected by the common level of

[1:14:36] appraisal of the town of Water and our

[1:14:40] grand list

[1:14:42] uh as it shows uh about $8 million of

[1:14:46] the grand list as I understand it. about

[1:14:49] 50%

[1:14:50] low. Um, so the pilot payment, if you

[1:14:55] look on page 24,

[1:14:58] um,

[1:15:00] and Tom's, uh, Tom's manager's report

[1:15:04] speaks to it, there's $36,000

[1:15:08] that is budgeted for 2026.

[1:15:11] Um the bigger concern unfortunately is

[1:15:15] that while we received $383,000

[1:15:19] in 24 according to this budget um he and

[1:15:23] the select board presented a budget of

[1:15:25] 420,000 last year and only received

[1:15:29] 340,000.

[1:15:31] So I think they've taken into

[1:15:33] consideration

[1:15:35] uh the fact that the pilot payment

[1:15:37] formula is going to generate less money

[1:15:40] than it has before. Um so it it is a

[1:15:45] little bit of a concern but I think

[1:15:46] they've addressed it.

[1:15:48] >> Madam moderator, I'm happy to speak to

[1:15:49] this.

[1:15:50] >> Um yes, Miss Johnson, sorry I know it's

[1:15:53] out of order. Um I just wanted to offer

[1:15:55] on pilot specifically. I think the

[1:15:57] significant error was actually with

[1:15:59] regard to last year's budget and I think

[1:16:01] that $420,000

[1:16:03] number is part of the reason we're

[1:16:05] looking at this. So, uh Tom Light's

[1:16:09] reasoning when I asked him is that um

[1:16:11] the pilot fund, the fund that the state

[1:16:13] pays this out of, and I saw at least one

[1:16:15] of our representatives has joined the

[1:16:17] room, um is based on a formula. And so,

[1:16:20] um the payment, as has been noted, is

[1:16:22] decreased by the common level of

[1:16:24] appraisal. Um if you look between 2024

[1:16:27] and 2025

[1:16:28] um without a change to that formula why

[1:16:31] we budgeted for approximately $40,000

[1:16:34] more revenue in my mind that was the

[1:16:36] error um without that formula being

[1:16:38] changed. I believe the reasoning was or

[1:16:41] the thought Tom had was that because

[1:16:43] more towns are adopting local option

[1:16:46] taxes because it no longer requires a

[1:16:48] charter change. He presumed perhaps that

[1:16:51] there would be more money coming into

[1:16:52] that fund and the formula would change.

[1:16:55] No such change happened. So instead, we

[1:16:57] were just looking at a decreasing common

[1:16:59] level of appraisal. So again, we've

[1:17:01] accounted for that moving forward. But I

[1:17:03] think the large discrepancy this year

[1:17:05] was due to last year's budget number.

[1:17:07] And again, we've tried to account for

[1:17:08] that moving forward.

[1:17:11] >> You can ask another follow-up um

[1:17:13] question um for Mr. Seplot.

[1:17:18] And I apologize to Tom Glor now a known

[1:17:21] entity so next year I I'll wear a sign.

[1:17:24] Uh Mr. Sheplock again you referenced um

[1:17:29] patterns in the past and when I look at

[1:17:31] this I just want to know and I'm one of

[1:17:33] those people that tabulate and go

[1:17:35] through it. Um details matter and I

[1:17:38] think you know that in a budget a

[1:17:40] budget's not a blank check right. So, in

[1:17:43] your experience,

[1:17:45] when I look at these budgets, I look at

[1:17:47] the 2024 actual, then the 2025 budget,

[1:17:50] then the 2025 actual. And I noticed

[1:17:53] before I even get to page 25, there are

[1:17:56] many lines that are overspent in 25. Um,

[1:18:00] I'm not really worried about the each,

[1:18:03] it's the big each. And as a previous

[1:18:06] town manager, how do you typically deal

[1:18:09] with the debits and credits, the fact of

[1:18:11] life changes that happen during the year

[1:18:13] as we approach 2026

[1:18:16] when we appear to be on path to be over

[1:18:18] spent on the line items?

[1:18:23] » Well, that that's a little bit of a

[1:18:25] complicated question. Um, clearly a

[1:18:28] budget is the best representation that

[1:18:31] the manager and the board um expects

[1:18:35] spending to be for the the the year that

[1:18:39] we're in. So, it started January 1st, so

[1:18:42] we've had two months of spending already

[1:18:46] that have happened. The budget is put

[1:18:49] together in December and January. And uh

[1:18:52] you know, we didn't get it, but if we

[1:18:54] were on a calendar year basis and we got

[1:18:57] a huge blizzard that impacted us like it

[1:19:01] did down in southern New England,

[1:19:04] you know, we might be well ahead of uh

[1:19:07] schedule in terms of our spending for

[1:19:10] salaries and overtime and the like uh

[1:19:13] for for the highway department. um if a

[1:19:16] fire truck uh gets hit on the

[1:19:18] interstate, which happened at least once

[1:19:21] or twice in in my career, and uh you

[1:19:24] know, you don't have it in the budget

[1:19:26] that you have to uh pay a couple

[1:19:28] hundred,000 to get a new truck, even

[1:19:31] when you take into consideration

[1:19:33] insurance because the insured value of

[1:19:35] the a truck is usually less than the the

[1:19:39] cost to replace that truck. So, um, if

[1:19:43] there were times when, uh, we had an

[1:19:46] unanticipated

[1:19:47] significant overspending, I would report

[1:19:50] that to the select board and I would

[1:19:52] send a memo to all the department heads

[1:19:54] and say, "We had an issue in the fire

[1:19:56] department. I know you think the fire

[1:19:58] department is its own department and it

[1:20:00] doesn't affect the library or the

[1:20:02] recreation department. However, we're

[1:20:04] going to be $300,000 over in our budget.

[1:20:07] So, everybody's got to pull back a

[1:20:09] little bit." So, I'm sure that kind of

[1:20:12] thing has happened here with Tom and

[1:20:15] with with this select board. Um, so

[1:20:18] that's the answer to that.

[1:20:20] >> Thank you.

[1:20:21] >> I I would make one uh correction to what

[1:20:25] you said that we get to only vote yes or

[1:20:28] no here. We actually get to amend the

[1:20:30] budget here if you think that it needs

[1:20:32] to be amended either up or down. And

[1:20:35] that's why we had a discussion a year

[1:20:36] ago about presenting the budget like

[1:20:40] this where we can talk about it as

[1:20:41] opposed to Australian dollar. So with

[1:20:44] that I'll

[1:20:48] » is there further discussion

[1:20:52] we are um on article nine.

[1:20:57] » Thanks Mrs. moderator. Um

[1:21:00] >> Christian from Waterberry. Yeah. Hey,

[1:21:03] everybody knows from the discussion that

[1:21:05] just took place that uh our ensuing year

[1:21:08] budget is a moving target.

[1:21:11] Last year, I stood right here in front

[1:21:13] of all you voters and suggested that if

[1:21:15] the local options tax was used wisely

[1:21:18] that the town municipal tax rate

[1:21:20] shouldn't see an increase for at least

[1:21:22] 10 years.

[1:21:24] Well, I have to apologize for that u

[1:21:27] because of the way the the budget is

[1:21:30] structured this year. So, and you can

[1:21:33] correct me if I'm wrong, um, any of the

[1:21:35] board members or even Mr. Sheffle, but

[1:21:37] u, it seems like we rolled into 2025

[1:21:41] with about a $400,000

[1:21:44] surplus in the U local options tax and

[1:21:47] then this year's local options tax

[1:21:49] generated $935,000

[1:21:52] for a total of $1.3 million of local

[1:21:55] options tax. What bothers me about the

[1:21:58] budget, even though it's, you know, if

[1:22:01] you look at it, uh, in its entirety, it

[1:22:03] seems like it's been structured very

[1:22:05] well, the problem is we're still asking

[1:22:09] for a 2.7%

[1:22:11] increase.

[1:22:12] That may not seem like much. It's

[1:22:15] figured as a a typical cost of living

[1:22:18] increase.

[1:22:21] I've spent a lot of time in the last

[1:22:22] week and a half talking to my neighbors.

[1:22:26] About 10% of them are on the on are are

[1:22:30] going to be packing up and leaving the

[1:22:31] state, another 30% of them are

[1:22:34] considering it.

[1:22:36] So,

[1:22:37] at this point, I think and then what we're seeing from our school

[1:22:41] education tax increase and if anybody's

[1:22:44] been watching some of the legislative

[1:22:46] proposed bills, they're looking at

[1:22:48] coming after our non-residential

[1:22:50] properties from one end to the other,

[1:22:52] obviously scaled differently depending

[1:22:55] on whether you're an out ofstate owner

[1:22:57] of that property or you're a resident of

[1:23:00] the town.

[1:23:02] Somehow, we got to stop the bleeding

[1:23:04] here.

[1:23:05] because it's just forcing out more

[1:23:07] people out of this state than we think

[1:23:09] we're bringing in or trying to help

[1:23:11] bring in. The ones that are here are

[1:23:14] struggling, a lot of them. I know I've

[1:23:17] talked to them. So,

[1:23:20] this particular budget for 2026 calls

[1:23:23] for a 2.7% increase. I told the select

[1:23:27] board there a few weeks ago that I was

[1:23:28] going to ask for that to be reduced to a

[1:23:32] 0% increase at this particular meeting.

[1:23:36] You can't there's no indication here on

[1:23:38] 2026 proposal of a projected fund

[1:23:42] balance for the end of 26.

[1:23:45] If we knew that, we might be able to

[1:23:47] wipe that 2% 2.7% right out immediately

[1:23:51] and even if we ended up with a 0% at the

[1:23:53] end of 26, but we don't have that

[1:23:56] information here. The other issue that's

[1:23:58] not in this town report is the cost of

[1:24:02] replacing the staff that we lost and the uh um training that's going to

[1:24:10] involve in replacing those staff and

[1:24:13] just the entire concept of the fluidity

[1:24:17] once you get those people into those

[1:24:20] positions and then make it all gel.

[1:24:23] Off the top of my head, based on my 20

[1:24:26] years of being involved in town

[1:24:27] politics, I'm suggesting that it's going

[1:24:30] to eat into $100,000 at least, probably

[1:24:34] pretty hard. Um, so

[1:24:38] I'm not going to call for that 2% 2.7%

[1:24:42] uh increase to be wiped. I hope that the

[1:24:45] in the the new board will look at that

[1:24:48] and try to

[1:24:50] mitigate through not only the

[1:24:52] replacement costs of or the costs for

[1:24:55] the training and the new staff and of

[1:24:58] course I'm sure increases in pay will

[1:25:00] come with that as well and other benefit

[1:25:02] increases but um I just want everybody

[1:25:05] to know that

[1:25:07] I'd like to see this a 0% increase this

[1:25:10] year uh in lie of the fact that we got

[1:25:14] $1.3 million of additional taxes. The

[1:25:17] cost of living increase doesn't take

[1:25:19] into the fact that when every whenever

[1:25:22] you go purchase something at the store,

[1:25:25] that's another increase that's coming

[1:25:26] out of your pocket that goes towards

[1:25:28] that local options tax. So, that needs

[1:25:30] to be considered when you're thinking

[1:25:32] about it in your head as well because

[1:25:34] that's also impacting your ability to

[1:25:37] continue to stay here. Thank you.

[1:25:44] Is there further discussion?

[1:25:49] » Hi Karen Miller uh very senator and I

[1:25:52] just want to touch on the thing about

[1:25:54] yes or no for the budget. It's very

[1:25:56] admirable that you can go to the budget

[1:25:59] meetings and see what's happening and

[1:26:01] hear what's happening but that's what

[1:26:03] meeting is also for. There's uh I mean

[1:26:06] that's the glorious thing about town

[1:26:07] meeting. You can amend any single line

[1:26:11] in the budget. I just want to be, you

[1:26:13] know, clear and concise. It's not you're

[1:26:16] voting yes or no. You do have the option

[1:26:18] to look at each line and say, "Let's

[1:26:20] talk about that." All right? Or or we

[1:26:23] need to explore that more. I don't

[1:26:24] understand what that line is being paid

[1:26:26] for. So, I just wanted to bring up

[1:26:28] again. is it's town meeting is

[1:26:31] empowering and it's empowering you to

[1:26:33] question and just because you didn't

[1:26:35] attend every single budget meeting the

[1:26:37] board did doesn't mean you don't have

[1:26:39] the right to question the budget.

[1:26:51] » Hi, my name is Kathy Murphy. here. I

[1:26:53] live in Waterbury Center, but I own a

[1:26:55] Stow Street Emporium in the village. And

[1:26:57] Chris brought up the local option tax as

[1:27:01] did um Alyssa. Very confused about it.

[1:27:04] As a retailer, people ask me all the

[1:27:06] time, what is this extra 1% I'm paying.

[1:27:09] I struggle to be able to answer where

[1:27:11] that money is going. It seems like we've

[1:27:14] really taken in a lot of money, and I

[1:27:16] thought that was going to go towards

[1:27:19] other expenses. But if somebody could

[1:27:21] clearly answer that for me, I'd really

[1:27:23] appreciate it.

[1:27:27] So, um, we will be discussing the local

[1:27:30] option tax as part of article

[1:27:34] 15.

[1:27:38] Um, further discussion on article 9.

[1:27:49] Uh, Angela Wells, Waterberry Center, and

[1:27:51] I have a question about the public

[1:27:54] safety and adding Washington County

[1:27:57] Sheriff's Road Patrol Service

[1:28:00] for $75,000

[1:28:02] in addition to the embedded trooper

[1:28:04] program,

[1:28:06] uh, which is 477,

[1:28:10] uh, bringing

[1:28:11] law enforcement up over 550,000.

[1:28:20] What are what are the hours? What are

[1:28:23] the numbers? Do we get that revenue

[1:28:26] back? I'm less concerned about having to

[1:28:30] help our embedded troopers for their

[1:28:32] sick pay or vacation pay or training. I

[1:28:35] mean, I as an employee get that, too.

[1:28:38] But I'm wondering,

[1:28:41] crime is increasing. We have more

[1:28:44] traffic. We're a destination.

[1:28:47] We're a link between, you know, Stowe,

[1:28:50] the Mad River Valley. Um, so my question

[1:28:54] is, what are the hours? What are the

[1:28:56] sheriff's going to be doing? Is it only

[1:28:59] road patrol ticketing? Are they going to

[1:29:02] be investigating other crimes,

[1:29:05] responding? Are they covering what

[1:29:07] hours?

[1:29:10] Um, I really I like our troopers, but I

[1:29:13] just don't see them very often. And I

[1:29:15] know that VSP is spread thin over the

[1:29:19] state. Um, so it's not really on them

[1:29:23] that we don't see them very much. Um,

[1:29:27] and then as a follow-up question, is the

[1:29:30] select board looking at reestablishing

[1:29:33] our own police department?

[1:29:35] I mean what which is a huge expense but

[1:29:40] this just

[1:29:42] we seem to be adding new things without

[1:29:46] looking at existing problems that we

[1:29:50] seem to just kick down the roof.

[1:29:52] >> Thank you. Um is there a member of the

[1:29:54] select board who would like to respond

[1:29:55] to that question?

[1:30:00] » Mr. Bar.

[1:30:03] Thank you madam moderator. Just as a

[1:30:08] uh responding to that, we too understand

[1:30:11] that there are especially issues with

[1:30:15] lifestyle kind of things, speeding in

[1:30:17] town, parking, etc. And that's one of

[1:30:20] the reasons why we've added that $75,000

[1:30:24] for the sheriff's department as kind of

[1:30:26] a pilot program to see if that's going

[1:30:29] to help stem some of the lifestyle

[1:30:33] things.

[1:30:34] People don't realize the cost of

[1:30:37] policing. If we went to a fullervice

[1:30:41] police department,

[1:30:43] not only with startup for equipment,

[1:30:47] etc. Uh we're looking at probably

[1:30:51] multi-million dollar budget for for a

[1:30:54] fullervice police department. Uh small

[1:30:57] departments don't function very well. Uh

[1:31:00] they have, you know, police have a lot

[1:31:03] of training requirements. We would be

[1:31:05] responsible for that. The troopers

[1:31:08] already have that kind of uh training as

[1:31:11] well as the deputies if we feel that

[1:31:13] there was additional uh policing needed.

[1:31:17] That's one reason where we would go next

[1:31:19] year to maybe increasing that uh the uh

[1:31:22] budget for the uh sheriff's department

[1:31:25] to aid the troopers in what they do.

[1:31:28] They just don't have enough time in the

[1:31:30] day. The troopers, you know, between uh

[1:31:33] drugs and other kind of, you know,

[1:31:36] enforcement issues. Uh we're actually to

[1:31:39] me getting a great deal with what I know

[1:31:42] people think, oh a half a half a million

[1:31:44] dollars is, you know, a lot of money.

[1:31:47] That's just it's very little compared to

[1:31:50] what we would have to pay with a full

[1:31:52] service and that would really have an a delirious effect on our tax rate.

[1:32:00] >> Thank you.

[1:32:02] >> Um

[1:32:04] thank you. Um I think Miss Johnson, did

[1:32:07] you want to um speak to that?

[1:32:09] >> Sure. Yeah. So I wanted to just start to

[1:32:11] clarify for folks that the state police

[1:32:13] contract is included in public safety.

[1:32:15] The pilot with the sheriff's office is

[1:32:17] something we're proposing to fund out of

[1:32:19] the local option tax with Kathy spoke

[1:32:21] to. So for folks looking that's an

[1:32:23] article 15 that we'll talk about later.

[1:32:25] I will say the sentence you said about

[1:32:28] um awareness and presence. So the state

[1:32:30] police contract is 80 hours a week for

[1:32:33] those two officers. It includes their

[1:32:35] vehicle. It includes their leave time.

[1:32:37] Again, we recognize they sometimes are

[1:32:39] called away um for other things. And

[1:32:41] though there is a mechanism to not have

[1:32:43] the town charged for that, in general,

[1:32:45] we have less control over that. With a

[1:32:47] sheriff contract, which again is not in

[1:32:49] this item, but for 15, we are build only

[1:32:52] for the actual hours served in the

[1:32:55] community and we have the ability to

[1:32:56] tailor and target. So again, I recognize

[1:32:59] it's the challenge because these are in

[1:33:01] two different areas in terms of talking

[1:33:03] to this, but the goal of that pilot was

[1:33:05] to have more information for the

[1:33:07] community again to say is this serving

[1:33:10] the needs more appropriately and

[1:33:11] something that could be scaled up or

[1:33:13] considered in future years as we don't

[1:33:15] have any contract with them right now.

[1:33:19] >> Thank you. Do we have further

[1:33:20] discussion?

[1:33:22] Um there's several people I think um you

[1:33:25] were standing there for a long time.

[1:33:28] Would you like to come up?

[1:33:29] >> Well, I don't know that I'd like to, but

[1:33:36] » good morning.

[1:33:38] My name is Peter. I'm your beekeeper on

[1:33:40] Guild Hill.

[1:33:46] » Okay. Is that more better?

[1:33:49] >> Okay. um our local option tax years ago,

[1:33:54] 3, four years ago, the come on was we're

[1:33:57] going to have a local option tax. We're

[1:33:59] going to have more revenue. We're going

[1:34:01] to pay down the municipal debt and we're

[1:34:04] going to hold the line on spending and

[1:34:07] no more tax increases. Well, here we

[1:34:10] are. Taxes are going up. That was so

[1:34:13] much Hulum. Municipal debt is going up.

[1:34:17] We're borrowing money against money that

[1:34:20] we might be getting from the low block

[1:34:23] tax.

[1:34:24] Now we've gone from a volunteer select

[1:34:28] board to a professional select board.

[1:34:33] Somewhere

[1:34:34] I think the residents of Waterberry Center ought to start

[1:34:40] thinking about the money we're spending,

[1:34:43] what we're getting our bang for our

[1:34:45] buck. I don't see any profit in going

[1:34:50] further in debt. I don't mean to be the

[1:34:53] bearer of bad tidings,

[1:34:56] but I'm afraid little by little we're

[1:34:58] digging ourselves a hole that's going to

[1:35:01] be awfully hard to climb out of. Thank

[1:35:03] you for your time.

[1:35:06] >> Is there further discussion?

[1:35:10] » You can come up to the microphone. There

[1:35:11] are several people with hands raised.

[1:35:13] So,

[1:35:16] » hi. Um, can you hear me?

[1:35:18] >> Yes.

[1:35:19] >> Perfect. Um, my name is Michelle Downey,

[1:35:21] Barber Center, and I wish this was after

[1:35:24] I believe Karen in the green was up

[1:35:25] here. This would have been much better

[1:35:27] timed. But I'm here actually on behalf

[1:35:29] of supporting what Karen had suggested,

[1:35:31] which is figuring out a better way to

[1:35:33] talk about all of the articles that

[1:35:35] we're that we're addressing today. And

[1:35:37] one of those ways that we can do that is

[1:35:39] joining the Waterberry Town Study um

[1:35:41] meeting commission, which I'm thankful

[1:35:43] to be a part of. We're actually looking

[1:35:45] for four additional people to join um to

[1:35:48] join us. And so um we meet monthly over

[1:35:52] the next six months to figure out ways

[1:35:53] in which we can find compromise between

[1:35:55] current town meeting structure and

[1:35:57] Australian ballot. So if you're

[1:35:59] interested, please um come find me at

[1:36:00] some point today. Thanks.

[1:36:04] >> Thank you, Miss Downing. Is there

[1:36:06] further discussion?

[1:36:11] » My name is Kathy Grace and I live on

[1:36:13] South Main Street and I just want to peg

[1:36:14] you back on what Angela Wells said. Um I

[1:36:17] live in the village and until the last

[1:36:21] couple years there didn't seem to be so

[1:36:23] much crime as there has. I just want to

[1:36:25] tell you about something that happened

[1:36:26] this summer. but a 15year-old boy that

[1:36:30] um had moved here from another town into

[1:36:33] the subsidized housing. And my

[1:36:36] grandchildren were swimming in our pool

[1:36:38] and all of a sudden this kid goes across

[1:36:42] our yard followed by three policemen and

[1:36:45] they tackled him and what had happened

[1:36:48] is he actually had a gun and they took

[1:36:50] the gun away from him and he'd been

[1:36:52] breaking into some of the houses on

[1:36:54] South Main Street. So I and we've also

[1:36:57] as much of the village now has seen we

[1:37:00] have constant breakins in cars and

[1:37:02] things. So I'm concerned whether even

[1:37:05] with the contract with the um church

[1:37:08] department if we're going to have enough

[1:37:10] coverage given what I've seen over the

[1:37:13] last couple years which also begs do we

[1:37:15] need uh you know 90 more housing units

[1:37:19] without an increase in policing to add

[1:37:22] more issues to the village. So could

[1:37:24] somebody answer that please?

[1:37:26] >> Um

[1:37:29] you brought up several um points um and

[1:37:32] I think they are actually

[1:37:35] in other articles that we'll be

[1:37:36] discussing those points. Um

[1:37:40] so unless a select board member wants to

[1:37:43] respond I think that will come up as we

[1:37:44] go through um some of the additional

[1:37:47] articles.

[1:37:52] Is there further discussion on article

[1:37:54] nine?

[1:37:55] >> Um,

[1:37:57] >> yeah, Mr. Sheffllock has already spoken

[1:37:59] once, so if there's another person who

[1:38:00] would like to speak, please go ahead.

[1:38:06] » Good morning, Cheryl Glor. Um, just a

[1:38:09] question on page 23 regarding the

[1:38:12] recreation facility planning and

[1:38:14] estimating. We budgeted 175 uh last

[1:38:19] year. I don't see it expended and I have

[1:38:22] a note here working on potential figures

[1:38:24] for 2026 but it's blank. Um has that

[1:38:29] been sidelined? I know we're trying to

[1:38:31] build direct department back up in the

[1:38:33] program. So um is that money reserved

[1:38:37] and we're going to further explore this

[1:38:38] in 2026. Um but I see nothing budgeted

[1:38:42] for 2026. So just question.

[1:38:45] >> Thank you. Is there a member of the

[1:38:46] select board who can respond to that

[1:38:48] inquiry? On page 23, the 2026 budget for

[1:38:53] recreation facility planning and

[1:38:55] estimating. Yep. So once again, these

[1:38:57] are local option tax expenses. Those

[1:38:59] will be covered in article 15, but the

[1:39:01] 175 was last year from the 2025 budget,

[1:39:04] and there is no funding proposed for a

[1:39:06] recreation facility this year.

[1:39:11] » Is there further discussion? Is there

[1:39:13] anyone who has not spoken a first time

[1:39:16] who would like to speak for a first

[1:39:18] time?

[1:39:25] Why don't you come on up to the

[1:39:27] microphone? Thank you,

[1:39:35] » Madam.

[1:39:41] How about now?

