Okay. We're recording. Okay. Good evening. It's December 5th, 2022. This is a regular meeting of the town council, but unusual in that after the call to order, we will go immediately into executive session. We will return to the regular meeting after the executive session at approximately 630. For counselors, you will be getting a new link to join the executive session. After I complete, somebody needs to work on their sound. After I complete the roll call. On November 7th, 2022, an act was signed into law which extends the suspension of certain provisions of the open meeting law. This allows us to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of the council physically present at a meeting location while providing the public with adequate alternative access to the meeting. This meeting is accessible in real time by Zoom, by phone when we're not in executive session in person and on Amherst Media. Given that we have a quorum of the council present, I'm calling the December 5th, 2022, town council meeting to order at, hold on, 533. I will call upon each counselor, and they will let me know that they can hear us and we can hear them, and then make sure you mute your mic after that. So we'll start with Shalini Balmilne, not present yet. Okay. Pat DeAngelis. President. President. Anna Devlin-Goth here. President. Lynn Griezmer is present. Mandy Jo Hanneke. President. Anika Lopes. President. Michelle Miller. President. Dorothy Pam. Here. Pam Rooney. President. Kathy Shane. Here. Andy Steinberg. President. Jennifer Taw. President. And Alicia Walker will be joining us, but she has not joined us yet. Can anybody see Shalini? No. Okay. There's no chat room for this meeting. If you have technical issues, please let Athena and me know. You need to use the raise hand button. And if we have technical difficulties, we will decide what to do at that time. So with that, again, I just want to remind you, you should, in your email now, have received an additional link. You're going to go off this link and you're going to go on that link. But before I do that, I have to make a motion, seek a second and take the vote. To convene an executive session in accordance with mass general law, Chapter 30A, S21A6, to consider the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property. The chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body. The town council will reconvene an open session at the conclusion of the executive session. Is there a second? Second, Devlin got here. Thank you. And I'm going to begin with Pat DeAngelis. Hi. Anna Devlin got here. Hi. Lynn Grieshmer is in the eye. Mandy Johanicki. Hi. Annika Lopes. Hi. Michelle Miller. Hi. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Hi. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Hi. Jennifer Tob. Hi. And Leisha Walker has still not joined us yet. Shalini is setting up. So I'm going to mark you as present. Shalini, can you tell me how you vote on going into executive session? Yes. Thank you. That does it for me. Okay. So there's going to be a sign. It'll go up on the screen so that people in Amherst media can see it on the screen.  Correct, Athena? Thank you. And Pam Rooney, please make sure your sound is working. Dorothy, can you hear us? Yes, I can hear you. Thank you. Alisha, can you hear us? Yes, I can. Thank you. Thank you. And Pam Rooney, can you hear us? Yes, I can now. Okay, great. Thank you. First of all, thank you for your patience and waiting for us to complete our executive session. We're going to proceed with the rest of our meeting and the next item is announcements. Next on the December 19th, we will do a state of the town address and the library and the schools will each make a brief presentation. We have upcoming council meetings of our committees going all the way up to the 15th of December. And let me just also mention we have Human Rights Day this Saturday, December 10th at 4.30 p.m. on the North Common and the first annual downtown Amherst Sip and Stroll and Makers Market at the Drake on Thursday, December 15th from five to nine. I also wish to congratulate the Community Safety Working Group upon receipt of the Gene Hagerty Award by Amherst Media, given in recognition for their dedication to advocacy, free speech, social justice and service. Since their work, Councilor Leisha Walker was co-chair of that group. We'd also like to congratulate Town Councilor and President and co-founder of Ancestral Bridges, Anika Loaves and Aileen Tierney, President of Cune Riddle, architects for being recognized by Business West as two women of impact and they will be honored this Thursday. And now the moment you've all been waiting for, general public comment. Let me just mention to the entire room that there are 21 people who are logged on as panelists. There are 35 people in attendance on Zoom. And I'm looking out over the audience and I'm gonna estimate there's another 25 to 30 people who are sitting with us in the town room. So with that, we're going to do public comment the way we have most recently. And that is Athena is going to either call on people whose hands are up on Zoom or call on people who have registered with Athena because you're in the room and you would like to speak and she'll alternate between that. So what I need now is for those people who are on Zoom who would like to make public comment to please raise your hand. I might also mention this is the only public comment this evening. There will be no other specific public comment. So there may be comments about a variety of different issues, not just one. And right now I'm seeing 11 people in the Zoom and Athena, how many do you have? You have seven that are registered. Why don't you begin? Okay. Okay, the first person is Stephanie Hawkman. Before we start, I'm sorry, Stephanie. There is a clock up here. We've tried to make it large enough so that people see it. We would love for you to keep your comments to less than three minutes if possible because of the number of comments we have tonight. So Stephanie, you can come up to the microphone. Please say your name and address before you begin your comment. Thank you. Sure. Hi, Stephanie Hawkman. I'm a Palin, Massachusetts resident, mother of two high school student athletes, 10th and 11th grade, and the treasurer for the Amherst Hurricane Athletic Boosters. As most of you on the council know, I emailed earlier a presentation that I wanted you to have an opportunity to look through. And as promised, I brought show and tell and I will leave it up here if that's okay. But I did wanna quickly go through what we plan for as far as fundraising. The boosters have always focused on safety, safety physically, mentally and emotionally for our student athletes and members of our community. And when we looked at all the options, we found something that balanced that approach. We found an eco-friendly, environmentally friendly and player-friendly option. From top to bottom, this is an option that is friendly for our players and friendly for our environment. So maybe I'll just kinda start and go through it from the top to the bottom. Here's the bottom. It is a shock pad. It is made of recycled turf. 80% of it is recycled material. It's made with no water. Okay. This is what is on the base after they level it out and put some rocks down. Okay. It is cradle to cradle certified, made in the United States. Excellent for performance, breeze and thaw resistant and has superior drainage rating. On top of that, we're gonna put sand. I'm not gonna really go through that because we all walk on the beach every once in a while but it's just sand. The next layer is called geofill. Please take the opportunity to unzip this. It is coconut fibers. They match together in a matrix that keeps the sand down and keeps the infill from flying up. It's all natural. It's sourced from India or Sri Lanka. Again, coconut fibers, all natural. No crumb rubber. Everything that we are seeing in the sites that you've been cited, all are talking about crumb rubber, crumb rubber. We will not be using that. And then lastly is the turf itself. The back is called Legion turf. Doesn't really matter other than it is a mix of mono microfill and a blended type turf that allows the grass to bloom over and keep the infill down. It also allows for a cooling effect. Between the geofill and this type of turf, it is the same temperature as normal grass. It keeps it 40% cooler than crumb rubber. Again, this is what we're talking about putting down. This is what we are raising for as boosters. This is what we're talking to donors about. It is not crumb rubber. And we have balanced the eco-friendly, player-friendly option to what are possible problems with the other type of turf. Please vote yes to reallocate the free cash. Thank you. Thank you for your comments and your demonstration. We ask that you not publicly demonstrate. Thank you. Just it's kind of our council rules. Athena. Next is Diana Carpinone. Please say your name and address before you begin. My name's Diana Carpinone. I'm actually in Dover, New Hampshire. I'm the president of non-toxic communities, a national nonprofit that focuses on eliminating pollution from landscaping practices. We've been in touch with members of your community. I'm here to encourage you to choose the option of grass fields for Amherst. The New England community that I live in has learned through firsthand experience with synthetic fields that you must question and verify every single claim made by engineering consultants and manufacturers who have a vested interest in selling a lucrative product. Be aware of anyone telling you that just a little more plastic, PFAS, or other pollutant is okay to add to your community in perpetuity, especially when there is an alternative available. The city of Portsmouth, New Hampshire was once promised a certified PFAS-free synthetic field. What we were promised was not delivered. Portsmouth residents were assured on public record by the engineering consultants, Weston and Sampson, and manufacturers, FieldTurf, that the field we would be getting installed would be PFAS-free. The council narrowly voted five to four to install a new synthetic field based in part on this promise that was included in the bid criteria, but without requiring comprehensive testing. This was a mistake. Eventually the city council, despite objections from the engineering consultants, unanimously voted to have more comprehensive testing performed on new samples of the field components. We also received an admission from the manufacturer that they use a PFAS polymer to produce the plastic carpet. The city's test results came back with numerous known and unknown PFAS present in all parts of the field. So now we have a synthetic turf field with leachable PFAS compounds sitting on top of a regional stormwater treatment system that flows directly into our watershed. As you may imagine, this is very worrisome for a community that cannot afford another drop of PFAS in our environment or in the bodies of our residents. We now face looming questions of contamination and liability. The nonprofit I co-founded is a member of the Harvard Planetary Health Alliance. Planetary Health is defined as a concept that encourages evidence-based policies to promote human health and prosperity while preserving the environment that allows us to thrive. Human health and