we'll do all the presentations available in the works and also you know just before we actually started maybe we should just go around and do a round of introductions because i do see some new faces here so maybe we can just say our names their affiliations and and something like that but so is that area but in addition to that there's a second process that happens at this table where we've designated the area that we want to be planning for so that's how we got out to the county boundary that didn't happen last time but we've got another census coming up depending upon how population thresholds and other definitional thresholds move we could end up with a second mob i know you can really see this just each state has at least one in peel but as you can see there is a cluster of n p o is where the population centers are east and west coast in the south history that it's very much and evolving organization that happened over time and really starting like land use planning also in the united states really kind of going in the early one nine hundred s when there was really a lot of urbanization and cities were really growing and there led to a lot of conflicts between land use and transportation and not a lot of planning was happening at that time after world war two construction of the interstate highway system which started in one thousand fifty six forty one thousand miles interstate was set to be conservative the united states and i think a lot of that was kind of an engineering exercise connecting a to be not a lot of thought about planning about communities and their ended up being a lot of negative feelings about where those were going to be going through urban areas going through neighborhoods disadvantaged communities and all that stuff so  so it was really in that highway actually the first thing that really happened for and here is the highway act of ninety sixty two was this idea that we call three c it's it made federal highway aid available to areas over fifty thousand people contingent on establishing a continuing comprehensive plan process carried out cooperated lead by the state and local community i wanted to read that so i got it clear but so the two things that happen is this this recognition of wanting to have planning in cities so that that number of fifty thousand people and also to say ok if you make this organization and if you plan in this way you can have some money choir by by the federal government they said they must exist and you know from outside there was a lot of incremental changes are really changing over time increasing authority of m p o is really dedicated funding source was a big deal as i said before the federal planning funds was given to the m p s but then around in the mid seventy's this point when this half percent of the federal money so a specific funding source was made available so there is money and then also this idea that the projects had to be in tip creation improve programs in order to spend federal funds so that really said ok deities you have to pay attention to these organizations so it would be great to say that that was where you know n p r is took off and everybody listened to us but it can it in exactly happened that way during the reagan era things really pushed quality funding and that's transportation conformity and we can forget we've heard that because since we're in tame it with the clean air act we don't have to do that but it's a lot of effort for a larger n p r studio quality modeling structure that was set up with later this slide is actually one giant run on sentence in the federal regulations because i guess the federal government felt that we should put everything in a single sentence as to what the  supposed to do so yes so it's everything we're supposed to we're still supposed to do this three c process that's remained since the very early since the mid east it's got to be performance based it's got to promote safe lot and we have to work together so that's that's ultimately what's come out of this is that we all have to work together the state the transit operation operators we have a public involvement process  for you that's only the meaning this is a poll members that are part of the m p o the organizational are there are other people that are part that represent groups as part of our r p o is for larger areas over two hundred thousand there's a little bit more definition but generally they have a policy board they have some in five three committees and director and staff and we have to have a written agreement with us and it ends up providers to detailing how we're going to work together and we do have the islands and i website and a couple of years ago maybe the learning curve might be to figure out stuff but don't just group get discouraged because there's a lot of free time any questions i mean we have very happy to talk to you we're very happy to work with  boundaries pretty closely follow county lines but there are some exceptions which are a little bit about the whole organization of the regional planning commission here are easy to chart board of directors are all the members of the board of directors here we do have an subcommittee of the board of directors that meets monthly there are two committees the yellow ones to the left and right there that are subcommittees consisting of board members only for development deals with christine pointed out that clean water committee can keep these two couldn't fit but it would be equal to the other blue committee's unified planning work program committee it's a group that meets usually in the winter and spring to talk about and come to plan to meet for the two or three years for developing that and take a vis the planning advice or committee in the transportation advisory committee or to standing committees that meet pretty much monthly the planning advisory committee consists mostly of but our whole deal was we only have a certain number standing committees and committees can come and go right based on me but i'm filled i'm thinking clean water advisory committee is going to be more like a standing committee that's in the exactly anyway the key responsibilities of an m p are these in fact i'd say the top three people sort of main ones we have to develop a long range transportation plan every five years looking out twenty to twenty five a transportation improvement program which is simply a list of all the agreed upon projects to receive federal funds over the next four years and it's something we are very close to coordinate with the agency of transportation and we updated annually and sometimes amended monthly just so in fact a very common activity at the board level related to transportation will be to consider amendments to the transportation for program and maybe the most those the main things i would say being a board member ninety percent of the transfer troop transportation related activity that you'll consider take action on it's going to come up under one of those people and most of them under the second so a little bit about how the decision making process unfolds the staff might develop something we'll go through a public process through that we do employ consultants quite a bit and specific projects sometimes we don't we'll do some technical analysis the value way things eventually will come up with a recommendation that takes more transportation kind of the normal process it's what the transportation improvement program goes through that's what the hack will review it maybe make some changes most likely not make a recommendation to the board and that's a second detail the the broad transportation plan that also go through this process recommendation to the board the other thing i think that's important is this organization and on n p r business is heavily driven by committees that's why we want to have not only actual board members that are sitting on those committees but we also encourage alternatives to participate on them because if you're an alternate you can actually have an impact on the decision making by participating in one of the one of the  committees just some things to consider if your new board member when you come to the table in a transportation related items on the agenda asked you to make a decision on something things to consider and that decision making process this kind of generic to all o especially if they're from your community and if your local government has particular issues and points to make you know you're probably most of your and you're representing a community so whether it's jericho or essex or whatever listen to the local government and bring that view to the table is pretty important consider the environmental economic and the operations of the transportation systems impacts funding is a big issue when it comes to the transportation we know how much money we have available to program that projects considering cost effect and this is well when it comes to the civic projects federal state local regulations are pretty important obviously we operate under them so be aware of them were you know as was pretty important i think sometimes we hope we bring information to you that's completely been thoroughly vetted and then you can make a decision on the information provided but if you feel there's not enough information always ask for more i think it's a rare event but if it does occur please yeah just finishing up here so peter talked about the role of the board this is the role of the n p r staff and we did talk a little bit about this you know through the sleights so our role here is of course to provide information and technical support to the board and all the advisory committee is usually the time but sometimes we do provide information to the other committees as well so we also provide technical assistance to our member  funded mandates that by we need to respond and incorporate that as those changes into our work program accountability and performance based planning and