[1:39:43] I'm Billy Bingdorf from Waterberry. I'm

[1:39:44] on the planning commission. I'm not

[1:39:46] speaking on behalf of the commission at

[1:39:48] all. But for the last year, I've

[1:39:50] listened to great ideas about what we

[1:39:52] need in town, how many things we want to

[1:39:54] do. And nobody talks about how to spend

[1:39:57] money to do it or how we spend it. So

[1:39:59] there's a tension in the room when we

[1:40:01] talk about we want to reduce our taxes,

[1:40:04] but where's the line item of the

[1:40:06] services that we're going to forgo? So

[1:40:08] if we're going to either challenge the

[1:40:10] budget, the real way to do it if you

[1:40:12] want to reduce spending or reduce the

[1:40:13] growth of spending is to actually decide

[1:40:15] what services we do not want to have

[1:40:18] less of. Fewer plows, fewer roads, fewer

[1:40:21] fire trucks. When I look at these lines,

[1:40:24] it's hard to see things that we don't

[1:40:26] really want. So when you know we have we

[1:40:28] have so the debate should really be what

[1:40:30] less we want, not less what do you

[1:40:33] attach to. Thank you.

[1:40:38] Is there any other um further

[1:40:40] discussion? Anybody who has not had a

[1:40:43] chance yet to speak for a first time, go

[1:40:45] ahead.

[1:40:51] » My name is Sandy Sen from War Center. Um

[1:40:54] I have a quick check on um number 20 on

[1:40:59] page 23 about the local options tax. It

[1:41:03] has the adopted budget uh 2025 budget

[1:41:07] but it doesn't have the actual figure

[1:41:09] and I'm just wondering why.

[1:41:12] Um so we will be discussing the local

[1:41:16] option tax as part of article 15 I

[1:41:19] think. Is there a quick answer to that

[1:41:22] question from the select board?

[1:41:27] Um no. So we'll we'll discuss that at

[1:41:29] article

[1:41:31] 15. Any

[1:41:35] further discussion? Anyone who has not

[1:41:37] had a chance to speak for a first time.

[1:41:42] Okay. U Mr. Shappelock, would you like

[1:41:44] to speak for your second time?

[1:41:48] >> Yeah. Still Bill Shappel. um to try to

[1:41:53] um uh point back to Chris's Chris

[1:41:56] Vienza's question about the um fund

[1:42:00] balance and a little bit to disagree

[1:42:03] with Mr. Big Door. I agree with Billy

[1:42:07] when he says we should talk about what

[1:42:09] services we don't want if we have to

[1:42:13] just um either raise taxes or cut

[1:42:17] services. What I'm not sure of, and

[1:42:20] again I I mentioned this to the select

[1:42:22] board before the meeting started, but I

[1:42:25] cannot find anywhere in the 2026

[1:42:29] budget any reference to what our general

[1:42:34] fund fund balance is. Um, if you look on

[1:42:38] page

[1:42:40] uh 21,

[1:42:46] you'll see on line number 23, which is

[1:42:49] about 2/ird of the way down that page,

[1:42:52] it says that we are proposing to use

[1:42:55] $87,8650

[1:42:59] of the general fund balance to reduce

[1:43:03] taxes. So, uh, our our grand list is

[1:43:07] about 8,600,000

[1:43:10] or 8,800,000 right now. So, that 80 that

[1:43:14] 80 um

[1:43:17] use of fund balance uh 85,700

[1:43:21] is that the number? Yeah. 85,759

[1:43:25] on line 23. That's that's one penny. If

[1:43:29] we didn't use that $85,000 to reduce,

[1:43:33] you know, to help uh pay for the 2026

[1:43:36] budget, our our our tax rate would have

[1:43:40] to be one penny higher. If you look over

[1:43:43] at page 43,

[1:43:46] and Paul Willard will ask for his

[1:43:48] magnifying glass when he looks at page

[1:43:50] 43,

[1:43:53] that first column there is the general

[1:43:55] fund.

[1:43:57] At the end of 2024,

[1:44:00] the audit report that we got from

[1:44:03] Southern Empower, our CPA, said at the

[1:44:06] end of 2024,

[1:44:08] coming into 2025, we had 848,000.

[1:44:12] So almost $850,000

[1:44:15] of of fund balance.

[1:44:17] There's nowhere in this book that I can

[1:44:20] find that tells us what the current end

[1:44:24] of the year 2025 fund balance is. Um, a

[1:44:29] couple of weeks ago when I started this

[1:44:32] new job of mine, the balance sheet said

[1:44:34] that we had negative $477,000.

[1:44:39] I worked through that for about three

[1:44:42] days and because of some mistakes with

[1:44:46] regard to uh the the school taxes that

[1:44:50] were paid, we fixed that and I believe

[1:44:54] that the fund balance is somewhere

[1:44:57] between $450 and $600,000

[1:45:00] ending 2025.

[1:45:03] So if you look back at page 35,

[1:45:10] at the bottom of page 35, you see our

[1:45:14] grand list, the municipal grand list,

[1:45:16] 8,66,000.

[1:45:18] So

[1:45:20] to Chris Vienza's point,

[1:45:23] um the tax rate that the select board is

[1:45:25] proposing this year, and that's back on

[1:45:27] page 21, is um is 57 cents. I think last

[1:45:34] year it was $55 I mean 55.5.

[1:45:40] So there's a 1.5 cent increase between

[1:45:43] last year's taxes and this.

[1:45:46] If you've got five or $600,000 of

[1:45:50] year-end fund balance,

[1:45:53] you could use $120,000 of that fund

[1:45:56] balance and that that would reduce your

[1:45:58] taxes by 1.5 cents. So,

[1:46:02] we don't have all the information in the

[1:46:05] talent report that we need to make these

[1:46:08] decisions, unfortunately. Um,

[1:46:11] a lot of towns keep a significant

[1:46:15] percentage of their general fund budget

[1:46:17] as a fund balance. CPAs, the Vermont

[1:46:20] League cities and towns suggest that

[1:46:22] maybe you should have 5% of your budget

[1:46:25] as a fund balance. Um, Waterbury has

[1:46:29] several reserve funds. We've got a tax

[1:46:31] stabilization fund that's over a million

[1:46:33] dollars. We have a library fund that's

[1:46:36] over $800,000. We have a cemetery fund

[1:46:39] balance,

[1:46:39] >> Mr. Shepher. 30 second warning, Mr.

[1:46:42] Shephel.

[1:46:42] >> Okay. So, anyway, um I'm not sure that

[1:46:45] we need to have an unrestricted fund

[1:46:48] balance in our general fund of four or

[1:46:51] five or $600,000.

[1:46:54] We could use some of it if we wanted to reduce our tax rate without having to

[1:46:59] reduce the services that Mr. Bigor

[1:47:02] suggested we should fund.

[1:47:06] Thank you. Is there further discussion?

[1:47:14] » Yeah, Christian from Waterberry again.

[1:47:16] Uh I just wanted to respond to Bill as

[1:47:18] well. Um

[1:47:22] looking at the budget, reducing the

[1:47:23] budget doesn't necessarily mean reducing

[1:47:25] services. I can tell you right now

[1:47:28] without really looking into it, uh

[1:47:30] there's a line item in our town report

[1:47:33] for concrete sidewalks.

[1:47:36] I asked for the information from our

[1:47:39] former town manager. How many feet of

[1:47:42] sidewalk are you planning on doing this

[1:47:43] year there? He didn't have that

[1:47:45] information, but said he would get it

[1:47:47] for me. After doing a little bit of

[1:47:49] research myself, because I own my own

[1:47:51] concrete business for 10 years, uh

[1:47:55] half of that budget of 150,000, just if

[1:47:59] you put just that number towards the

[1:48:01] concrete itself for the sidewalk would

[1:48:03] do 1,500 lineal feet of sidewalk.

[1:48:07] There's no way in heck in this town in

[1:48:09] one year you're going to accomplish

[1:48:10] 1,500 ft of sidewalk. that one line

[1:48:13] item, that one budget line item could be

[1:48:16] reduced by $50,000. Wouldn't even you

[1:48:19] wouldn't even know it was gone. I've

[1:48:21] also asked about a year and a half,

[1:48:24] maybe two years ago, for a 10-year

[1:48:26] proposed outlook to see where our town

[1:48:29] is headed. There's a lot of knowns in

[1:48:34] our expenditures that we can project out

[1:48:37] uh to try to get some guard rails on our

[1:48:39] spending and try to look at the the

[1:48:42] issues that need uh repairing and need

[1:48:46] to be brought up to date that we could

[1:48:49] uh plug into that 10-year proposed

[1:48:51] outlook. And at least it would give us

[1:48:53] an idea of what type of revenue we're

[1:48:55] going to need moving forward and

[1:48:57] possibly holes in that timeline where we

[1:49:01] actually by buying down debt and making

[1:49:05] some smart moves and getting caught up

[1:49:06] in some of our problems. we could find

[1:49:09] revenue holes in that 10-year outlook

[1:49:12] that we could come up with revenues to

[1:49:15] solve like our swimming pool problem or

[1:49:17] look at other projects that we're

[1:49:19] interested in doing without going back

[1:49:21] to you guys turning you upside down and

[1:49:23] shaking you for more money to try to

[1:49:25] solve our problem. So there, you know,

[1:49:28] this year's budget, proposed budget, I

[1:49:30] believe there's even without any uh fund

[1:49:33] balance, if there was zero fund balance,

[1:49:35] I think there's enough fat in this

[1:49:37] budget uh based on bringing the right

[1:49:40] information to the table that we could

[1:49:42] cut this back so there wouldn't be any

[1:49:44] municipal tax increase at all.

[1:49:49] » Is there further discussion?

[1:49:55] If you would like to call the question,

[1:49:57] you have to be in order. So stand at the

[1:49:59] microphone and um you can do that like

[1:50:03] next. Um can I ask a question about

[1:50:06] order? So if I understand what Bill said

[1:50:10] is if we use some of the general funds

[1:50:13] just questionable about what that fund

[1:50:16] man much is and reduce it reduce our

[1:50:19] overall tax of the 57% or 57 cents down

[1:50:23] what to 1 reduce it by 1.5 by taking

[1:50:26] from the general fund then we would be

[1:50:29] basically paying the same amount that we

[1:50:30] paid last year in our taxes is my

[1:50:34] understanding. So, how do how do we go

[1:50:37] about saying we want to move money from

[1:50:39] the general fund to cover an increase

[1:50:41] that that 2.7% increase? Just take it

[1:50:44] from the general fund instead. I don't

[1:50:46] know how to make that. Um, all right.

[1:50:48] So, you would like to make a motion.

[1:50:53] Um, I think you would

[1:50:55] add however much money you want to add

[1:50:58] from the general fund to the nonpropy

[1:51:02] tax revenues.

[1:51:04] So I don't know what amount you want to

[1:51:07] add.

[1:51:07] >> I don't know what the amount would be to

[1:51:08] do I want to know what the amount would

[1:51:10] be to do that to take it from the

[1:51:12] general fund so that we don't have that

[1:51:13] increase. I don't know what that is.

[1:51:42] So what you would have to do is um the

[1:51:46] tax rate last year was 55 cents. The

[1:51:50] proposal this year is 50 50 55.5 cents

[1:51:55] last year and it's 57 cents this year.

[1:51:58] Right.

[1:52:00] So that's 1 and 12 cents, isn't it?

[1:52:05] So 1 12 cents 1.015

[1:52:11] times last year's grain list was

[1:52:15] 8,66,457.

[1:52:22] So, if you if you moved $120,000

[1:52:27] from the general fund balance and add

[1:52:30] that to the U nonpropy tax revenue,

[1:52:35] that would be close enough. Your grand

[1:52:37] list is going to increase a little bit

[1:52:39] this year. So, um

[1:52:42] but that's the best that I can do right

[1:52:44] now. So, it would be $120,000.

[1:52:48] >> So, I think what you would have to do is

[1:52:52] And I'll have to do a little bit of math

[1:52:54] before I can you completely, but you

[1:52:56] would reduce the amount of money that

[1:52:58] you would raise by property taxes and

[1:53:00] then increase the amount of money that

[1:53:02] you would fund by non-property tax

[1:53:04] revenues. And I can if that amount is

[1:53:08] $120,000

[1:53:10] um

[1:53:14] we can just add those amounts and I'll

[1:53:17] give you the numbers.

[1:53:58] So, um, you'd be do you have your, um,

[1:54:03] I'll just write the numbers in for you.

[1:54:37] So if you want to

[1:54:40] amend the motion.

[1:54:42] by way of substitute. You can just

[1:54:46] read that. And for the body removing

[1:54:50] $120,000

[1:54:53] um from property tax revenues or um

[1:54:58] looking at the property tax number and

[1:54:59] subtracting $120,000 and looking at the

[1:55:02] nonpropy tax revenues and adding

[1:55:04] $120,000.

[1:55:06] >> All right. So, you have to bear with me

[1:55:08] because I have to read the paragraph.

[1:55:09] So, um, I'd like to should I say amend or

[1:55:15] >> Yeah. Okay. Move.

[1:55:16] >> I move to amend article Yeah. Article 9

[1:55:19] substitute the following numbers. Um, it

[1:55:22] said, "Shall the voters of the town of

[1:55:24] Waterberry adopt the proposed operating

[1:55:26] and capital budgets which contains

[1:55:28] 6,567,486

[1:55:31] in expenses of which, and this is where

[1:55:33] the substitute is, um 4,465,774,000

[1:55:40] be raised by property taxes. And again,

[1:55:44] this is a substitution. $2,11,712

[1:55:48] to be funded by anticipated nonpropy tax

[1:55:51] revenues.

[1:55:52] >> All right, there's a motion to amend it.

[1:55:54] Is there a second for that motion?

[1:55:57] The motion to amend has been moved and

[1:56:00] seconded

[1:56:03] and the um motion to amend by

[1:56:06] substitute. So, it's a will read. It has

[1:56:09] been moved that the town of Waterbury

[1:56:11] adopt the proposed operating capital

[1:56:13] budgets which contain 6,567,486

[1:56:17] in expenses of which 44,465,774

[1:56:24] is to be raised by property taxes and

[1:56:26] 2,1001,712

[1:56:29] is to be funded by anticipated non-propy

[1:56:31] tax revenues. So, we're going to vote on

[1:56:34] the motion to amend um and then go back

[1:56:37] to the main motion.

[1:56:40] Is there discussion on the motion to

[1:56:42] amend?

[1:56:48] You can come up to the microphone. Thank

[1:56:50] you.

[1:56:58] I would like to I would like to see two things happen. Uh number one um

[1:57:07] eliminate the 2.7%

[1:57:11] property tax increase.

[1:57:14] I have to agree there's enough fat in

[1:57:17] the budget. um we don't have to improve

[1:57:21] abuse homeowners anymore than we already

[1:57:24] are. Uh number two,

[1:57:28] um the town has trust funds, savings

[1:57:31] accounts, bonds, whatever it is. And

[1:57:36] these monies become sacred. they the the

[1:57:41] money in trust funds, bonds and whatever

[1:57:44] cannot be robbed from to subsidize the

[1:57:47] budget. The interest off that money uh

[1:57:52] is something else. Um that can be used

[1:57:57] for um to subsidize the budget if

[1:58:01] required. But those monies that have

[1:58:04] been invested by the town

[1:58:07] uh the residents be grants or whatever

[1:58:09] uh become sacred and not rob from. Thank

[1:58:14] you.

[1:58:17] Is there further discussion of the

[1:58:19] motion to amend? So, the motion to amend

[1:58:21] is to reduce the tax revenues by

[1:58:25] $120,000 into or the the amount of

[1:58:28] revenue raised by property taxes by

[1:58:30] $120,000

[1:58:32] and to

[1:58:34] add $120,000 to the anticipated

[1:58:37] non-propy tax revenues.

[1:58:41] Yes,

[1:58:46] Teresa Wood from Waterberry. Uh, madame

[1:58:49] um, uh,

[1:58:51] >> moderator.

[1:58:51] Yeah. Yeah. I I I was gonna

[1:58:53] say speaker just because that's what I'm

[1:58:55] used to saying. Um, uh, madam moderator,

[1:58:57] I just I didn't know if there's still

[1:58:59] going to be an opportunity or this is

[1:59:01] the opportunity to still ask a question

[1:59:02] about a line item in the budget.

[1:59:04] >> Um, that would still be Germaine, so you

[1:59:06] may ask that question.

[1:59:07] Um, so I'm referring to page 25 under

[1:59:11] the fire department revenue

[1:59:14] and I'm just curious as to the town of

[1:59:18] Ducks's fire contract um for 2025 is

[1:59:22] 127,500.

[1:59:24] However, we've only received 63,780.

[1:59:27] I'm wondering if there's an explanation

[1:59:29] for that. Is there a member of the

[1:59:31] select board who can respond to that?

[1:59:33] I'll start by crediting our treasur,

[1:59:35] Bill Sheplick, who already brought this

[1:59:37] to our attention before the meeting. We

[1:59:38] believe it's a printed error. We did

[1:59:40] receive the full contract amount and

[1:59:41] it's just not reflected appropriately in

[1:59:43] the report.

[1:59:44] >> All right. Thank you.

[1:59:46] >> Sorry, I wasn't here.

[1:59:48] >> No, that was he didn't say it publicly.

[1:59:50] So, I will just say, but it among many

[1:59:52] things because I believe it is Germaine.

[1:59:55] Madam moderator, I will also take this

[1:59:56] time to note Chris Vienn's about 15

[1:59:58] comments ago talked about the cost of

[2:00:01] staff transition and the like. And I

[2:00:03] will take the moment to acknowledge Bill

[2:00:05] Woodrrith to my right and Bill Sheplech,

[2:00:08] um, Carrick, Beth Jones in the back. Too

[2:00:11] many that I can list, but I will just

[2:00:13] say as the one who had to put out calls

[2:00:15] for an interim municipal manager, if you

[2:00:17] get an outofstate consultant for that

[2:00:19] position, they ask for the entire

[2:00:21] previous salary plus benefits and

[2:00:23] housing. And so the fact that Bill

[2:00:25] Woodruff has stepped up to serve in this

[2:00:28] interim role for the community is really

[2:00:30] important. And I just want to recognize

[2:00:33] and thank him publicly.

[2:00:50] Again, because we have an incredible

[2:00:52] dedicated group of community members and

[2:00:55] municipal employees, I don't want to

[2:00:57] mitigate or diminish the points that

[2:00:58] were raised. There's unquestionably um

[2:01:01] opportunity costs and real cost of staff

[2:01:03] transition, but I just wanted to note

[2:01:04] that the community would be far worse

[2:01:06] off monetarily and otherwise if not for

[2:01:09] these folks stepping up.

[2:01:12] » Thank you. Is there further discussion?

[2:01:14] This is a motion to amend the main

[2:01:16] motion.

[2:01:19] Uh Andy Wood. Um, I have a concern with

[2:01:23] the amendment to the motion of using the

[2:01:25] 200,000 without a clear accounting for

[2:01:28] the fund balance now which was called in

[2:01:30] question. It seems like we could be

[2:01:32] using a large amount of that fund

[2:01:35] balance without the clear ramifications

[2:01:37] and expectations without the select

[2:01:39] board other having done the thought

[2:01:42] process for that exercise. I think that

[2:01:44] would be a good thing to entertain

[2:01:46] building the budget for next year. But I

[2:01:48] say I have a concern with that large

[2:01:51] portion. You know, we said maybe 400,000

[2:01:53] the actual balance. We talked 200,000 a

[2:01:56] large portion of that

[2:01:59] 120.

[2:02:00] >> And these references given that 80,000

[2:02:02] from the 86,000 I believe from the fund

[2:02:04] balance is already in the budget. So if

[2:02:06] we have that 86 plus the 120 of this

[2:02:09] motion were to pass, it would be in the

[2:02:10] neighborhood of 200.

[2:02:14] » Thank you. Is there further comment?

[2:02:19] I was thinking the same thing. Evan Carl

[2:02:21] Hoffman again. Uh based on the numbers

[2:02:24] Mr. Shepard gave earlier, the proposed

[2:02:26] 120,000 could be between like 20% and a

[2:02:30] third of the general fund balance. And

[2:02:33] without knowing exactly what that number

[2:02:35] is, I don't feel comfortable drawing

[2:02:36] from it because if it is in the

[2:02:38] negative, as the audit showed, we could

[2:02:40] be pushing ourselves further into the

[2:02:41] negative.

[2:02:44] Sorry, you mentioned a a negative

[2:02:46] balance that from somewhere.

[2:02:50] >> Do you want to interrogate Mr. Chev?

[2:02:53] >> He doesn't mind.

[2:02:55] >> Thank you.

[2:02:59] » So, the the fund balance going into 2025

[2:03:03] was over $800,000.

[2:03:05] The balance sheet of the town unodudited

[2:03:08] a month ago showed that we were negative

[2:03:12] $477,000.

[2:03:15] I've worked with the bookkeeping staff

[2:03:18] and uh communicated with the auditors.

[2:03:22] We fixed some mispostings to the general

[2:03:25] fund to the general ledger I mean. And

[2:03:28] that $477,000

[2:03:30] negative fund balance is gone. I can't

[2:03:33] remember if it's 500,000 now or $600,000

[2:03:38] now, but it's in the range of about a

[2:03:40] half a million dollar. So, if we use

[2:03:44] $200,000 a bit, I think we will still

[2:03:46] have $200,000

[2:03:49] at minimum left in the general fund

[2:03:52] balance. I would remind the audience

[2:03:54] that until

[2:03:56] three years ago that every year the

[2:03:59] budget that was built by the select

[2:04:01] board and the manager used all of any

[2:04:04] previous fund balance. We brought the

[2:04:06] fund balance down to zero, used all that

[2:04:09] money as a carry forward to uh prevent

[2:04:12] us having to pay taxes. So if we have

[2:04:16] two or three or even $100,000 in the

[2:04:19] fund balance now, it's significantly

[2:04:22] more than the town ever carry. And my

[2:04:24] point before was we have a number of

[2:04:27] reserve funds that can be used if

[2:04:30] there's an emergency. When we had

[2:04:32] tropical storm Irene, we drew off the

[2:04:35] tax stabilization fund. We paid it back,

[2:04:37] but we had the cash available to meet

[2:04:40] our needs. So I don't think if we use

[2:04:44] $200,000 of the fund balance that we're

[2:04:46] going to be in peril.

[2:04:51] » Hello. Is there further discussion? Did

[2:04:53] you have a further comment to make?

[2:04:55] >> Just to say that I I'm still

[2:04:56] uncomfortable with that without knowing

[2:04:59] exactly what the number is in the

[2:05:00] balance.

[2:05:05] » Is there further discussion? This is a

[2:05:07] motion to amend the main motion.

[2:05:15] Madam moderator, uh just in this

[2:05:18] conversation, I think it's been very

[2:05:19] good. This is why we do town meetings. I would absolutely, again, the reason I

[2:05:24] seconded this is there's a lot of

[2:05:26] uncertainty out there. I think we all

[2:05:28] recognize that, but also there are many

[2:05:30] towns that are introducing a local

[2:05:32] option tax. The last word in that

[2:05:35] acronym is tax. We will experience that

[2:05:38] when we go to different areas. You buy a

[2:05:40] refrigerator, you buy a you name it.

[2:05:43] Some of those towns don't have one now.

[2:05:46] They've gotten good on this. I think we

[2:05:48] are out ahead of it. I think the white

[2:05:49] board did a phenomenal job along with

[2:05:51] the town manager before. Um but these

[2:05:54] are all costs we're going to see. So I

[2:05:56] absolutely advocate that if if we could

[2:05:59] use town meeting the way I I was taught

[2:06:01] we could do this that we take advantage

[2:06:04] in and resto.

[2:06:07] Thank you.

[2:06:10] Is there further discussion?

[2:06:19] Yeah, Miss Johnson,

[2:06:21] >> I would just note I will not be a select

[2:06:23] board member making a budget next year,

[2:06:25] but I certainly would say, you know, I

[2:06:27] just have a concern for a future board

[2:06:29] about if we are using a total of if this

[2:06:33] uh substitution was to pass $200,000 of

[2:06:36] fund balance, notwithstanding the

[2:06:37] difference, notwithstanding the peril of

[2:06:39] the budget. Um, but it will just be more

[2:06:42] challenging. I will note the sidewalks

[2:06:43] that were discussed are in local option

[2:06:45] tax. There's other options to fund it.

[2:06:47] Um, but I guess would echo Mr. Wood's

[2:06:49] comments that

[2:06:51] this is an opportunity to do this and

[2:06:54] can feel challenging at this moment. But

[2:06:56] if other board members want to speak to

[2:06:57] it, that's mine.

[2:07:03] Is there any further discussion on the

[2:07:05] motion to amend? This is to move

[2:07:07] $120,000 from property tax to non-propy

[2:07:11] tax revenues.

[2:07:23] Sorry, Miss Moderator. I'll make it

[2:07:24] quick. Um, can you give me an idea of

[2:07:26] how much uh debt service will be paid

[2:07:29] down and eliminated this this year from

[2:07:31] this this proposed budget?

[2:07:37] » Is there a member of the select board

[2:07:38] who would like to respond to that

[2:07:40] question?

[2:07:42] Um, ballpark. I want to say we had maybe

[2:07:46] 80,000 to 150,000 that is built into the

[2:07:49] budget as being paid down so that it

[2:07:50] didn't need to be serviced. There's also

[2:07:52] additional debt service and local option

[2:07:53] tax that is three-year debt. So we will

[2:07:55] pay this year and propose to budget next

[2:07:58] year.