ecosystem health are inextricably linked. We value athletics programs and their important benefit to the community while also recognizing the need to act now to preserve a livable planet for future generations. The choices we make in our landscapes can be part of the solution to move us toward that goal or they can contribute to the factors causing our current climate and biodiversity crisis. If we don't quickly avert the course we're on, we can expect more severe local and global repercussions that we've already begun to see. In the case of athletic fields, it's easy to avoid the use of plastic and other contaminants because a proven safe and durable alternative is already available to us. Unlike artificial turf, natural grass fields are green space and as such an extension of our ecosystem. We need you to wrap up please. Oh, I'm just about finished. They do not contain microplastics, release potent greenhouse gases, bioaccumulative PFAS compounds nor do they need toxic chemicals to be safe and playable. With proper installation, organic management and a policy for best practices and maintenance, grass has numerous benefits to players in the planet. I urge you to vote for natural grass. Thank you. We're going back to the audience. Next is Caitlin Woods. Please say your name and your address when you, before you begin your public. Thank you. Hi, my name is Caitlin Woods. I'm a resident of Shootsbury, Mouse. I live at 79 Lake. You wrote and I'm also a parent of a student who goes to school in the Amherst and plays cross country. I'm also a science teacher. So I should probably also start by prefacing this by saying, well, I hear what the previous person was just saying and that's what they may have done. And I'm sorry that that happened. You had a bad experience with that in New Hampshire. I know that Amherst has done their research and I really appreciate all the effort that's gone into that. I think that there is a multitude of reasons why I think that this absolutely should be put through. For one, it's a safety concern. And I think that goes without saying safety is a big concern of mine, not just for me, but for everyone who uses it, including not only obviously the students because we don't want to see injuries happening, but even for parents, families that attend these things, the track and field that we have right now, quite frankly, needs to be addressed. It's not safe. And that's not even just in terms of like compliance with ADA and so on. But I worry about, for instance, my son who's got a very bright future ahead, he's an honor student. He's just started doing cross country and loves it. And it's quite frankly, it's also a little bit embarrassing when you go to other schools, knowing what Ann Horst's town reputation is, you look at our track and field and you look at some of these other schools that they compete at. Harrison's facilities, because I know that we have higher standards than that. And more importantly, we have the capability to address this as it should be, environmentally and otherwise. So my vote is not just for my son, but for all the children that use that field and the families that go there. And quite frankly, it reflects on the town. It would also be a source of revenue.  But I wanted to give my voice as a parent and a science teacher. So trust me when I say environmentally, that is a huge, I've done environmental research before I talk. So I look into that thoroughly as well. But mostly I'm also speaking of all, all of the reasons why it should be a yes. And that's why I came tonight. And quite frankly, I could have just gone home and teach long day. And quite frankly, to be on a personal note, it's not exactly an easy thing to come here right now, considering my physical issues. But I did that because that is how important this is to me and it should be to everyone involved. That it's a definite yes vote. Thank you for joining us this evening. Thank you. Next is Jennifer Schau. Yeah, we can do it as well. Hi, my name is Jennifer Schau. My address is 291 Potline-Lamon Amherst. My comment tonight is about the length and timing of Amherst Town Council meetings. I certainly don't have to tell counselors that your meetings last for hours and often end after 10 p.m., 11 p.m. or even midnight. In my opinion, if a public meeting goes on after 10 p.m., 9 p.m. even, it is no longer accessible to the public, really. Having to stay up until late night hours in order to keep abreast of local government is the opposite of transparency. At your previous meeting, counselors were delighted to see so many young people attending the meeting. And yet how can we expect young people who have to get up and go to school in the morning, not alone adults who have to get up and go to the work in the morning, to attend meetings that end so late at night? If you wouldn't schedule a meeting that starts at 10 p.m., if you did that, you would be making it clear that you don't want anyone to attend. So having your meetings continue past 10 has the same impact. This practice discourages people from being involved and engaged and aware of your actions and discussions. It also discourages people from running for town council positions. I wanna say to individual town counselors, it doesn't have to be like this. You don't have to accept the meeting schedule, frequency, length and timing that has been laid out for you by town council leadership. You can figure out a way to have shorter meetings, meetings that don't run until late night hours and meetings that are truly open, transparent and available to the public. Thank you. Thank you for joining us, Athena. Next is Deb Leonard. Hi, my name is Deb Leonard. I live at 401 Old Farm Road in Amherst. And I wanna say I'm getting really tired of doing this kind of thing.  I have two older children who graduated from the high school having been student athletes in football, basketball, track and field and lacrosse. To me, this is entirely about process. Just like the school building project that wasn't really about grade configuration and the library project wasn't really about moving the garden, this is not about turf. It's about the fact that a handful of people can torpedo good projects by late stage beer mongering advocating for holding out unrealistic alternatives and actively undermining years of community, excuse me, community forums, consultation with experts and elected and appointed committee members. Personally, I trust the judgment of the athletic director. I trust the decisions made by the committee members who have been engaged in this project for many years. I know that noncommittee community members provided input at the appropriate time of public meetings. I know that if it were important to me to advocate for a certain perspective, there were many opportunities for that. I also know that my perspective doesn't always prevail. Counselors, don't give overly proportioned weight to the opinions of armchair quarterbacks. It would be bad for the student athletes. It would be bad for the spectators who come together to support their team and to engage with each other socially. It would be bad for the health of the town government and for future decisions. Athletes learn that sometimes officials make flawed calls because decisions are made quickly and officials can't see everything that goes on on the field. In the end, the official's primary task is to enforce the rules as best they can in order for the athletes to compete in a fair and safe manner. If withholding funding is truly based on issues of safety, where is the concern for the athletes who play every single away game on turf with the exception of long metal? And what is the financial commitment necessary to maintaining a grass field like the town of Longletta? Because here in Amherst, we have yet to commit to consistently mowing, nevermind otherwise maintaining the often rock hard and always dangerously uneven grass fields that we currently have. What is fair? What is safe? And what is the lesson from your decision? Thank you for your work on behalf of all members of Amherst. Thank you for joining us, Jeff. Next is Vasu Devan Raghavan. Please go ahead. Hi, everyone. First off, thank you for everything you do. I'm Vasu and my address is 10 McIntosh Drive. I chair the Energy and Climate Action Company for the town. As ECAC, we've been charged to plan and prioritize cross-sector efforts and recommend programs and policies to the town. And our car plan is ambitious and so are some of the plans laid out by other towns in the state. I sent over ECAC's recommendation for town manager goals to Anna, who is our liaison. There are challenging yet achievable goals and it is meant to be that way considering that we need to, we need a persistent level of coordination between the town, ECAC and the community to meet our 2025 goals and beyond. And ECAC can and will step up to support these goals but I hope you can make them a priority for 2023. We have a very supportive community and I'm glad to see the engagement in the audience that we have today. And with our concrete goals, we will not have a direction. So thank you for your time. Thank you for joining us. Next is Pam Wright Kirk. Could you please repeat that into the mic? Sure, sorry. Pam, Rick Kirk, 102 Wildflower Drive, Amherst. Thank you. So I'll be brief. I just wanna simply lend my voice in support of the track and field turf field project. I'm sure you've heard all the arguments and support. And instead of repeating all of those, I'll just say that my three kids were and are athletes at Amherst High. And I see a lot of athletes here too. And we all know firsthand how dire the need is for a new and approved outdoor athletic facility which should include a turf field. Excuse me, I'm on the board of the boosters and I wanna give a shout of appreciation to the planning committee, including Stephanie and Mary, Mike, Morris, Vic Dawson, the school committee and so many others who work tirelessly to plan, research, secure funding, and so much more to keep this project moving forward. I hope this vote doesn't come down to the loudest or most organized voices. The student athletes, the school district, the whole community will benefit from this project. And I totally trust those planning for it will make the best and safest choices for a new track and turf field. Please vote to approve this project. Thank you for joining us. Next is Richard Farah. Good evening, everybody. My name is Rick Sarn. I'm here to speak about the field situation which has been at the center of town and regional school district politics of late. I've lived in this community my entire life and have played in coach sports in our fields for the better part of 40 years. I'm currently a science teacher at the middle school. I coach hockey and lacrosse for our schools and I served as the athletic director for the region from 2011 to 2019. I'm not here to try and convince anyone one way or another about the decision they should make concerning artificial versus natural planning services. There are benefits and drawbacks to both. I'm here to try and convince people to work together to do the best we can for our local students, athletes, and the greater community who utilize our recreational facilities. The reality is there are no good solutions for the situation we currently face with our recreation and