meeting for january the first item on the agenda actually i believe is a public hearing for our budget which we're required to do every year about this time so i do not see any members of the public unless my missing someone you know ok so if someone comes in absolutely we will allow them to questions and and anything like that so ok next item i believe  ok i didn't think it was like the minister was open so ok so we have one additional item on the agenda for executive session so the next item i believe is the minutes so do we have a move the minutes of the as you can see from the memo we have not closed december entirely so december is still a bit in flux the staff is doing great works in the middle of switching to a are where your cash investments are the big note is that we're starting to move the money out of morgan stanley is required to do an into the peoples and the nice thing about that is we move from getting point three percent  nt three percent interest on our regular deposit to one point eight percent on all of our money so our interest is really doing well and we're beginning to that's looking much better than it has so i'm pretty pleased with that what you should know about this ember is i haven't because i haven't closed it we haven't moved the money from the operating back into the fir there will be a transfer there so that that will change we more money in the fur and less money in the operating reserve when that that work is ongoing and it's been amazing the dramatic amount of time that has been saved in going to electronic time sheet system so everyone has adapted to that very very well and it's been very smooth approved to bring to the full board fairly minor the motion does know the date says fact of january third twenty third so we would change that to today if approved we wanted to clarify the personal appearance of employees section and just give some more direction for employees of when they're required to wear either uniforms or for example the outreach folks have shirts they would you wear when meeting with the public potentially whereas drop off center folks would have high visit and they would be required to wear them all the time so we determined that the department directive would make the most sense so with that we can update that regularly also the safety plan and we just wanted to update that it's not a policy it's a living document it's a plan changes fairly regularly it is an append to seize of the personnel rules and regulations but would require each time to come back to the board so clarification on that as well as a few changes that josh s t r director of compliance had made and also the worker's comp section has been updated there were some duplicate wording in there and title changes so we're requesting that that be updated as part of their contract and what it does is it just provides a policy of what they can what's there to do a holler comes in with  material a lot of contamination in their in their recyclables and so it provides guidance on what what's done and so the changes to the policy include just rewording to clarify things a little bit better to modernize the language some of it was pretty for playing wage and to actually reflect what's being done at the market today as well as some see some slight changes in the policy itself and the most significant change that we incorporated was instead of the hauler who was dumping materials recyclables that were grossly contaminated having to pay a fee or remove them from them or they would now have the option to work with c s w d to identify the source of that contamination and remedy it and that is something that not only siesta staff wanted to see happen  we have a second second we do i don't have that for you tonight but we do keep track of it it's been let's see if we've seen an uptick recently in the last six months to a year and that's what sort of prompted our looking at the policy well i think i'm going to hollers are going back to where they can identify the people that are contaminating because they're occurring these fees and have been incurring these fees and either raising the price of our or or if there's a significant amount of moisture in the load it will get rejected and it's all or that provide word to cover the loads when it's snowing out except that's also up to the murphy operator and supervisor on the floor our goal is not to tag callers and to not have to reject loads you slightly wet and maybe on the border we can move something to the side maybe we can wait a little bit see the trays and try to run it so it gets soaked then that's clear the holler should know they get it they don't play it that pretty much material then he basically work with you to identify the source so the arm and money just to finish the question is my question is what happens with operator at the murph i think that that we can work with this hall or to identify the source then and then they give them options and then the holler would contact  i've seen this problem from the other in being a landlord and having tenants and having established a dumpster for garbage in a dumpster for recycling trying to teach the tenant what to put in which place and it never seems to work i did seem to find that if they had children who were instructed at school where staff those tended seemed to comply better but it is a problem of education at the family level and i'm not sure how that how the district can and the hoarders can get involved in those other the community clean up fine and the how we support green up day that directly support funding for cleaning up illegally or improperly dispose and then we have one fund that i oversee the container and project grants that is really more designed at prevention of waste and illegally or improperly disposed materials i've had several board members express a desire to do more in the way of prevention and asking and specifically sometimes about the community cleanup on can we apply those funds toward things that would prevent this illegal disposal and that's not