programming it's something that we do more and more  the federal government is requiring us to do now more performant performance he's planning and we're going to talk about that we have a presentation at the very end of the meeting tonight that we're going to talk a little bit more about that  one of the challenges is that the performance based planning from the federal government puts a lot more emphasis on the n h s the national highway system we're going to talk about the national highway system too later during this meeting so we have environmental quality economy rizzoli and see energy health and i can go on and on on all these needs that we have out there so our job here in your job is to actually b further you know discussions and we are starting to put together our social number two already but we're open to suggestions for to hear more detail about municipal members you know we have we have a we have a state and a federal representative that participate m p o business but they maybe not don't participate in our d c business that's related to you know what it is and then our ar member commissioners or directors whatever they are they they need to understand it's nice for them to understand what's going on but they need to understand that when the voting happens it's just the municipal members so there's no disagreement they don't waste their time looking at something they don't need to look at those kinds of acts so if we get can get into the mechanics of delineating the responsibilities of an m p oh board member and the commissioner because all of us both right and how we vote i mean in our p c business we're all equals and m p o weighted by the population counts in our communities so burlington gets four votes and that's six only gets to split between the village proposed it's my understanding is before nine hundred sixty six so i'd like to know who had the forethought to see the need for that obviously that wasn't they saw and then you know how it kind of imagine what the metrics might be for those but that work resilience i'm just wondering what that refers to yeah i think you're really probably referring to the hazard mitigation plan that we did work with all towns with two years ago now i think probably will probably work another three years ago you know where we kind of look at the impact that weather events have also a lot of resilience is kind of like that what do we do you know when the river comes up so but also might be helpful is suggestions for best practices and communication between us as commissioners and representatives for our communities and our legislative bodies or point will complaining commissions for example i always like to know when the executive director is going to go to my select board so i have the opportunity to go support the executive director when it's before my select word but at the same time one of the things that i haven't done well that i'd like to do a better job on is when there is result from a scoping study or something like that that i'm also there to help support the c staff when they're involved in that if for no other reason that sometimes the you know beyond the technical staff if you're appointed by your legislative body sometimes you can be helpful in communicating things that otherwise might not be received well by it or p c or n p r staff member but i haven't done a good job of tracking that the last time you walked in i saw that our sidewalk or whatever sidewalk studies got done in there was a controversial and result to it that i could have possibly been helpful with in terms of communicating and getting the understanding because as a former select board member i can kind of club into the way select people think well pizza next time right to the clock on the wall six fifteen so we'll start our september meeting of the chignon county or regional planning commission are there any changes to the agenda during none of this is an opportunity for any member of the public who may be here to comment on items that do not otherwise appear on the agenda is there anybody here who would like to make such a common hearing none  any comments questions and it's yes catherine volunteer time but little bit of both excellent thank you for your interest and time and i had a chance to sit down and it kind of review what the what the r p c is about and some of the roles and his resume they further discussion yes zero for sure yeah i know it's the the structure of our businesses is structured towards larger dairy farms oh i don't personally work with a lot of vegetable growers but i get around the town of richmond a lot of i think i interact with a lot of veggie growers and a lot of farmers and share a lot of trade stuff so it's but that's the point here ginning county oh i don't know how many and having you know my maternal grandparents having operated a dairy farm up in derby and i'm margaret from the farm i think it's been a long time but to see that we don't have an agricultural sector person on the r p c welcome next item i guess emily is going to be handling the st george town plan pub that hearing in approval oh well then if it's a public hearing we shall motion open the public hearing on the scene georgetown pla are there any questions or comments about the sink georgetown play in the process that went into it are there any members of the public who would like to make it is all just a quick one i was nervous of the staff comments that there is a lot of data updates that we wish they could have gotten to but may not have them you're hoping that includes at least some references to other sources that get incorporated a further discussion questions your questions and and discussions after none of them are so long that we're going to forget what we have questions about and i think i'll just be more smooth this week and just let them do their presentations so i thank you for that never again for the record and albre c plan so if i don't know exact some of the details of trying to answer the questions at the at the end or upon further review some of the walk through it first sort of at the high level what our tactical basin plan is what's our role and  n and once that introductions overall get a little bit more into ok well what is it what if what is contained in the planned and wonder it's essential elements especially as regards to the simple responsibilities and obligations framework around watersheds and these are updated every five years and i but these three bullet points there because it's really about a year like many plans assessing the condition of the resource in the case of a natural resource trying to protect what you have a high quality waters maintaining them and then restoring any degraded streams and the rationale for why you do these   so all tactical basin plans in the state share this is this common framework so again you'll see this reflected as i go through the plan in more detail but again like like many plans assessing assessing the conditions what's the baseline understanding in the way the state does that is it goes through your collection is any data they can do can find their own data data collected by others monitoring stations public pollutants might be of them and then going from there you begin to implement their total maximum daily load formal plan such as phosphorus plans or regulatory programs to address these areas of concern morally touch too much on this but there are different goals for certain types of streams so there are you know a one is a classification referring and don can probably knows the details but you know that you're very high quality pristine wilderness waters down to lower designations you know depending on what other uses go on in that system and then finally big the playing concludes with  implementation in terms of broad strategies and what is different about the plans more recently is that rather than sort of a spread sheet of projects ranging from physical on the ground projects to education an outreach this is more in terms of categories of projects that you'll see that as we walk through what's also makes the new ski plan a little more of a more robust exercise is that this plan as well as read to address the loyal plan most recently is also incorporating element of the state's efforts to implement the lake champlain total maximum daily load the t m d l so this is a demonstration to e p a of the state saying you know near addition to our regulatory programs here this planning document that outlines how we're going to meet the targets we said we would meet with the state had sort of a temporary clean water advisory committee and then we ran it for a few months and it came formal and we've used the clean water committee advisory committee which meets every tuesday after the attack meeting the transportation advisory committee meeting to work on different issues and lately it's been a lot about the basin plans as well as keeping municipalities abreast of other key issues so through that the clean water advisory committee plus multiple emails for me separate storm sewer system communities and they're very active both in terms of participation as well in their own staffing so we gather that input we update the information on municipal zoning bylaws and provide that to the d c to show  misspellings are already doing with setbacks and buffers etc right now the last few months we've been sort of in the working draft stage where the nice is that the d c is giving us the rough document we don't have to wait for the formal formal and just get a sixty day window and that's it we've been seeing rough drafts of the plan for several months now by karen bates from d c and so we're now here actually in these middle bullets here where we're having our first meeting on this we'll have a formal public meeting and are in october and then what happened early october public form more casual meeting and then at the end we bundled this up to into an r p c recommendation on how