athletic facilities in Amherst and on regional school district property. We've neglected our fields for 30 years. We'll increase the amount of time they are used substantially. I sat on the Amherst Recreation Working Group who completed the study and resulting report from Weston and Sampton which included a comprehensive three-stage plan for renovating our facilities at ARHS arms in the community field complex. I walked the track in the spring of 2012 with a consultant who told me our track was not able to be resurfaced and was not safe for competition. I watched thousands of athletes compete on playing surfaces that were not safe, accessible, or compliant with current regulations and standards for the sports that they were played on. I helped disabled students and family members to navigate a way to watch their friends and family compete. What has happened as a result of these experiences? Absolutely nothing. We now have two sides we're arguing about whether one, I state one of our fields should be made out of artificial or natural grass. People are so passionate about their stance on this that they'll demean each other. They completely inaccurate statements about one thing or another and generally act like some of the kids were supposedly doing this for. I've heard over and over again about how we're the only town with artificial turf. This is not true. There are many. I recently read an email that stated 80 rich ferrule literally dumped chemical fertilizers on the fields in a test attempt to make them better. Also not true. I've heard people talk about crumb rubber that will be used and how bad it is, never part of the plan. There have been statements made about how we can't afford to renovate and maintain good grass fields, completely inaccurate. The list goes on and on from both sides. A little bit of history from my perspective and I'll try to keep it short. So maybe we can actually move forward and do something for the people who utilize these fields. We stopped using true green in 2013 on our fields for fertilizer because it was not working well. We don't need to go down that road again. Adam Feldman and I, who works for the DPW, we utilized for about two years a system of using compost, punching our fields to improve drainage and they were probably the best they had been in years. Unfortunately, with the minimal budget that he or I were provided to deal with our fields, I literally spent probably less than $10,000 a year on maintenance of our fields if you go outside of what the actual labor was. And I know the budget for the DPW in terms of field maintenance is not much more for actual things. The equipment that we currently use. Richard, we need you to wind up, please. I will wind up in a second. The equipment that is currently used to work on our fields, a roller, things like that are completely out of date. So I would totally support a safe artificial turf field that minimizes potential for harm and people who use it in the environment where it exists that would help our situation, but not solve it. We need to support funding for our recreation facilities a level far beyond what we've done for several decades. We owe this to our kids and the families to support them. I implore you to action and fund this work to not just include the field we're debating about but all of our fields and facilities into the future. Thank you. Thank you for joining us, Dana. Next is Neil Cunniff. Hi, I'm Neil Cunniff. I'm an Amherst resident, seven poets corner, and I go to the high school here. You guys heard from me last meeting, so I'm talking for the people who couldn't be here today. My little sister, Kira, has a statement and I wanted to share it with you. So my name is Kira Cunniff. I'm an eighth grade student at Amherst Regional Middle School and a three sport athlete. On the topic of our current fields, I would like to point out last spring, I played lacrosse for the JV Girls team and the only time I got a serious head injury or any injury was at our home field. But the injuries that you can get from overworked fields aren't the only important factors. Because of the status of our school fields and the overall look to them, many families decide Amherst programs aren't best fit for them. Well, that's why a lot of people choose to bring their kids to private school. So these sport programs in middle school and early high school are starting to fade away with more people going to private school. I realized that some people at this meeting tonight might not even care about the sports in general, but I'd like to stress what they've done for me. Sports have given me a voice and an opportunity. They have guided me through the pandemic, anxiety and trauma with family health issues. I would not be the same person I am today without sports. Even though council members, you may not be affected personally with a new track and turf field, I will. So please take this opportunity. We are given to support Amherst students in the future of Amherst programs. Along with that, I just wanna say because of many families now deciding to bring their kids to private schools, she is right with the Amherst sports are dying. Baseball is a big, I play baseball and we've had teams with around 12, 15 kids and it's been falling off since then. So I just wanna really push forth the idea of we wanna bring this community together and I believe that a new track and field will actually help with that. Thank you. Thank you to both you and your sister for joining us. Next we have Dan Kaplan. Hello, my name is Dan Kaplan. I live at 88 Stage Coach Road down in South Amherst. I've been a resident of Amherst since 1994 and had two kids who went through Amherst High School as multi-season athletes. I am now the head of the Girls Ultimate Frisbee Program at the High School. For all the years that I've been involved in parenting, boostering and coaching, Amherst track, cross country and ultimate, there has been issues with playability of the fields of the high school. There have been tournaments canceled due to poorly drained fields, home games changed, two away games due to field conditions and many difficult moments of conflict between the teams and coaches that wanna use the fields and the hardworking staff who are trying to make these fields do what they just can't do. Last season in the course of a 14 week season, we were granted the opportunity to play exactly one game on the main field inside the track. The fields around the high school are built on poorly drained soils as are the fields around the Port River School and the fields of Plumbrook and Gropp Park. There's just no getting around that. One solution that has been broadly successful has been to use a targeting amount of artificial turf to help the grass fields meet the needs of the athletic endeavors. That's why Amherst College and UMass have really nice turf fields and won't let anyone rent them. This one turf field would be an incredible boon to the athletic program at the high school or our sport and so many other sports that use all the fields and for the town recreation department in general. This field will be able to be used in all weather conditions relieving pressure on all the other fields to be able to make them more usable when they are needed. In addition, a new turf field in the inside of the track could be an additional source of revenue for the town in addition to being a coach. I'm also an organizer for Valley Ultimate, a nonprofit based in Northampton and ran a league this past fall at Port River School with 100 players. It was the only field in town that had lights and was available to rent. The field was very wet and after a minor rain event was basically unplayable. I estimate we could fill three nights of league play with 300 people participating each week renting the fields by the hour. I hope the council realizes the benefits to the hundreds of athletes every year who will benefit from the wise allocation of these available town resources. At a time of contraction both for sports and youth socialization in general, youth engagement in sports represent an investment that pays dividends long into the future. Thank you very much. Thank you for joining us. Next is Mike Isabelle. Good evening. Mike Isabelle, seven, Cadwell Street in Pelham. 1992 graduate of Amherst High School. I have played, excuse me, on the Amherst fields. I was just thinking since about 1984 there hasn't been a year whether I wasn't playing or coaching on these fields. When you wanna talk about safety of grass over turf, properly maintained grass fields are safer than turf. You do not wanna know how much it costs to properly maintain an athletic field. I work at the university and I've taken care of all of the athletic fields at the university for 27 years. I can tell you everything there is to know about maintaining the turf and grass fields from fertilizer to aeration to top dressing to seating on a regular schedule. It is a race car of a project, okay? We aerate four times a year. We top dress four times a year and we seed twice a year.  I will say that grass fields maintained like that are going to be safer than your turf. Injury-wise, having, I won't say, it's a terrible system because of money. The fields are, they're neglected on a regular basis. There was a divot on the football field that happened the first game this year that is still there. We could go out and see it right now. Nobody maintains them on a regular basis. You can roll an ankle in this. I fixed it because my son plays out there. I have two children in the school system and both are athletes. They play volleyball and football and I am voting. I'm hoping you guys will vote for the turf fields. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. Next is Darcy Dumont. Can you hear me? We can, Darcy. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Darcy Dumont and I live in district five. Today the council is going to be discussing its commitment to climate action in both the town manager goals and in the FY24 budget guidance.  This year it became very clear that it's coming at us at a rate faster than was previously predicted. First, the town manager goals. We have very bold overall climate action goals that were adopted in 2019. In order to meet our 2025 and 2030 goals, a strong commitment to yearly progress needs to be made along with a plan outlining what will be done each year. I commend ECAC on their recommended goals which they sent Anna. They very much track the actions recommended by the Emmer's Climate Justice Alliance including the completion of the manager's 2022 goals. They also both request the implementation of a town contracted waste hauler system including universal curbside compost pickup. That goal needs not only to be after town council adoption, it needs not to be after town council adoption but to enable the staff to do the work needed to enable adoption and then implementation. So the hauler goal is supported by a wide array of town organizations and has been endorsed by the Board of Health. Regarding the format for the goals, I urge the council not to give away their power. Please retain a list of specific town manager goals under each main goal and evaluate each sub goal too. The balance of power in town is delicate and creating goals and then evaluating the town manager on them is the council's most meaningful power as elected. On the FY24 budget guidance letter, please make a strong affirmative statement of commitment to implementing the Climate Action Adaptation and Resilience Plan as stated in last year's letter. That seems to be missing. The FY23 letter mentioned climate action 19 times, the FY24 draft seven times. Please strike this sentence that's new in the FY24 budget that starts out. The town will likely need to forgo taking on some new efforts unless revenue neutral until we have the funds needed for the major building projects required work on rows and sidewalks, determine the long-term public safety plan and have the staff needed for the three public safety departments. To my knowledge, the council has never spoken on any prioritization among the seven policy priorities of climate, racial equity, affordable housing, the capital projects, public health and safety, et cetera. We can't sacrifice any of our policy areas that we have committed to. And lastly on artificial turf on behalf of the Amherst Climate Justice Alliance and Zero Waste Amherst, I urge you to vote for natural grass for the environment for zero waste and for the new normal. Thank you for joining us. Next is Shilpa Conniff. Good evening. My name is Shilpa Conniff. I'm at Seven Poets Corner.  