what that fund is intended for so the point of this memo is just to make really explicit and clear the funding we're providing for cleaning up material that shouldn't have been littered or disposed the way they were versus the finding that we're providing to prevent that and also some of the inconsistent sees that i uncovered specific to green day fund and i can speak more about that in more detail if you'd like i've also realised in retrospect that one of the questions i posed to the board probably did not have adequate the first question i have is does the board want to can fit continue funding this funding it of these efforts at this level so as you see between community cleanup on grants and green up day donation and the waivers  for the f one thousand budget it's almost thirty thousand dollars and that's specifically targeting cleaning up material that shouldn't have been littered or disposed and then we have twenty five thousand dollars that we budgeted for prevention if the board feels that's appropriate then that's great all use that information going forward for the f y twenty budget season the second question is does the board support or is a board interested in changing that balance any and diverting any of the cleanup money that we're currently putting in to clean up the community cleanup fund grants or the way we support green up day some of that into more preventative types of programs such as maybe container in public areas such as for instance jericho use some funding to provide  trash and recycling station on the town green and at the cemetery efforts like that potential cameras or game cameras have been mentioned as something to put in place at illegal dump sites like where tires are dumb things so that you could actually see who's doing it and then the third question would be the partnering with social service agencies i put in there because we have had requests for potentially things like vouchers that sort of thing to provide assistance to people who are under financial hardship or have transportation limitations or disabilities and can't get their items or or afford to pay for their items like and then they end up potentially resettlement or something like that would be the potentially vetting agency since their expertise is in identifying need and verifying that we would not be involved and that we would partner with them protect the people are identified the population is identified we could potentially provide belters or something like that to enable proper recycling or disposal of these materials that are being improperly managed  currently you're looking for guidance from three areas first being do we want to continue the program that's correct seconding if we do do we want to change the balance for act or it is do we want to enter into a new initiative to potentially huge amount of money to you know to put towards these projects and hides birds i think did one other one a number of years ago that was similar where you know people were financially able to clean up in the property the town health officer determine the property was condemned or whatever and pretty much the case of this last one so as far as the talents played out fun i think we should certainly continue that program it's not i don't believe it to be a financial burden to the district and it does it does help these special circumstances as the funding  preventative things i think that that is a good idea because eventually if you don't do that then someone else has to pay for it and you know solid waste district is responsible for solid waste and shit in the county and we should take the lead  on pretty preventative measures iceberg has not had a huge problem with illegal dumping in the last few years but back in the maybe ten years ago we did have a big problem at our highway crew put up barriers and stuff so people could pull off to the side of the road in those areas and dump couches and refrigerators and tires and stuff because every year the town would go and have to clean that up and we'd have to pay for disposing of it so i think that those two areas are good  the third area about vouchers for low income people which is something i think that it would be better that each community handle case by case basis that would be my cause let me  we did use a small amount of community cleanup fund and it had to do with solid waste on a property that the homeowner did not have the means to clean up so the two things work together we didn't have to involve social services or communities or small everybody knows everybody i don't i don't think we need to go in another direction and honestly the amounts involved are so small relative to our budget i have no problem with the proposed amounts for for fiscal ninety five for the current year  i don't understand the green update issue what the what's the problem it's a ten thousand dollar thing is it something we need to deliberate here i me ask it this way is there anyone here a board that would like to see us get out of the community clean up under the prevention and stop those expe that much so well just to clarify for green update the reason that's included here is because it's inconsistently used for instance one of the issues we've had is we see something like three hundred times of tires come for instance town garages are hoarding their tires and they're bringing them in and then green up day you know we're finding those that disposal via our green up day fee waiver and that's ok if the board wants to find tire talum garage disposal that way but i would like it to be overt and known this is what we're funding this isn't tires down by the roadside  my concern is that if it's listed as tenant now why the roadside in included in that is stake the trans tires that they're collecting and bringing in that were paid for then that date is going to be seen somewhere down the road and oh my goodness look at all these tires that people are littering we should do something about that and it's not litter tires but that's how it's categorized because it's