the plan conforms how the topical basin plan very different from the rest of the bases you can see because we have quite a bit of cultivated land and develop land as well more locally here it's several of our urban communities and then our our upland communities and the more mountainous terrain and then some major tributaries that just muddy brucker allen brook which gets a slice of essex and a little bit less for it and so on it includes several of the impaired streams  so that's a concern consideration those streams you see and read are the amas for storm water impaired streams so as i mentioned the state looks at different stressors you can see them there will read them out that the key ones we have of course are nutrient loading phosphorus and some some toxins and we do have some flow alteration in the main stem of the when you ski obviously because in the document you assess these different stressors and then as we'll see here the next year slides the state makes a determination on what is the condition of some of these tributaries or segments of the river  depending on whether they meet water quality standards and whether they provide for the uses which are designated swimming fishing drinking water etc competition so depending on those levels of whether it meets the standards or does not it gets one of these designations of fully supports the use of stressed altered impaired in our particular case a lot of these are stressed or impaired impaired being the most common  for phosphorous and stormwater as a pollutant and in some cases altered for invasive species so the distinction here is really about whether if you look at altered whether it's a non pollutant such as an invasive species flow or there's an actual pollutant as we'll see we'll talk about some of those so in terms of our area we have fourteen streams or certain segments that are considered either stressed  the problem areas so to speak and you can see several of our storm waters impaired streams which we've talked about for some of our municipal is for for quite a while morehouse broke for example centennial sunderland book there are several others for example and in monroe broken shelburne or potash angles be in south burlington but those are to the west of the when you ski basin proper those are what are called direct to lake streams that's a different base and place but but they're there so again phosphorous is the one we hear about quite a bit but there are others from a planning standpoint and making everybody aware like we can start thinking about these things we've got some other issues going on as well too that we have to keep on top of the collective we in the state in a suppose in the public so for example we sunnyside brooke which is impaired  that that's a plan a t m d l that that is coming down the track and there are other streams as well in the state that are affected by by chlorides primarily from road salt we've got the long term issue of sh you know there's assistance needed whether it's to community groups the towns that abut the pond it's quite a large ecological system there but if we don't pay attention to it you know we don't want to come back twenty or thirty years later you know hoops it's completely overrun and you can't really fish there anymore never mind the snakes and then an issue of flow when land use the plan identified it's joint or broke in bolton that i altered because of some portions of it the received insufficient flow and that's a matter of working with both the valley on the issue of water withdrawals are still making as well as generally your successor so again it's an issue of the way it's talked about the plan is that review of the data and some sort of protection is needed because you get too low a flow or an altered flow it's hard for the bugs and fishes to make their home their systems could get further degrad so those are you again several issues to think about you know whether it's you know mercury storm water chloride eco life for example in an alan breck some of these have multiple problems not just you can have phosphorus plus another estimates that there's a current estimate of six hundred thirty one metric tons of phosphorus going into lake champlain on an annual basis and the relative contributions by by different  sectors the plan over the next twenty some years or maybe we only have eighteen years left i think is to bring that down by thirty four percent so the plan lays out the overall goal of thirty four percent but that allocates those targets reductions depending on the different sectors so you can see ag is a pretty heavy lift at thirty percent forestry so on and so forth the ones i bring your most attention to all follow up tom so breaking it down down to ok so we've got to make these reductions over the next several years within the municipal framework but total it's currently about twenty eight percent of below the base allocation comes from broadly speaking the developed landscape and then another nine point five percent from from waste water so in order to meet the targets over the next twenty seven years the developed lands have got to reduce exception of the gore and then the trans obviously on some roads and some parts of the amas for responsibility and so on so that lift is about about twenty percent so then the plan then goes into ok wow where are you going to get this phosphorous from it's in different areas and these are the plan recognizes that these geographic and they have several maps like these the plan identifies where some phosphorus can come from where are the heavy loading areas depending on the types of use and so not surprisingly you see within the developed landscape these these areas where there is a presumed heavy phosphorous loading so those are the quote unquote hot spots you would want to hit in terms of projects to reduce phosphorous within the develop plans in terms of roads again this is partially a function of of the the network of roads but it's also a function of how many road segments are hydrological connected and you've heard from from chris duhon our staff person about the loading areas are so the next thing so that sort of that that outlines where the phosphorus is where the potential areas are there is also of course this plan addition to identifying projects there's also i didn't identification of unknowns or data gaps in a way areas of concern so we have several streams and i would urge you know the members from these towns to keep an eye on these of work with me on the other staff here to keep advocate for keeping an eye on these streams because if you don't keep an eye on them and you have no data to really assess the baseline but you may end up with a problem and it'll show up because you weren't keeping an eye on watching it get to be a problem so there are several small streams which are which are of concern here as well as you know some some ones that are more obvious because of the development impacts there there are nearby so see there's are some of the goals in there and they're very basic collecting the macro invertebrate and fish data is a key baseline data collected understand the health of the stre ship projects data but it sets forth categories of projects which i think personally is a huge a useful rubric because there's so many projects being identified over the past few plus projects in the amas for communities alone that are identified because of flow restoration plans and they'll be another batch once the phosphorus control plans get done by those amounts for communities so you go nuts trying to keep updating a spreadsheet in the back of  document so the state refers to the watershed projects database but within the plane itself it outlines these categories of projects and this list is comprehensive it captures a lot of the key concerns in our areas which  urban communities it's primarily about implementation of the emmys for permit which includes a flow restoration plan for those impaired streams phosphorus control plans for all those towns and then storm water master plans which which we've helped out with a few most recently jericho richmond underhill we've completed or should i say are consultants have and were about to do one for milton as well to move lots of projects being identified out there river corps of course of always  the good thing is we're ahead of the curve on that we've done the inventories for all the communities we've identified top problem areas roads that need to be fixed and we're working with the towns to help get the grants and getting  have the overall main stem which again is is going to be assisted through strategies that help v m s fores as well as general landowner education within the impaired streams those tributaries i talked you ski again some concerns that have been identified with higher with higher stream temperatures as well as don't want to run off from roads and so on and then the smaller tributaries as you move on up with again concerns about road runoff other other activities that impact some of these streams and in some cases like huntington more specific issue which has been under monitoring for quite a while of septic  in the village area that affects things and then you see this thing about driveway education outreach the issue of driveways and private roads and their discharge to meetings that huntington richmond that came up with both meetings it's a real recognition of something something assistance needs to be done and it's a sticky wicket because it's private lands discharging into the municipal right away so again as i reference so again this there's no giant spreadsheet of projects within the plan and it refers to the watershed projects database which is the state or initially started cataloging some of the grants they had already supported but over the last year recommended actions so when you see in the r p grants which come out about every three months down there was a strong directive to doesn't implement