[2:07:58] >> So you're saying that

[2:08:02] 80 to 150 is going to be completely

[2:08:04] eliminated. I'm guessing that that

[2:08:06] you're about right with that.

[2:08:08] So with that debt service being

[2:08:10] eliminated,

[2:08:12] that starts to build your fund balance

[2:08:13] for the following year automatically.

[2:08:16] Uh so you need to take that into

[2:08:18] consideration. I I I approve this motion

[2:08:21] uh that Karen made. Um so

[2:08:30] go ahead.

[2:08:33] This is um Miss Wood's second time

[2:08:37] speaking. So, if there's anyone who

[2:08:38] wants to speak a first time

[2:08:42] on the motion to amend. Okay, go ahead.

[2:08:45] Thank you, madam moderator. Uh Teresa

[2:08:47] Wood again, Waterberry. Um for people

[2:08:50] who are concerned about the lack of

[2:08:52] available cash resources, I do want to

[2:08:54] call your attention to page 34 that uh

[2:08:57] lists all of our reserve funds and the

[2:08:59] balances. And I particularly want to uh

[2:09:02] Mr. Sheplick had uh talked about the tax

[2:09:05] stabilization fund. It's a fund I helped

[2:09:08] create when I was on the school board

[2:09:10] and um I'm happy to see that it's uh

[2:09:13] more than doubled since we made that

[2:09:15] initial investment and uh I speak in

[2:09:18] favor of the motion that's before us

[2:09:21] because uh I believe that we have

[2:09:23] sufficient revenues if an emergency

[2:09:25] occurs that we are along with whatever

[2:09:28] is already built into the budget. uh as

[2:09:31] we get to the uh talking about the um

[2:09:35] various other funds that have already

[2:09:37] been built into the budget for reserves

[2:09:39] uh in addition to these that uh we have

[2:09:42] sufficient funds in order to handle

[2:09:44] that. And so um I speak in favor of this

[2:09:48] motion because that is taxpayer dollars

[2:09:50] that were paid by taxpayers and should

[2:09:53] be returned to them in my opinion.

[2:09:59] Is there further discussion on the

[2:10:01] motion to amend? And this is to move

[2:10:03] $120,000

[2:10:04] from tax revenues to nonpropy tax

[2:10:07] revenues.

[2:10:12] Um well, seeing no further discussion,

[2:10:16] um we'll now vote on the motion to

[2:10:19] amend.

[2:10:22] And again, um I'll reread it. We're

[2:10:25] going to vote on the motion to amend and

[2:10:27] then on the main motion. Um even if they

[2:10:30] end up sounding the same, we're going to

[2:10:31] do both votes so that we um make sure

[2:10:33] that we've done it correctly. So the

[2:10:36] motion to amend is to in some move

[2:10:38] $120,000 from property tax revenues to

[2:10:41] non-propy tax revenues. And the motion

[2:10:44] is to move that the town of Waterberry

[2:10:45] adopt the proposed operating and capital

[2:10:47] budgets which contain $6,567,486

[2:10:52] in expenses of which $4,465,774

[2:10:58] is to be raised by property taxes and

[2:11:01] $2,11,712

[2:11:04] is to be funded by anticipated non-propy

[2:11:06] tax revenues.

[2:11:08] So all those in favor of the motion to

[2:11:10] amend, please say I. I.

[2:11:14] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[2:11:16] >> No.

[2:11:17] >> The eyes appear to have it.

[2:11:22] And the eyes do have it. You have passed

[2:11:25] the motion to amend. We are now going to

[2:11:28] vote on the main motion. Um, which is

[2:11:32] the same as the motion to amend. That

[2:11:34] might be your moderator's fault, but

[2:11:35] anyway, we're going to do it. Um, are

[2:11:38] there any questions on the main motion?

[2:11:42] Okay. The main motion. It has been moved

[2:11:45] that the town of Waterbury adopt the

[2:11:47] proposed operating and capital budgets

[2:11:48] which contain $6,567,486

[2:11:53] in expenses of which 4,465,774

[2:11:58] is to be raised by property taxes and

[2:12:00] $2,11,712

[2:12:03] is to be funded by anticipated nonpropy

[2:12:05] tax revenues.

[2:12:07] All those in favor, please say I.

[2:12:10] >> I. Those opposed, please say no.

[2:12:14] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[2:12:17] have it. And you have passed article

[2:12:19] nine. Yay.

[2:12:23] Um I want to um remind people that there

[2:12:28] will be lunch in the cafeteria at I

[2:12:30] believe 12:00

[2:12:32] um that the senior center is serving.

[2:12:36] Um, we will not take a break for lunch.

[2:12:40] Um, but if you are hungry, please go

[2:12:42] downstairs at 12:00 and get some food,

[2:12:45] eat it, and come back up. Um, but we are

[2:12:48] going to take a short break right now to

[2:12:51] hear legislative reports from

[2:12:53] Representative Stevens and

[2:12:56] Representative Wood. Um, if there is no

[2:13:00] objection.

[2:13:02] All right, let's move to legislative

[2:13:04] reports.

[2:13:24] Uh, good morning everyone. Uh, my name

[2:13:26] is Terresa Wood. Um, I've been your

[2:13:29] state representative. This is my 11th

[2:13:30] year. I serve in the House Human

[2:13:33] Services Committee and am currently

[2:13:36] chair of that committee and sit on four

[2:13:38] other legislative committees as well. Um

[2:13:42] just to give you a little bit of updates

[2:13:44] about what are happening in the House

[2:13:46] Human Services Committee and uh things

[2:13:48] in general. Um we deal with everything

[2:13:51] from prenatal services to death. So

[2:13:53] essentially across the lifespan in house

[2:13:56] human services and one of the things

[2:13:59] that we have recently done is to update

[2:14:01] the adult uh protection laws. So uh to

[2:14:05] update the laws where the adult abuse

[2:14:09] protection where people have to report

[2:14:11] on abuse where uh there is consequences

[2:14:14] for that abuse and um so we have updated

[2:14:17] that statute recently. Um, one of the

[2:14:20] things that is making its way relatively

[2:14:22] quickly through the legislature this

[2:14:25] year and the governor is poised to sign

[2:14:28] is um, H545, which is legislation that

[2:14:31] we have passed actually already in the

[2:14:34] house once and it's passed in the Senate

[2:14:36] and they have moved it back to the house

[2:14:38] um, to create authorization for the

[2:14:41] Vermont Health Department and the Health

[2:14:43] Commissioner uh, to issue vaccine

[2:14:46] recommendations to uh, Vermont monitors

[2:14:49] about um what is safe, what's

[2:14:52] appropriate, what is recommended by the

[2:14:55] science and we have needed to do this

[2:14:58] honestly um just being frank that the

[2:15:00] CDC has become very politicized and um

[2:15:05] by our health care professionals in

[2:15:07] Vermont um believe that they are not

[2:15:09] making recommendations that uh meet with

[2:15:13] um the strict scientific and uh public

[2:15:16] standards that we would expect. So, um,

[2:15:19] we have instituted this law to enable

[2:15:21] Vermonters to still receive, uh,

[2:15:25] accurate and timely information about

[2:15:26] vaccines. I I this is not requiring

[2:15:29] anybody to get vaccines. This is just

[2:15:31] saying if you want the vaccine, it will

[2:15:34] still be available to you and at no cost

[2:15:37] um at no cost to you. So um we are

[2:15:41] relying on the science and the best

[2:15:44] practice in the field to make these

[2:15:46] recommendations and the commissioner

[2:15:47] will have an advisory panel that will

[2:15:49] advise him on that.

[2:15:52] Other implications of things that are

[2:15:54] happening in Washington in terms of

[2:15:56] having a real impact on our state tax

[2:15:58] dollars uh that we all pay to run our

[2:16:02] government. um uh three squares which is

[2:16:06] a uh food assistance program. It's a

[2:16:09] federal program. The federal government

[2:16:12] has reduced the amount that it will pay

[2:16:14] for administration of that program and

[2:16:16] that now is being borne by state

[2:16:18] taxpayers in the governor's FY27 budget.

[2:16:22] Uh we are going to pay an an additional

[2:16:24] $4.5 million to administer that program

[2:16:28] uh for verers. And that's all because of

[2:16:31] uh HR1, the budget uh that was uh

[2:16:35] passed, the bill that was passed by the

[2:16:38] federal government.

[2:16:39] >> Um

[2:16:41] during that same time in November, I

[2:16:43] think people remember the government

[2:16:44] shutdown that happened and we had very

[2:16:48] significant number of verters, 60,000

[2:16:51] verters who rely on SNAP benefits. It's

[2:16:54] known as three squares here in Vermont.

[2:16:56] And during that time, we did not know um

[2:16:59] if there were going to be resources for

[2:17:01] Vermonters. Um we we did not know if

[2:17:06] people were going to have access to the

[2:17:07] food that they needed. And so um not

[2:17:10] only did our community step up and uh

[2:17:13] hold food drives and the Waterbury

[2:17:15] Common Market was very busy during that

[2:17:17] time. Um but as a state we also had to

[2:17:20] pay out another $6.5 million to asssure

[2:17:24] that people had access to food. So um

[2:17:27] that's $11 million in one little

[2:17:29] microcosm of one program and we have

[2:17:32] many many federal programs that uh

[2:17:35] Vermont participates in. So I just

[2:17:37] wanted to give you some sense of how uh

[2:17:39] what happens in Washington is really

[2:17:42] impacting what uh we have to deal with

[2:17:45] here in Vermont. and uh it's a it's a

[2:17:47] daily occurrence frankly about whatever

[2:17:49] news is coming out of DC. Um we've also

[2:17:53] been busy in my committee working on

[2:17:55] solutions to the uh homelessness uh

[2:17:58] issues that we have in the state. We

[2:18:00] have uh over uh 4,500 people nearly

[2:18:04] 4,600 people who are homeless in this

[2:18:06] state. Over 800 of them are children. Um

[2:18:09] those are children 800 children who lack

[2:18:12] any kind of dependable fixed nighttime

[2:18:14] residence where where they call home and

[2:18:18] uh we can do better than what we're

[2:18:20] doing in this state for people who are

[2:18:23] homeless and among our most vulnerable

[2:18:24] individuals.

[2:18:27] Um on a positive news, um we we hear a

[2:18:32] lot about education and about the cost

[2:18:34] of education and about restructuring

[2:18:37] education and about test scores and all

[2:18:40] the like and um honestly it's it's not a

[2:18:43] lot of positive news that we hear these

[2:18:45] days about education, which um is

[2:18:47] unfortunate. However, um the the changes

[2:18:51] that we've done and the investments that

[2:18:53] we're making in pre kindergarten are

[2:18:56] paying off and I think that it's

[2:18:58] important for people to know that we uh

[2:19:01] in my committee we deal with prek. Um

[2:19:03] I'm not the education committee but uh

[2:19:06] pre kindergarten is a what we call a

[2:19:09] mixed delivery system. It is uh provided

[2:19:12] by private prek providers as well as

[2:19:14] public schools and those funds are

[2:19:18] utilized for all verers to have access

[2:19:21] if you're a three or four year old to up

[2:19:23] to 10 hours a week of uh prek. About 60%

[2:19:27] of our youngsters receive it in the

[2:19:30] private system and about 40% receive it

[2:19:33] in the public prek. Um, on the good news

[2:19:36] side of things, uh, Vermont ranks second

[2:19:39] in the nation in access to preK. And not

[2:19:42] only access, but 85% more than 85% of

[2:19:47] our pre kindergarteners are showing

[2:19:50] excellent readiness for kindergarten.

[2:19:52] And that's because of the investments

[2:19:54] we're making in early education. And

[2:19:57] those investments will pay off as those

[2:20:00] children make their way through the

[2:20:01] public school system. So, um, we're

[2:20:04] among the tops in the country in that

[2:20:06] area. And I just wanted to be able to

[2:20:08] share some positive news about education

[2:20:11] as well. So, thank you very much for the

[2:20:14] opportunity and the honor to represent

[2:20:15] you in Mont Pillar and I appreciate all

[2:20:19] the texts and um, emails and keep them

[2:20:22] coming. So, thanks very much.

[2:20:32] Um, just I'm going to always call Teresa

[2:20:35] out for the work that she does for the

[2:20:37] human services committee because it is

[2:20:41] it's one of the largest budgets in the

[2:20:43] state and we're dealing primarily with

[2:20:46] people who um the way that I grew up

[2:20:50] were the way that my grandparents or my

[2:20:53] parents refer to them were people who

[2:20:54] are less fortunate than we are. And too

[2:20:58] often we forget that the people who are

[2:21:00] being served by the human services

[2:21:02] department are people who don't have the

[2:21:04] resources that many of us have. And

[2:21:07] that's why there's such a focus in the

[2:21:09] state house on making sure when we say

[2:21:11] that we want to protect the most

[2:21:13] vulnerable or the young or the or the

[2:21:15] old or the poor, that's what we're

[2:21:17] talking about. And I just the the work

[2:21:19] that um Teresa puts in for not only

[2:21:23] during the session but throughout the

[2:21:25] year is just remarkable to me. Her

[2:21:27] energy and her passion for her work is probably deeper than anything I've

[2:21:32] ever seen before in in in the state

[2:21:35] house. So thank you Teresa.

[2:21:42] IER now on the appropriations committee

[2:21:45] which means that all of the policies

[2:21:46] that that Teresa is talking about or any

[2:21:49] of the other policy committees think is

[2:21:51] going to be the greatest idea then has

[2:21:53] to come to the appropriations committee

[2:21:55] to get paid. We just had that

[2:21:57] conversation locally here and whether or

[2:21:59] not we have enough money in our state

[2:22:02] budget to fund um feeding Vermont

[2:22:06] verters feeding verters which is a

[2:22:07] program that gives money to farmers this

[2:22:10] time of year so they can grow crops that

[2:22:11] they will then donate to the food bank.

[2:22:14] um is asking for more

[2:22:16] funds. Um there are so many programs

[2:22:19] that our pri when when people say well

[2:22:21] you have to budget to your priorities.

[2:22:23] It's like there's been $300 million

[2:22:26] worth of requests by the time we get

[2:22:28] back of what people's priorities are

[2:22:30] whether they are part of a policy

[2:22:32] committee or whether they are one-time

[2:22:34] items that did not make it into the

[2:22:36] governor's recommended budget. And that

[2:22:39] kind of balance or imbalance between the

[2:22:42] amount of money that we have um to to to

[2:22:46] help Vermonters in in these categories

[2:22:50] is we're basically back to an austerity

[2:22:53] budgeting method which is saying we have

[2:22:55] this many dollars and this is what are

[2:22:58] we going to spend it on as opposed to

[2:23:00] what we experienced a little bit of

[2:23:01] during COVID which was what are the

[2:23:03] problems and here's you know how much

[2:23:06] money do we need to do it and and it was

[2:23:09] provided through the COVID relief money.

[2:23:11] CO relief money is gone and we're now at

[2:23:14] a point where we are seeing all of those

[2:23:17] investments pay off. So the housing that

[2:23:19] you're seeing is being built downtown um

[2:23:21] and across the state. This is about the

[2:23:23] last year that there's going to be

[2:23:25] multiple ribbon cutings because all of

[2:23:27] the money that we used from CO to go

[2:23:28] towards housing, which was over three

[2:23:30] or400 million is has has

[2:23:35] um been is is being harvested as we

[2:23:37] speak. So, but in the next several

[2:23:40] years, we're not going to see as much

[2:23:42] affordable housing built because there's

[2:23:44] just not the funds to do it through our

[2:23:46] normal budgeting process. So, when we

[2:23:48] get back, there's going to be two solid

[2:23:50] weeks of of listening to folks ask for

[2:23:53] money and for us making decisions in the

[2:23:55] appropriations committee um to create a

[2:23:58] document that we think reflects what we

[2:24:01] believe in, but also what the what the

[2:24:03] financial reality is going to be. It's

[2:24:05] going to be very difficult to say no to

[2:24:08] people, but that's that's probably 75%

[2:24:11] of the job on the appropriations

[2:24:13] committee. So, we have um we have gotten

[2:24:17] to work on it and in in several weeks

[2:24:19] we'll see what the results of that were.

[2:24:21] I want to speak a little bit about

[2:24:22] education funding. um whatever the

[2:24:25] budget turns out this weekend in all of

[2:24:27] the towns that are voting on the on your

[2:24:30] school budgets, just remember that we

[2:24:32] paid down um over $120 million of the

[2:24:36] property tax burden last year and it was

[2:24:38] a response to the two years ago when

[2:24:41] there was a 15 to 20% increase on

[2:24:43] property taxes and it's and it's we know

[2:24:45] it's unsustainable to see increases like

[2:24:47] that.

[2:24:49] The governor has proposed to use $105

[2:24:52] million to do the same thing this year.

[2:24:55] The problem that we're seeing and that

[2:24:57] we're experiencing was when we look at

[2:24:59] your when the December letter came out

[2:25:01] and said that there is an anticipated

[2:25:03] 12% increase in um statewide property

[2:25:07] taxes to pay for the your education. 50%

[2:25:10] of that was because of the $120 million

[2:25:12] we put down the year before. And so that

[2:25:16] under most circumstances is very

[2:25:18] difficult budgeting. We did it because

[2:25:20] it seemed to be the right thing to do

[2:25:21] last year. And the question for us to

[2:25:24] answer is is it going to be the right

[2:25:26] thing to do this year? And do we get

[2:25:28] back on the regular track of whatever

[2:25:30] the increases are? Um or should is it a

[2:25:33] priority to pay down to keep paying

[2:25:35] down? So every year a portion of what we

[2:25:37] have to raise is paying down last year's

[2:25:40] education funds. Um because we're not

[2:25:43] reducing spending when we do that. We're

[2:25:44] just reducing um what it costs to um to

[2:25:49] the taxpayers. It's got it's got some

[2:25:51] mileage to it, but that's going to be a

[2:25:54] big thing because again, it's $300

[2:25:55] million of asks for people who are

[2:25:58] looking for funds that are going to keep

[2:26:00] Veroners alive over the next year. So,

[2:26:03] that's that's our that's our um job. And

[2:26:08] the chaos that's coming out of

[2:26:09] Washington every day is not making it

[2:26:11] easier. And so we we're constantly being

[2:26:15] told something is being cut um just a

[2:26:17] second on housing. The Vermont State

[2:26:19] Housing Authority receives almost all of

[2:26:21] its all of its funding from the federal

[2:26:23] government until this year when the

[2:26:26] federal when the Housing and Urban

[2:26:27] Development cut their funding for

[2:26:29] existing vouchers. So people who need

[2:26:32] vouchers to help pay for rent, which

[2:26:34] helps landlords keep people in their

[2:26:36] building on a regular basis.

[2:26:37] >> Mr. Stevens, 30 second warning.

[2:26:39] >> Thank you. um it is it we have to fill

[2:26:43] in a gap that the federal government is

[2:26:44] doing and we may lose those those

[2:26:46] vouchers in the meantime. So that's what

[2:26:49] we're working with. It's not been fun,

[2:26:51] but the people who are doing it, I

[2:26:53] believe in them. I even if I don't um

[2:26:55] belong to the same party as they do, I

[2:26:57] believe in working together across the

[2:26:59] aisle to come to the best decisions that

[2:27:00] we can make together. Thank you for the

[2:27:03] privilege of serving with you. Um, I

[2:27:05] know I'll be here for a little while to

[2:27:06] answer questions in the back if anybody

[2:27:08] has any particular questions. But again,

[2:27:10] thank you for your time. Thank you for

[2:27:12] your support and we'll see you soon.

[2:27:22] Thank you to our legislators. And if you

[2:27:24] do have questions um for them, I'm sure

[2:27:26] they'd be happy to chat with you in the

[2:27:28] back.

[2:27:30] So, back to the orders of the day. We're

[2:27:32] now on article 10 which is in page one

[2:27:34] of the town report. Article 10. Shall

[2:27:37] the town establish a reserve fund to be

[2:27:40] called the natural disaster reserve fund

[2:27:42] for the purpose of responding to natural

[2:27:44] disasters in accordance with 24 Vermont

[2:27:47] statutes annotated section 2804.

[2:27:51] What is your pleasure with respect to

[2:27:53] article 10? Miss Taraveella.

[2:27:56] I move that the town of Waterberry

[2:27:59] establish a reserve fund to be called

[2:28:00] the natural disaster reserve fund for

[2:28:03] the purpose of responding to natural

[2:28:05] disasters in accordance with 24 VSA

[2:28:08] section 2204.

[2:28:11] Moved by Miss Taravela. Is there a

[2:28:13] second?

[2:28:15] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[2:28:17] It has been moved that the town of

[2:28:18] Waterbury shall establish a reserve fund

[2:28:20] to be called the natural disaster

[2:28:22] reserve fund for the purpose of

[2:28:23] responding to natural disasters in

[2:28:25] accordance with 24 Vermont statutes and

[2:28:28] section 2804.

[2:28:30] Mr. Tarella, would you like to speak to

[2:28:32] the motion? Yes, please. Uh, I would

[2:28:34] like to point out that on our town

[2:28:37] within the booklet on page 57, we

[2:28:40] include a natural disaster reserve fund

[2:28:43] allowable uses. The point of this fund

[2:28:45] is that we realize that FEMA funding

[2:28:48] cannot really be depended on going

[2:28:50] forward. And also, it's not going to

[2:28:52] cover everything that could come up if

[2:28:54] we unfortunately have to experience

[2:28:56] another flood or other natural disaster

[2:28:59] like our neighbors in Connecticut just

[2:29:01] went through. Um the purpose of this

[2:29:03] fund is to help mitigate the costs of

[2:29:07] training of volunteers, personnel over

[2:29:10] time, repair and cleanup, and other such

[2:29:12] costs um that may or may not be covered

[2:29:15] by federal or state response funds. It's

[2:29:17] the purpose is to hopefully alleviate

[2:29:20] some of this burden from the town

[2:29:22] taxpayers and allow the people the

[2:29:24] employees of Waterberry to respond

[2:29:27] promptly and efficiently should a

[2:29:29] disaster occur.

[2:29:32] Thank you. Is there discussion on

[2:29:34] article 10?

[2:29:52] » Karen Miller Weber Center. I have just

[2:29:54] one question. I'm not opposed to this

[2:29:56] fund. I think it's actually a good idea.

[2:29:58] But how are we're not putting any money

[2:30:01] into it this year? How's the funding of

[2:30:03] it going?

[2:30:04] >> That's article 11.

[2:30:06] >> There you go.

[2:30:11] Is there further discussion on article

[2:30:13] 10?

[2:30:17] Seeing no discussion, we will move to

[2:30:20] voting on article 10. Um,

[2:30:24] it has been moved that the town of

[2:30:25] Waterberry shall establish a reserve

[2:30:27] fund to be called the natural disaster

[2:30:29] re reserve fund for the purpose of

[2:30:31] responding to natural disasters in

[2:30:33] accordance with 24 VSA 22804.

[2:30:37] All those in favor, please say I.

[2:30:40] >> I.

[2:30:40] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[2:30:44] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[2:30:46] And you have passed article 10. Article

[2:30:49] 11. Shall the town appropriate $14,000

[2:30:52] of local option tax revenues to the

[2:30:55] natural disaster reserve fund? What is

[2:30:56] your pleasure with respect to article?

[2:31:01] Miss Paravella.

[2:31:03] >> I move that the town of Waterberry

[2:31:05] appropriate $14,000 of local option tax

[2:31:08] revenues to the natural disaster

[2:31:09] reserve.

[2:31:11] >> Is there is there a second? Sorry about

[2:31:13] that. The motion has been the article

[2:31:16] has been moved and seconded. It has been

[2:31:18] moved that the town of Waterberry shall

[2:31:20] appropriate $14,000 of local local

[2:31:23] option tax revenues to the natural

[2:31:25] disaster reserve fund. Mr. Harvella,

[2:31:27] would you like to speak to the motion?

[2:31:28] Yes, please. Uh

[2:31:31] what is the point of making a reserve

[2:31:33] fund if we don't actually put money in

[2:31:35] it?

[2:31:37] We've chosen to take it from the law

[2:31:38] local option tax as a

[2:31:41] hope to not you know impact the tax rate

[2:31:44] further with this uh fund balance. But

[2:31:46] we also recognize that while there may

[2:31:49] not be expenses every year that we have

[2:31:52] this fund creating this and putting the

[2:31:54] money into this reserve fund will allow

[2:31:56] us to have this amount roll over year to

[2:31:59] year and be protected for this specific

[2:32:01] use. So that is our hope.