called green at that so those are some of my issues and we're the only solid waste management entity in the state that is donating to green day at their suggested rate and nobody else donates to green up day on behalf of their member towns except for the oil and that one hundred dollars town for twelve hundred dollars so is that if the board is fine with that then that's my direction but i just want to be clear this is what we're funding it with regards to greed of day and i'm happy to explore and just contact them and have a discussion about how are our funds that we're providing are being and that information being tracked to that screen one thing i can discuss the other separately outreach coordinator has been doing that every january and every about may in preparation for the end of the fiscal year for that cleanup fund we will be doing a better job on the waste reduction grants but i also suggest contacting the public works ok i experience as a boom town manager's been so busy i don't think he's communicated the availability of this to the public works director so i contact the public works director you know directly it's easy to do a more respons that works green up day last year we spent just under eleven thousand dollars and with the way through the action container project grants we spent about and just to be clear the cleanup fund as approved by the board is is not for preventative projects it's for cleaning up problem areas so that was one i've had two or three of them you know we can expand a little bit or go down a board member thinks it's a good thing to do and you know i mean i think it's it's worked well the past and i don't see any reason why we can't follow similar guidelines ok so i will doing noted and we will explain why we feel that what the board approved is is not what the member is requesting if that comes up you know i don't know the other way round oh ok concerned if they don't want to approve what a board member wants to have done i agree that a very so then the board would need to approve that the cleanup fund is is available for an expanded application is what i'm saying because under the current policy we're not allowed to use it for preventative projects that's all and there has been an uptick recently in the past few years of requests to do something different because there aren't those issues every year where there's an emergency in the town and needed to be used so what we're looking for is you know is there a sense though that we do want to be able to have some flexibility and to be able to expand the scope right now where it's restricted leslie so what kinds of requests have not met the criteria for  cleanup funds but we do need criteria for waste reduction project grants i mean somebody comes and say i want to use cleanup funds to do this and say no that's really waste reprieve have very clear scope under way and not so clear and they are so direct somebody is in the other thing i mean i personally have had projects inquire about produce and have been told  because of the strict parameters so i would appreciate flexibility that was like practically a year ago so i can't give you examples but because of the desired so when i believe i'm hearing is i can bring that can be cleaned up fund guyland back for revision in approval to expand the scope so that staff will feel comfortable and giving the commissioners full authority small fire within the fire house and they had a lot of material that they wanted to have to dispose of in order to clean it up and they wanted to use the cleanup funds town and the town of underhill and they have their own budget from the towns so that it's the financial support would have been in a civic manner helpful to them because they wouldn't have to use their own funding but in the end we didn't feel that it fit the criteria of the district it wasn't trash sitting by the th and i think this is this is the type of question you get into that when you say you want to work span that is to other requests is to who is the person or what is the group that's asking circling stances of of how the trash was accumulated and that leads you into a big open area and i see that as a problem i don't believe you're going to be able to quantify every possible scenario but i mean i think you're seeing the board would like some flexibility and the use of those communities and so i would suggest you take a look at it and bring it back at some point and not to dismantle i mean i just think that the towns are budgeted a certain allotment with the problem with allowing a little bit more discretion to  i mean you follow birch guidance with respect to the thing in jericho i mean i think the board member has a big role to play and i think that discussion with the board members key i think that's really great you have to do that subsidizing the low income this point must someone else have something to say add one other support of what we've seen is the occurrence of free dumpster days being funded in different neighborhoods that we were trying to address in part through this with a more targeted support so that the dumpster day would go away in wouldn't just be free for all where people are encouraged to get rid of whatever they have accumulating for free which is not in the district's mission that was the basic premise for you know maybe change over the years but that was the idea of setting it up and it's not a lot of money where we're discussing a lot of this it's just not a good budget  and are there any motions that anyone would like now with respect to the biosolids management service agreement be resolved that the board of commissioners authorizes the executive director to extend the existing residual management service agreement with a solo or again ex that was scheduled to end on thirty one january two thousand and eighteen to no later than twenty eight feb two thousand and nineteen and to adjust the start and end of the five year term of the accepted residual management service agreement to reflect the signature date discussion on that mo