the plan what is the pollutant load reduction can't just be oh this is a good idea which we cleaned up we would really letter give that to the quack quack will then finalize that letter pass it on to you guys for your next meeting in the interim we will have a public meeting here are two of our second in october seventeenth  again as part of a public meeting here will want to take any other input that people want to give to the plan which we can then forward to d c and then we'll finalize or conformance letter and submit that to the d c we thank you and thank you dan there are any questions or comments about this document where it stands where it's going certain the the big question i had was about the the project prioritization the watershed projects database a lot of the language in here makes it sound like the authors of this report slash the state you know the sort of research side of things are coming up with priority projects and adding them to the database and they're just literally one line item descriptors in the database that say whether they're funded whether they've been graded presumably to receive funding and i'm just wondering is this sort of setting up a framework where this the regulatory side is going to identify the projects and then pull in the town or are these sort of organically bubbling up from the towns or some combination i couldn't really i scanned a lot of this but it wasn't clear to me where this was headed in terms of you know a project mandate framework versus just a nice good work that everyone's doing of their own accord right it's a little bit of both the state obviously has projects that they've identified over the years more on the from the assessment research and the projects are all mostly you know the state sets these broad frameworks but when it does any r p it's sort of serendipitous who happens to apply for one and submit a grant for it rather than the state say there's eight hundred projects identified we really like to see a proposal for projects one through fifty and then so that's a little bit of a challenge there so it's in part because the state runs it by grants not like they have a fifty biologist an engineer is ready to go and do a project and i guess it's pretty vague right now in terms of how little roll out when we get to an assessment stage right we're anticipating this is going to be reviewed on a five year cycle there's all the happy talk about we just do the b m p as will meet the targets the next cycle they'll be more of a reckoning i'm sure when we we make that evaluation of ok what if what if we have funding for it if we had municipal partners for what have we accomplished and hoops we didn't meet the target so  i was expecting this to least anticipate maybe it's just the state you know the the policy side needs to give the the the writers of these plans more you know of a clear framework for how it'll get to project identification and implementation in the absence of grant funding or a municipal or emmett's for projects that are going to happen anyway i mean right now it seems like it's just a happy list where you apply for funding but looking over their eyes and this is a regulatory plan to achieve an outcome and i'm just curious if anyone has been more involved in discussions has seen over that horizon to how this plan will require implementation of prairie projects funding or not because that's what we all think we're headed towards and this is just sort of vague and happy talk about it yes it's kind of thirty thousand foot level because it's not getting down to the project level and i think frankly you know i think in a little more oil basin plan that basin plan or started to try to get down there and up with thousand i've heard secretary moore talk a couple times a legislature that you know ninety percent of achieving our clean water objectives are going to be done through people comply with their permits so those of the ag b m p's the waste water the storm water and us for permits municipal roads general permit i don't know if that's not that's the framework i don't know if that number is exactly accurate but at least that's that's the sense that it's coming from the agency right now and so this a take that one more step in that regulatory permit framework they are basically putting the obligation of prior position on to the municipalities to dan reference a couple times the n s a for doing the  flow restoration plans of the foster control plans those municipalities have to figure out how do we get to the target and what projects do they want to prioritize to get there so that those those things i think we have a pretty high level of confidence are being prioritized municipally and so it's more of a bottoms up here's what needs to be done it makes most sense biggest bang for the buck type things you know simply and then and we've been working with towns on the municipal roads general permit to do the same kind of thing you know for all the rural towns that were meant looking at where the roshan's happening and trying to prioritize which projects should happen first and say some put some money behind that we trance and aid other view transformed better roads a pretty good about that piece so to sir translate that into you know how do you get from being identified in a priority area broadly to a specific project being required and it being a partnership effort to come up with the funding where the states at the table to help but at some point you know not if there's a thousand projects to hit the target and we're just sort of narrowly looking at the low hanging fruit eventually we run out of those and we get to unfunded large required project and i'm just kind of curious so what up what i'm taking from it is if you're broadly identified as in a priority area or having a priority impact to be addressed expect any associated water associated permits to be looked at through this context this is providing the lens for a permit renewal which is a separate process but if it's a priority expect that a project might be required of renewal i guess that's what i'm trying to have not heard them talk about using this enough that kind of permit context that you're referring to it i've only heard them talk using this as as long as your project that you came up with locally as a priority is consistent with this that it would be a book probably for funding and this is honestly  little frustrating conversation that i've been having for a couple of years now with the agency that there is a lack of analysis investment between the plan and these projects a last minute fall he's taken it  sort of pick a crop concrete example if the authors of a report based on modeling identify a purty project and place that on the list if you're the town where that piece of land exists expect that to be a conversation about implementing it i do not think that they have really gone down to that level ok so they're not used so it's an aspirational project list and you'll see minutes more objectives you know categorical if you will strategy level than individual projects did the projects that are on there just really i think mostly came from local efforts whether it was a watershed group or the municipality i vants i have not at least i'm not aware c has tried to dictate projects and i was just focusing on one statement in particular and seventy two where it talks about identifying the highest priority stream segments so the highest priority stream segments in the basin have been assessed will be revisited as needed and have been added to the table and that listed online in the watershed projects database so it's sort of the nature of the water pressure said projects database that's where the rubber meets the road with specific projects and i just couldn't divine from this whether that was bubbling up from towns in their midst or is doing it anyway or if this is the planning process listing the projects and designating them themselves so it just seems like a distinction the towns won't be aware of that i mean once this is adopted we all say it conforms with our understanding we sort of lose the opportunity to have that discussion of the town near go back to that other big no you had it first all those other masks that show the basin on this one yeah and the next one where it you don't have any water that's are several maps like this with related to them in more detail but because even though we're not necessarily primarily because of where it is still a good part of our economy as we talked about earlier there still is october's discussion next item on the agenda is clean water advisory committee membership and going to  to and out  regulatory agency here the other three are m s four permits keys as in addition to the urban suburban and so that's why there are members of the committee to get some consistent process and representation going on around the state in these conversations and i think i get into this further  commentary for me we are unusual in our koach compared to the other pieces and not having a conservation district or watershed associations as a member of members of the quad they may call it something different than the quad maybe their natural resources committee or something but and so this language was added to this agreement this here trying to get us all consistent statewide doing this i think there's another dynamic in background for this i think is building credibility in the legislature that the decisions that are coming out of our pc's are well balanced and reflect in our inclusive and reflect all the voices around water quality in the region you know we were pretty unique when we started up our kwok i think we were the first ones to have one in the states but it's you know that's so that's kind of the some of the background in the the two page thing the comment the thing that starts comments regarding black membership received sense of work back it was male so the first g just that i found myself