I urge you guys today to please listen to what they're saying. These students, specifically four of my children have all played on that field. All four of them have gotten hurt on that field. One would be the youngest who's in eighth grade who got hurt the most last year. It is really important that the students who go to the school are safe. It's important to me as a parent, it's important to their coaches, it's important to their teammates, that everyone is safe. They want to see pride. They want to be able to be proud of what they can accomplish. Our programs are phenomenal programs. Our children are wonderful children. They bond, they become a family. Yes, I understand these chemicals are scary, but I ask you, do you have them in your homes? Do you use teflon pans? Do you have pizza boxes? The computers that we're using currently, they all contain those same chemicals. It doesn't make a difference. Yes, we can go lower. We presented an alternative and I appreciate the boosters doing all the hard work they have done. But I urge you to think about this and the students that are behind me currently will probably not see this field, but they are here for the future of our town, for the future students that will be hopefully using that field. I urge you to vote yes this evening. Thank you for joining us. Mary Claes is next. Hot, excuse me. Hi, I'm Mary Claes. I'm a resident of district five. The last couple of public meetings, I focused on equity and justice, but apparently I've learned something new about PFAS and the town of Amherst. We're tunnel vision on just that one aspect. I can't say much more than what many people have said here today. You're listening to a lot of longtime residents, some who have been here over 30 years, some who are alumni, some who are in this field maintenance themselves. And I think a lot of the message is we understand some of the complexities and difficulties with PFAS. We've done research, there's been committees. I particularly appreciate Deb Leonard talking about process and thinking about evaluating all the information. So my point today is gonna be, please look at your sources, ask who and what the mission motive and agenda is. You have a lot of people here who are advocating for the good of this community, not the community of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, not the community of Martha's Vineyard or Nantucket. You have a lot of people who have done a lot of work, invested a lot of money, time, effort because we care about our community. We care about the safety of our kids. But one thing I wanna really, really highlight is our school administrators. They have an extremely tough job. They have unfunded mandates. They're trying to keep these kids educated, safe and their hearts are in it and you're not listening to them. I apologize, but please listen to the people who are doing the best they can to help our public education students be safe. And athletics is a really important part of curriculum for all of the student athletes. You've heard from them specifically. So please listen and evaluate the sources. And I wanna give credit to Rich Farrow. I think he came out and also highlighted that. Just please look at everything. You have to balance everything. There's pros and cons to everything. So please don't compare Amherst to other communities. Please don't just listen to one factor. There's been a lot of hard work and effort put into this. We understand if we had all the resources available in our town, we would all choose the long meadow or the marble head or the Wilburham grass fields. But those come with cons as well. So I just want you to really support the option three, the reorientation of the track, the eight lane track and synthetic turf field. Thank you for your all your time. Thanks for joining us, Mary. Next is Mariah Luchin. My name is Mariah Luchin. I live at 137 Wendell Road in Cheatsbury. I'm a sophomore at Amherst Regional High School. I'm a member of the varsity soccer team and co-captain for the track team. I've been unable, unfortunate enough to have to train on unacceptable facilities. And I'm here tonight to ask that you support me and my teammates for a year round facilities that allow us to train and play competitively. First I want to talk is starting there in the varsity soccer team. Our grass fields, no matter how many days or months of resting rehabilitation, they may have their topography combined with one to two days of rain reverberate back to its treacherous condition. The DPW and other more knowledgeables can speak better than me to the upkeep needs. But it seems that no matter how hard they work, the fields in mother nature are consistently defeating them. We need opportunities to play in practice that all our friends and family can provide the, sorry, we need an opportunity to play and practice that our fields can provide the playing service we deserve. That's why we need the artificial turf field. Now as a member of the track and field team, I want a track where I can run races in front of my family and friends. I am not currently given the opportunity to feel supported by my community. I take time for my studies to borrow the track at Amherst College. When our team went to Western Mass, we could not host. We had to compete at Holyoke High School. Although some could travel, it's not the same as competing in front of a home crowd. Our team placed second, but I feel we could have done better if we had the support of our student body air and had facilities to practice consistently throughout the season. By the end of the season, I competed nationally. I don't like to talk about my accomplishments. That's not why I tell you this. I'm providing this information because I work hard to achieve my goals. It's not just about resurfacing the current commencement sixth lane track. Yes, that would help for practicing and maybe hosting some meets, but it does not allow Amherst to host regional or state championships. Our team deserves the opportunity to not only train on an eight lane track, but to have our classmates support us from the start. I love being a hurricane on the track and the soccer field. I want to be able to share my love of my sports and the accomplishments of my team with my friends, families and fellow students. Please vote to support financially and with your votes to reorient the track and field, install an eight lane track and install an artificial turf field that I can be proud hurricane and help my team bring pride to our school and community. I know this may have seemed repetitive and I'm sure you are aware of the conditions, but I'm speaking tonight in hopes it's more meaningful to you all, coming from an athlete who has to deal with this field and track first. Thank you. Amrita Rutter. Please go ahead and we need the clock Athena, thanks. Amrita. Amrita, you are unmuted. So I think you can go ahead. Let's go to another person. We'll come back. The next is public employees for environmental responsibility. Thank you so much. My name is Kyla Bennett. I am the science policy advisor for the national nonprofit public employees for environmental responsibility. I am located in Massachusetts. I live in East and Massachusetts. I am here tonight of my own volition. Nobody is paying me. I was one of the two scientists who discovered PFAS an artificial turf in 2019. And the reason I am here tonight in front of your city is not because I wanna make trouble for you but because I'm trying to help you not make the same mistake that my town and many others have. PFAS is an extremely dangerous chemical. In fact, in June of 2022, the US Environmental Protection Agency said that there is basically no safe level of at least two of these chemicals, PFOA and PFOS in drinking water. We have yet to find an artificial turf product that does not contain PFAS. We have scientists, myself included and a number of them at Notre Dame, Michigan State University, the Ecology Center out in Ann Arbor, Michigan, all over the country. We have tested dozens of samples of brand new artificial turf and we cannot find a brand that does not have PFAS. If you put artificial turf into your town, it will leach PFAS into your soil, into your groundwater and ultimately into your surface waters. You say that you want your athletes to be safe and have a good playing surface. Artificial turf is more dangerous than well-maintained natural grass. It is a huge problem for climate change. They are heat islands. They are not much cooler if you use cork nut or anything else. They're a little bit cooler but they're still much, much hotter than grass. I submitted a letter with two other scientists to you. I hope you get the chance to read it. These fields will emit carbon greenhouse gases and methane. They create heat islands. The PFAS will leach off. The state of Massachusetts is poised in 2023 to lower their limits. Right now they regulate six PFAS to the point of 20 parts per trillion. That number will probably come down. And what will happen is that eventually all of these towns that have artificial turf installations will have contaminated soils and waters and they will have to rip them out. You are setting yourself up for a huge liability in the future. I know because there are many, many towns now looking at this very problem when their water and their soil has become contaminated. I urge you to think very seriously about putting in organic natural grass. As one gentleman said tonight, it is safer when it's done well. There are several towns in Massachusetts, the town of Sharon, Concord, Wayland. They have all issued moratoriums on artificial turf because of PFAS. The city of Springfield uses natural organic grass. There are big city, everything is working out great. I really urge you to do some research by listening to the scientists who don't have a pony in this race and who really just want you to do the right thing for your citizens and your environment. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Andrew McDougall. Andrew McDougall, 75 Memorial Drive in Amherst. I spoke last time as well, I'll keep my comments brief. I think the only thing that has not been brought up today, which I think is really an important point and something that may be lost on the folks who are calling in from out of town is that we have a utilization problem that our fields are at 150% utilization. Replacing living grass with living grass leaves us at 150% utilization. We've heard about safety risks from the PFAS. There are safety risks from playing on living grass as well. We've heard of turn to ankles and so forth. If we really care about safety, and we're not willing to move forward with PFAS or artificial turf fields, we really need to start thinking about canceling sports programs. If you want to keep kids' safety paramount, that's the only way you can keep the field at 100% or less utilization. I'm in favor of moving towards artificial turf and I hope you are too. Thanks. Thank you for joining us. Next is Maura Keane. Hi, can you hear me? It's Artine, not Maura. Hi, Art. Thanks, Art. Hi. My name is Artine. I live in District 5 and I coached girls cross-country at the high school for 17 years. I'd like to share two brief paragraphs from a report from the Children's Environmental Health Center at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, written at the request of Maplewood Township in New Jersey and widely reported, including in Boston Globe and The Guardian. Here's the quote. We, the Children's Environmental Health Center of the ICANN School of Medicine at Mount Sinai strongly discourage the installation of artificial turf fields in Maplewood Township due to the uncertainty surrounding the safety of these products. As pediatricians, epidemiologists and laboratory scientists, recipients of numerous research grants from the National Institute of Health and host to one of 10 nationally funded pediatric environmental health specialty units, we receive frequent inquiries from concerned parents and physicians regarding the wide scale use of artificial turf surfaces on school grounds and in park properties. This led us to conduct a review of the risks and benefits of artificial playing surfaces during which we found significant gaps in the evidence supporting the safety of artificial turf products. Children and young adults are uniquely vulnerable to harmful exposure from artificial turf surfaces. This is due to a number of factors, including their unique physiology and behaviors, rapidly developing organ systems and immature detoxification mechanisms. Vulnerability persists through the teen years as the reproductive and nervous systems continue to develop beyond the first two decades of life. Children and young athletes breathe faster than adults at rest, putting them at greater risk for inhalation of chemicals that off gas from turf fields. What we see an end of quote, what we see around the country is towns contracting with scientific institutions to evaluate these risks, which has new data emerge, appear more alarming with each passing month. As of last year, 23 Massachusetts towns have asked for assistance in this matter from UMass Lowell's Toxic Use Reduction Institute. In Amherst, we would do well to follow their examples. The fact that you all are holding this vote tonight, prior to receiving the report from your own Board of Health, which will come out on Thursday, is not at all a good look. Thank you. Next is Madeleine Hawkman. Hi, I'm Madeleine Hawkman. I live at 61 Arnold Road in Pellum. I'm a current student athlete at Amherst High School. I'm a three-year starting varsity athlete on the girls' soccer team. I have watched my teammates come out of home games and practices with injuries that have taken players out for the season. I personally have come out of practices with swollen ankles along with teammates who have lost their entire season due to our fields. As you know, my soccer coach, Dawn Frazier, spoke at the last meeting. Besides him being dissatisfied with the outcome of the vote, I can say with full confidence he is mostly scared to lose more players to injuries. As he stated last meeting, to the poor conditions of our grass field, we ended up having to play 12 games in 24 days. That probably seems like a lot, doesn't it? Well, it's because it is. And to quickly touch on the emotional damage this can create to our student athletes that you all claim to care and want to support, I can say that the days that even the slightest bit of rain causes us to cancel practices or games. I go home unsatisfied and honestly very upset. I should be able to practice daily to improve my own skills and release my long day worth of stress. Me personally, along with several other athletes, I have talked to rely on our afterschool sports to release our mental stress. I take my sport very seriously as my goal is to play at the collegiate level. I was very close to going to private school next year where I can get the practice and fields everyone should be able to play on. I'm very, very fortunate to have the means to move to a private school unlike so many. So many student athletes in our school rely on our fields and our athletics to go to college on scholarships. I chose to stay due to the care and loyalty to my teams and with hope that you make the right decision and vote yes tonight. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. I'm just gonna be very clear. We have about 10 more people in the Zoom thing. I'm cutting it off at Charles Edwards and in the Zoom and I would really encourage people to go to two minutes if possible. Maria Kapicki. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you. Maria Kapicki, South Amherst. Briefly, I want to urge the council to make sure that the Hall of Reform moves forward and does not get tied up into any bureaucratic snafus and stumbling blocks. But I want to speak now about this debate. The students and coaches and everyone in town should be upset about the state of the fields. This has been something that has been a problem for a long time and has not been adequately addressed. But the fields that we're talking about installing that Western and Samson themselves are talking about installing for a grass surface are not going to be the same fields that you're playing on right now and having so many problems with. In addition, there's several other fields, not only at the region and on community fields and throughout town, several other grass fields that need to be better maintained. And that does take investment and that takes money and we should be doing that. The problems with artificial turf fields are not limited to the significant issues of PFAS and other chemicals. They're not limited to the injuries, the heat injuries, the orthopedic injuries, the skin injuries. We also have to deal with the fact that these products are not recyclable. They are going, these carpets are going to then be replaced every 10 years at significant cost to the tune of the lifetime costs of artificial turf fields, very much exceeding the cost of grass fields. And then you're going to give these recycled, these non-recyclable products to some other town for it to be their problem. So we need to maintain our fields. We need to spend that money. We need to maintain the grass fields aside from this tracking field. All the kids cannot play all the sports on one field. The town council has to make a commitment to repairing and maintaining properly all the fields at the region and in town. This is a false issue to say that what we have now versus an improved, well-draining, well-constructed grass field, that is absolutely not a rational comparison. We do need to fix this, but you need to do it right. And you need to do it without adding unnecessary risks that are involved with artificial turf fields. They're going to be gone in a few years. We don't want to be the ones that buy the last couple of artificial turf fields and cause these problems for our town and for the environment. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. Kristen Wargass. Again, I want to repeat that Charlie Edwards is the last person I'll be calling on. Hi, Lynn, it's Kristen Wargass and I'm at 680 Bay Road. I'm actually here with my 11-year-old son, Caitlin, who would like to read a statement. Is that okay? Please. Hi, my name is Caitlin Wargass and I'm 11 years old and play football and baseball. I'm speaking to you because I would like you to vote in favor of the turf fields and new track orientation. I attended the entire town council meeting on Tuesday the November the 22nd. The town council meeting was very frustrating for me because I feel that some of the town council members were not listening to our athletes and only focusing on environmental impact. In the meeting, they failed to recognize that there are other options other than rubber turf, such as what Tintas High School put in, which uses organic materials like renewable cork, coconut fibers, coconut, rice husks and walnut shells, which reduces the surface temperature by 20 degrees. I felt that some of the town council members didn't realize that a no vote means we get nothing but a resurfaced track. Did you know that all tracks contain SBR rubber, which produces heat and contains toxic chemicals? If we don't want a turf field, we should mind as well run on dirt or gravel. We will continue to not be able to host championship games, but also we can't even play on any of our field for a regular season game or practice due to field conditions during or after rain. This leaves all Amherst sports at a disadvantage. This causes some of our best athletes who can afford it to move to private schools. When I attended the town council meeting, I heard various people talk about grass field, which is simply not an option. If we were to put all grass fields in, it would run us well over 10 million dollars. If we were to put it in a turf field, all the sports could be played on the same field, which is a way more affordable option for our community. I'm in sixth grade and most of my classmates think that athletics are just as important to us as school. We are the voices you should be listening to. Thank you. Are we, we're just to the list now, right? Okay. Kristen Mello, please go ahead. Thank you so much. My name is Kristen Mello. I'm calling in from Westfield, Massachusetts, and you have most of my statement in an email from earlier today, but some of the information from earlier speakers has moved me to raise my hand. I wanted to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you, but to tell you that PFAS contamination from these fields occurs in three communities. The communities where they're manufactured because you ordered it, the community where you install it because you ordered it, and the community where it ends up getting disposed of later. And the first speaker said that the underlayment shock pad was made of recycled turf. And so in this case, and what prompted me to raise my hand, in this case, you are that third community where the material gets recycled and that is exceptionally dangerous. And I would not say yes to this without extensive testing and consulting with the people that know this the best. Part one, but part two, if out of character for me, I may speak about non-PFAS things for just one moment. Listening to your field, maintainers and your athletes, you have a stormwater problem. You don't have a field problem. You have a water problem and by replacing a grass field with a plastic surface that is labeled as impervious surface by the EPA, even though it infiltrates water, it is considered an impervious surface in the state of Massachusetts by the EPA. You are going to increase the amount of stormwater in that property dramatically. And so by trying to solve the problem, you're actually going to make it much worse and it's going to cost the taxpayers over and over and over again to fix it repeatedly when instead you could have made a vegetative buffer with wetland plants next to tan brook to mitigate that water and then recreate your grass fields, maintain them properly, reorient it north to south was a good idea because it'll get it off of your utility line. And if you ever had a sewer problem there, you would be able to dig it up without disturbing the fields. You can satisfy your community needs without polluting anybody, but if you install a plastic field here, you're going to have more water to move, dramatically more water. And I haven't heard that said yet tonight. And so that's why I raised my hand. I thank you for your time and I'm at your service if you need to speak with me. Thank you. Marisol Pierce Boniface. Hello, my name is Marisol Pierce Boniface and I am a Sunrise Amherst co-hub lead. I'd also like to point out in regards to accessibility that Amrit has not been able to speak due to technological difficulties. Oh gosh. We need you to speak into your microphone and actually mute it. Now you're unmuted again. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. I'm going to speak from a different device and raise my hand on my mother's phone as my computer is spotting. I should be raising my hand as Lisa Pierce Boniface. I see that. And so we're supposed to bring in Lisa Pierce Boniface. She's speaking from her mother's phone instead. Thanks. My name is Marisol Pierce Boniface. I'm a Sunrise Amherst co-hub lead. I would also like to point out in regards to accessibility of public comment that Amrit to Rudder, my co-hub lead that was having technological difficulties may not be able to speak due to the limited time and I would urge you to have further accessibility. Personally, while I've been listening to this meeting, I've been also having to do my history homework to juggle both things of schoolwork and listening to town council meetings at the same time. I'd like to speak to a letter Sunrise Amherst published in the Amherst Indy this morning, which says that Sunrise Amherst opposes the GOL proposal to remove specific climate action, affordable housing and racial equity priorities from town manager goals. Sunrise Amherst demand that the town sustain climate action and racial equity priorities in the town manager goals to be presented at the town council meeting right now. We denounce the suggestion by Councillor Haneke to disregard large sections of these fundamental priorities. The removal of mandates for climate action provides a direct message to our generation. We will not fight for this planet and our future. Climate change will be irreversible by 2030 that is eight years to fight for our generation, for future generations, our children and our grandchildren. In a time of unprecedented global warming, destruction of livelihoods and habitats, mass pollution and overall climate emergency, we must take action locally, statewide and federally. Actions locally matter. Holler reform is a critical local action we can take here and now. Priorities and town manager action matters. In light of the July 5th incident this summer, the establishment of Cress and the overall necessity of racial equity measures, we must put racial equity in action at the forefront of town manager goals. By deep prioritizing racial equity, we send our community a clear message that this does not matter to us. Lastly, the cost of Calcing Nationwide went up by over 14%. Amherst and already hot real estate market is even more prone to these price increases as out of state firms buy up affordable home internship opportunities. Moving affordable housing home internship and sheltering goals actively makes our town less welcoming to diverse families who will send their kids to school here, contribute to our tax base and oftentimes make a career within the municipal workforce. Counselors, please vote your conscious to uphold climate action, affordable housing and racial equity measures in the town manager goals. Uphold them for our generation. Uphold them for future generations and most importantly, uphold them for this community. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Zeke Taglas Rosenthal. Hello, I'm Zeke Taglas Rosenthal. I live at 133 North and East Street. I attend Amherst Regional High School and I've lived in Amherst for 16 years, which is as long as I can remember. I'd like to speak about the town manager goals and the upcoming year budget goals. I'd like to say that while you are elected officials and your responsibility is primarily to your constituents, you also have a responsibility to yourselves and to your family to do what is right, not only for the people in the town of Amherst, but for the people all over the state of Massachusetts and all over this country. And I think that it would be shameful for you and good for you to vote for an action that could harm this climate and primarily harm people of low income who do not live in Amherst. So I think that we as citizens of this great town Amherst who are in a very fortunate position is to be mindful of how our choices can affect those less fortunate than us. And so thank you and please vote to work hard to meet the admission school 2025. Thank you. Devine Moisten. Hello, my name is Devine Moisten. I'm a sophomore at Amherst Regional High School and also had three, two brothers and a parent that graduated from Amherst. I don't know, I want to talk about the horrible conditions of the field. Instead I would like to talk to you about the benefit of good fields. I play football and lacrosse. Lacrosse is no doubt my favorite sport. Lacrosse motivates me to do good in school. My mom, who I'm sure many of you know can always find me on the field. I'm usually one of the only or few of color players that play on the field. She looks for my dark legs because they're not a lot of kids of color on the field. This gives me and others advantage for athletic scholarships for college, which helps create an opportunity for so many other students who might not be able to go to college without athletic scholarships. I hope that you change your votes and vote yes tonight. If you're not, please commit to fixing the turf or putting down turf, please commit to fixing our fields. Thank you. Thank you, Devin. Julianne Hines, please go ahead. Good evening. My name is Julianne Hines. I am a resident of District 5. And I am here to speak to you today about our town budget guidelines. I recently read over what the finance committee has put forward in our budgeting guidelines for the FY 2024 budget year. And although vague, it concerned me that it appeared we were trying to put a pause on new initiatives in our budget instead of moving forward with a lot of these new initiatives and current things like keeping our fire department well staffed as well as continuing our Crest program are very important to me. However, it also noted that we have to prioritize our capital projects. And other public safety departments. And that concerned me to the extent that it seemed as though we were foregoing new capital and operating budget opportunities in favor of funding these other four main capital projects. I believe that we should not forget about smaller ticket items such as $40,000 in the tree planting fund, affordable home ownership opportunities and affordable housing, a DI center and youth center fully funding our CART plan, sustainability office staffing and solar over the ARHS and arms parking lots. I think that these issues despite being smaller ticket items will have much bigger impacts to our larger community as opposed to only focusing on our capital projects. I would encourage you to instead of solely focusing on our capital projects focus on all of these issues at the same time as much as possible even if that only means 50 grand this year and then another 50 grand the next year and moving it along like that as opposed to in one big lump sum. That will show the public that you're making meaningful progress on all of the town's goals rather than favoring some over others during the budgeting process. I urge you to get these funds from Amherst College from UMass in our pilot payments from our free cash reserves over $8 million at this point. So I would urge you to look elsewhere and at least expand our opportunities and possibilities to fund not everything at once but at least show our residents that you are working towards funding all of the goals rather than putting some before others. Seeing that I'm about out of time I will see the floor and appreciate you all staying for the night. Marcus Smith, please go ahead. Hi, yes, my name is Marcus Smith. I'm a district one resident. I just have a question for the council. Why do we keep investing in investigative committees? Because I have yet to hear anybody actually agree with the outcomes of these committees. I mean, we have had what a school building committee. We've had school fields committees. We've had all these committees to investigate things and have people come out with recommendations. And yet then at the 11th hour we have the usual Google research crew that turn up and just change things for us. So I would suggest then that instead of putting money into these committees, we actually put money into potentially like fiber internet so we can get better research. But obviously some people are having some issues because everything needs context, right? So everybody's been lording up Springfield and their organic grass. Well, I mean, everybody can have organic grass if they've also got an artificial surface to rely on when things rain and when fields are terrible. But I mean, nothing to say about that because a simple Google visit to Google Maps would have seen that for everybody. So thank you very much. And that's my comment. We have three more people and two more people that have had their hands up before I announced we were cutting it off. Camarita. Hello, can you guys hear me? Sorry about the technical difficulties. You can hear you. Thank you for joining us again. Amazing, thanks. Hello, I'm Amitra Redder and I'm a resident of district two and a junior at ARHS. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of Sunrise Amherst. Every year our town council sets goals for our town manager to complete in that given year. This year, one councilor suggested cutting most of the language in affordable housing, racial equity, community safety and climate action. We are opposed to the deprioritization of these goals. We demand that affordable housing, racial equity, community safety and climate action are included in the town manager goals for this year. The finance committee recommends that we don't push new climate justice and racial equity initiatives due to the lack of funding and the need to fund the four capital projects and long-term safety plans. Likely included in these are the CARP affordable housing projects and more funding of the Cres. Sunrise Amherst demands that CARP is prioritized. If it is not prioritized, we risk not meeting the 2025 CARP goals. We demand affordable housing and we demand the funding of the Cres program. Thank you all so much. Thank you. Hi, can you hear me? We can. Thank you. Hi, my name is Charlie Edwards. I'm a resident of Montague, but I have lived in Amherst for four years in the past. For the past six years, I've been the boys lacrosse head coach. I also coach in camps in town. The Amherst School District Mission Statement professes a commitment to high quality education that addresses the demands and opportunities of technology in our society. The fact that we have not had a field turf opportunity thus far to me is not living up to the opportunities of technology in our society. If you look at institutions such as Harvard, Deerfield, Amherst College, UMass all have multiple turfs within their institutions. And it's not consistent to demand that we're meeting these opportunities if we're not doing the same. One misconception I think would be that this one turf would not be shared. This would be a shared surface that would lessen the grass impact on grass on all of the other fields within our complex. If we have a single grass surface that cannot take the same shared impact of multiple programs using that surface. So there's been some views expressed that a single grass surface would be a silver bullet. It would not. It would take impact and be impacted more heavily than a field surface would. There are 10 turfs already in town. So I understand some of the, there's been some kind of intense language regarding safety to drinking water. If these concerns are to the degree that they're expressed, I think a resolution might be considering removing the 10 turfs that are in, apportion at least of the 10 turfs that are in town if these are that severe. I frankly don't share those views, but that might be a consideration. I also heard expressed that Springfield, Long Meadow and Wilburham do not have turf. All three communities do. I have played on turf within those communities and I have not heard any moves to remove them in the near future. Thank you for your time. Have a good evening. There are two additional people. One is identified as S and I will not call on somebody unless you have a much more fully identified name. So could you please add your name in? Shalini? Maybe we can explain to them how to do that. What if they don't know how to do that? How to change the name? Athena, can you explain to them how to change their name, please? Let's just ask them to state their name when they begin their comment. Other people have other names in the comment list. Please state your name. Can you hear me? We can. My name is Sam McLeod. For whatever reason, I'm unable to change it right now. I tried to and it stuck where it is. I just had a brief comment I spoke last week. I'm a member of the Community Depresivation Act committee chair, but I'm not speaking as that. Speaking as a parent with two kids, one who's currently in the high school active in sports. My comment and the reason I chose to spoke was listening to all the high school kids calling in. My comment from last week is on record, but I was moved to communicate to the counselors that they listened to the kids. Not all were in favor, but I don't know. It's very hard, or at least was for me when I was a kid to speak up in a public meeting as a high school kid or even some middle schooler kids here. I hope that the counselors will give weight to just how important the issues that they're talking about are. If anyone thinks back to their own lives at that age, it takes an awful lot to get somebody to speak publicly when they're a high school kid. So they obviously care quite a lot. My opinion is that the decision before the town council, certainly the track, it's about the kids and I hope that will be remembered. Thank you. Sam, thanks for joining us. That concludes public comment. Some counselors have expressed an interest in a very brief break, maximum three minutes. Back in and out. I'm not even gonna ask people to unmute or anything. Just take your break. We will be moving on to the consent agenda. We'll show that item up on the screen. And then after that, we will be moving directly to action items and the reconsideration of the November 21st, 2022 town council vote will come up at that time. Thank you. I really, for the sake of keeping the meeting, going would like people to return to their seats. As you return, please turn your video back on and we're going to get started. Okay, we're all back here. Michelle Anika, Michelle, video on Kathy. All right, the following items were selected because they were considered to be routine and it was reasonable to expect they would pass with no controversy. To remove an item, please say so after I make the original motion, but before it's seconded. The request to move an item does not require a second. Let me just point out the one item about 457 Main Street is only an item for referral. There will be a presentation later, but this just allows us to do the referral, okay? The motion is following to move following items in the printed motions they're under and approve those items as a single unit. 8D, referral to finance committee proposed purchase of real property 457 Main Street. 8I, authorization for town council president and finance committee chair to speak on behalf of the town council at the December 17th, 2022 for towns meeting. Is any questions or comments? Seeing none, is there a second? Second. Wait, didn't you miss, did you do the last one? I'm sorry. Yeah, you missed one. Oh, I'm sorry. 11A, we did not get the minutes completed in time for the meeting. So that has been struck from the consent agenda. Okay. Second. Devlin got here. Okay. Moving on, the vote. We'll start with Anna Devlin-Gothier. Yes. Lynn Griesmer is a yes. Mandy Johanke. Aye. Anika Lopes. Aye. Michelle Miller. Aye. Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Yes. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Aye. Jennifer Taub. Aye. Alicia Walker. Yes. Shanley Balmillan. Yes. Pat DeAngeles. Aye. Okay. We are now going on to action item 8A. It is reconsideration of the November 21st, 2022 town council vote. It's an appropriation and transfer order, FY23-05C, an order appropriating funds for a portion of the town of Amherst Capital Program, school track and field rehabilitation. Based on the submission of new information, I moved as a member of the non-provelling side to reconsider the town council's vote on November 21st, 2022 on this particular order. I also sought town council, town attorney's opinion, and she agreed that I had the opportunity to do that. In our meeting today, we have with us school superintendent, Dr. Mike Morris and Amherst Regional High School athletic director, Victoria Dawson. Together they composed a letter that we all received the day after last council meeting. And our town manager, Paul Bachmann, assistant town manager, Dave Zomek and finance director, Sean Mangano, I'm sure with some input from Guilford Mooring, we're able to respond to the extent possible to that letter and that information is also in your packet. The order of votes should we proceed down this path are the following. First, there will be a motion to reconsider. If you do not want to reconsider this, you vote no. If you want to reconsider this, you vote yes. If you disagree with the president's decision to put this on the agenda, you vote no because you don't want to reconsider it. If the vote to reconsider passes, there is then a motion on the floor and that is the motion for the transfer order of $900,000. At that, once that motion has been placed on the floor and seconded, there is an opportunity for amendments. I also want to point out that Councillor Miller has submitted a resolution around this very issue. It's in your packet. It was submitted earlier, it has since been revised and some recommendations and that resolution directly relates to this. That came under the item in your packet of the 48 hour rule and I've agreed that we will move it up and take it along with the items that I just mentioned. So as we move forward, I'd like to ask Superintendent Morris and athletic director Dawson whether you have any specific comments you would like to make at this time. Pardon me, was there a second on that motion, Lynn? Second, back it. Thank you. Second on what motion? Didn't you just make one to reconsider? You've read a motion. Okay, thank you. I read a motion. I didn't realize that. Is there a second on the motion to reconsider? Thank you. All right, with that, you have a question. I do have a question, Lynn. Are you making the motion to reconsider based on new information? Is that what is correct? And the new information is what we're about to hear. Yes, it is. Thank you. Okay. So Superintendent Morris and Victoria. Yeah, I think we can be quite brief, actually. So after the meeting, the last meeting that we attended at the town council, we heard significant feedback and input from town councilors who express an interest in using a natural grass field. And so I think I can speak, I'll start anyway, speaking for both Ms. Dawson, excuse me, and myself was that we wanted to actually make concrete what that would look like because these fields are a problem. These students are expressing not just their opinion, they're expressing their experience and the experience of all the other student athletes who have participated in our fields for years and years and years. And when we talk about safety, this is very much a real safety issue, our current fields. And so the words we use in our letter were commit. And I think what we would advocate for tonight is for the town council to commit. There are more than one way, there is more than one way to get to better playing surfaces. We are unchanged with our recommendation around artificial turf field. That said, with the town council, when numerous town council members expressed a preference for alternatives to that, and we tried to express what that would look like. And so that was really the genesis of the letter was that we feel this is an incredibly urgent situation that requires commitment. And we wanted to give based on town councilors' thoughts and views that were shared at that meeting what that would look like if they wanna oppose artificial turf, but still make a significant impact on this safety situation we currently have. And so we wanted to express that in writing in a formal manner. So the town council could consider an option B and option B. It's my opinion that there is no option C. Option C is to maintain fields that continue to have safety risks that have students not being able to practice, sometimes being able to practice and practicing on fields and playing on fields that the MIAA, our governing agency, continues to find unsafe on a regular basis. And so that was the information we wanted to share with the council so that you had up your consideration. I wanna thank all of you for all the work that you do and the careful consideration. These aren't easy decisions. It's not easy to make a commitment, but I believe that's what we're asking for. I wanna particularly express my appreciation for councillors Miller and councillor Steinberg who came to meet with Ms. Dawson and