[2:32:04] Is there discussion on article 11

[2:32:15] John Malter Waterberry Center I'm the

[2:32:18] chairman of the uh natural disaster

[2:32:21] preparedness committee and along with

[2:32:23] the other committee uh personnel

[2:32:27] uh we strongly uh endorse this. We see

[2:32:31] the need for both volunteers and

[2:32:35] resources to be available in the event

[2:32:38] that July 10th happens again someday,

[2:32:42] which we know unfortunately it has

[2:32:45] happened and maybe it'll be a different

[2:32:47] day, a different year, but uh it's

[2:32:49] important to have certain uh resources

[2:32:52] there that uh the the town isn't going

[2:32:55] to be purchasing. things like uh factory

[2:32:58] trucks, uh industrialgrade

[2:33:01] dehumidifiers,

[2:33:02] uh things like having extra dumpsters

[2:33:06] and rolloffs and uh other equipment as

[2:33:09] well as training and uh some staff uh

[2:33:13] extra time for staff to participate in

[2:33:16] the immediate uh aftermath of an event

[2:33:19] of this nature. So I just that money is

[2:33:23] important. We uh are always looking for

[2:33:26] more volunteers. I'm happy to sign

[2:33:28] anybody up who is looking to uh get

[2:33:32] dirty and uh get the satisfaction of

[2:33:35] seeing the before and seeing the after.

[2:33:38] So, thank you.

[2:33:42] Is there further discussion on article

[2:33:45] 11?

[2:33:49] Seeing no further discussion, it is it

[2:33:52] has been moved that the town of

[2:33:53] Waterberry shall appropriate $14,000 of

[2:33:56] local option tax revenues to the natural

[2:33:58] disaster reserve fund. All those in

[2:34:00] favor, please say I.

[2:34:02] >> I.

[2:34:03] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[2:34:06] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[2:34:08] And you have passed article 11.

[2:34:11] Article 12. Shall the town establish a

[2:34:14] reserve fund to be called the Waterbury

[2:34:16] Housing Reserve Fund for the purpose of

[2:34:18] supporting

[2:34:20] housing initiatives and incentives in

[2:34:23] alignment with the Waterberry Housing

[2:34:24] Trust Fund allowable uses in accordance

[2:34:27] with 24 Vermont statutes annotated

[2:34:29] section 2804.

[2:34:32] What is your pleasure with respect to

[2:34:33] article 12? Mr. Sweeney.

[2:34:37] >> I move that the town of Waterberry

[2:34:39] establish a reserve fund to be called

[2:34:40] the Waterberry Housing Reserve Fund for

[2:34:42] the purpose of supporting housing

[2:34:44] initiatives and incentives aligned with

[2:34:46] the Waterberry Housing Trust Fund

[2:34:47] allowable uses in accordance with 24BSA

[2:34:51] section 2804.

[2:34:54] >> Moved by Mr. Sweeney. Is there a second?

[2:34:57] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[2:35:00] It has been moved that the town of

[2:35:02] Waterberry shall establish a reserve

[2:35:03] fund to be called the Waterberry Housing

[2:35:05] Reserve Fund for the purpose of

[2:35:06] supporting housing initiatives and

[2:35:08] incentives in alignment with the house

[2:35:10] waterberry housing trust fund allowable

[2:35:12] uses in accordance with 24 VSA section

[2:35:15] 2804.

[2:35:16] Mr. Sweeney, would you like to speak to

[2:35:18] the motion?

[2:35:19] >> Sure.

[2:35:21] So, we already have as a line item the

[2:35:24] Waterberry Housing Trust Fund, which

[2:35:26] just solely exists as a line item in our

[2:35:29] local option tax

[2:35:31] on the applicable page in your report.

[2:35:35] Um, what this will do is codify

[2:35:39] Waterberry's commitment to housing going

[2:35:41] forward. Um, look to the next article

[2:35:45] which

[2:35:46] present shortly. the funds have already

[2:35:49] been allocated to the trust fund.

[2:35:54] Therefore, we wouldn't be allocating any money that hasn't been set aside for

[2:35:59] this project already the previous year.

[2:36:06] » Is there further discussion?

[2:36:12] » Please come to the microphone.

[2:36:20] the Woody um Avenue project.

[2:36:24] >> Um sorry, the Woody Island up by the

[2:36:27] actually is they're thinking of

[2:36:28] developing the land across from the

[2:36:30] school where the armory is. Can't hear

[2:36:32] me.

[2:36:33] >> Oh, sorry. Kathy Grace, South Main

[2:36:35] Street. I'm just curious um because I

[2:36:39] haven't seen a bond vote or anything on

[2:36:42] selling or uh the Woody Avenue project.

[2:36:45] If we put money more um if we codify as

[2:36:49] you say um does that mean that you can

[2:36:51] spend money on a project without the

[2:36:54] town

[2:36:56] taxpayers voting a yes or a no? Is this

[2:36:59] money going to be something that we get

[2:37:01] to say where what it gets spent on or is

[2:37:04] it just a way of giving you money to do

[2:37:06] it without us having a project?

[2:37:08] >> Okay. Thank you for the question. So um

[2:37:11] is there a member of the select board

[2:37:12] who would like to respond? All right,

[2:37:14] Mr.

[2:37:15] Um, if you looked at page 53 in your

[2:37:17] reports, there's allowable uses for the

[2:37:20] trust fund.

[2:37:22] As of right now, the housing fund as it sits funds a

[2:37:29] program called the Waterberry Housing

[2:37:30] Improvement Program, which operates much

[2:37:33] like VHIP, which um provides grants and

[2:37:39] loans to folks building ADUs.

[2:37:44] If you look at the allowable uses, there

[2:37:47] are guidelines

[2:37:49] and a massive focus on affordable

[2:37:52] housing.

[2:37:57] » Um, thank you. If there are questions,

[2:38:00] you can address them to me and I'll find

[2:38:02] out if there's someone who would like to

[2:38:04] answer it.

[2:38:06] is will it will spending the funds on

[2:38:10] like using that as an example the Woody

[2:38:14] Avenue development will be passed

[2:38:16] through that or will taxp

[2:38:20] okay so the question if people can't

[2:38:21] hear it is whether or not funds that are

[2:38:24] put into this reserve fund are can be

[2:38:26] spent at the discretion of the select

[2:38:28] board or if there needs to be further

[2:38:29] vote on how they're expended. Is there

[2:38:32] someone on the select board who would

[2:38:33] like to answer that?

[2:38:35] Um, so the function of a reserve fund is

[2:38:38] the select board would have the

[2:38:40] discretion to spend in alignment with

[2:38:42] the allowable uses. So to your question,

[2:38:44] if there was a housing project that

[2:38:47] aligned with the objectives defined

[2:38:49] here, we specifically designed the types

[2:38:51] of affordability that would count and

[2:38:52] the types of projects. If there was to

[2:38:55] someday be a project at Woody that met

[2:38:57] those criteria, the select board could

[2:38:59] spend from this reserve fund to support

[2:39:01] that project if it met the other

[2:39:03] allowable criteria without needing to go

[2:39:05] to a full-time vote. I will note for

[2:39:07] today's conversation, the funding that

[2:39:09] Kane spoke to and that's in the next

[2:39:11] article is for the other programs Kane

[2:39:14] already spoke to and we have a separate

[2:39:15] item in local option tax specifically

[2:39:18] addressed to Woody AB. So, I don't think

[2:39:20] it's contemplated at this point as a

[2:39:22] use, but it technically could

[2:39:24] potentially be allowable under these

[2:39:26] guidelines.

[2:39:31] » Is there um further discussion on

[2:39:34] article 12?

[2:39:36] >> Madam moderators,

[2:39:39] um I understand that and I advocate for

[2:39:40] this. It's a wonderful thing. My

[2:39:42] question though is the number correct

[2:39:44] because I we have an active program

[2:39:46] right now like so we're asking for this

[2:39:49] to be put in reserve fund but there are

[2:39:51] actually applicants for an active

[2:39:54] program so that will be burned down this

[2:39:58] year.

[2:40:00] >> Okay. So the question is

[2:40:02] >> reconstitute 175 right it's 175 minus

[2:40:07] anything that's already been earmarked

[2:40:09] for people targeted for that

[2:40:13] >> so article 12 is just the creation of

[2:40:16] the trust fund um I think you may be

[2:40:18] speaking to article 13

[2:40:24] » is there any further discussion on

[2:40:26] article 12.

[2:40:30] » Um, Teresa Wood again. I just thought

[2:40:33] folks might be interested because it's

[2:40:35] been mentioned in the last two articles

[2:40:37] what 24 VSA section 2804 actually is.

[2:40:41] Um, so, uh, and I just was, uh, bringing

[2:40:44] up because, um, Kathy's question, um, it

[2:40:49] says specifically at it, it's about

[2:40:50] reserve funds, and it's at an annual or

[2:40:54] special meeting, duly warned, a

[2:40:56] municipality may establish a reserve

[2:40:58] fund, and this is the part that the

[2:41:00] question came up about to be under the

[2:41:02] control and direction of the legislative

[2:41:04] branch of the municipality,

[2:41:07] which is the select board. So, I just

[2:41:08] thought I would provide that background

[2:41:10] for you.

[2:41:15] Is there further discussion on article

[2:41:17] 12?

[2:41:19] Seeing no further discussion, um we'll

[2:41:22] proceed to a vote. It has been moved

[2:41:24] that the town of Waterberry shall

[2:41:26] establish a reserve fund to be called

[2:41:28] the Waterberry Housing Reserve Fund for

[2:41:30] the purpose of supporting housing

[2:41:32] initiatives and incentives in alignment

[2:41:33] with the Waterberry Housing Trust Fund

[2:41:35] allowable uses in accordance with 24 BSA

[2:41:38] section 2804.

[2:41:40] All those in favor, please say I. I.

[2:41:43] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[2:41:46] The eyes appear to have it and the eyes

[2:41:49] do have it. And you have passed article

[2:41:51] 12.

[2:41:52] Article 13 um

[2:41:55] states, "Shall the town allocate 175,000

[2:41:59] of local option tax reserves to the

[2:42:03] Waterberry Housing Reserve Fund." What

[2:42:06] is your pleasure with respect to article

[2:42:08] 13, Mr. Sweeney?

[2:42:10] >> I move that the town deposit 175,000 of

[2:42:14] local option tax reserves to the

[2:42:15] Waterberry Housing Reserve Fund.

[2:42:18] >> Moved by Mr. Sweeney. Is there a second?

[2:42:22] The motion has been moved and seconded

[2:42:24] that the town of Waterway shall allocate

[2:42:26] $175,000

[2:42:28] of local option tax reserves to the

[2:42:30] Waterbury Housing Reserve Fund. Mr.

[2:42:32] Sweeney, would you like to speak to the

[2:42:34] motion?

[2:42:36] >> As I uh iterated before, the money the

[2:42:40] 175,000 had already been set aside as a

[2:42:42] line item in for tax

[2:42:45] budget. Um, it's money that was set

[2:42:48] aside over the last two years, which

[2:42:50] means there would be no money coming out

[2:42:51] of, as far as I understand it, 2026

[2:42:54] budget to go into this fund. It's just

[2:42:57] money that has already been set aside.

[2:43:02] » Is there further discussion about

[2:43:04] article 13?

[2:43:10] » Yes.

[2:43:12] Um, preemptively to the potential

[2:43:14] question, I would just note $100,000 of

[2:43:16] that was designated by the select board

[2:43:18] in 2024. The other $75,000 of local

[2:43:21] option tax money was voted here a year

[2:43:23] ago by all of you at town meeting. To

[2:43:25] the question about uses, we do have a

[2:43:28] use following the approved uses that

[2:43:30] we've discussed. The Waterbury Housing

[2:43:32] Improvement Program, we do have

[2:43:33] applicant. As far as I'm aware, we have

[2:43:35] not yet awarded funding. Though we have

[2:43:38] designated that $100,000 could be used

[2:43:40] for that. Out of those two items, they

[2:43:42] have not been paid. They would be

[2:43:44] allowable uses. So even if this funding

[2:43:46] was moved to this reserve fund, it still

[2:43:48] could be used in that manner. I also

[2:43:51] will take this moment while it's

[2:43:52] journeying to recognize Sandy Saving for

[2:43:55] her advocacy on both of these articles.

[2:44:04] Is there further discussion on article

[2:44:06] 13?

[2:44:10] Seeing no further discussion, we will

[2:44:13] proceed to a vote. It has been moved

[2:44:15] that the town of Waterberry shall

[2:44:17] allocate $175,000

[2:44:19] of local option tax reserves to the

[2:44:22] Waterberry Housing Reserve Fund. All

[2:44:25] those in favor, please say I. I.

[2:44:28] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[2:44:31] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[2:44:33] have it. And you have passed article 13.

[2:44:37] Article 14.

[2:44:40] shall notes of the town of Waterberry in

[2:44:44] an amount not to exceed $414,47

[2:44:51] subject to the reduction from the

[2:44:52] receipt of available state and federal

[2:44:54] grants and aid and reserve funds be

[2:44:56] issued for the purposes for the purpose

[2:44:59] of acquiring a replacement fire truck.

[2:45:01] The estimated cost of such improvements

[2:45:03] being $414,47

[2:45:07] with the debt service by $110,000 in

[2:45:10] local option tax revenues in 2026.

[2:45:14] What is your pleasure with respect to

[2:45:15] article 14?

[2:45:18] Mr. Bard.

[2:45:23] » Madame moderator, I move to authorize

[2:45:26] the select board to transfer up to

[2:45:29] $380,000

[2:45:31] from

[2:45:33] >> That's last year's motion.

[2:45:48] corrected one. I move to authorize the

[2:45:52] town of Waterbury to borrow by note in

[2:45:55] an amount not to exceed 414,47

[2:46:02] subject to the reduction from the

[2:46:04] receipt of available state and federal

[2:46:07] grants to aids and reserve funds for the

[2:46:10] purpose of acquiring a replacement fire

[2:46:13] truck. the estimated cost of such

[2:46:16] improvements being $414,47

[2:46:23] with the debt service by $110,000

[2:46:27] in local tax revenues in 2006.

[2:46:32] Um the moved by Mr. Bard. Is there a

[2:46:35] second?

[2:46:37] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[2:46:40] And um if there's no objection, I will

[2:46:43] not reread the article. And Mr. Dylan,

[2:46:46] would you like to speak to the article?

[2:46:50] >> Sometimes I think you're better off just

[2:46:55] that.

[2:47:00] » Thanks for having my back.

[2:47:03] You need two of these.

[2:47:06] Um, so here I am again and I and I sound

[2:47:12] like a broken record. Um, and I get it,

[2:47:16] but it's what happens when you um merge

[2:47:18] two fire departments into one and

[2:47:21] previously you bought fire trucks

[2:47:24] together to save a little bit of money.

[2:47:27] Um, so this is the last big truck that

[2:47:30] you're going to see me for. Um, yeah,

[2:47:34] like forget it. Uh

[2:47:38] there there's still a pickup truck out

[2:47:39] there somewhere. Um and that was delayed

[2:47:43] from this year to possibly next year. Uh

[2:47:46] this tank truck is replacing a truck

[2:47:48] that should have been replaced in 2018.

[2:47:52] Um but that was before we merged. And in

[2:47:56] working with Bill originally, uh we

[2:47:59] started doing a lot of separation of our

[2:48:02] trucks.

[2:48:03] um to put them off a little bit so that

[2:48:05] we're not buying two big trucks in a

[2:48:09] year. Um I also worked with the previous

[2:48:12] manager to come up with uh the

[2:48:16] replacement date for this truck this

[2:48:17] year. Um and

[2:48:22] what we're getting is a new tank truck

[2:48:25] to replace one that is in need of

[2:48:28] replacing. Again, it should have been

[2:48:30] replaced in 2018. I'm not saying that

[2:48:33] I'm upset about that. It was the right

[2:48:34] thing to do. Uh but this one it is due

[2:48:40] and it is necessary. There are

[2:48:43] mechanical issues that we're we're

[2:48:45] piecing together. There's, you know,

[2:48:48] it's a poly tank and a body, meaning

[2:48:51] plastic. Um and they work great, but

[2:48:55] over time bolts and stuff shift. We if

[2:48:58] we we're going to have to start start

[2:49:00] taking a look at uh refabricating some

[2:49:02] of the the parts where the hinges go and

[2:49:06] there's shock issues or not shocks uh

[2:49:09] springs and brackets that hold the

[2:49:11] springs on. I'm not a mechanic. Chris is

[2:49:13] probably sitting there thinking I know

[2:49:15] what that is. Um, but this truck again

[2:49:19] is a demo truck and in in lie of

[2:49:23] spending more money um and trying to

[2:49:26] save money. That's what we've been

[2:49:28] buying for the last four trucks are demo

[2:49:30] trucks. We get it, we order the other

[2:49:33] parts that we that need to come on it

[2:49:35] because it comes as just a plain truck.

[2:49:37] Even with the parts that we're ordering

[2:49:39] that have to be on this truck, we're

[2:49:41] still saving in the area of $40,000

[2:49:44] in a $400,000 truck. I get it's not

[2:49:47] much, but maybe it's a sidewalk. I don't

[2:49:51] know. Um, but it is something. So, we

[2:49:55] are doing our best to to get a truck

[2:49:58] that works for us.

[2:50:00] We're not a big city, a big town that

[2:50:04] has a lot of money that are buying

[2:50:06] trucks with big names that some places

[2:50:09] do. Um because that's not what we need.

[2:50:12] And you know, we can spend $400,000 on

[2:50:16] this truck and other towns would spend

[2:50:18] $750,000 because it's a big brand name.

[2:50:22] And the trucks do the exact same thing.

[2:50:25] So, I'm willing to answer any questions

[2:50:27] for you if you have them.

[2:50:31] uh fire away.

[2:50:32] >> Okay. So, um if there's further

[2:50:35] discussion um so you can put the

[2:50:37] microphone down and then if people have

[2:50:39] questions, we'll let you answer them.

[2:50:46] » Okay. Is are is there further discussion

[2:50:49] on this motion?

[2:50:59] All right. Well, seeing no further

[2:51:02] discussion, we will take a vote on it.

[2:51:06] Um, it has been moved that the town of

[2:51:08] Waterberry shall issue notes in an

[2:51:09] amount not to exceed $414,47

[2:51:13] subject to the reduction from the

[2:51:15] receipt of available state and federal

[2:51:17] grants and aid and reserve funds be

[2:51:19] issued for the purpose of acquiring a

[2:51:21] replacement firet truck. the estimated

[2:51:22] cost of such improvements being $414,47

[2:51:26] with the debt service by $110,000 in

[2:51:29] local option tax revenues in 2026.

[2:51:32] All those in favor, please say I.

[2:51:36] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[2:51:39] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[2:51:40] And you have passed article 14.

[2:51:43] So,

[2:51:46] I've just been informed that if you are

[2:51:48] hungry and would like to take a short

[2:51:49] break in the cafeteria, lunch is being

[2:51:52] served by the senior center. However,

[2:51:55] for those who want to stay upstairs,

[2:51:56] we'll continue going through articles.

[2:51:59] We will now move to article 15. What is

[2:52:02] your pleasure with respect to article

[2:52:04] 15, Mr. Sweeney?

[2:52:06] >> I move article 15.

[2:52:10] So to popular claim, we're going to

[2:52:12] shorten some of the process here. So

[2:52:14] moved by Mr. Sweeney. Is there a second?

[2:52:18] >> The motion has been moved and seconded.

[2:52:20] Now I actually do have to read the whole

[2:52:21] thing. It has been moved that the town

[2:52:23] will during 2026 appropriate a total of

[2:52:26] $935,000

[2:52:28] from local option tax revenues as

[2:52:31] follows. $150,000 for grapple roads,

[2:52:34] $25,000 for the highway capital fund,

[2:52:37] $150,000 for a new pool filter, $75,000

[2:52:40] for a new F350 vehicle for public works,

[2:52:44] $150,000 for sidewalk improvements,

[2:52:46] $15,000 for consulting services to

[2:52:48] assist with the town plan update, $8,500

[2:52:51] for tree inventory, $10,000 for expenses

[2:52:54] related to Teimo Bio projects, $25,000

[2:52:57] for the Stanley Wson and Woody Avenue

[2:52:59] housing projects, $10,000 for non grant

[2:53:01] eligible expenses for the Randall Meadow

[2:53:04] Flood Mitigation Project, $75,000 for a

[2:53:07] pilot service agreement with the

[2:53:08] Washington County Sheriff, $8,000 for

[2:53:11] inventory supplies for natural disaster

[2:53:13] preparedness, $3,500 for the Waterbury

[2:53:16] Vermont 250 planning committee, $126,67

[2:53:21] for debt service for a fire truck

[2:53:22] approved by voters in 2025. $13,333

[2:53:27] force debt service for a public works

[2:53:29] truck approved by voters in 2025.

[2:53:32] Mr. Sweeney, would you like to speak to

[2:53:34] the motion?

[2:53:36] >> Sure. Uh, briefly,

[2:53:40] we feel that all of these expenditures

[2:53:42] fall into the four buckets of allowable

[2:53:45] usage for the local

[2:54:00] Okay. Any um further discussion about

[2:54:04] article 15? This is the article dealing

[2:54:08] with the local option tax. So there were

[2:54:10] questions about this earlier. So um

[2:54:13] please come up to the microphone if

[2:54:14] you'd like to make comments.

[2:54:21] Sandy Saven, Waterberry Senate. Um, as I

[2:54:24] had asked before, um, I just wondered on

[2:54:27] page 23 of the local options tax

[2:54:30] breakdown from the adopted budget last

[2:54:33] year and proposed this year if we have

[2:54:36] the actual figures that were spent for

[2:54:39] 2025

[2:54:41] so that we can see compared to what was

[2:54:44] budgeted, what was spent.

[2:54:47] and then a final after that a final

[2:54:51] actual year end balance.

[2:54:56] So the question relates to page 23 um

[2:54:59] the local option tax 25 2025 budget

[2:55:03] compared to actuals and the final

[2:55:06] balance

[2:55:07] regretfully I don't have it in a

[2:55:09] beautiful well-laidout format or in the

[2:55:11] town report but to speak to the 2025

[2:55:13] column to help um outline my

[2:55:16] understanding and knowledge is that um

[2:55:18] all of the expenses adopted for local

[2:55:21] option tax in 2025 have been expended

[2:55:24] did at least substantially with the

[2:55:26] exception of the card access/security

[2:55:29] system for the municipal offices that

[2:55:31] $25,000 I believe the estimates came

[2:55:33] over very high and we haven't moved

[2:55:35] forward with the project as a result of

[2:55:37] that but otherwise my understanding is

[2:55:39] again at least substantially those funds

[2:55:42] have been spent as allocated

[2:55:44] and then I believe the question also was

[2:55:47] if there's a balance is that your

[2:55:48] question

[2:55:51] just

[2:55:52] >> yeah sorry So if the um if the 25,000

[2:55:58] was not re does it go back to the

[2:56:00] balance fund and if it you decide later

[2:56:03] on to do it at a higher cost will be

[2:56:06] brought to for the voters at that point.

[2:56:10] So is that still in the balance because

[2:56:13] it didn't get used last year. So the

[2:56:16] balance actually was higher and if we do

[2:56:19] decide to do it later on I think it is a

[2:56:22] good idea present that to the voters.

[2:56:28] » Miss Johnson, would you like to respond?

[2:56:29] And just to restate, if anyone couldn't

[2:56:31] hear, what I think Sandy walked along

[2:56:33] and we are agreeing with is that that

[2:56:34] 25,000 that was allocated but not spent

[2:56:37] out of local option tax is still in the

[2:56:39] town accounts coming from local option

[2:56:41] tax and could be used for that purpose

[2:56:43] and additional funding needed to be

[2:56:45] sought that could be brought to the

[2:56:46] voters.

[2:56:58] moderator. Um, Chris Fens,

[2:57:01] can I ask a general question about local

[2:57:03] options tax? I've been kind of waiting

[2:57:05] for the right article to pop up. Uh, and

[2:57:07] could I request a show of hands based on

[2:57:09] that question?

[2:57:10] >> No, you may not.

[2:57:11] >> Okay.

[2:57:13] All right. Something to think about. Um,

[2:57:15] I won't ask for a show of hands. I had

[2:57:18] proposed earlier in the year, um, this

[2:57:21] local options tax is generating about a

[2:57:23] million dollars a year additional

[2:57:25] revenue that we never had before.

[2:57:28] Uh, back when I was on the board, we

[2:57:30] always worked within the confines of the

[2:57:32] budget year-over-year and didn't

[2:57:34] fluctuate too far from from the tax rate

[2:57:37] that we had. Obviously, it increased

[2:57:39] penny and a half to two pennies

[2:57:41] year-over-year.

[2:57:44] The reason I'm interested in this

[2:57:46] proposal, I had mentioned it to the to

[2:57:49] our select board earlier in the year.

[2:57:50] What I'd like to see of that local

[2:57:52] options tax, it's almost a million

[2:57:54] dollars a year. We have our tax

[2:57:55] stabilization fund that's about a

[2:57:57] million4 plus or minus. It fluctuates

[2:58:00] back and forth based on um stock market

[2:58:03] and portfolio and based on whether we

[2:58:05] borrow it down or not.

[2:58:08] Prior to co that million4 and we can

[2:58:11] only draw that down to 650,000. Uh that

[2:58:14] was I believe a an an amendment that

[2:58:18] Teresa put forward back in the day to uh

[2:58:20] stabilize that at no lower than 650,000.

[2:58:24] Prior to CO,

[2:58:27] that million4 bought what we thought

[2:58:30] would buy a million4.