in at the awkward position because at the end of the quack meeting as you saw and there really was a lot of time for this discussion the quack really wasn't prepared to make a decision and said you know they want to keep the membership as is until we have and can establish some guidelines for membership and i found myself in a difficult situation because this contract language kind of says we're going to have these other parties participate in our base and planning to vote and as you just saw are basing planning vote is coming up in a few weeks and this is not the way anybody likes to do business it's not you know it wasn't would have a lot time to make a change if we want we need to be the need to do it tonight or not do it or push it off you know for another time i don't know i got asked a question of the quack you know what's what's d e c a going to do to us if we don't i don't think there's a gun or a fine associated with this but i don't think it's in the big picture of the situation we want to be and in terms of  inclusive conversations that are advisory committees and positioning ourselves with regard to water quality going forward so i'm not going to review all these comments but just to let you know that i did get the comments  based on the comments i got back i'm proposing a revised staff recommendation on the law you can see highlighted in yellow are some of the things i've picked up from expressed about it would we get a lot of other non profits or other organizations that maybe are not real partners with our municipalities but have other interests so i'm suggesting that we propose interim guidelines or or institute interim guidelines for future municipalities water quality and this is between marty alone and james shore are some some more detail about water quality projects education monitoring and or implementation the third  this morning which is not reflecting his comments that it would help if the municipalities could actually nominate organizations that they are partnering with and so suggesting that there be at least two municipalities nominating an organization based you know they demand your behavior not participating and i was going to feel like she's a little having a lot of anxiety here and they didn't even show up and that may very well happen and all the people will make fun of me then and i will deserve it but that may happen so anyway acclimation personally i think that those are we're taking too narrow a view of who deserves a seat at the table i think it should be broader as broad as possible that said there are plenty of other avenues for organizations or individuals to comment on on something like the tactical basin plan other than sitting around at the quad so we're not really  rational criterion for asking somebody comes that appeal to me as i understand it that was intended to address the desire to make sure that these are organizations that have the kwok and if you read all those comments you'll see some of that come out as is the xterm all force to expand membership right it wasn't it wasn't something that either got talked about at this table or their table to say organically point would really be nice you know to have these members and i think this was a notion don you're right on to make sure the additional members came up from internal conversation not extra  just a point of clarification on the voting versus the ex officio membership and just don't know what the thinking was behind that i mean i think the thinking behind having people be x of fish here versus voting was the voting members had the responsibility from military action where they're the ones that could be expected to have to bear the fiscal consequences of doing things it's very easy for someone who doesn't have fiscal consequences to making recommendations to say yes without balancing whether or not it's affordable for the member community so in one respect you know i'm troubled by people who vote i want to have skin in the game i don't want to be able to just like we hard for me to imagine well so and also let me put one one piece on here which is the crack makes recommendations to this war none of these organizations have that the first the second the un i think the focus in this recommendation about these guidelines focusing on the partnership was really so that they are organizations that they may not be financing you know as in how the municipality pays you know uses their tax taxpayer funds to finance a project but they these three organizations are organizations that do apply for wire funds to do projects you know sometimes or with a range garden at a school or things like that so they to that extent the reason that i was proposing them as voting members is because they are actively bringing money into the region to put into water quality projects and then and therefore have an hour of talking with people about which projects should happen they've been active partners in our stormwater master planning you know trying to help the community decide on priorities very much more  think of a lot of things that we have actually voted on and of those few that we have voted on i can't recall any close or even non unanimous falls so i think the voting is really almost a phone call yeah and i've been on this i've been on the m p o since like two thousand and one this is the absolute worst acronym i've opinion but given the numerous the how it works out some more advocacy people of the table with a bunch of bureaucrats and municipal officials isn't necessarily a bad thing might my real question here is is there a definition of political and legal advocacy groups simply because most groups that are involved in some sort of environmental charge you know they're there as an education group or that education is technically lobbying and that's they come to people with ideas and they try to influence public policy through the work that they do that's kind of their charge and why they exist so i and i think i understand what three is trying to get  read the comments and i'm aware of what's in there but i'm just wondering if we're trying to solve what i would consider to be a real issue with wording that's going to potentially take the time to actually think through some of those and come up with a set of more permanent guidelines that are a little bit more rigorous in that regard just to follow up on this any other numbers would have to be determined by this commission based upon a recommendation of the quack and it's a may there's no entitle that not every organization that conforms with these criteria will get on the air it just says that anybody who's who's going to be recommended for inclusion has to meet that so ultimately it comes down to this commission having the ability and ri to determine who is or is not and i take that to mean that if one of these member organizations either does not work productively or falls out of compliance with their criteria whatever they may be that they can be removed from the committee as well so ultimately we have control and i think we need to have you know thank you so you know when i saw the comments and to be clear i don't sit on the to get into the level of detail here and would trust the quack to make recommendations based on what makes sense and then it comes to the position what is the reason for having interim guidelines as opposed to just saying these three for now quack work on something that definitely could be i was really trying to just say i think fast forward the conversation at least one staff to like throw something on the table for them to work with just in case and partly also addressing the fear of like there's going to be another organization that heard about this and and asked organizations that are out in the community they are simply making recommendations to the board here are more likely to participate if they feel like they have a seat at the table that has a little bit of pap a little bit of power and that their input is going to be respected as opposed yes i would i would support them being voting members if we had guidelines if it was fully vetted by the quack ok i don't believe it was based on the comments that have come in i will i would support any organizations as not moaning members and ask the quack for a recommendation on whether they should be voting members and if the crack decides that they should be voting members and i might change my mind but i can't support the criteria is put forward making them voting members especially since we don't have guidelines because essentially what we're doing is dealing with an optics problem we don't have enough representation or we feel we might get dinged for it and i don't want to do something like this without having it thoroughly vetted and if the guidelines well developed and supported by the see that were you a c so i can't bring myself to say it now so i just i mean i i  feel like we've run out of time we need to do something and we're doing this because we fearful that we have a problem with the state in terms of how it looks and doing something like this without having something fairly that in a way in which we are giving a nominee this simple and ity a chance to vote on something and i understand about inclusiveness i understand that some may believe that the voting is a non sequitur but this hasn't gone through our usual process and so therefore i can't support it at this time i could support of next month if it goes across just a note on that that the university of vermont is on there and that's not to be useful number i guess where do we draw the line do we just say that only municipal members can have a vote we're miniscule service organization that we can expand our environment when we do we do it correctly in front fully and not last minute based on putting our executive director on the spot for taking over responsibility and so i do think this is more than optics  actually a term of art grant agreement which we committed to