and i think the i think we have discussed it would be it would it would affect those who came to us and could if the burden of proof is on them yes it was on them to prove and really this this was in response to them to the if you can prove that you had a leak in your property and it was it was what it based on whatever and you fixed it and so you can prove that this is your consumption and so this is what you with tom clarke before doing these we did get a timeline from him and that he would be able to do that starting in april if he received the information from the town and he would have it done by favorable rates and terms if we can prove that the median household income of this community falls below the state wide range because right now richmond richmond as a whole does not fall in the state when average from he and household income which with this funding year depending on our for it depending on the median household income is there are what's called affordability points and we could get up front subsidy on t v how of the potentially negative interest rates which i know nothing of interest rates unlike some made up to do but it's that's how we work our program and the pricing and it and then the world but on the real development side is they have a different way of calculating median household income and we already qualify for grants from them so this would be just a kind of you know we're playing the field and we're we're playing for the agencies against each other and there's no well we think it is but we really have no basis for this so that's why and that's why it's important that we that we do this so that we can all of for better interest rates and terms and this is done by a third party know we've done some work i would play him to help them and i and that's what i'm proposing at this point of slightly higher just to cover costs here what we've been doing and what we plan to do to help on just to get in the maps and so forth almost ninety thousand dollars so again in the height eighty's of not ninety thousand dollars and we know the village is nowhere near that and then the one that the role the development uses it's based on the two thousand and ten cen at a town wide median household income which is around seventy two thousand a year and then it recognizes what's called a census designated place or c d p of the village which if you overlay or lines if it's a match up and that is forty one of the outs and you get which if you look at those numbers and if you look at the kind of the qualifying ratios we qualify for seventy five percent grant from rural development now qualify and get our very you fill it out and it's you don't even have your name on it it's it's like it's anonymous matching up it's only if we don't get enough response it's on the initial air out that there may be a follow up mailing or a follow up that's why i said it will flourish that starts with participation from the town given the information for each of those users as are each of the actual addresses for the water of yours that you  and the reason i mention that is because the funding is one if you would like to get some of it that funding nailed down as soon as possible to move forward and also from from my standpoint which summer to get it to get the project funding moving because the funding has and a yes but also that would also we also need to get the best president from experience for next summer for range for the x are off and what that means is that while the income survey is happening i mean it's a great deal anyway and it's a it's a better deal than going to the bond bank to get funding to answer but the results of the income survey will no help for probably a better rate term for that current context but worth but but we're first dan and that's really important because stand means means that we secure our place in line and it means that we secure our place and in that ranking of money of the grant money a principal subsidy because it's first and gets the principal subsidy so it really important that we get in and you know there's plenty of systems who want the money  that's why we have polite items that we have so kendall has a twenty five thousand dollars a year might have for water lines and then we also have to reserve funds that we've made sure that we've reinstated to make sure that where that we're protecting ourselves from a tough winter and then we're able to save a little so that maybe we can replace that section like we did with people like we did with brown scored so that we can replace those short sections with the money that we're saving that's why the that's my contributions to the reserve funds are so critical and cuddle has badgered us and not reducing those every time we go to try to cut the budget to save on rate is is that's why we have it there  bad winters but to be clearly very good for the the difficulty elements is you can't replace everything at once because it will cost you millions of dollars so you can't afford millions of dollars so i think can do it folks historically have done or a good job trying to balance what we replace with based on the repair process friel thier problems so it's an ongoing problem i would also observe this is a national problem it's not unique to richmond affected positively or negatively by the forthcoming rape her so do we have details partly for the minutes and the audience sort of time so it's going to be i think we should probably do it over the at that meeting and we get new members at that meeting yes it will have it will have an opening for line one citizen so if anybody's interested in serving we can explain there wasn't only there was a problem with the sprinkler system doesn't appear that water ran through the sprinkler system but there was an air compressor issue so all four is a leak so if they can't prove a leak i mean i can think of a variety explanations we want or can be used inside a building youth or my pick of omission or commission that we can't this is