[2:58:33] After CO and now we all know that the

[2:58:36] dollar value has plummeted to such a

[2:58:38] degree that that million4 has only gone

[2:58:41] to buy about half of that. It only has

[2:58:44] about half the value it had precoid.

[2:58:48] What I'm asking the board to consider is

[2:58:51] 200,000 a year for 5 years out of that

[2:58:54] local options tax. Contribute it to that

[2:58:57] tax stabilization fund to build that to

[2:59:00] 2 million for or whatever it'll be at

[2:59:03] that time through growth, normal growth

[2:59:05] on on the through the portfolio

[2:59:08] uh and then interest paid back by the

[2:59:10] town if we borrow off it and pay

[2:59:12] ourselves back. But we need to bring

[2:59:15] that up to a higher value than it

[2:59:18] actually can buy right now. Because just

[2:59:20] because we think it's a million4 there,

[2:59:22] it's not going to buy what we think a

[2:59:24] million four would would have bought 10

[2:59:26] years ago. So I want you to consider

[2:59:28] that. Um the other thing I'd like to ask

[2:59:33] the Woody Avenue that's on here, the

[2:59:36] $25,000 and kind of answer Kathy's

[2:59:39] question there that she kind of brought

[2:59:41] forward before. I'm hoping that this

[2:59:45] project behind us here uh we have the

[2:59:47] capacity I believe within our town and

[2:59:51] maybe we don't have to

[2:59:54] uh uh seclude it just to the town but

[2:59:56] open that project up to local developers

[3:00:00] and I've got some ideas in my head that

[3:00:02] I don't believe that the taxpayers will

[3:00:05] have to burden any of that cost and I

[3:00:08] think we can get some good homes out of

[3:00:09] it at a at an affordable price tag.

[3:00:13] if we approach it in the manner that I'm

[3:00:15] thinking of. Uh, and I just, you know,

[3:00:18] to remind everybody, I've been in the

[3:00:19] construction industry for 45 years. So,

[3:00:22] I have a little bit of clue as to how

[3:00:24] those projects can take place. And I'm

[3:00:26] hoping that we can produce this project

[3:00:30] out here with no with no additional tax

[3:00:33] revenue from you guys.

[3:00:39] Is there further discussion on article

[3:00:41] 15?

[3:00:47] » Yeah,

[3:00:48] >> Kathy Grace, I think this is where I'm

[3:00:50] supposed to ask the questions I tried to

[3:00:52] ask before. Okay. um about the Ludy

[3:00:55] Allen project. First of all, um I have

[3:01:00] been questioning all along why we need

[3:01:02] to put housing up there and basically

[3:01:07] get rid of the only property we have

[3:01:09] around the school to use in case we have

[3:01:11] to expand the school. Plus, parking is

[3:01:14] already a nightmare. if you I mean right

[3:01:17] now the school if you have a kid in

[3:01:20] first grade and a kid in fourth grade

[3:01:21] you have to come twice because there's

[3:01:23] not parking um for um everybody to be

[3:01:27] here all at once. So I just I think

[3:01:29] there needs to be a discussion about the

[3:01:32] use of Woody Allen at Woody Avenue. And

[3:01:35] the other thing is just the traffic at

[3:01:37] the coming of school and departing of

[3:01:40] school. The fact that can you even get

[3:01:42] um safety vehicles up through there? My

[3:01:45] son owns a house on the corner of Stow

[3:01:47] Street and High Street and you can't

[3:01:50] even park there. So, there's just so

[3:01:52] many questions that I feel haven't been

[3:01:54] answered or brought forth to the town.

[3:01:56] How about the people that live on

[3:01:57] Alenwood Avenue? You know, is there

[3:02:00] going to be a forum for people to

[3:02:01] discuss that that and I'm hoping that's

[3:02:04] maybe what your $25,000 is for is to

[3:02:08] have more public input about that. And

[3:02:11] the second thing I brought up before is

[3:02:12] the police. And you notice that I did

[3:02:15] say there were three troopers down there

[3:02:17] that night. But we have had an

[3:02:20] incredible increase in viol violent

[3:02:23] crime in Waterbury Center and in

[3:02:25] Waterbury. Domestic issues and you know

[3:02:28] the stabbing in the park by the

[3:02:30] teenagers, the um issues in the cemetery

[3:02:33] behind the uh white church, you know,

[3:02:36] defacing the monuments and then you this

[3:02:39] is a 15year-old kid with a gun going

[3:02:42] house to house and on South Main Street.

[3:02:45] So I I wonder if there could be some

[3:02:48] explanation about um what you're doing

[3:02:52] with the sheriff because it looks like

[3:02:54] it doesn't start to July 1st,

[3:02:57] right? Am I right? It's not starting

[3:03:00] soon. It's not starting as of town,

[3:03:01] meaning I guess we want to know um the

[3:03:03] rationale why it's not starting sooner.

[3:03:06] Um it looks like the state police's

[3:03:08] contract ends on June 30th. Is is that

[3:03:12] being reuped? Are we going to have the

[3:03:14] two for a while? I just would like an

[3:03:16] update on the public dece.

[3:03:18] >> Okay.

[3:03:20] >> Thank you. So the first question um is

[3:03:24] will there be a forum to discuss the

[3:03:26] Woody Avenue project? Is there um can

[3:03:29] you answer that Mr. Clap?

[3:03:31] >> Yeah. As the uh soul select board member

[3:03:35] that will be remaining here uh next

[3:03:37] year, uh I will say yes, we will have a

[3:03:40] hearing on Woody Avenue. Uh that's part

[3:03:43] of what the funding is for is to figure

[3:03:44] out what's feasible in terms of traffic

[3:03:46] and building parking, etc. Um uh I'll

[3:03:51] also respond to Chris's comment that uh

[3:03:55] 230,000 of this uh funding uh is to pay

[3:04:00] down debt service, which serves uh much

[3:04:03] the same proc uh uh objective of the uh

[3:04:07] debt stabilization program. Uh that's

[3:04:10] money that is not going to have to come

[3:04:12] out of the taxpayers's pocket uh because

[3:04:14] we're paying down debt that would

[3:04:16] otherwise have to go into the regular

[3:04:17] budget. Um and then uh in terms of

[3:04:21] public safety uh yeah we are uh looking

[3:04:25] to see what we can do uh by using the

[3:04:28] $75,000

[3:04:30] to pay for a sheriff. They don't have

[3:04:32] anyone available until the 1st of July.

[3:04:36] Uh and so we are uh you know doing what

[3:04:40] we can with with what's available uh to

[3:04:42] see if that's a better use of our public

[3:04:44] safety funding uh to direct uh the uh

[3:04:49] service points where it's really needed.

[3:04:53] » Is there further discussion on article

[3:04:56] 15? Um just about Yeah, Miss Johnson,

[3:04:59] did you want to respond?

[3:05:02] I was just going to elaborate on Rogers

[3:05:04] to note that this $25,000 in local

[3:05:06] option tax for the housing is not the

[3:05:08] only funding. We have also received a

[3:05:10] federal community development block

[3:05:12] grant planning grant planning only

[3:05:14] because as was noted there's quite a lot

[3:05:16] of questions and that we've been awarded

[3:05:18] that grant. It doesn't have a local

[3:05:20] match. So we are still asking for this

[3:05:21] budget request in case there are things

[3:05:23] that are not covered. that that has I

[3:05:25] believe north of $270,000

[3:05:28] for things like engineering permitting

[3:05:30] and public engagement. So knowing that

[3:05:32] significant additional needs work needs

[3:05:35] to be done working with all of these

[3:05:37] things to figure out next steps. So I

[3:05:39] just wanted to note this is not the only

[3:05:40] funding allocated there is other funding

[3:05:43] the town has received again for planning

[3:05:44] for that property.

[3:05:48] Go ahead, Martha Stasis. I'm actually

[3:05:51] here speaking on behalf of the planning

[3:05:53] commission and I'd like to ask the

[3:05:55] planning commission members to stand

[3:05:57] just so you can see who your planning

[3:05:59] commission members are. I know Robbie's

[3:06:01] here. I thought I saw Dana. Did he

[3:06:03] leave? He had to leave. Okay. And Billy

[3:06:06] Victor. Um there's an additional 15,000

[3:06:09] in here. I I think I hope folks are

[3:06:12] aware that the town is going through a

[3:06:14] significant overhaul of the entire town

[3:06:18] plan and we had we asked for 50,000 last

[3:06:21] year and another 15 this year. Uh

[3:06:24] there's some key elements to it and I

[3:06:26] kind of making a pitch here too for your

[3:06:29] participation. There have been questions

[3:06:31] asked about what about housing, what

[3:06:33] about development. There's 12 chapters

[3:06:36] in the town plan that cover energy,

[3:06:38] transportation, housing, local

[3:06:40] government, and this is your opportunity

[3:06:43] to participate. We've had visioning

[3:06:46] sessions and surveys, but um our emails

[3:06:49] are on the website, and if you have

[3:06:51] comments or thoughts, we certainly would

[3:06:53] like to hear about it. Now, we're the

[3:06:56] timeline is to have a draft by the end

[3:06:59] of the summer going and have this

[3:07:01] project completed by the end of the

[3:07:03] year. So, now is the time if you haven't

[3:07:07] done so already.

[3:07:09] >> Thank you.

[3:07:15] » Do you have a point of order or uh would

[3:07:17] you like to discuss article 15?

[3:07:20] >> Okay, so we'll go in order. Thanks.

[3:07:23] Angela Wells Waterberry Center. So to go

[3:07:25] back to my original question which

[3:07:27] didn't get answered, the 75,000

[3:07:30] for the sheriff program. We don't know

[3:07:34] what that's going to cover, what hours,

[3:07:37] what that's going to look like for

[3:07:39] coverage, and what coverage they are

[3:07:43] providing. We don't know that right now.

[3:07:47] >> Is there a member of the select board

[3:07:49] who would like to respond to that

[3:07:50] question?

[3:07:55] Um, we did use a number. I'll try and

[3:07:57] get the estimate for you. The reason the

[3:07:59] proposed start date was was to cover

[3:08:01] nine months of service through next town

[3:08:03] meeting in March, beginning in July, I

[3:08:05] believe they might need to h try and

[3:08:06] hire more folks to be able to provide as

[3:08:09] many hours as this funding would cover

[3:08:11] in Waterbury. So recognizing that if our

[3:08:13] budget passes today in the end of March,

[3:08:15] we need to wait till the end of April

[3:08:17] and then give two months for hiring for

[3:08:19] the sheriff beginning in July seemed

[3:08:21] prudent. So it's not that I think the

[3:08:22] town would be opposed to starting

[3:08:24] sooner, but that was the reasonable

[3:08:26] planning. Um I will try and see now if I

[3:08:29] can get the estimate of number of hours.

[3:08:32] Um it's not another 40 hours a week.

[3:08:34] It's supplemental. Um, but I think the

[3:08:36] town does have the ability through the

[3:08:37] town manager and the select board to

[3:08:39] provide input on where and at what times

[3:08:41] would be most important. Um, the sheriff

[3:08:44] also serves a number of our neighboring

[3:08:46] communities in the Mad River Valley and

[3:08:48] there's some benefit to clustering time

[3:08:51] of service closer together because we do

[3:08:54] have to pay them for mileage travel from

[3:08:55] Montielar. And so they said there's some

[3:08:58] work they're already doing and might be

[3:08:59] able to add on and also serve water.

[3:09:02] >> But there's no average number of

[3:09:05] >> point of order. Yes.

[3:09:07] >> No point of information.

[3:09:15] » $75,000 for Washington County Sheriff is

[3:09:18] for patrol services. So that's speed

[3:09:21] control. It says that the estimated time

[3:09:25] would be 650 to 700 hours of road

[3:09:29] control services. So that's what 75,000.

[3:09:34] The state police are not able to do a

[3:09:37] lot of

[3:09:39] >> Okay. Thank you. That's not a point of

[3:09:40] information. The point of information um

[3:09:43] would be to ask me, but that's helpful

[3:09:45] information that you can share when you

[3:09:47] come up to the microphone.

[3:09:51] >> I think that 50 to 700 hours over a

[3:09:56] year, over 6 months. I'm trying to get a

[3:09:59] clearer picture of what the hour

[3:10:02] estimated hours

[3:10:05] >> we're going to get.

[3:10:07] >> Okay. Um, so I think that the select

[3:10:10] board has actually tried to answer the

[3:10:12] question. Not to your satisfaction

[3:10:13] though. Um, but uh both Mr. Bard and

[3:10:17] Miss Johnson have attempted to answer

[3:10:19] the question and Mr. Shepher has pointed

[3:10:22] to page 12. So you may not be satisfied

[3:10:25] with the answer you've gotten, but I

[3:10:27] think that's all the information there

[3:10:28] is.

[3:10:29] >> Okay. So there is no clear definition

[3:10:33] what I'm getting from you of the 650 to

[3:10:36] 700

[3:10:37] road patrol hours of service. We don't

[3:10:41] know what hours and what time frame

[3:10:45] those hours are covering.

[3:10:48] >> I think your question has been asked and

[3:10:50] answered. So um and not to your

[3:10:53] satisfaction.

[3:10:56] >> I would just say assuming we start in

[3:10:58] the nine months. I'm out of order.

[3:10:59] Apologies not moderator. Um assuming we

[3:11:01] do the 9 months I outlined July till

[3:11:04] March and it's the higher end of that

[3:11:06] the 750 is we're paying the sheriff

[3:11:09] about $100 an hour. I don't know that

[3:11:11] that's quite the correct rate. It's

[3:11:12] about 20 hours a week of road coverage.

[3:11:15] And again, the times of day and where

[3:11:17] they would be would be up to negotiation

[3:11:19] with the future board in management

[3:11:21] based on community needs.

[3:11:27] » Thank you. Is there further discussion?

[3:11:35] » Chuck Magnus question

[3:11:41] » on your proposal for up back for

[3:11:44] housing. What are you planning on for?

[3:11:46] Um so in terms of the process you can

[3:11:51] state your question and then I will ask

[3:11:53] the select board if they would like to

[3:11:56] um be interrogated and answer your

[3:11:58] question. So um

[3:12:01] are you going to be asking a series of

[3:12:03] questions or do you want to um make a

[3:12:05] statement just for

[3:12:06] >> I'm just curious on how many units going

[3:12:08] to be there and how much they thought

[3:12:11] this out with the access with the road

[3:12:15] with the one access room out of there in

[3:12:18] the winter time.

[3:12:20] >> Okay.

[3:12:20] >> You can't use the other entrance to

[3:12:25] them, etc. So, I'm just curious what

[3:12:28] they thought out and how much

[3:12:30] >> Sure. So, the the question for the

[3:12:32] select board um is um how what are the

[3:12:37] current thoughts as to the the Woody

[3:12:39] Avenue project? Is that the one you're

[3:12:41] asking about?

[3:12:42] >> Yes. What what you think it can get for

[3:12:45] housing? Okay. So, is there a member of

[3:12:46] the select board who would like to

[3:12:48] respond to that? Miss Carvella.

[3:12:51] So, it's my understanding that those

[3:12:53] answers would come after the research

[3:12:56] that we would be undertaking with the

[3:12:58] community development block grant money

[3:13:00] that we have been awarded and without

[3:13:03] having that research already undertaken,

[3:13:05] we are not able to answer that right

[3:13:07] now.

[3:13:10] >> Okay. So, you really have no idea. So if

[3:13:12] you want to make a comment, let me just

[3:13:14] for general conversation and moving this

[3:13:17] along. Uh if you want to make a comment

[3:13:19] about the project or the planning of the

[3:13:21] project, that is um perfectly in order.

[3:13:23] Um but asking continued questions,

[3:13:26] unless it's a very specific question

[3:13:27] that a select board member or somebody

[3:13:29] in the audience wants to answer, that

[3:13:31] would be out of order. So if you want to

[3:13:33] make a comment about the project or the

[3:13:35] planning, now would be the appropriate

[3:13:37] time to do that.

[3:13:41] Okay.

[3:13:43] Is there any more discussion on article

[3:13:46] 15?

[3:13:51] » Good afternoon Jonas Waterberry.

[3:13:55] Um more of just a comment.

[3:13:58] Can you hear me?

[3:14:01] >> Okay. Louder. Um just regarding public

[3:14:04] safety. There's kind of an array of

[3:14:06] different public safety related issues.

[3:14:08] There are ordinances that the state

[3:14:10] police are not in going to enforce

[3:14:13] typically and then there's like major

[3:14:15] crimes like a previous commenter was

[3:14:18] talking about. Um, and I just wonder um

[3:14:22] what is the best way for us to know

[3:14:24] better what the troopers are doing with

[3:14:26] their hours um what we're getting for

[3:14:29] that commitment that we've made to the

[3:14:31] state police. I speak as a retired

[3:14:33] member of the state police. Um and also

[3:14:37] regarding the sheriff's department,

[3:14:39] their contract, do you know or have you

[3:14:41] asked about um what level of

[3:14:44] certification

[3:14:46] the deputies would have here? Because

[3:14:49] there are different levels of

[3:14:51] certification and that enables deputies

[3:14:54] to uh enforce things from traffic stop

[3:14:57] all the way through major crimes. So, I

[3:14:59] think it's important to know what we're

[3:15:01] getting for our commitment. Thank you.

[3:15:05] >> Thank you. Is there a member of the

[3:15:06] select board who would like to address

[3:15:08] that question,

[3:15:10] Mr. Bar?

[3:15:14] Thank you, madam moderator. I think

[3:15:17] that's going to come out a little bit in

[3:15:21] uh

[3:15:22] we kind of have a set contract with this

[3:15:25] state police. We know that from

[3:15:29] residents comments and such that it's

[3:15:32] not sufficient.

[3:15:34] Uh

[3:15:36] we are going to engage in

[3:15:39] you know a pilot with the the sheriff's

[3:15:42] department. I think that's going to be a

[3:15:44] supplement a lot due to the lifestyle

[3:15:48] things that people have addressed things

[3:15:50] such as speeding in different areas. But

[3:15:52] I think we're going to be getting uh

[3:15:57] from the from the state we get from the

[3:15:59] state police we get quarterly updates. I

[3:16:03] would encourage you to when those items

[3:16:06] are on the select board agenda either

[3:16:09] attend the meeting or follow the the

[3:16:12] minutes and that will give you an idea

[3:16:14] as to what what type things the the uh

[3:16:18] state police is doing. And if not,

[3:16:21] attend a select board meeting. And we we

[3:16:24] always welcome questions from the from

[3:16:27] residents at to the state police as to

[3:16:30] what they're doing. So that could answer

[3:16:32] some of your questions. Thanks.

[3:16:38] » Is there further discussion? Miss

[3:16:40] Johnson?

[3:16:42] >> Sorry, terrible habit. Um, two quick

[3:16:44] followups. We do get a monthly breakdown

[3:16:45] from the Vermont State Police of the

[3:16:47] types of calls they respond to, which

[3:16:49] for folks would know what they are, and

[3:16:51] I'm trying to find the appropriate page

[3:16:52] on the municipal website to direct you

[3:16:54] all to, but we do receive that. We Sally

[3:16:56] Dylan helps compile it. Um, and I don't

[3:16:58] think we have any agreements as to the

[3:17:00] level of certification for the sheriffs.

[3:17:02] I think that could be a discussion

[3:17:03] point, but we were I don't given any

[3:17:06] explicit um particular level of service.

[3:17:14] Is there further discussion on article

[3:17:16] 15?

[3:17:21] Um if if there's anyone who has not

[3:17:24] spoken a first time who would like to

[3:17:25] speak,

[3:17:28] you're welcome to. Um seeing nobody. Um,

[3:17:33] Miss Grace,

[3:17:36] » I want to um The reason I'm just

[3:17:39] focusing on the Woody Avenue project is

[3:17:42] that the prior um zoning administrator

[3:17:46] um had let me know that they were

[3:17:48] planning for 40 to 60 units up there.

[3:17:52] So, I'm thinking that there is some

[3:17:53] information that potentially you can

[3:17:55] share. Can you anybody speak to that?

[3:17:59] I'm assuming that the administrator, the

[3:18:01] zoning planner or the zoning

[3:18:03] administrators had some discussion, the

[3:18:06] developers or someone, otherwise it

[3:18:08] wouldn't be out there in the public. So,

[3:18:09] I think that's what Mr. Magnus was

[3:18:11] probably wanting an answer to.

[3:18:15] >> Thank you. Um, is there anyone in who

[3:18:18] like to respond? M

[3:18:19] >> I can't speak to what the former

[3:18:21] employee do. I will say town employees

[3:18:22] looked at municipally owned land that

[3:18:24] could be used for housing and that was

[3:18:26] one of the parcels that came up. I've

[3:18:28] seen a subdivision for eight potential

[3:18:30] single units that was sketched out for

[3:18:32] that lot. Beyond that, what's allowable

[3:18:34] under the zoning, which to your point

[3:18:36] could likely be a very significant

[3:18:38] amount of units, is possible. I don't

[3:18:40] think there's been any commitments made

[3:18:41] by the board or others, which is why

[3:18:43] we're trying to not speculate, but there

[3:18:45] could be a huge range. And that's part

[3:18:47] of the goal of the study is to

[3:18:48] understand what the community wants,

[3:18:50] what's allowable and permissible. I've

[3:18:52] heard varying opinions from varying

[3:18:54] boards, committees, and individuals in

[3:18:56] town about what they'd like to see

[3:18:58] there. So again, I think that's the goal

[3:18:59] of the outreach and study work.

[3:19:03] >> Further discussion?

[3:19:05] >> Andy Wood. Um, I have a question. I'm

[3:19:08] looking at the proposed budget on page

[3:19:10] 20 or local option tax on 20 page 23 and

[3:19:14] comparing with this article and other

[3:19:16] articles and I don't see where we're

[3:19:18] voting on the payoff for the bank loan

[3:19:20] or the payoff for the loan for the fire

[3:19:23] vehicle. Um

[3:19:26] can somebody address that?

[3:19:27] >> Sure. Miss Johnson, would you like to

[3:19:30] address that? They were in article 9. It

[3:19:32] was an inconsistency, but they were

[3:19:33] built into the previous overall budget

[3:19:36] and not called out as an item.

[3:19:41] » Further discussion, article 15.

[3:19:47] » Just a quick question. I know that when

[3:19:50] we built the two new fire stations that

[3:19:53] we had to offset some of the

[3:19:55] recreational property in Waterbury

[3:19:57] Center and that is up here. So, is there

[3:19:59] a plan to switch that somewhere else or

[3:20:02] are we just going to develop?

[3:20:05] >> Okay. So, we're not going to impede on

[3:20:08] >> Okay. So, the question was whether or

[3:20:11] not the land and water conservation fund

[3:20:14] easement on the property behind the

[3:20:17] school would need to be swapped out in

[3:20:19] order to do further housing development.

[3:20:22] The answer was no. The easement would

[3:20:25] stay.

[3:20:29] No, the easement is only on the back

[3:20:31] part of the property. Yeah.

[3:20:35] Is there further discussion on article

[3:20:37] 15,

[3:20:39] Miss Johnson? I think maybe point of

[3:20:41] information. I did find the appropriate

[3:20:43] municipal web page and uh the reporting

[3:20:46] monthly from Vermont State Police is

[3:20:47] under departments public safety. So

[3:20:49] there's PDFs there.

[3:20:56] Is there further discussion?

[3:21:06] » Yes. My name's Conrad Emma and on

[3:21:09] article 15,

[3:21:11] $150,000

[3:21:13] for a pool filter. Are we replacing the

[3:21:16] whole pool house or is it a filter?

[3:21:23] All right. Thank you for the question.

[3:21:24] Is there a member of the select board or

[3:21:27] the town manager would like to answer

[3:21:29] this one?

[3:21:31] >> No. The question

[3:21:32] >> Wait a second.

[3:21:33] >> I've just been notified that the town

[3:21:35] manager is a resident of Ducks. Hearing

[3:21:38] no objection, will you allow the town

[3:21:40] manager, acting town manager to speak?

[3:21:43] Okay, no objection. Go ahead.

[3:21:45] >> I thought I heard objections.

[3:21:50] I will speak as the only member of the

[3:21:52] head table who didn't get a raise today.

[3:21:58] Um the 150,000 for a pool filter is kind

[3:22:02] of still in the study phase. Uh the pool

[3:22:05] filter system and the chlorine injection

[3:22:08] stuff and the circulation of the pool is

[3:22:11] all very old and in need of update.

[3:22:19] Are there any other questions or

[3:22:20] discussion on article 15, the local

[3:22:24] options tax article?

[3:22:30] Seeing no further discussion, um we will

[3:22:33] proceed to a vote on article 15.