and indicated we're going to comply with one of those requirements is that these groups participate and we are the only r p c that doesn't currently have participation too fast i think i think that i think what was going to happen was the quack see whack what everyone call it was going to look at this and make a recommendation but they didn't get a chance to if i understand correctly so do we really should we be stepping back and letting them this last bullet says determined by the board after recommendations from the quack and we haven't gotten a recommendation from the quack on this so should we  and we have to vote on the basin plan next month so that absolutely i'm pushing the situation in a very uncomfortable way mia called and that would but for the fact that we're voting on the basin plan next month and this grand agreement for this fiscal year says that our our recommendation on the basin plan will include these other organizations to let's see if we can move this discussion from the abstract to the concrete is there motion with respect to this particular matter i would move that we  b be invited to participate i'd be pretty advanced to the board for approval to participate and secondly the second part of that directly quark to come up with a would originally thinking i would just say let's invite those three organizations to be members but seeing this in the bylaws that we seem to be in agreement that the mechanism is that the quack brings the nominees other other members may be deterred as determined appropriate by their p c s there's a policy that's developed that's going to guide the quack going forward with respect to these advocacy group members i think we need to take a look but i'm not i was standing this last vote i'm not entirely certain that in the bylaws or whatever administrative words that describe the quack in this operation i'm not even sure the voting versus non board leaders distinguished in those files because we don't there are no noncoding numbers now i'm not sure there is such a type of membership well there if you look at the top though in the bylaws it talks about other voting or non voting member is just going back to what it doesn't say is are the ones above that voting or non voting so it doesn't really it's a it's referenced in passing once but it's not really been really the m s four towns and it is very important for the rural towns to be able to participate in that and that the municipal staff for our rural communities really is projects but for implementation projects you know ranging from you know seventy thousand dollars projects to you know two thousand dollars projects or four hundred thousand dollars project so i think it is valuable to have friends of the when you see the conservation just at the table yes it will bring a more robust conversation for the issues that are affecting the world community i think our back to us let us just just side how we're going for and then have the quack review the tactical plan we were missing why don't we just wanted to zoom back and say that just from my perspective it comes down to what this board you know this board is the authority for all these questions ultimately from constituting the committees to approving the membership we want to encourage broader participation in those discussions to inform our discussions we have a limited time to do that this is three out of nineteen on the table today and we're going to undertake a more deliberate thoughtful process to come up with guidelines with the full input input of the current membership of the question for us to consider and then direct them in their future nomination so i'm one hundred percent comfortable with the motion on the table as amended i think it represents you know the broad inclusive conversation the convening role this board has and i don't see any of the wild wild important considerations for the future i don't see them really you know having any you know substantive impact on the the outcome of the quote deliver the quack deliberations so i'm i'm fully supportive of this and no further comments i just have a question or clarification number twenty two section twenty two twenty two for section twenty to page three of us are we really suggesting that we we have them you should double the per acre fee and i just was wondering how that was responsive to our of the communities be one perspective here you know i understand i just want to make sure that we're proposing to double the fee essentially with our  with righty good evening everyone i'm marshal distal on the transportation planner here with the c c r b c and i will be presenting with jason giraffes on our chin in county national highway system updates we have a very short presentation so you could keep comments or questions the end there would be greatly appreciated so the overview so congress approved the establishment of the n h s to focus federal resources on roadways that support the nation's economy defense and mobility to give you a little idea of the scope of the n h s roughly ninety percent of americans live within five miles of one of connectors and so those are n h s routes that connect intermodal transportation facilities so rail stations airports and bus terminal it's a it's a nationwide aspect terms of funding the bottom line is that we you know we don't really know if there will be funding implications related to performance measures but we do know that you know  there's likely to be a penalty if we do not meet our pavement in bridge condition targets on the through our previous transportation bill federal transportation bill known as map twenty one when it was signed into legislation it  incorporated a whole classification of roadways known as principal or tiriel onto the national highway system so with the stroke of a pen if you will about forty four miles of new n h s routes were added  so while they were undertaking this process with the regional planning commissions we were in the process of updating our functional classification system and you may recall updates of that came before this board review it was back in and seventeen and the recommendations that we were looking at are the changes that we're looking at to our functional classification system at the time could have had implemented implications to the national highway system so we asked that we hold off on making any changes to the n h s at that time so that we could finish our functional classification updates so we had done that and we have done that and now we are here talking with us one was signed we had about one hundred twenty one miles after map twenty one was signed that went up to one sixty five and tonight our recommendation would come somewhere in the middle out about one hundred thirty seven so before we get to the actual recommendation just want to go through the process that we've that we have laid out before us we went to the tac back in june and they made their mistake this from the top so we went before the attack with a recommendation in june and they made their recommendation and it should be noted that their staff recommendation tonight differ slightly from what their attack recommended and that subtle change is detailed in the packet and are happy to go into that after we finish up only have one more slide after this and from there we brought a recommendation to the executive committee in august which is what is before you tonight for hopefully your approval after tonight assuming there is an approval of sorts we would s official quest to be trans and should be also noted that we've been in console with the trans throughout this process of they're on board with the recommendation that we're proposing tonight and they would then submit their official request to federal highway headquarters in washington d c for review and approval so here's our recommendation our recommended national highway system map on the right we have proposed which is a two part motion if you will that is almost verbatim to what's in your packet tonight with one subtle change that we had over looked for this kind of run through this that the board accepts the final c c or p c staff recommendation as presented and this is the subtle change here with the additional intermodal connection to the burlington downtown transit center and that's something that we had discussed with attack but we have just forgot to include as part of this presentation and also with the understanding that this system can be reviewed in changes can be made at any time as circumstances change population the system evolves and secondly to request of you trends this isn't intended to be a forward looking planning document this is intended to reflect the transportation infrastructure as it exists now and so as circumstances warrant in the future changes purse strings to meeting certain standards so when the state gets around to putting a budget together what roads and what bridges and what infrastructure is going to have money thrown at it it's going to throw money at the ones it needs to be the performance standards so there's no extra money coming in for anything but what i think it does mean is that the trims and the legislature will pay particular attention to this network to make sure they meet those performance standards which generally will mean you'll get priority for funding so there's a little that's a little bit different than the way you phrased it but that's kind of what this is where the next item that we're going to be looking at is some more of those transportation performance measures and those are going to be tied directly to the n h s and so to the extent how you grade on performance measures is tied in a way to funding availability in prior sation it does have an interactive effect  and with that in mind why would we want to reduce the size of our national harbor system and cut out the areas from that one per or for future form suspect he's going to have something and so i don't i don't