this is just the tenants perspective but the difference in readings between the meter reader and the outside of the meter itself that was with that was to me the most this can so all of our meter is have period of time with all independently have taken action to crease their uses but this is about a bit shipman's right and i think we just did larry and an awfully take an average of the previous three years usage and apply it to tennis with it with great design it was not quite ready for prime time for this meeting but it should be by the next one and it will go out all the hours of the commission before the next meeting and i can sit down with everybody what your usage would be under the proposed new bridge structure based on last year's consumption that gives everybody and apples and oranges way to see what the what the impact of the useful i make most people just residential most residual people happy here and also restaurants happy are the people that are not going to be happy are those the multifamily buildings that are master meter that are going to be affected by each unit being being built separately as as this commission was decided with lots of positive input from the public so there is no way to make everybody happy but connection so so if the building has five residential units in it five apartments it'll be five on that one meter now as opposed to whatever there you are you end up being the three could be ten but don't think that i to be honest if you have the time to commit to the water to mission in addition to this so i will probably unless we really actually talk cherry i know but i guess what i'm throwing in here is to oppose  say i am opposed excellent they are the official newspapers ok so we should appoint liaison's everyone has the list in front of them and  against those expectations and we haven't done that concerns me was there there has was a couple times where we asked for a quick legal opinion and and got it and probably the case that when ask request yes yes ok then the windows were covered in the early eighty's with plexiglass covering that's on there now and it you see it's all turned clouded in yellow and underneath the and i certainly appreciate that as a town resource and it's not supporting a specific religion it needs to preserve the conservation and you know how many times that you are on the way to that conservation commission has given money to that the rest of us are made plus individual contributions if we keep working at this the way we have so far since the beginning of year it's possible that we would be able to do this late summer early fall provide as well so i asked her to join us we did put provide a significant amount of financial information so i think it's pretty obvious and clear that the project really can't afford to pay back the loan without a significant increase in rents so that's the reason for the request to the different brenda could maybe talk a little bit about the history of you know fifteen years ago and what  heat source it was extremely expensive and i think especially through that period of time we will cross directly and it contributed to high vacancy rates folks who moved in to take it for the rent but then they'd live through a winter and the heat costs were so was going to end with quest is if you would be willing to do a five year deferral moving ahead for people to continue the deferral for five years and then over that five year period you can commit to looking at other options for the property  looking at other options perhaps for refinancing that debt for a longer term right now there is just that one hundred percent and see if i suppose if we could reduce some other significant because we've had a significant increase in the water expense and insurance because we're now in a flood zone so those are two things that had increased while our occupancy has also increased which is great but you know if we can take a few years to look at it see if there is an opportunity for some why we're here again is i think what barbara's saying and what you resends we want to make sure that all of the expenses are covered and in theory this is an expense and and so there's been in durham for fifteen years an above the go there was deliver for all for another fifteen years is it's a cost of doing business and and if and if we need to phase it in then we need to the extent of the terms i think that that that's what we're saying is that this is still part of the cost of doing business cost of doing business transparency this this and this is this needs to be planned for and and i know i am and i'm a little uncomfortable with and i know i voted one way before but for the discussion causes people to rethink their position and and fifteen years is a long time to plan for this and not not planning for it for fifteen years troubles me you know we're we're we're dealing with a lot of deferred maintenance and  places and in our community you know as you are now having to make sure that we're paying for and i think this is just this is another thing that you know you guys in the community that are having to plan for that deferred maintenance or the not planning members are that such that it would be an increase in rent of two hundred sixty four dollars per unit per month so first of all it's not allowable because of the other restrictions on the property but also  the folks who are living there the other way to look at this housing risk that the the money this got real money that came through the state and it's specific lee for the development of affordable housing in communities this is served as an asset for the community for the last fifteen years and that's that's what that money is for is to provide affordable housing in communities that don't have other affordable housing in particular i will  defer this for fifteen years to continuing to defer this for fifteen years i'm not sure how this became a referendum on sharon housing trusts ability to finance this project the way