[3:22:38] It has been moved that the town will

[3:22:40] during 2026 appropriate a total of

[3:22:42] $935,000

[3:22:44] from local awesome tax revenues as

[3:22:46] follows. $150,000 for gravel roads,

[3:22:49] $25,000 to the Highway Capital Fund,

[3:22:52] $150,000 for a new pool filter, $75,000

[3:22:56] for a new F350 vehicle for public works,

[3:22:59] $150,000 for sidewalk improvements,

[3:23:01] $15,000 for consulting services to

[3:23:03] assist with the town plan updates,

[3:23:05] $8,500 for a tree inventory, $10,000 for

[3:23:09] expenses related to FEMA bio projects,

[3:23:11] $25,000 for the Stanley Wson and Woody

[3:23:14] Avenue housing projects, $10,000 for

[3:23:16] non-grant eligible expenses for the

[3:23:18] Randle Meadow Flood Mitigation Project,

[3:23:21] $75,000 for a pilot service agreement

[3:23:23] with the Washington County Sheriff,

[3:23:25] $8,000 for inventory supplies for

[3:23:27] natural disaster preparedness, $3,500

[3:23:30] for the Waterberry, Vermont 250 Planning

[3:23:32] Committee, $126,667

[3:23:36] for debt service for a firet truck

[3:23:37] approved by voters in 2025. $13,333

[3:23:42] for debt service for a public works

[3:23:44] truck approved by voters in 2025.

[3:23:48] All those in favor, please say I.

[3:23:51] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[3:23:55] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[3:23:57] And you have passed article 15.

[3:24:02] We'll now move to article 16.

[3:24:06] What is your pleasure with respect to

[3:24:08] article 16?

[3:24:11] Mr. Malter,

[3:24:19] » madam moderator,

[3:24:23] » thank you. whatever she said. I move

[3:24:26] that article 16 uh to uh for the voters

[3:24:32] uh during 2026

[3:24:34] appropriate the funds for the 12 items

[3:24:37] listed.

[3:24:39] >> All right. The article 16 has been

[3:24:41] moved. Is there a second?

[3:24:44] >> The article has been moved and seconded.

[3:24:46] It has been moved that the town will

[3:24:48] during 2026 appropriate $1,000 for

[3:24:51] support of Capstone Community Action,

[3:24:53] $1,000 for support of Community Harvest

[3:24:55] of Central Vermont, $500 for support of

[3:24:58] Everybody Wins Vermont, $1,000 for the

[3:25:01] support of the Family Center of

[3:25:02] Washington County, $1,000 for support of

[3:25:05] Friends of Waterberry Reservoir, $500

[3:25:07] for support of Good Beginnings of

[3:25:09] Central Vermont, $975 for support of

[3:25:12] Mosaic Vermont, $250 for support of Our

[3:25:15] House of Central Vermont, $1,000 for

[3:25:17] support of the People's Health and

[3:25:18] Wellness Clinic, $500 for support of the

[3:25:20] Vermont Association for the Blind and

[3:25:22] Visually Impaired, $600 for support of

[3:25:24] the Vermont Center for Independent

[3:25:26] Living, and $800 for the support of the

[3:25:28] Waterberry Community Band.

[3:25:31] Is there um discussion on this article?

[3:25:40] Um Kathy Grace, this is a question I

[3:25:43] asked early on. Could you turn to page

[3:25:46] 22, please?

[3:25:51] » You can't hear me?

[3:25:53] >> Okay, turn to page 22. Um, over the past

[3:25:57] several years, I've just seen the number

[3:26:00] of um people who get the 30 signatures

[3:26:02] needed to have their um special interest

[3:26:06] put on on the voting ballot. And um and

[3:26:10] there's a policy I think they have for

[3:26:12] that that I want to have this slide for

[3:26:14] explain in a bit. But if you notice in

[3:26:17] the last year we had an 18% increase in

[3:26:21] the number of people who asked to have

[3:26:23] um their um

[3:26:26] organizations put on the ballot and on

[3:26:28] your taxes it's going to be adds up to

[3:26:31] be 2.71%

[3:26:32] interest. That might not seem like very

[3:26:34] much, but we've been arguing over 15,000

[3:26:37] for planning, 25,000 for Woody um Woody

[3:26:41] Avenue planning, and this is 50,000.

[3:26:44] Those two things don't even equal that.

[3:26:46] And usually we just pass them all at

[3:26:48] once. And I've sat here many times and

[3:26:51] thought about what about the

[3:26:53] organizations that benefit are kind of

[3:26:55] like the Rotary that never ask for

[3:26:58] money. and some of the the good neighbor

[3:27:00] fund we just talked about that never

[3:27:02] asked for money, but yet we're giving

[3:27:05] $50,000 away to some company that, you

[3:27:08] know, they don't even have to give a

[3:27:10] financial report. I would have to to

[3:27:12] look it up. And sometimes it feels like

[3:27:15] I'm being asked to fund something that I

[3:27:18] should fund personally. And I would I

[3:27:21] think I spent $5,000 a year donating to

[3:27:24] different organizations.

[3:27:25] But here I don't feel like I have that

[3:27:27] same choice sometimes because it's just

[3:27:29] passed over all the time. So I I guess

[3:27:32] I'd like to have a discussion about that

[3:27:34] and the policy that you use because the

[3:27:36] other thing there's many more of these

[3:27:38] special interest groups that aren't on

[3:27:40] this list because after 5 years I

[3:27:43] believe they automatically go in the

[3:27:44] budget. So if they've collected

[3:27:46] signatures for five years in a row, they

[3:27:48] automatically go in the budget. So

[3:27:51] question one is how much is in the

[3:27:53] budget from that were these at one time

[3:27:56] special interest groups that are now

[3:27:58] just in the budget. I want to know the

[3:28:00] answer to that and I would like you to

[3:28:02] explain the policy that you have to

[3:28:06] tax. Thank you.

[3:28:09] Is there a member of the select board

[3:28:11] who would like to talk about the policy

[3:28:14] of which articles or which requests are

[3:28:16] in the special article?

[3:28:19] >> Kathy, I appreciate your comments

[3:28:22] because this is always this has been a

[3:28:24] peekadoo of mine for ever since I

[3:28:26] started on the select board.

[3:28:30] you have the option to make an amendment

[3:28:32] to remove any of these from the from

[3:28:37] that special article. I don't you know

[3:28:40] no one wants it's like mother apple pie

[3:28:42] and Chevrolet you know no one wants to

[3:28:45] go against a lot of things but I'm I'm

[3:28:48] concerned as well as probably a lot of

[3:28:50] people in this audience of the creep of

[3:28:53] special articles. Where is it going to

[3:28:55] go? We have a a lot of these groups are

[3:28:58] very worthy groups. I'm not going to

[3:29:00] deny that. But if someone really feels

[3:29:02] that one of these organizations need to

[3:29:06] be excluded, less money, you have that

[3:29:09] option. So, I'll I'll leave it at that.

[3:29:11] Thanks.

[3:29:14] >> Um, I'm going to take the select board

[3:29:16] members first, Mr. Abello.

[3:29:18] >> Thank you, madam moderator. If I may,

[3:29:20] the policy is that we follow state law

[3:29:22] and that if they collect the right

[3:29:23] amount of signatures, then we have to

[3:29:25] put it on to the special articles. The

[3:29:27] only thing that the select board policy

[3:29:30] so to speak can control is how we group

[3:29:32] them. As to the amount of the budget, I

[3:29:34] would defer to somebody else. Respect.

[3:29:39] » Mr. Bar,

[3:29:40] >> I could answer article

[3:29:45] 16 are

[3:29:48] special articles that are grouped at

[3:29:50] 10,000

[3:29:53] and below. So we group those all

[3:29:55] together so we don't have to go through

[3:29:57] them one by one and you know town

[3:30:01] meeting will be over at 3 4:00 in the

[3:30:03] afternoon if we wind up doing that. Uh

[3:30:06] again you have the right to you know

[3:30:09] have an amendment to remove one of these

[3:30:12] special articles should you should you

[3:30:14] wish. The article 17 through 30 are all

[3:30:20] uh requests that exceed that $1,000

[3:30:23] level or when there there are new

[3:30:27] requests we ask that they they get voted

[3:30:30] on separately.

[3:30:34] » Um there's other people who haven't

[3:30:36] spoken yet. Well, you hear from

[3:30:38] >> question.

[3:30:46] » So, there's a question as to whether or

[3:30:47] not any of the special articles are in

[3:30:49] the budget.

[3:30:53] » No, there there there are some things

[3:30:57] that formerly were

[3:31:00] as special articles are now embedded.

[3:31:02] Things like the senior center, etc. are

[3:31:05] now costs that we feel that have have

[3:31:09] shown the test of time. The community

[3:31:12] supports and they're they're in the the

[3:31:15] standard budget. We don't a lot of these

[3:31:18] other charities and such, they do good

[3:31:21] things. They're not they're not usually

[3:31:23] put in into this into a special article

[3:31:27] designation.

[3:31:32] » Is there further discussion? Um I'm

[3:31:35] happy to just hand you this Kathy. This

[3:31:37] is the list of town funding requests

[3:31:38] that we reviewed on 11626. And shout out

[3:31:42] to our town clerk staff past present

[3:31:44] including interim Carol Oz for helping

[3:31:46] to compile. So the standard has been if

[3:31:48] an organization receives a funding

[3:31:50] amount last year approved by the voters

[3:31:52] and they request that same amount this

[3:31:54] year we put it on the warning. That has

[3:31:56] been the standard of the select board.

[3:31:57] We decreased the amount of the clumping

[3:32:00] in article 16. Last year that was a

[3:32:02] $2,000 threshold. In response to

[3:32:04] community feedback, we changed it to

[3:32:06] just $1,000.

[3:32:08] I during my four years on the select

[3:32:10] board am not at all aware of a five

[3:32:12] years and then you become part of the

[3:32:14] budget policy. The one change I'm aware

[3:32:16] of in my time is for example the senior

[3:32:18] citizen center who is represented here

[3:32:21] um will vote on later for article 27.

[3:32:23] There is $30,000 for the senior center

[3:32:26] that was included in the budget that we

[3:32:27] already voted on in earlier years on the

[3:32:30] select board. I think it used to be 225

[3:32:32] in a special article and the balance in

[3:32:35] the budget and after a certain amount of

[3:32:37] time the select board chose to put more

[3:32:39] in the budget. The select board funds a

[3:32:41] number of nonprofit organizations as

[3:32:42] part of the budget and I don't have an

[3:32:44] overall number to give you.

[3:32:49] » Thank you. Is there further discussion?

[3:32:51] We are on

[3:32:53] article 16.

[3:32:56] >> Mr. Colleague

[3:33:02] Alex Collie from uh Village Library. Um

[3:33:06] obviously times of affordable

[3:33:09] >> obviously these times we all are trying

[3:33:11] to afford um just try to live here very

[3:33:15] difficult. What you need to understand

[3:33:17] about these nonprofits is that, you

[3:33:19] know, yes, they might add up, but they

[3:33:21] don't add up to much, but they're very

[3:33:23] important to each and every one of these

[3:33:26] organizations

[3:33:27] because when they do their grant

[3:33:29] writing, they include how many towns

[3:33:32] support them. So even if it's like $200

[3:33:35] for such and such, if they have the um

[3:33:39] you know, if they have the support of 15

[3:33:42] towns, it shows really great when it

[3:33:45] comes to Grand Rank and they're they're

[3:33:48] able to get more money to help support

[3:33:51] all of us in their uh in their

[3:33:54] activities.

[3:33:57] » Further discussion

[3:34:00] point of order.

[3:34:01] >> What is your point of order?

[3:34:09] Yes. Um, is the board of civil authority

[3:34:14] chair available?

[3:34:17] Um,

[3:34:22] Mr. McDougall will help her.

[3:34:39] Thank you for the point of order and

[3:34:41] thank you Mr. McDougall. Go ahead.

[3:34:44] Uh the amounts on the warning match the

[3:34:48] line item on page 22, but I noticed

[3:34:51] there's a table on page 35 of the report

[3:34:54] that summarizes the special articles and

[3:34:56] that has a very different total number.

[3:34:59] Uh 59,000 as opposed to

[3:35:04] 50 where we here 50,600.

[3:35:09] Uh so I'm just wondering where that

[3:35:11] discrepancy came from. I can't make the

[3:35:13] numbers in the table add up to what's

[3:35:15] actually on the warning.

[3:35:16] >> Sure. And can you repeat the page

[3:35:18] numbers again?

[3:35:19] >> Uh the line item is on page 22 and the

[3:35:22] table is on page 35 right above the

[3:35:24] grant list.

[3:35:28] >> Is there a member of the select board

[3:35:29] who can address that or Mr. Shappl? I

[3:35:32] was say I'll defer to Chevle, but just

[3:35:34] note the asterisk indicating items

[3:35:36] included in budget line items, which

[3:35:38] would have been in not special articles,

[3:35:39] but in the budget, and I don't know if

[3:35:41] that fully accounts for it. I

[3:35:42] >> I don't believe it does.

[3:35:46] » I'm I'm pretty certain that the table on

[3:35:51] page 35 is what was appropriated a year

[3:35:55] ago. It's It's not accurate at all. The

[3:35:59] column adds up to $75,15749,

[3:36:04] not 59,357.

[3:36:07] There's 26,500

[3:36:09] in there for the senior citizens

[3:36:11] association.

[3:36:12] Um the special articles last year for

[3:36:16] senior citizens were 6,500.

[3:36:19] As Alyssa mentioned, there was uh

[3:36:21] actually 32,500

[3:36:24] has been in the budget since 2024. So

[3:36:27] these numbers don't make a lot of sense,

[3:36:29] but they do not refer to the 2026

[3:36:33] budget request.

[3:36:37] >> Is there further discussion?

[3:36:44] » MK Monley from Waterberry Center. Um, I

[3:36:48] would just like to point out that these

[3:36:51] organizations in article 16

[3:36:55] are part of our community and it what

[3:36:58] makes Waterberry a great place to live.

[3:37:02] And um I'll give a plug for Good

[3:37:06] Beginnings. I'm a new volunteer. So if

[3:37:08] anyone is interested in holding new

[3:37:11] babies and helping out new families,

[3:37:14] it's a great thing to do. So I totally

[3:37:17] support article 16.

[3:37:21] >> Further discussion.

[3:37:26] Duncan McDougall from Waterberry Center.

[3:37:28] And speaking of volunteers, just a quick

[3:37:30] glance at article 16 all the way through

[3:37:32] article 30. I would guess 3/4 of those

[3:37:36] organizations are run in large part by

[3:37:38] volunteers. So it's not like they're,

[3:37:41] you know, making a lot of money or

[3:37:42] anything. Uh these funds go a long way

[3:37:44] because a lot of the work is done by

[3:37:46] volunteers. They do need some funds for

[3:37:48] things that they do. Um but this is a

[3:37:51] really key part of our community and it

[3:37:53] gets a lot done. So I think you'd be

[3:37:55] hardressed to find a better investment

[3:37:57] than than these organizations. Thank

[3:37:59] you.

[3:38:02] » Is there further discussion on article

[3:38:04] 16?

[3:38:09] Seeing no further discussion, we will

[3:38:11] proceed to a vote. It is moved that the

[3:38:14] town will during 2026 appropriate $1,000

[3:38:18] for Capstone Community Action, $1,000

[3:38:21] for support of Community Harvest of

[3:38:22] Central Vermont, $500

[3:38:26] uh for support of Everybody Wins

[3:38:28] Vermont, $1,000 for the support of the

[3:38:30] Family Center of Washington County,

[3:38:32] $1,000 for support of Friends of

[3:38:34] Waterberry Reservoir, $500 for support

[3:38:37] of Good Beginnings of Central Vermont,

[3:38:39] $975 for support of Mosaic Vermont,

[3:38:43] $250 for support of Hourthouse of

[3:38:45] Central Vermont, $1,000 for support of

[3:38:47] the People's Health and Wellness Clinic,

[3:38:49] $500 for support of the Vermont

[3:38:51] Association for the Blind and Visually

[3:38:53] Impaired, $600 for support of the

[3:38:56] Vermont Center for Independent Living,

[3:38:57] and $800 for support of the Waterberry

[3:39:00] Community Band. All those in favor,

[3:39:02] please say I. I.

[3:39:04] >> Any opposed, please say no.

[3:39:07] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[3:39:09] have it. And you have passed article 16.

[3:39:17] So, we'll now go through a series of

[3:39:20] articles. Article 17 to30 and I'll be

[3:39:23] looking for um members of the body to

[3:39:26] make the motions. Um so, article 17 is

[3:39:30] shall the town of Waterberry vote to

[3:39:31] appropriate $2,000 for support of the

[3:39:34] American Red Cross. What is your pledge

[3:39:36] with respect to article 17?

[3:39:55] I move that the town of Waterberry.

[3:39:58] >> Um,

[3:40:00] I propose

[3:40:01] >> I move that the town of Waterberry

[3:40:03] >> I move the town of Waterberry um propose

[3:40:06] to appropriate $2,000 to support of the

[3:40:08] American Red Cross. Thank you. Is there

[3:40:10] a second?

[3:40:12] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[3:40:14] The motion is to appropriate $2,000 for

[3:40:17] support of the American Red Cross. Would

[3:40:19] you like to speak to the motion?

[3:40:20] >> Uh, the information is on page 61 if

[3:40:23] anybody is interested.

[3:40:27] » Is there further discussion?

[3:40:31] » Hearing no further disc, we will proceed

[3:40:34] to a vote on article 17. The motion is

[3:40:38] for the town of Waterberry to

[3:40:39] appropriate $2,000 for support of the

[3:40:41] American American Red Cross. All those

[3:40:43] in favor, please say I. I.

[3:40:46] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[3:40:48] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[3:40:50] And you have passed article 17. Article

[3:40:53] 18. Shall the town of Waterbury vote to

[3:40:56] appropriate $2,000 for support of

[3:40:58] Central Vermont Adult Basic Education?

[3:41:00] What is your pleasure with respect to

[3:41:02] article 18?

[3:41:07] Uh Jane Willard, uh Waterbury resident

[3:41:10] and I reside just above Woody Avenue.

[3:41:15] >> So um Madame Waterberry here.

[3:41:18] >> Yes. Um I move that the town of

[3:41:20] Waterbury vote to appropriate $2,000 for

[3:41:24] support of Central Vermont Adult

[3:41:26] Education.

[3:41:27] Moved by Miss Willard. Is there a

[3:41:29] second?

[3:41:30] >> The motion has been moved and seconded.

[3:41:32] The motion is to appropriate $2,000 for

[3:41:35] support of Central Vermont Adult Basic

[3:41:36] Education. Miss Bullard, would you like

[3:41:38] to speak to the motion? I would say that

[3:41:40] I am a very enthusiastic,

[3:41:43] longtime volunteer with the organization

[3:41:47] and I would refer to you to refer you to

[3:41:50] page 63.

[3:41:53] Is there further discussion?

[3:41:57] Seeing no further discussion, we will

[3:41:59] proceed to a vote on article 18. All

[3:42:01] those in favor, please say I.

[3:42:03] >> I.

[3:42:04] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[3:42:06] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[3:42:08] And you have passed article 18. Article

[3:42:11] 19. Shall the town of Waterbury vote to

[3:42:14] appropriate $2,250 for the support of

[3:42:17] Central Vermont Council on Aging and

[3:42:19] Americaore Senior RSVP? What is your

[3:42:21] pleasure with respect to article 19?

[3:42:39] Uh, madame moderator, I move that the

[3:42:40] town of Waterbury for 19 um vote to

[3:42:44] appropriate $2,250

[3:42:46] for the support of Central Vermont

[3:42:48] Council on Aging and Americaore Senior

[3:42:52] RSVP.

[3:42:54] >> Thank you. And uh

[3:42:56] >> for the body, what is Please state your

[3:42:57] name.

[3:42:58] >> Oh, Queen Waterbury.

[3:43:00] >> Thank you.

[3:43:00] >> I have no idea where Woody Allen or Pat

[3:43:03] have is.

[3:43:05] >> Is there a second on this motion? The

[3:43:07] motion has been moved and seconded to

[3:43:09] appropriate $2,250 for the support of

[3:43:12] Central Vermont Council on Aging and

[3:43:14] Americanore Senior RSVP. Is there

[3:43:16] discussion on the motion?

[3:43:21] Seeing no discussion, we will proceed to

[3:43:23] a vote. two for 2000 for the town of

[3:43:25] Waterberry to appropriate $2,250

[3:43:28] for the support of Central Vermont

[3:43:29] Council on Aging and Americaore Senior

[3:43:31] RSVP. All those in favor, please say I.

[3:43:35] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[3:43:38] appear to have it. The eyes do have it

[3:43:40] and you have passed article 19. Article

[3:43:43] 20. Shall the town of Waterberry vote to

[3:43:45] appropriate $1,375

[3:43:47] for support of circle? What is your

[3:43:49] pleasure with respect to article 20?

[3:43:58] Madam moderator. Yes. Uh I move that the

[3:44:03] town of Waterberry appropriate Where did

[3:44:06] it go? $1,375

[3:44:08] with the support of circle.

[3:44:11] Moved by Miss Wood. Is there a second?

[3:44:15] The motion has been moved and seconded

[3:44:17] to appropriate $1,375

[3:44:20] for support of Circle. Wood, would you

[3:44:22] like to speak to the motion?

[3:44:23] >> Um, yes, I would. Uh, just uh because I wasn't able to find it, although it

[3:44:27] might be in here. Um, uh, Circle is an

[3:44:31] organization that supports mostly women,

[3:44:34] uh, who experience domestic and sexual

[3:44:36] violence in Washington County and an

[3:44:39] organization that does an awful lot of

[3:44:40] good for people who um are are fleeing

[3:44:44] those kinds of situations. Thank you.

[3:44:46] >> Is there further discussion on article

[3:44:48] 20?

[3:44:50] Seeing no further discussion, we'll

[3:44:52] proceed to a vote. It has been moved

[3:44:54] that the town of Waterbury appropriate

[3:44:56] $1,375

[3:44:57] for supportive circle. All those in

[3:44:59] favor, please say I.

[3:45:02] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[3:45:04] >> The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[3:45:07] have it. And you have passed article 20.

[3:45:10] Article 21. Shall the town of Waterberry

[3:45:12] vote to appropriate $1,500 for support

[3:45:15] of down street housing and community

[3:45:17] development? What is your pleasure with

[3:45:18] respect to article 21?

[3:45:28] » Madam, moderator.

[3:45:30] >> Yes.

[3:45:30] >> I move that the town of Waterbury

[3:45:33] appropriate

[3:45:35] uh which one are we on?

[3:45:37] >> 21.

[3:45:39] >> Vote to appropriate 1,500 for support of

[3:45:42] downtown Housing and Community

[3:45:44] Development.

[3:45:47] moved by Mr. Goule. Is there a second?

[3:45:50] >> The motion has been moved and seconded

[3:45:52] to appropriate $1,500 for support of

[3:45:55] down street housing and community

[3:45:56] development.

[3:45:59] Is there discussion?

[3:46:04] Uh seeing no uh discussion, we will

[3:46:07] proceed to a vote on article 21. It is

[3:46:09] moved that the town of Waterberry

[3:46:11] appropriate $1,500 for support of

[3:46:13] downstream housing and community

[3:46:14] development. All those in favor, please

[3:46:16] say I. I.

[3:46:17] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[3:46:20] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[3:46:22] And Article 21.

[3:46:25] Article 22. Shall the town of Waterberry

[3:46:28] vote to appropriate $1,500 for support

[3:46:30] of Elevate, formerly Washington County

[3:46:33] Youth Services? What is your pleasure

[3:46:35] with respect to article 22?

[3:46:40] You're on a roll.

[3:46:43] >> Madame Water, I move that the town of

[3:46:45] Waterbury

[3:46:46] uh vote to approve appropriate $1,500500

[3:46:52] to uh for support of Elevate Washington

[3:46:55] County Youth Services

[3:46:58] in Wayu Lake Waterbury.

[3:47:00] >> Is there a second? The motion has been

[3:47:03] moved and seconded. Is there discussion?

[3:47:09] Seeing no discussion, it has been we'll

[3:47:12] proceed to a vote on article 22. It has

[3:47:15] been moved that the town of Watergate

[3:47:17] appropriate $1,500 for support of

[3:47:19] Elevate Washington County Youth

[3:47:21] Services. All those in favor, please say

[3:47:23] I. I.

[3:47:24] >> Opposed, please say no.

[3:47:27] >> The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[3:47:29] have it. And you have passed article 22.

[3:47:32] Article 23. Shall the town of Waterberry

[3:47:34] vote to appropriate $7,500 for support

[3:47:37] of the Early Education Resource Center

[3:47:39] of Waterberry, the Children's Room?

[3:47:42] Michelle Downing, Waterberry. Let's see

[3:47:44] if I got this right. I move that the

[3:47:45] town, Madam Speaker, moderator, I move

[3:47:48] that the town of Waterberry go to

[3:47:50] appropriate $7,500 for the children's

[3:47:52] room of Waterberry.