agree entirely with what john is saying because it isn't about the priorities the important thing is that we get the national i was system down to a sustainable network of roads that meet the federal criteria and many of these problems don't meet the criteria that's why your staff is making the recommendation that they're making what took place in back twenty one was added on these roads that quite frankly that's sustainable these are roadways that we're going to have to do additional data collection on you're going to have to do desa dishnet data collection we're going to have to develop performance measures of these we don't we never get to a situation where we don't meet the performance measures because we set them and you set them so if we're doing our jobs and doing them correctly the performance measure should be something that's reasonably achievable for us very very real we don't ever we're avoiding we're trying to avoid that the problem is if you spread this network and make of this grand thing it becomes absolutely unsustainable for us to do the necessary data collection analyses to support what the performance measures should be not going to do agree with that we should make sure that what once again show last night there but i had a similar question and it makes sense to me that the you know there's not enough money to cover all the arterials that were there before it adds a burden terms of additional analysis and red tape and paper record keeping for something that's not going to be i always ask is it like the original free throw every potential project that could ever get funded onto a list in the hope that you maximize your options first reading the dollars around in this case there's a penalty for doing that in terms of the administrative overhead so i get the idea of streamlining it but i do wonder is there an eligibility question where first some strategic roads it may be worth keeping it in the system just to preserve eligibility that might not otherwise be there so that's that's one question to jim's last comment about the sort of redundancy of major north south east west routes you know we did add pine street the bovver segment was in both but we've added the pine street north south connection to the train station and i'm just curious if the goal was to streamline why did meeting our performance metrics or at least as far as we know lenny will talk about it more we have the ability to flex our n h s funds over these routes so if there is a need we can absolutely meet that need but if we enter into the situation where we're including these routes and then you know degrading the overall performance and then losing that ability to flex funds and if we may end up in a situation where there is a route that needs it and it can't get it  piece that got out is the last shot where it's running on pine street so yeah she added i'm sorry yeah i just say there's no benefit to having roads that are going to really get federal highway dollars why add one that will guaranteed have lousy consider removing the intermodal connector from exit fourteen so it's something we could think about typical jeff questions i never thought we'd got a trillion dollars to the national debt in the ninth year of an economic upturn like we did last december has anybody given any thought to what if they decide then another trillion dollars to the national debt in the next well maybe two thousand one thousand leading up to two thousand and twenty elections and they decide that what will take the federal funds are what your market to the national highway system for improvements and are we doing something to reduce our national highway system network and i understand all the reasons we're in a world that doesn't change i completely understand why we're doing it but are we potentially being short sighted if something like that happens or is anybody even as anybody thought about that and it's been dismissed or or what i same question last year but i feel like i need to ask it again and i fully appreciate understand the reasons for doing this and the good thoughtful staff input but if anything i've learned over the last three years the world changes and changes pretty rapidly and are we go t of doing something maybe by doing this that he might eighteen twenty four months from now feel better about all the one common i have my understanding is that this has been an effort that's also been engaged in across the country to sort of happens if that circumstance changes and maybe it's not a big chance ok maybe it's not a big thing for fed another trillion dollars in national debt put it into infrastructure projects and they take quarter that a third of it half of it and put it in the roads and they say oh we'll just crazy conversations you know like oh maybe the federal government should get out of this business of you know you know so you know i think we did have some cover sation about you know trying to walk her way around that but at the end it still felt like a reasonable place to land but you know no guarantees in life for sure  projects on a route that we just attracted so to jeff's question i mean to me that comes down to a balancing of any administrative burden of leaving the list inflated that you could relieve by winnowing it and potential eligibility of risk if there's a windfall in infrastructure we number ten you know leads to something i mean i care jeff's point and that's the question is there so much administrative overhead that we've got to win it now because it's just burdensome verses what the hell keep your options open maybe there's some formula that's pegged to miles i don't know but i think it's also it's not everyone takes time to crayons and comes up with whatever roads they want to have federal money for but there are specific criteria regarding animal connections and primary routes to get from point a to point b across the country that have to be met and it's and it's just a matter of who which roads meet those criteria here and this is an effort that complying with and again how wise the criteria are isn't within every election but our job is to evaluate those criteria and i road network and come up with what we think is the fairest map understanding that what the future holds is anybody's guess so the last two questions and maybe you can take a stab at it is there an order of magnitude sense of the administrative relief when we get this much is it ten thousand dollars is it one hundred thousand dollars just that sort of curiosity on my part that would inform a decision on this the other day that that basically is what it comes down to and is there any sense of timing or relationship damage if we just the other the other dynamic we're talk we're focus here of the n h s but really the federal pot of money to come supermarket i think we know has been flexed a lot to do a lot of different priorities in our region of particular yet also so we're trying not to have it be used as a punitive thing against this just that it's a double edged sword it's local control verse sort of being dictated from washington short of some new pot of money that directs towards that because if you've got to flex locally locally but i mean statewide you get to make your own decisions to live degree if you don't then you go to deal with what's coming down from the mothership in d now that said you know there you grieve with jeff's point of you know trump and company were to come up with something that they're only going to focus on a narrow piece which all indications are they ever do come up with money that is either going to do it will it fall down on this or you don't know so you needed there we want to there so there's a lot of soup going on there without one straight answer to get to it there question plane you're going to be doing the transportation performance measures befor so we talked about this back in february game to the board to talk about performance measures in targets typically related to safety and we took some action at that meeting  and i want to give a little bit more background of primmer on that because it's kind of a complicated new thing related to transportation so it doesn't hurt to get in the refresher on it but there are some new deadlines coming up for some new performance targets and that's where is going to take over talk about those because she's been working with the trans on those so a little bit of background first and again this is a bit of a refresher from when i was here back and february so to give you background on this is a national thing that came down from the federal government and  the the law that was passed back in whatever was two thousand and fifteen or two thousand and twelve they're kind of laid out the groundwork for performance management subsequently there was a lot of rule making if you really were the federal process  transportation performance management goes back to two thousand and twelve it was reiterated in two thousand and fifteen those two federal transportation bills jason talked about math twenty one that came out in two thousand and twelve the legislation itself stablished these goals in these these various areas that are listed here in the last post in the page see fifty infrastructure congestion reliability is cetera they don't all apply to us because of our population size and air is going to talk about that more detail in a minute or so the rulemaking they came in after the laws were passed talked about the performance measures in more detail and it went a lot of detail on the rules responsibilities of the parties that are involved in this specifically and this applies to pretty much any transportation related planning activity the transportation at the state level the m p o the transit provider always listed as a group of three ordinate all their activities as they do in planning activity they do here and setting transportation performance measures and targets as well so the three of us have been talking