i look at it is they've actually got a great shot of taking this from something that was clearly not affordable that people were leaving and putting us into putting the project in the one hundred percent occupancy and on the path to sustainability when i look at their financials which have been called not transparent i disagree  they're very clear and it's very clear why they do what they do what this is about my opinion and i think this is how the board should look at it is this is an important project to the community community and do we want to continue the commitment we ma then there is also the other issue and as we have a draft here in a long run time is the as it was a loan down originally to then be reinvested back in the community and well today we don't have another project to reinvest and that's not saying in three years or five years or however fifty years there's not going to be another one but to have that to have that really be reinvested back in the community on an ongoing basis but also a future basis i think that's i think that's what you want to set to reopen this is that is that it was it was a commitment that these folks made to the community to full yes to invest in the community and  this money that we could be using to reinvest in a similar project i think that's the that's the question that i had to get coming back around it was that this was a well i think it would take us you know really i don't see how it looks like there's money in the project on paper but it would be great for you to sit down with our asset manager and and go into more details with the questions i think that would be very fruitful rule no money coming out of this development through the years and say i don't think a year would be enough time for us to figure out some other financing mechanism basically that would be the options we'd have to look at is there some other place where we can get a longer term we would probably still need to the zero percent interest so that we can pay you guys off and then we would you know for for a period of how many years so we have until april eighteenth to be able to decide how to proceed we can either contract with the agency or order our employees in house to your assessing my recommendation is for the first year at least that we do a we will now talk about cell towers go back to we go through a period probably the another three thousand dollars on top of that we spent eighteen thousand dollars already on our total totally legal expenses for the year we had a budget of one thousand five hundred so we  spent already by eleven thousand dollars we do have about getting three hundred dollars left on the plane and we will budget again i think that we get a hearing for the tell and be another three thousand dollars and minimum issue and the fact that the public services were considers the towers individually and collectively and so on on the merits of each individually they they are blinders on and it's it's really challenging in the g you're going to have this form in this i'm going to give c n n asks whether or not you know whether you decide to spend more money than we have be it would be not ones for us to support something that there is such especially political opposition to i will tell you that we haven't even got me on occasion so because because they were holding off on actually submitting them until this meeting so that's why we haven't even seen that that's why we haven't seen anything to something it's because there wasn't anything for us to start with the only one that i remember was the for for burd n and that we did say yes we supported we didn't sound well i remember a scene you said you had no objection ok so i remember seeing the application on that one but that's an existing silo so we haven't seen anything to make any formal determination yet but i would i would echo press and say that i would i would not be supportive of signing it but then i certainly hope you're right yet because everything that we've heard does before we move on to other topics and to hear from the board is anyone else want to comment tonight ok we're going to we need to make a decision to make a decision precedent of breaking the cell towers up a separate projects and asking for legal opinions before we take big steps yeah i think that the board in this is making a decision to so the money goes quick and they measure trips and one way trip so if somebody goes there back it's like one hundred fifty four hundred forty dollars so it's two one way trips yeah so it's very expensive so the recommendation is to continue the policy just very tedious because i'm taking roland emmerich data and i have to populate individual cells and it just takes forever if i can't get it to work the way i want it to so i'm still working on it  right now so this is for the fiscal year fifteen trucks and this is with the same as with the police cruiser we preorder the police cruiser because somebody else has to build it and has to come in and we take delivery in july and we charo boy jamie and clerks and clerks with a low bid and that was both for the body in the truck truck the cabin chances looks like big one or caterpillar kind of run of the mill that never started uses the problems which could be very expensive seven years from now we did have i think this truck in particular that we're getting rid of which is the eight here a truck i think last year we did know to order by  you know pete said that they're on the cusp of being able to live or in july or august their next meeting is in three weeks so it may be august before they get to the truck jeff if you want to go then there are a number of people there on the state it sure uses the state a bit but they're not named to the state for some reason here is able to get all major little bit more prepared things will go a little bit better and we'll work hard all right so the next item on the agenda is to discuss this in a verse the town of richmond is there a motion to enter executive