[3:47:55] Moved by Miss Downing. Is there a

[3:47:57] second? The motion has been moved and

[3:47:59] seconded. It has been moved that the

[3:48:01] town of Waterberry appropriate $7,500

[3:48:03] for support of the Early Education

[3:48:05] Resource Center of Waterberry, the

[3:48:07] Children's Room. Miss Downing, would you

[3:48:09] like to speak to the motion? Um, there's

[3:48:12] more information about the children's

[3:48:13] room if I'm familiar on page 67 in your

[3:48:15] booklet here. Um, the the children's

[3:48:18] room is an excellent resource for

[3:48:19] families with young children in the town

[3:48:21] of Waterberry and beyond. We've seen an

[3:48:23] increase of 50% uh usage over the last

[3:48:26] two to three years and haven't asked for

[3:48:28] any change in budget in over 10 years

[3:48:29] with the exception of this year. So

[3:48:31] really appreciate your support and

[3:48:33] continuing to provide young families

[3:48:35] with a resource and opportunity to um

[3:48:38] create community in. Thank you.

[3:48:43] Is there further discussion?

[3:48:46] Yes.

[3:48:53] I just note that um

[3:48:57] the appropriation a year ago was $4,000

[3:49:00] and now it's $7500 which is almost a

[3:49:04] it's an 88% increase. Um we talked about

[3:49:08] more more children. Uh what other

[3:49:12] resources besides $7,500 from the town

[3:49:15] of Waterbury do you get?

[3:49:18] So, the question is, what resources

[3:49:21] besides um what sources of resources

[3:49:23] does the Waterberry Children's Center

[3:49:25] have besides the town? And if you choose

[3:49:27] to be interrogated, you may answer, but

[3:49:29] you don't have to.

[3:49:35] » Downing Waterberry um thank you for the

[3:49:37] question. So, our our um program is

[3:49:40] completely volunteerrun. Um and we have

[3:49:43] that's we have one uh paid employee.

[3:49:46] Most of our funding comes from

[3:49:48] donationbased um sources. So families in

[3:49:51] the community of of Waterberry and

[3:49:53] beyond. We also receive funding from

[3:49:55] additional towns much to I think you

[3:49:58] were you were mentioning um based on the

[3:50:00] number of of folks who come from those

[3:50:03] towns. So of the about 5,500 people who

[3:50:06] generally use the children's room in

[3:50:09] Waterberry annually about 50% of those

[3:50:12] people come from Waterberry. others come

[3:50:14] from multiple towns um surrounding us.

[3:50:18] Does that answer question?

[3:50:22] >> We do. We do. Yes. And and um

[3:50:27] Yes.

[3:50:30] » Thank you. Okay. Is there any other

[3:50:32] discussion? Yes.

[3:50:40] Cheryl Glory.

[3:50:42] Madam moderator, I would like to amend

[3:50:44] this article.

[3:50:46] >> I would like to level fund the funding

[3:50:48] back to what it was last year. Um, and

[3:50:52] not because these services aren't

[3:50:53] needed, but as a taxpayer, I'd rather

[3:50:57] see my tax dollars fund the town

[3:51:00] recreation department and their programs

[3:51:03] that are in need. Um, and if you look at

[3:51:06] page 27 and page 67, you'll see that

[3:51:10] most of those

[3:51:12] um, services are either very similar or

[3:51:16] duplicative of what the recck department

[3:51:18] also offers. Um, and I think if we build

[3:51:21] up the recck department, we get a better

[3:51:24] a bigger demographic for um, not just

[3:51:26] young children, but other children as

[3:51:28] well.

[3:51:29] So, the motion to amend is to strike

[3:51:33] $7,500 and replace with $4,000.

[3:51:40] » Yes, the level fund what it was last

[3:51:42] year and hopefully that money would go

[3:51:44] back to the record.

[3:51:45] >> Okay. So, um we'll first vote on on the

[3:51:49] motion to amend and then once that is up

[3:51:52] or down, we'll vote on the main motion.

[3:51:56] Oh, is there a is there a second? Is there a second on

[3:52:03] the motion to amend from $7,500 to

[3:52:06] 4,000?

[3:52:09] >> The motion h the motion to amend has

[3:52:11] been seconded. So, is there discussion

[3:52:13] now on the motion to move uh

[3:52:17] >> to strike $7,500

[3:52:19] um and replace with $4,000?

[3:52:22] Yes.

[3:52:30] Hi, my name is Beth Anne Mayor. I'm a

[3:52:32] resident of Waterbury Village and I was

[3:52:35] on the founding board of the Children's

[3:52:37] Room. My 43year-old son was a

[3:52:40] one-year-old when we made the the

[3:52:43] Children's Room. That's how long this

[3:52:46] organization has been working in our

[3:52:49] community. My memory of previous years

[3:52:54] is that this funding from the town was

[3:52:57] usually in the range of $6,000 to $7,000

[3:53:01] a year and that last year or the few

[3:53:04] years before that it was diminished. I I

[3:53:08] have a memory of asking for $6,000 from

[3:53:10] the town and getting it easily. Um, so

[3:53:14] I'd be willing to be uh corrected on

[3:53:19] that, but this money is is very well

[3:53:23] used to support families to have a place

[3:53:27] to be with other young

[3:53:30] families trying to put their lives

[3:53:32] together and uh it's a service that is

[3:53:36] very well worth continuing.

[3:53:41] Is there further discussion?

[3:53:45] Hi, Happy Fish. Uh, I'm a Waterberry

[3:53:47] resident. I am also a um previous member

[3:53:52] of the children's room board. Uh both of

[3:53:55] my children attended this children's

[3:53:57] room and um to answer questions too

[3:53:59] about like fundraising, they do amazing

[3:54:02] community events like the barn dance

[3:54:04] where families can come together and

[3:54:06] they run they do a lot of fundraising

[3:54:08] and and get money from that. Um

[3:54:12] I think it's also a resource space for

[3:54:16] educators who are in their homes. I was

[3:54:20] a family child care educator for 13

[3:54:22] years and I could bring my group of

[3:54:25] children here into the school and have

[3:54:29] them have the opportunity to experience

[3:54:31] what the school that they were going to

[3:54:33] be attending. So, we would come and eat

[3:54:35] in the cafeteria because the children's

[3:54:37] room is located right next to it. So,

[3:54:40] it's a great community resource. It also

[3:54:42] provides um specialized care services to

[3:54:47] happen in that space. So for children

[3:54:49] who need services and the families can't

[3:54:52] do that in their home, they can use the

[3:54:54] children's space for that. Um, so I'm an

[3:54:57] advocate and I would say that they

[3:54:58] deserve that $7,500 and more.

[3:55:03] Further discussion.

[3:55:07] » Hi, I'm Lena Gordon uh live in

[3:55:10] Waterberry Center. Um, I just wanted to

[3:55:12] say that as a parent who utilized this

[3:55:15] children's room as an incredible

[3:55:17] resource for those of us who moved to

[3:55:19] the state because we fell in love with

[3:55:21] Vermont. We don't have roots here. We

[3:55:24] don't have a community that we can rely

[3:55:27] on already in place. And organizations

[3:55:30] like the children's room gave me that

[3:55:32] community so I can meet other parents so

[3:55:35] I could learn about the resources that

[3:55:37] were available to me, form

[3:55:39] relationships, form friendships. And

[3:55:42] without that resource, um, I don't think

[3:55:45] that I would have stayed. So, I really

[3:55:48] want to make sure that we understand the

[3:55:50] value to new families moving to this

[3:55:52] area that the children room um has.

[3:55:56] Thank you. I believe you deserve the

[3:55:58] higher number.

[3:56:02] » Is there further discussion on the

[3:56:03] motion to amend?

[3:56:07] » Uh Alex Collie Village again. Uh it's

[3:56:10] been years since

[3:56:12] my kids have needed the program, but we

[3:56:14] certainly did. Um, I just want to say

[3:56:18] the recck department, what they do is

[3:56:19] great. What children does is great.

[3:56:24] I don't see a whole lot of overlap. I

[3:56:26] think they uh work well together. They

[3:56:29] are viable for this community.

[3:56:33] >> Is there further discussion?

[3:56:37] >> Mr. Shlock,

[3:56:40] >> I want to be clear. I I support the

[3:56:42] $7,500 request. I wanted to just ask

[3:56:46] whether there were funding that came

[3:56:49] from other towns. This was a significant

[3:56:51] increase in one year. Um, and to Miss

[3:56:55] Glor's point, I don't think there's a

[3:56:57] way that you can at this time direct the

[3:57:00] $3,500 to the recreation department.

[3:57:02] We've already passed the town budget,

[3:57:05] but I support this. I just wanted more

[3:57:08] information about other funding.

[3:57:12] Um, Miss Danner, would you like to speak

[3:57:14] again?

[3:57:16] >> First off, thank you for everybody who's

[3:57:18] already spoken. Um, I think two other

[3:57:20] things that might be helpful when making

[3:57:21] a decision. Um, one is beyond the barn

[3:57:24] dance, which is our largest fundraiser

[3:57:26] of the year, we do put on mostly free

[3:57:29] events for the entire town. Um, whether

[3:57:32] it's dabble days or open gym during the

[3:57:34] winter when our kids get so crazy

[3:57:36] inside, it offers opportunity for for

[3:57:39] community. And I think that's really

[3:57:40] important especially in this day and

[3:57:42] age. Um and um then secondly with the

[3:57:45] recck department totally support the rec

[3:57:47] department too but I think what the

[3:57:49] children's room does that is different

[3:57:51] is services those who are under the age

[3:57:53] of six. And so I think that's a pretty

[3:57:55] significant difference between the two.

[3:58:00] Is there further discussion? This is a

[3:58:02] motion to amend the strikes $7,500 and

[3:58:07] replace with $4,000 on article 23.

[3:58:12] Is there any further discussion on the

[3:58:13] motion to amend? All right, we'll vote

[3:58:16] on the motion to amend and then we'll

[3:58:17] still vote on the main motion. If you

[3:58:20] vote yes, then you are striking $7,500

[3:58:24] replacing with $4,000. If you vote no,

[3:58:27] then the amount will remain $7,500.

[3:58:34] All right. So, all of those in favor of

[3:58:37] the motion to amend, please say yes.

[3:58:43] >> All of those opposed to the motion to

[3:58:44] amend, please say no.

[3:58:46] >> No.

[3:58:48] >> The nos appear to have it. The nos do

[3:58:52] have it. And we will now vote on the

[3:58:55] main. We'll consider again the main

[3:58:57] motion. Is there any

[3:59:01] further discussion. Thank you. I ask the

[3:59:04] folks in the back to just um keep their

[3:59:07] voices a little lower. The vote on the

[3:59:10] main motion um is it's now is not the

[3:59:13] motion to amend um did not pass. So the

[3:59:16] motion is now shall the town of

[3:59:17] Waterberry vote to appropriate $7,500

[3:59:20] for support of the Early Education

[3:59:22] Resource Center of Waterberry, the

[3:59:23] Children's Room. Is there further

[3:59:25] discussion on the main motion?

[3:59:30] Seeing no further discussion, we'll

[3:59:33] proceed to a vote. Shall the town

[3:59:35] appropriate $7,500 for support of the

[3:59:37] Early Education Resource Center of

[3:59:39] Waterberry, the Children's Room. All

[3:59:41] those in favor, please say I. I.

[3:59:43] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[3:59:46] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[3:59:48] have it. And you have passed article 23.

[3:59:53] Article 24. Shall the town of Waterbury

[3:59:55] vote to appropriate $2,382

[3:59:58] for support of the Green Mountain

[4:00:00] Transit Agency? What is your pleasure

[4:00:02] with respect to article 24?

[4:00:13] » But I'm moderator.

[4:00:15] >> Yes. I move the town of Waterbury

[4:00:20] vote to appropriate 2382 $2382

[4:00:24] for the support of the Green Mountain

[4:00:26] Transit Agency.

[4:00:29] » The motion has been moved and seconded

[4:00:32] for the town to appropriate $2382

[4:00:36] for support of the Green Mountain

[4:00:37] Transit Agency. Is there further

[4:00:40] discussion?

[4:00:45] Hearing no further discussion, we will

[4:00:46] proceed to a vote on article 24. Has

[4:00:49] been moved that the town of Waterbury

[4:00:50] appropriate $2,382

[4:00:53] for support of the Green Mountain

[4:00:54] Transit Agency. All those in favor,

[4:00:56] please say I. I.

[4:00:58] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:01:01] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:01:03] And you have passed article 24.

[4:01:06] Article 25. Shall the town of Waterbury

[4:01:09] vote to appropriate $1,500 for the

[4:01:11] support of the Harry N cutting American

[4:01:13] Legion?

[4:01:15] >> What is your pleasure with respect to

[4:01:16] article 25?

[4:01:17] >> Madon moderator, I move that the town of

[4:01:19] Waterbury

[4:01:21] vote to appropriate 1,500 for the

[4:01:23] support of the Harry and Cutty American

[4:01:26] Legion.

[4:01:28] >> Moved by Mr. Goule. Is there a second?

[4:01:30] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[4:01:32] It has been moved that the town

[4:01:33] appropriate $1,500 for the support of

[4:01:36] the Harry and Cutting American Legion.

[4:01:38] Mr. Goule, would you like to speak to

[4:01:39] the motion?

[4:01:40] >> Sure. Um, my name is Wayne Gule. I am

[4:01:42] the commander of the Harry and Cutting

[4:01:44] 459 Waterbury uh American Legion post.

[4:01:49] Um and what I want to say is uh thank

[4:01:52] you in the so in the past you guys have

[4:01:55] uh given us a lot of or voted to um

[4:01:59] provide us a lot of money that and we

[4:02:01] really appreciate like for example in

[4:02:03] 2024 you gave us $4,125

[4:02:06] to replace our LED lighting and we did

[4:02:08] that. So thank you very much. And last

[4:02:11] year um we asked for 2500 to support our

[4:02:15] programs and our programs support we

[4:02:18] have four pillars of the American

[4:02:19] Legion. It's veterans affairs, national

[4:02:21] security and national security,

[4:02:23] Americanism and and children and youth.

[4:02:26] And so the money that you provide to us,

[4:02:30] it helps us to um to donate to the

[4:02:34] community. And so the $2,500 that you

[4:02:37] gave us last year uh helped us we used

[4:02:40] that money and and it and and the the total amount that we provided to to

[4:02:46] the community was $10,000 from the

[4:02:49] American Legion and about $5,000 from

[4:02:52] our auxiliary auxiliary and our um sons

[4:02:56] of the American Legion.

[4:02:58] So, um, this year what we want, the

[4:03:01] $1,500 is for an AED for our downstairs,

[4:03:05] um, uh, room where we have fundraisers.

[4:03:10] So, that's where we're requesting the

[4:03:12] money for. So, thank you.

[4:03:16] >> Is there further discussion?

[4:03:20] » Yes. Come to the microphone.

[4:03:26] Uh, the reason I'm speaking to this one,

[4:03:28] and full disclosure, I've come from a

[4:03:30] family of veterans and I'm an auxiliary

[4:03:32] member of Post 59. But I kind of feel

[4:03:35] like this crosses the line because it's

[4:03:37] a um, it's a private club. You have to

[4:03:41] have memberships to belong to it, paid

[4:03:43] to it. Not everyone's can go in there

[4:03:46] all the time because it's a private

[4:03:47] club. And I just feel like, and I said

[4:03:50] this three years ago, when we first gave

[4:03:51] them money that

[4:03:53] Um, I think it's a precedent that we

[4:03:56] don't want to go down. Will the Masonics

[4:03:58] come to us next? Will Boy Scouts come to

[4:04:01] us next? Who else will come? It's a

[4:04:03] private club. So, um, I'm voting in

[4:04:06] opposition.

[4:04:12] Is there further discussion?

[4:04:20] » Declan Scandal, Waterberry Center. Uh, I

[4:04:22] would like to say that if the majority

[4:04:25] of those funds that are being

[4:04:26] appropriated are for an AED in the

[4:04:28] lodge, I am 100% for it as a first

[4:04:31] responder. These things save lives. I

[4:04:33] think they should be in every private

[4:04:35] club regardless. Uh, but good on the

[4:04:37] American Nation for requesting one.

[4:04:44] » Is there further discussion? Mr.

[4:04:49] First and foremost, I want to thank all of our veterans. Um, I think they're

[4:04:54] important. I understand Kathy Grace's

[4:04:57] sentiment, but one, I do like the idea

[4:05:01] that the uh, Legion has decreased their

[4:05:04] requests. I don't see that too much from

[4:05:06] other of these nonprofits. And I think

[4:05:10] based upon it, it I know as a heart

[4:05:14] attack survivor and I was glad to see an

[4:05:18] AED put in our town offices finally uh

[4:05:21] which I think was really great. I think

[4:05:23] it's a really important need to support

[4:05:26] community organizations uh do important

[4:05:29] work like like that. I think it's you

[4:05:32] know a lot of people Winterfest goes in

[4:05:35] there. I know I'm president of the

[4:05:37] Rotary. we have our pie for breakfast.

[4:05:39] It's really important that and with all

[4:05:42] these community functions I think that

[4:05:44] an AED be uh you know put in pass in is in align with what's what will be for

[4:05:51] a special article. Thank you.

[4:05:56] Is there further discussion?

[4:06:02] We're on article 25.

[4:06:05] All right. Seeing no further discussion,

[4:06:08] um we'll proceed to a vote. It has been

[4:06:10] moved that the town of Waterbury

[4:06:11] appropriate $1,500

[4:06:14] for the support of the Harry N cutting

[4:06:16] American Legion. All those in favor,

[4:06:18] please say I.

[4:06:20] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[4:06:23] >> The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[4:06:26] have it. And you have passed article 25.

[4:06:31] Article 26. Shall the town of Waterberry

[4:06:33] vote to appropriate $2,500 for the

[4:06:36] support of the Waterberry area maker

[4:06:38] sphere cooperative? What is your

[4:06:40] pleasure with respect to article 26?

[4:06:42] Madam moderator, Kley Waterberry Center,

[4:06:46] founding board member, Maker Sphere, I'm

[4:06:48] going to make it short. Page 94 of the

[4:06:52] book. It's a great organization and I we

[4:06:55] all appreciate your support. Thanks.

[4:07:02] Come on, Bill. All right. I move I I did

[4:07:06] my little speech before, Rebecca. Sorry.

[4:07:10] >> I'll add a moderator. I move that the

[4:07:11] town of Waterberry vote to appropriate

[4:07:13] $2,500 for the support of the Waterberry

[4:07:16] Area Maker Spear Cooperative.

[4:07:18] >> Great. It's been moved by Miss Monley.

[4:07:21] Is there a second? The motion has been

[4:07:23] moved and seconded by many. Um, it has

[4:07:25] been moved that the town of Waterberry

[4:07:26] appropriate $2,500 for the support of

[4:07:29] the Waterberry area Makersphere

[4:07:31] Cooperative. Is there further

[4:07:32] discussion?

[4:07:34] Yes.

[4:07:39] Don Schneider at Waterberry Center. I

[4:07:41] was on the Makersphere board for 6

[4:07:43] years. Just got off in October. And I

[4:07:45] will let you know this is a maker

[4:07:47] organization. In the six years, not one

[4:07:49] class workshop ever was run in front of

[4:07:52] a bunch of computers. This is all

[4:07:54] hands-on clay, stained glass,

[4:07:57] woodworking, uh, drawing, painting,

[4:07:59] creative stuff. So, if you want, if

[4:08:02] you're concerned about our society

[4:08:03] drifting into the digital outer world,

[4:08:05] make a spirit, not that. This is very

[4:08:07] hands-on that teach people to make

[4:08:09] things that they can use or enjoy. So,

[4:08:15] is there further discussion?

[4:08:18] This is article 26.

[4:08:21] Hearing no further discussion, we will

[4:08:23] proceed to a vote on the article. It has

[4:08:25] been moved that the town of Waterberry

[4:08:27] appropriate $2,500

[4:08:29] for the support of the Waterberry Area

[4:08:32] Maker Sphere Cooperative. All those in

[4:08:34] favor, please say I.

[4:08:36] >> I.

[4:08:37] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:08:39] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:08:42] And you have passed article 26.

[4:08:45] Article 27.

[4:08:48] Shall the town of Waterberry vote to

[4:08:50] appropriate $6,500

[4:08:53] for the Waterberry area senior center

[4:08:55] senior citizens association in addition

[4:08:58] to the amount included in the general

[4:08:59] fund budget for such purpose? What is

[4:09:02] your pleasure with respect to article

[4:09:04] 27?

[4:09:24] Alex Schol. Uh, I move that the town of

[4:09:27] Waterberry appropriate $6,500 for the

[4:09:31] Waterberry Area Senior Senior Citizens

[4:09:34] Association in addition to the amount

[4:09:36] included in the general fund budget for

[4:09:39] such purpose.

[4:09:41] >> Thank you, Mr. Klay. Is there a second?

[4:09:44] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[4:09:48] Um, it has been moved that the town

[4:09:49] appropriate $6,500 to the Waterberry

[4:09:52] Area Senior Citizens Association in

[4:09:54] addition to the amount included in the

[4:09:55] general fund budget for such purpose.

[4:09:57] Mr. Collie, would you like to speak to

[4:09:58] the motion?

[4:09:59] >> Uh, the information is on page 95.

[4:10:03] >> Is there further discussion?

[4:10:13] and in the village. Um, if you look at

[4:10:17] page 95, the first couple of lines say

[4:10:21] that uh they enjoy service the seniors

[4:10:25] enjoy servicing us, but they're saying

[4:10:28] it's middle middle sex or more town, but

[4:10:33] it doesn't say waterberry.

[4:10:36] So, I'm confused, you know. Uh

[4:10:40] it for the seniors of um Middle Sex. So

[4:10:46] are we voting for water fairy citizens

[4:10:51] or for middle

[4:10:56] » it just proves that we need to be doing

[4:10:59] more with maker sphere and away from the

[4:11:01] >> um do we have um anyone who can respond

[4:11:05] to the question? Um it looks it looks

[4:11:08] like the letter though addressed to the

[4:11:09] town of Waterberry might have been

[4:11:11] intended for the town of Morttown.

[4:11:14] Is there anyone who can address that?

[4:11:17] Looks like we don't have anyone here.

[4:11:22] » Is there further discussion?

[4:11:29] » Angela Wells Library Center.

[4:11:33] Um, I

[4:11:36] love the senior center. My former

[4:11:39] father-in-law who's now passed away and

[4:11:42] other family members receive great

[4:11:44] services there.

[4:11:46] I question why their budget since

[4:11:51] they get um a significant amount of

[4:11:54] money in the general budget. why their

[4:11:57] budget is not included in the town

[4:11:58] report and what the additional

[4:12:02] this additional special funding money is

[4:12:05] for as it's in addition to what they're

[4:12:08] already receiving in the budget. And

[4:12:11] then as a side note, a few years ago, we

[4:12:14] also had a conversation about the fact

[4:12:17] if somebody from that organization can't

[4:12:21] come and speak to their motion and

[4:12:23] answer questions,

[4:12:25] then why are we continuing

[4:12:28] to vote to give them money, which ends

[4:12:32] up being an additional $50,000? So, I

[4:12:36] just am wondering what that additional

[4:12:40] special article money is for in addition

[4:12:43] to what they're already getting

[4:12:45] budgeted. Even though I support the

[4:12:48] senior center, I just question what the

[4:12:51] money is being spent on. Thank you. Is

[4:12:55] there anyone who can respond to that

[4:12:57] question? Mr. Sheff,

[4:13:02] >> I'm not from the senior center, though

[4:13:03] I'm a senior now.

[4:13:06] Um, so

[4:13:09] this this funding um this funding

[4:13:14] structure, if you will, goes back many years. Um, the senior center uh

[4:13:21] initially way back when I first started

[4:13:23] was probably asking for $5,000. They

[4:13:26] came to the town, they asked for a

[4:13:27] special appropriation,

[4:13:29] the town got it, gave it, and then the

[4:13:32] next year their appropriation was the

[4:13:34] same amount. Um, and we talked about

[4:13:36] this at the select board several times,

[4:13:39] uh, and decided that at some point that

[4:13:42] we would put money in the special

[4:13:45] articles for senior senate, um, and also

[4:13:50] put it in the budget. And we've

[4:13:51] continued to do that. If you look on

[4:13:54] page 29,

[4:13:56] you'll see that since 2024 anyway, there

[4:14:01] has been a $6,500

[4:14:03] appropriation in the special articles

[4:14:06] for the senior center. And if you look

[4:14:08] back on page 25, since 2024, there has

[4:14:13] been an appropriation in the budget of

[4:14:16] $32,500.

[4:14:18] So, the request is $39,000 this year. It

[4:14:22] was last year. It was the year before

[4:14:24] that. Um

[4:14:27] I'm not sure why we continue the same,

[4:14:30] but we must put it in there just so we

[4:14:33] have some extra things to talk about. So

[4:14:36] it it hasn't changed in a long time.

[4:14:45] Is there further discussion on article

[4:14:50] 27 $6,500 for the Waterberry Area Senior

[4:14:54] Centers Association, Senior Citizens

[4:14:57] Association.

[4:14:58] >> Hi, I'm moderator. Sorry, we were

[4:15:00] downstairs.

[4:15:03] >> Okay.

[4:15:04] >> Um, so

[4:15:04] >> can you state your name?

[4:15:06] >> My name is Charlene. I work at the

[4:15:09] senior center. I'm the director there

[4:15:10] and I can try to answer some of the

[4:15:13] questions that y'all have.

[4:15:15] >> Great.

[4:15:17] Go ahead.