about this for a while the general rule is the regional planning commission as an m has six months after the state sets a performance target in one of those categories for us to do one of two things agree with the target that the agency set or come up with our own and that appl targets for those five five year average items for up there we had numbers for each of those and we talked about this a five year and i think i've got a slightly dr you want to see what they are but they guessed i was last august we had told february this past year to except agree to them or set our own this board in february decided to agree to the v trans targets and we did that in february to free but we're about to move on now we have these other areas where performance targets are being set at the state level and i think this is probably were when he was to take over this year one is coming up we're just going to talk about the new measures and targets peter just talked about the safety which this board accepted the targets accepted bike in february in the in this winter and after after the submission so we need to be there accept we translate why targets for those measures or just set up our own and we have a draft stuff recommendation at the very  see the percent of payments improve conditions so see if i can use this one here so you can see the miles on the interstate and how many miles we have and that includes i believe also ramps not just the main percent of the interest there should be in good condition right now we are down to twenty seven point one for the non interstate again we are along but the important thing here is that the penalties only apply to the poor condition measure not the good condition measures so basically here is for the poor condition measure they provided the federal maximum which is five percent target was said slyly below that in we are actually doing pretty good on that for the on the interstate for this one we're a little bit it's the n h p p it's the national highway performance program i believe or something like that so the trans has had the ability to flex and we did flex over the years up to fifty percent of that program into the surface transportation program which actually the money is goes to all federally drugs so what the federal government is saying if you're not meeting the those targets then more funding needs to go to improving the condition of poor pavements on the n h s so more funding is going to go to two projects that they're just going to go in that direction so that penalty the other category that has a penalty also i need to point out that safety so we talked about that in february when we presented the presentation in safety but this is the penalty here of the hall any just they're not separating interstate versus not interstate and they just so right now the image is bridges classified this in good condition is you  were under the images condition this is the energy system performance which is the system reliability measures and that is broken into two measures two categories subcategories and total of three measures system explanation of how we get there i'm very happy to talk to any of you individually about all the equations i'm very happy to go through all the equations i don't want to do it right now but very happy to do it if you are if you're interested afterwards o e so those are two measures and this is the reliability either the freight movement and economic vitality category we have basically a similar measure for the truck travel time reliability but that's a little bit simpler because it's an index returns again had the dark a deadline we work with them to come up with a statewide target their deadline was may twenty the again submitted to the slightly earlier so the deadline is now early november for those measures together and basically they look that day therefore each month so these this measure is basically the price again the percent of person miles travel on the interstate that are reliable so they look at the state in this is the data for two thousand and seventeen and this is over a course of a year by the way that the target so they look at that the that and they came up to ninety nine point six percent always the ninety percent why isn't a ninety percent wine adjusted for every month because if you work in february and december those are snow months so there's a time base for this that's going to change this target because the problem with the stay there's a we don't have enough data historically that to go backwards to see what was happening so we have two thousand and seventeen now we're going to have two thousand and moving forward so we're going to have the ability to look a so anyway so this is this is basically and so this is this is not we can see that in february and december in two thousand and seventeen you know our interest is not that reliable but did not affect our you know total numbers i'm not so moving on this is the region's interesting track travel time reliability in there is a slightly different now it's not the percent it's more like it's that again you need to think of it is that measures that we presented before that is relevant to remark and the reason for that is that we don't see any practical policy or funding benefits or implications whether we set up our own targets or not at this point the jazz which are pretty much the class one time when we don't have enough historic day there for us to actually set up targets because of the trans only started collecting nonmusical in the jazz data for pavements only in two thousand and seventeen so we have not historically that for us to allow us to do that and the bullet after that talks about the this is this the the unreliability that i our non interstate in ages in inch in the county and the other the last bullet says that the board can actually in the future can decide to set up targets for this for the m p o area so if you're not being precluded in the future of doing year save these a yearly target for all the other measures there is two and four year kind of schedule for these targets so as we receive more information and more historical data and understand where this performers you know management effort is going from the u s side and the veteran side you can choose to do that in two years or in four years for all of the other measures except safety safety you have the ability and directly transit shift some of the things but there could be there may be at some point some value in having that if you decide but i think we're kind of like we're so early in this process that the seems to make sense right now might in the future when we have more data  data will become available we'll start using the better data as the performance measures go down and that data would also be available to them so you know the hope is that there's really going to be a much better refinement of the da real quickly these are the measures that are not really relevant to vermont congestion reduction environmental sustainability and because of our size and also because we are in all the ataman status which is great don't this chair slash executive director of one thing i would like to do at our annual meeting in june we had announced some service awards in the members to see those rewards weren't there to retro receive them so i think their last workshop in burlington last week a few of us were there and yes i know could have quite a few people were there i think they probably had about eighty people in the room so that's good and i think i'll just use that of make a note that they are coming up with recommendations at some point in this calendar year i think december fifteenth as our deadline and i think we've been having some conversation at the executive committee about probably asking for interest in being and they also in those workshops that there are they've offered to give us the materials to run a similar workshop if we wanted to do that with like if there was comments by october tenth or twelfth something like that so we'd have to do that you have to let me know soon if you want to try to get together and do that right through their workshop  governor's cabinet for a day you probably have seen in the media the governor has brought his cabinet to different counties around the state i believe the counties the last counties coming to next wednesday so  tracks and so there may be multiple things going on that i'm not sure where they're going to land which agency's going to land where the commissioner of public service is going to come here to meet with us probably that afternoon issues not sure where that will be i think it's a camera night fifty eight or nine fifteen i think that morning if you're interested in that let me know and so and if you're interested in talking to an agency we may get a heads up as to where that will be sometime that day but it's a little chaotic at the moment building homes together we haven't talked about that lately there's going to be press conference on october tenth to kind of give the  latest status report on that share that information with the next board meeting if you don't come to that it will share the announcement on that press conference there is going to be we're holding another housing convening october twenty nin regina just sent that notice out a couple hours ago so if you're on that list and then finally just planning see legislative breakfasts we're working on a day in early december that hopefully won't conflict with the bankers association this time  you have a number of committee reports and minutes in the packet are there any members items or other business yes jeff i just want to make a pitch for you to invest the forty five minutes to come get the  orientation there's a lot of alphabet soup there's a lot of things that govern our annual work program particularly if you're a municipal member in the ever sponsibility to vote just announce we're going to have to war one next month and then