[4:15:19] >> Oh, well actually, so you weren't here

[4:15:21] to hear the question. So,

[4:15:23] >> let's not sorry about that.

[4:15:24] >> Sorry.

[4:15:25] >> There was a question um in the town

[4:15:29] report. The um letter mentions more

[4:15:32] town. So, we're wondering if that was

[4:15:34] intentional or if it's a typo.

[4:15:37] was one question.

[4:15:38] >> Uh, Moretown, we do serve some

[4:15:42] >> some of the people in Mtown.

[4:15:50] » Charlene, are you from Waterberry?

[4:15:52] >> I'm sorry.

[4:15:53] >> Are you from Waterberry?

[4:15:54] >> I am not from Waterberry. I just work in

[4:15:56] Waterbury.

[4:15:57] >> Okay. So, um,

[4:16:00] normally only members of the town can

[4:16:02] speak unless, um, there's, uh, no

[4:16:04] objection to you speaking. So, um, the

[4:16:07] motion is for Charlene to And what is

[4:16:09] your last name?

[4:16:10] >> Suai.

[4:16:11] >> Suveet to speak. Um, if there's no

[4:16:15] objection. Okay, there's no objection.

[4:16:17] So, go ahead. Thank you.

[4:16:19] >> Okay. Um, so we do serve some of the

[4:16:23] seniors in Moretown. So, that is

[4:16:28] I'm not sure what the question on it is.

[4:16:29] We serve some seniors in Mortown. We

[4:16:31] split it with another center.

[4:16:34] >> Okay. Um

[4:16:40] I think there was a question from Miss

[4:16:42] Wells um asking

[4:16:45] um if you know why or happen to know

[4:16:47] that why um there's some money in the

[4:16:49] budget and some in the special article.

[4:16:51] There's $32,500 in the regular budget,

[4:16:54] $6,500 in the special article. And do

[4:16:58] you know, and you might not, but do you

[4:17:00] know why that amount is split up like

[4:17:02] that and what the 6,500 would be used

[4:17:04] for?

[4:17:06] >> That

[4:17:07] >> Yeah.

[4:17:08] That I unfortunately do not have

[4:17:10] the answer to.

[4:17:11] >> Okay.

[4:17:18] » I I think it's clear the first sentence

[4:17:21] here in this says it talks to the

[4:17:24] residents of Mtown. I think it's just a

[4:17:26] typo.

[4:17:27] The funding funding request from the

[4:17:30] senior citizen center is clear. It's

[4:17:32] 39,500.

[4:17:34] It's the town that has decided to

[4:17:37] bifurcate how it's being uh paid and

[4:17:41] that's our business really that

[4:17:45] >> um it might be helpful if you just want

[4:17:48] to say a little bit about the services

[4:17:49] provided by the senior center to

[4:17:52] residents of Waterberry.

[4:17:54] >> Okay. Um, so we offer the Meals on

[4:17:58] Wheels program where we deliver a hot

[4:18:00] lunch Monday through Friday to any of

[4:18:03] the seniors in the area and surrounding

[4:18:06] areas. We also deliver frozen meals on

[4:18:09] Friday to anybody who elects to have a

[4:18:12] weekend meal. And these are for the

[4:18:14] folks that are unable to get out and

[4:18:16] about in the community. They have no way

[4:18:18] to get to the grocery store, no way to

[4:18:20] get a hot meal. They can't cook for

[4:18:21] themselves or do things like that for

[4:18:23] themselves. Um, we also offer congregate

[4:18:26] lunch Monday through Friday at the

[4:18:28] center. It's it's geared towards

[4:18:30] seniors, but it's open to the community

[4:18:32] and we just ask for a $5 donation. It's

[4:18:36] a voluntary donation for anybody over

[4:18:38] the age of 60, but anybody in the

[4:18:39] community is welcome to come in. Um, and

[4:18:42] we do um ask for donations um for under

[4:18:46] 60 because we don't get any funding for

[4:18:48] anybody under 60. Um, that's Monday

[4:18:51] through Friday at noon. And then we

[4:18:54] offer activities such as dominoes on

[4:18:57] Mondays and Wednesdays. We hold dominoes

[4:18:59] games for the seniors and the community.

[4:19:03] We do a movie day um once a month on

[4:19:06] Sundays. Weekends tend to get kind of

[4:19:09] rough for some of our seniors who don't

[4:19:11] have a lot of family and friends around

[4:19:13] and that's one thing that we've noticed.

[4:19:15] So, especially on the long holiday

[4:19:17] weekends. So, we try to incorporate our

[4:19:21] movie days and things like that on those

[4:19:23] long extended weekends so they don't

[4:19:25] have the three or 4 day stretch of

[4:19:28] nobody seeing them. A big part of our

[4:19:30] program is with the meals on wheels to

[4:19:33] do a quick wellness check and to visit

[4:19:37] with these people for at least a few

[4:19:39] minutes. Sometimes we are the only

[4:19:42] people they get to see throughout the

[4:19:43] day or throughout the week. So getting

[4:19:46] that wellness check in and letting them

[4:19:48] have a little bit of communication with

[4:19:50] people is really good for them and it's

[4:19:53] good for their family to know that they

[4:19:55] have somebody here checking in on them

[4:19:57] regularly. So those are the main things

[4:20:00] we do for them.

[4:20:01] >> Great. Thank you. You can you don't have

[4:20:03] to sit stand at the microphone. You can

[4:20:05] sit down if you want. Is there any

[4:20:07] further discussion?

[4:20:17] Thank you.

[4:20:17] >> Thank you, Mr. Bar.

[4:20:20] >> Can can you or anyone provide how much

[4:20:23] support you're receiving from Morttown

[4:20:25] and Ducksbury or are you receiving

[4:20:28] anything?

[4:20:31] >> So, the question is, what kind of

[4:20:33] support does the Waterberry Area Senior

[4:20:36] Citizens Association get from the other

[4:20:38] towns? And um if you're able and want to

[4:20:41] answer that question, you may just come

[4:20:42] to the microphone.

[4:20:47] » So we do um put a request in to ask for

[4:20:52] funding through the other towns as well.

[4:20:56] And it's they do the voting on it and

[4:20:59] whatever they vote on and say we can

[4:21:01] cover this much funding. It's kind of

[4:21:04] the same as what we do here. and just

[4:21:06] ask for help with however many people we

[4:21:09] serve in their community. Do

[4:21:12] >> you know how much you asked of each each

[4:21:13] of those towns?

[4:21:14] >> Um, I am not sure. It varies depending

[4:21:17] on how many. We look at who we served,

[4:21:19] how many people we served in each

[4:21:21] community each year. So last year,

[4:21:23] however many people we served for the

[4:21:25] town of Mortown, we'll figure that out

[4:21:28] and we'll go to them and say, "This is

[4:21:30] how many people in your community we

[4:21:31] have served and this is what it costs us

[4:21:34] to feed them." and we are asking for

[4:21:36] your help with this much.

[4:21:41] » Is there any further discussion?

[4:21:44] Yes, Miss Grace and Charmaine, you can

[4:21:47] aside. Thanks.

[4:21:50] I'm actually pretty confused right now

[4:21:53] because we have a letter that says

[4:21:55] Moretown that's asking for 39. I can't

[4:21:58] find where senior center is in the

[4:22:02] regular budget, but it sounds like Joe

[4:22:04] says it's 32, right?

[4:22:07] >> Page 25.

[4:22:08] >> So that the two together,

[4:22:11] but we can't confirm that the 39 was not

[4:22:16] more than what?

[4:22:17] >> So I think that's been asked and

[4:22:19] answered and it was an error in the

[4:22:20] letter.

[4:22:24] » Thank you.

[4:22:28] Is there further discussion?

[4:22:31] So, the motion is to appropriate $6,500

[4:22:36] for the Waterberry Area Senior Citizens

[4:22:38] Association in addition to the amount

[4:22:40] included in the general fund budget for

[4:22:42] such purpose. Are you ready for the

[4:22:44] question?

[4:22:47] » Yes, Mr. Bar. I'm going to ask a

[4:22:50] question that I know the report on page

[4:22:54] 95 from the senior center to me is

[4:22:57] fairly deficient. I would ask that you contact the director and the board

[4:23:04] chair that they provide a better report

[4:23:07] to the town of Waterbury on you know

[4:23:11] what you're asking for, what you're

[4:23:13] receiving from other towns, etc. I think

[4:23:15] that's really important to a lot of

[4:23:17] residents. Thank you.

[4:23:21] Is there further discussion?

[4:23:24] >> We will proceed to um a vote on article

[4:23:27] 27. It has been moved that the town of

[4:23:30] Waterberry.

[4:23:32] >> Yes. Go ahead.

[4:23:34] >> I would just like to make a

[4:23:35] recommendation for future budget that we

[4:23:37] just have one line item and not break it

[4:23:40] out anymore.

[4:23:44] for future select board members has been

[4:23:47] requested.

[4:23:48] You have one item for the special

[4:23:51] articles or no, you wanted to have the

[4:23:54] senior center to be in one place, not

[4:23:56] two places. Noted.

[4:24:00] All right.

[4:24:01] Is there further discussion? Hearing no

[4:24:04] further discussion. It has been moved

[4:24:06] that the town of Waterberry appropriate

[4:24:08] $6,500 for the Waterberry Area Senior

[4:24:11] Citizens Association in addition to the

[4:24:13] amount included in the general fund

[4:24:14] budget for such purpose. All those in

[4:24:17] favor, please say I. I.

[4:24:20] >> Those opposed, please say no.

[4:24:22] The eyes appear to have it. The eyes do

[4:24:25] have it. And you have passed article 27.

[4:24:29] Article 28. Shall the town of Waterbury

[4:24:31] vote to appropriate $5,000 for support

[4:24:34] of the Waterbury Common Market? What is

[4:24:36] your pleasure with respect to article

[4:24:38] 28?

[4:24:46] » Madam, I'm Rick Weston. Live here in the

[4:24:48] town. I move

[4:24:53] » the town of Waterbury uh appropriate

[4:24:55] $5,000 for the Waterbury Common Market.

[4:24:58] >> Moved by Mr. Weston. Is there a second?

[4:25:02] >> Motion has been moved and seconded. The

[4:25:04] motion has been to appropriate $5,000

[4:25:06] for support of Waterberry Common Market.

[4:25:08] So, Mr. Weston, would you like to speak

[4:25:10] to the motion?

[4:25:11] >> Sure. Only that um for those of you who

[4:25:15] may not be aware of it, it is otherwise

[4:25:17] known as the Waterbury Food Shelf. that

[4:25:19] provides obviously a very important

[4:25:21] service to our community in particular

[4:25:24] to those who are needy uh by

[4:25:28] providing food at low cost or no cost

[4:25:31] and my wife volunteers there and we feel

[4:25:34] strongly about it.

[4:25:38] >> Is there further discussion on article

[4:25:40] 28?

[4:25:47] Hi, I'm Sarah White. I am a Ducksberry

[4:25:50] resident.

[4:25:51] >> Uh, so hearing no objection, Miss White

[4:25:54] will be allowed to speak.

[4:25:56] >> Okay. I'm the director of the Waterberry

[4:25:58] Common Market, formerly the Waterberry

[4:26:00] Area Food Shelf. I have been the

[4:26:02] director there for 5 years. In my time,

[4:26:04] we have not requested any funds from the

[4:26:06] town of Waterberry. We have also not

[4:26:08] requested funds from any other other

[4:26:10] towns that we serve. We will be doing

[4:26:13] that next year. It was a very big

[4:26:16] process to get on the ballot this year

[4:26:18] onto the budget. So, next year we're

[4:26:20] going to focus on some of the other

[4:26:21] towns that we serve. We do serve um our

[4:26:24] patrons are about 95% of Waterberry Center residents. Uh let's

[4:26:29] see. Um as Teresa mentioned, Three

[4:26:31] Square's benefits were um cut in

[4:26:33] November. Our numbers dramatically

[4:26:35] increased from there. In January last

[4:26:38] month, we had 210 visits. That was our

[4:26:41] record number of visits for ever ever since I've been in my job. And

[4:26:45] that's a 184% increase over last year in

[4:26:49] January. So just think about the

[4:26:51] numbers. Um we are funded by private

[4:26:54] donations and grants. Um but we request

[4:26:56] town funding. Um we are also going to

[4:27:01] next year, this summer, we're installing

[4:27:03] a wheelchair ramp to ex increase our

[4:27:05] access for wheelchairbound residents. So

[4:27:08] that's going to be huge. We are also

[4:27:10] working on a delivery system for folks

[4:27:13] that cannot reach us. So, um the funding

[4:27:15] will be used very well and I hope you

[4:27:18] support us. Thank you.

[4:27:22] » Is there further discussion?

[4:27:29] » Hi, John Malder. I I think that's a

[4:27:31] great thing. I just were wondering if uh

[4:27:34] the Meals on Wheels folks and the uh

[4:27:38] Common Market could possibly get

[4:27:40] together on some of the delivery of the

[4:27:43] foods to the people that can't get

[4:27:45] access to them. Thought

[4:27:52] » is there further discussion?

[4:27:56] Hearing no further discussion, um we'll

[4:28:00] proceed to the vote. It has been moved

[4:28:02] that the town of Waterberry appropriate

[4:28:04] $5,000 for support of Waterberry Common

[4:28:06] Market. All those in favor, please say

[4:28:08] I.

[4:28:10] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:28:13] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:28:15] And you have passed article 28.

[4:28:18] Article 29. Shall the town of Waterbury

[4:28:20] vote to appropriate $2,500 for support

[4:28:23] of Waterberry Local Energy Action

[4:28:25] Partnership League? What is your

[4:28:26] pleasure with respect to article 29?

[4:28:29] >> Duncan McDougall from Waterberry Center.

[4:28:31] Madam moderator.

[4:28:32] >> Yes.

[4:28:32] >> I move that the town of Waterberry

[4:28:34] appropriate $2,500 to support Waterbury

[4:28:37] Leap, the local energy action

[4:28:39] partnership.

[4:28:40] >> Is there a second?

[4:28:42] >> The motion has been moved and seconded.

[4:28:44] It has been moved that the town

[4:28:45] appropriate $2,500 for support of

[4:28:47] Waterberry Local Energy Action

[4:28:49] Partnership LEAP. Mr. McDougall, would

[4:28:51] you like to speak to the motion?

[4:28:52] >> I would. Thank you. Um, I encourage you

[4:28:54] to turn to page 100 for Waterberry Leap.

[4:28:57] As you may know, Waterberry Leap is an

[4:28:58] all volunteer uh town energy committee,

[4:29:01] one of 120 town energy committees in

[4:29:03] Vermont. Our job is to help our

[4:29:05] neighbors uh save energy and save money,

[4:29:08] and we've been doing that for 18 years.

[4:29:10] Um, this is a list of some of the

[4:29:12] activities that we run. All of our

[4:29:13] programs are for free. Uh we do walk and

[4:29:16] bike to school days where we have 200

[4:29:18] 250 people come out for that. Um we have

[4:29:21] been assisting uh Waterberry with the writing of the town energy plan. We

[4:29:25] have an electric vehicle fest. Um we do

[4:29:28] window dressers program where we build

[4:29:30] um window inserts for folks who have uh

[4:29:33] drafty cold houses. We do button-up

[4:29:35] weatherization and home heating

[4:29:36] workshops. Um, if you go to the front,

[4:29:39] you'll see that there's a display for

[4:29:40] the better connections grant. We wrote

[4:29:43] and received a 90 uh $97,000 grant from

[4:29:47] Vrans, and we're now trying to make the

[4:29:49] center of Waterberry Center be safer uh

[4:29:52] and more accessible for bikes and

[4:29:53] pedestrians and others. Um, and our

[4:29:56] flagship event is um the Leap Energy

[4:29:58] Fair, which happens every April. So, I

[4:30:00] strongly encourage you to come out on

[4:30:02] April 11th, Saturday, at the gym at

[4:30:05] Crosset Brook Middle School. will have

[4:30:06] 60 energy green energy exhibitors on

[4:30:09] every topic under the sun. Um it's all

[4:30:11] free. Uh we have free electronics to

[4:30:13] recycling, free ice cream, magician

[4:30:16] show, and it's a great way for you to

[4:30:17] learn how to save energy and save money.

[4:30:19] We'd love to see you there. Thank you.

[4:30:24] >> Thank you. Is there further discussion

[4:30:26] on article 29?

[4:30:31] Hearing no further discussion, we will

[4:30:33] proceed to a vote on article 29. It has

[4:30:35] been moved that the town of Waterberry

[4:30:37] appropriate $2,500

[4:30:39] for support of Waterbury Local Energy

[4:30:41] Action Partnership Week. All those in

[4:30:43] favor, please say I.

[4:30:45] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:30:48] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:30:50] And you have passed article 29.

[4:30:53] Article 30. And this is the last

[4:30:56] article. Shall the town of Waterbury

[4:30:58] vote to appropriate $3,000 for the

[4:31:00] support of Washington County Mental

[4:31:02] Health Services? What is your pleasure

[4:31:04] with respect to article 30?

[4:31:20] » Madam moderator, Teresa Wood here. I

[4:31:23] move that the channel Waterberry move to

[4:31:25] appropriate $3,000 for Washington Health

[4:31:29] Services.

[4:31:30] Moved by Miss Wood. Is there a second?

[4:31:33] The motion has been moved and seconded.

[4:31:36] Would you like to speak to the motion?

[4:31:38] >> I would just briefly. Um, Washington

[4:31:40] County Mental Health Services uh

[4:31:43] provides a wide variety of services for

[4:31:45] people with intellectual and

[4:31:46] developmental disabilities, people with

[4:31:48] mental health challenges, children and

[4:31:50] adults, uh, older Vermonters. and I can

[4:31:54] tell you that they are being

[4:31:55] dramatically impacted by the um changes

[4:32:00] at the federal level in terms of the

[4:32:02] resources that they have available to

[4:32:04] them. So the support from the towns is

[4:32:06] really important. Thank you.

[4:32:10] Is there further discussion?

[4:32:15] Hearing no further discussion, we will

[4:32:16] proceed to a vote on article 30. It has

[4:32:18] been moved that the town of Waterberry

[4:32:20] appropriate $3,000 for the support of

[4:32:23] Washington County Mental Health

[4:32:24] Services. All those in favor, please say

[4:32:26] I.

[4:32:28] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:32:31] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:32:33] You have passed article 30. You've now

[4:32:36] made it through all 30 articles in the

[4:32:39] morning. I now open the meeting to any

[4:32:42] other business that you would like to

[4:32:43] raise, but please note that no binding

[4:32:45] action can take place under other

[4:32:47] business. Are there any further items

[4:32:50] for discussion under other business?

[4:32:57] And I'm going I would request that the

[4:33:01] future select board and officers for

[4:33:05] next year's uh annual report printed as

[4:33:10] 8 12 by 11 and not 5 by seven. These old

[4:33:15] eyes even with a magnifying glass

[4:33:19] difficult.

[4:33:24] » Is there any other other business?

[4:33:28] >> Dr. McDougall, I would just like to

[4:33:30] express my thanks and hope you'll join

[4:33:32] me in expressing thanks to the select

[4:33:34] board, to the moderator, to the town

[4:33:37] clerk, to the board of civil

[4:33:38] authorities, to the voting volunteers

[4:33:40] for all their efforts.

[4:33:49] WELCOME BACK.

[4:33:51] >> Other business,

[4:33:53] >> Billy Big Waterberry and I also want to

[4:33:55] call out Mike because Mike has been on

[4:33:57] the board for almost as long as I've

[4:33:59] lived here. So, thank you for all your

[4:34:00] service, Mike, in the time you spent.

[4:34:10] » Anything else? Yes, Mr. Grace.

[4:34:17] » My name is Robert Grace. I live on South

[4:34:18] Main Street.

[4:34:21] I have a suggestion

[4:34:23] for the select board for next year's

[4:34:25] annual meeting. I think there's a large

[4:34:28] vacancy

[4:34:30] in the information that we're crying out

[4:34:33] for that is not visible in the town

[4:34:37] report.

[4:34:39] the subject I think should be approached

[4:34:44] that we have a a chapter

[4:34:48] for all of these small

[4:34:52] nonprofits

[4:34:54] that explains what they do and how they

[4:34:57] do it. We have line items for our street

[4:35:00] department

[4:35:01] that explains how many yards of sand we

[4:35:04] got and how many miles we've secured. So

[4:35:07] we have proper transportation.

[4:35:12] We have our fire chief explaining to us

[4:35:15] everything in his budget

[4:35:18] on how many accidents we went to and how

[4:35:21] many training hours we had.

[4:35:25] And I'd like to respectfully request

[4:35:28] that we receive that same information

[4:35:31] next year

[4:35:33] from our public safety and the Vermont

[4:35:37] State Police. Thank you.

[4:35:41] >> Thank you. Is is there any other

[4:35:43] business that people would like to bring

[4:35:45] up under other business?

[4:35:48] >> Yes, Mr. Clap.

[4:35:50] Uh madam moderator, uh we just spent the

[4:35:53] past hour supporting a lot of uh

[4:35:56] nonprofits here in Waterbury. Uh many of

[4:35:58] them are volunteer organizations and uh

[4:36:02] the town wreck department and

[4:36:04] revitalizing Waterbury will be hosting a

[4:36:07] Waterberry community volunteer fair uh

[4:36:10] right here on the 28th of March. Uh all

[4:36:14] these organizations need volunteer

[4:36:16] support and we really appreciate you

[4:36:18] coming out to support them.

[4:36:26] I just want to thank the people that

[4:36:28] were here asking for money that gave um

[4:36:31] really good reports and information on

[4:36:33] it. I know Teresa recommended they all

[4:36:35] be grouped together. I guess what I

[4:36:38] would prefer that you maybe group the

[4:36:40] Waterberry the local ones together. Oh,

[4:36:43] okay. I'm sorry. I guess I would like

[4:36:45] that. that you group the local ones

[4:36:47] together, county ones together, the

[4:36:50] state ones together, and the

[4:36:52] international ones together. And I and I

[4:36:54] also agree with Angela. It seems like if

[4:36:56] you're going to ask for money, you

[4:36:58] should be here to I have somebody here

[4:37:00] that works for that organization

[4:37:02] um to explain it, to request it, um and

[4:37:06] not just have somebody who says, "Oh, I

[4:37:08] think it's a great idea. I'm going to

[4:37:09] come up and and recommend it." Because

[4:37:11] as we saw today, we couldn't get the

[4:37:13] answers to some of our questions.

[4:37:15] And that's been my main thrust for

[4:37:17] saying it just seems to be too easy for

[4:37:20] people to ask for money and not have to

[4:37:22] do that much in exchange. I belong to a group a nonprofit and we got so many

[4:37:28] requests for money that we finally had

[4:37:29] to say that's why I asked about a policy

[4:37:32] because we're a educational student

[4:37:34] group that the money you have to show

[4:37:36] that how it's going to benefit children

[4:37:38] and education and it seems like we

[4:37:40] should have some kind of policy for that

[4:37:42] so we just don't become a catchall. We

[4:37:44] spend an hour on this. Thank you.

[4:37:48] >> Thank you. Other business,

[4:37:52] » Kathy, I can answer. Uh, a lot of these

[4:37:56] nonprofits are not big enough. They

[4:37:57] don't have enough people to go to all

[4:37:59] the towns like the ones that are in

[4:38:01] Washington County. I don't know how many

[4:38:03] towns in Washington County, Eric. Can

[4:38:05] anybody tell me exactly? But a lot of

[4:38:07] these nonprofits don't even have the

[4:38:09] staff that can go there. So, that's one

[4:38:13] of the problems. So, I understand your

[4:38:14] issue because we would like to have some

[4:38:17] uh give and take with them if we have

[4:38:19] questions, but it's not always possible.

[4:38:24] » Is there any other business?

[4:38:30] » Mr. Bar,

[4:38:34] » I I thank Billy. I know I enjoyed 22

[4:38:38] years in various capacities serving this

[4:38:40] community, but I do want to

[4:38:43] recognize we've had a lot of turnover of employees in in the town offices and

[4:38:51] I want to recognize all of our valued

[4:38:55] town employees. They're really, you

[4:38:58] know, it got a little turbulent with

[4:39:00] our, you know, you know, union contract,

[4:39:04] but I know I value all every one of our

[4:39:08] town employees. They're kind of the

[4:39:11] bedrock of what makes our town go. And

[4:39:15] everyone, if they could give them a big

[4:39:17] round of applause. Thank you.

[4:39:27] Is there any other business

[4:39:31] hearing? No further discussion. Would

[4:39:34] someone like to make a motion to

[4:39:36] adjurnn?

[4:39:40] I'll second.

[4:39:43] >> Who made the motion? Mr. Weston.

[4:39:46] >> Second.

[4:39:47] >> Mr. Maler seconded. The motion to

[4:39:49] adjurnn has been made and seconded. All

[4:39:52] those in favor, please say I.

[4:39:55] >> Those opposed, please say no. The eyes

[4:39:58] appear to have it. The eyes do have it.

[4:39:59] And the meeting is assured.

Waterbury Municipal Meeting - Town Meeting March 3, 2026

Transcript