myself and councillor Miller who came to walk the fields with Ms. Dawson and myself in the last week. And so I said this to, I hope it's okay to say in public, but we may not come to total agreement on what to do, but I appreciate the level of commitment that I'm seeing in trying to explore the issue. But I think we are at the place where our students, rightfully, are demanding a level of commitment to solve the problem. And we wanted to share, we talked a lot about one way to solve the problem at the last meeting and we wanted to share a different way to solve the problem so that you all would have the information you need to make the commitment one way or the other. And then certainly if Victoria has anything she'd like to add. Victoria? Welcome. Yeah, I just second everything Dr. Morse just said and I also wanna give a shout out to all the students who said something in the room tonight and online. I think it's really big that they let their voices be heard and I really applaud them all. Okay, thank you. Pam, I was gonna ask the town manager and their team to speak to the memo that they gave us. Did you have a question that needs to be answered now or can that wait? I'd like to just clarify what we're, so is this considered the new information that we're actually dealing with? Yes. And so we listen to this before we talk about the motion on the floor. The motion on the floor is to reconsider. The motion to reconsider has to pass before we can even come to the original motion. Does that make sense, Pam? Not really. I'm sorry? Not really. Okay, let me explain it, try it again. The motion to reconsider is not a motion about the financial order. It's just a motion to basically say we as a council either agree or do not agree to reconsider the financial order. That has to either pass or fail. If it passes, then we go on to the actual financial order. And so right now, all we're doing is gathering information about the new information that was provided first by the letter and then by the response in the memo from town manager, Brockham and Sean Mengano and Dave Zomek. Thank you. So this motion has been made and seconded. Now we're discussing it. We're discussing the information that was new. That is all. Dorothy? You need to unmute. I was listening and then you confused me. To reconsider is not to reconsider the motion for the $900,000. To reconsider just means we'll reconsider period. Is that correct? That's correct. That is the first motion. And then we talk about the new information. Is that correct? That's what we're doing. Yes. Okay. And then what do we do? Then we're going to vote as to whether or not we're willing to reconsider based on the new information. And if you do not feel you want to reconsider based on the new information, you will vote no. And if you feel you- I'm not sure. I just, I really, truthfully, I can't quite figure out what that means. The motion is two seconds while I get it. So I just don't want to get into a trap where I'm voting for the order to be served. I want you to completely understand. So based on the submission of new information, I move as a member of the non-provelling side to reconsider the town council's vote of November 21, 2022 on the appropriation and transfer order FY23-05C and order appropriating funds for a portion of the town of Amherst capital program, school, track and field rehabilitation. So it's a motion right now. This is the part where we say, do you in fact feel we have new information? And after we get done sharing that new information, we will vote on this motion. If this motion fails, we're done with the conversation. If this motion passes, then we go on to read, to actually look at the motion that was on the floor two weeks ago.  That would be the discussion that would take place during the motion on the transfer order. Okay. Okay, I'm going to need some help here, but... All right, we'll work with you, Dorothy. Thank you. Not to worry. Um, so, um, actually at this point, Anna, do you have a question? I think I might be able to take a stab at explaining this. All right. All right, so last meeting we voted, we closed the box on the turf field issue, right? Box was closed. We are now voting whether or not to open the box up. Once we, if that vote passes, if enough people say yes to open the box up to reconsider the vote, then we can go inside the box and play around. Metaphors might help. So does that help, Dorothy, at all? So the new information is the reconsideration, right? To open the box up. I can't hear you. I don't know if you're muted. I just want to be sure that to vote to reconsider does not mean I'm voting yes. That's correct. That is correct. It just means we can talk about it again and vote on it again. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay, so I was at the point where I wanted to ask Town Manager Backelman and his team, if they would like to speak to the memo that you've provided us, that was written in response, predominantly to the letter from Superintendent Morris and Athletic Director Victoria Dawson, but also I do note there were some other questions that were submitted at one point, but time did not permit to, and information is not available to answer all of those questions, but they are in the packet. Thank you, Lynn. So we're not going to read the entire memo, but I will highlight, give you the highlights. So one of the first questions is, given the Town Council's decision at the last meeting, the Superintendent and Athletic Director asked the Council to commit to reserving all current and future CPA funding for installing grass fields at Amherst Regional High School until the urgent situation is resolved. What we point out in this is that the Town Council can only appropriate funds for projects recommended to it by the CPA committee. There's not a proposal to the CPA committee for a project that addresses all of the athletic fields used by the Regional School District. The FY24 CPA grant cycle is closed. There were eight, the town has about $2.4 million in CPA funds. It has received requests for $8.3 million. It's going to be very hard for the CPA committee to allocate funds without this on the table. And we get into a little more detail about how the CPA funds work and where the money is allocated. The second question or request was to commit immediately funding the design and development of high quality grass fields and to explore whether additional fields are needed to prevent continuation of the current overuse issues. And based on the 2019 field study from Western Samson, which was the Town's consultant, the estimated cost to replace all high school and middle school fields is between $10 and $12 million. This amount combines the cost for the different phases that cover all of the fields and assumes the reoriented track with a natural grass field interior. And this is a number that's been verified with Western Samson recently. So that's, we just did that last week, I believe. The construction of a brand new playing field would cost about $1 to $2 million depending on the current state of the terrain. The town does not have the capacity within its projected capital funding to add a project of this magnitude. The third was commit to replacing the requisite number of fields by 2026 so that all sports teams for all genders will have a safe, high quality playing surface that is usable at all times during both the fall and spring seasons. We don't have enough information to really evaluate this commitment that the superintendent and athletic director are asking the town to make. I think the next step on this would be for the regional school district to hire engineers to look into this. The next one was to commit to limiting community use of those fields so they can be maintained over time according to industry standards. Again, we look to a study to look at this. Amherst recreation uses the fields. We, the town DPW maintains the fields and the community beyond Amherst rec uses the fields as well. So that would be a significant policy decision if we are going to be closing fields to maintain their condition for usability for high school athletes. And then commit to funding the additional resource in need to maintain high quality grass fields by immediately increasing the number of DPW staff, members who maintain the fields so they can be adequately cared for before, during and after construction and increase a budget specifically for irrigation and other materials needed for field maintenance. And I think we heard some testimony tonight about the cost of maintaining high quality grass fields in the 30 to $35,000 range is what our consultant has estimated. There are nine fields surrounding the high school middle school and some are larger than others. This is an expense that would have to be included into the regional school district's budget. And lastly, it was committed to funding the high school athletics program to rent field space elsewhere during the construction of the grass fields when there will not be enough field space for current sports. We don't have enough information or options for this to really evaluate that for you. And I'd look for Sean, the finance director, Sean Mangano or Dave Zomac assistant town manager if you want to add anything to that. I think you covered it. Okay. So the motion that is on the floor is the motion to determine whether or not we're going to reconsider the vote from two weeks ago. That's the motion that's on the floor. It's been made and seconded. Getting into the decision about grass versus turf, et cetera is not part of this motion. All this motion is to determine whether or not we're going to have any further discussion. Are there any questions from counselors? Let me just be very clear. If you do not want to reconsider the vote from two weeks ago, you vote no. If you are open to reconsidering the discussion and the vote from two weeks ago, you vote yes. Anna Devlin-Gothier. Aye. Lynn Griezmer is an aye. Mandy Jo Hanneke. Aye. Anika Lopes. Aye. Michelle Miller. Aye. Dorothy Pam. No. Pam Rooney. No. Kathy Shane. Epstein. Andy Steinberg. Aye. Jennifer Tob. Aye. Alicia Walker. No. Shalini Balmille. Yes. Pat D'Angeles. Aye. The vote is nine in favor, three opposed and one abstention, no absence. So with that, we move to the actual motion. And the motion is to adopt appropriation and transfer order FY23-05C in order appropriating funds for a portion of the town of Amherst Capital Program, school track and field rehabilitation recommended by the finance committee on October 17th, 2022, and shown on page six of the November 21, 2022, draft memo sheet. That's a motion. Is there a second? Point of order. It's already on the table with the motion to reconsider. Thank you. It's already on the table and therefore seconded. Yeah. It goes right back to where it was before. All right. So, thank you. All right. The floor is open for discussion. Alicia Walker. I'm sorry. I have a question that is not necessarily pertaining to this motion, but I'm just wondering what constitutes new information. So like in what, I just don't understand how what was presented to us was something we didn't have before we made the vote last time. And so not like particularly pertaining to this decision itself, but for future reference, what constitutes new information for a decision to reconsider? In this case, it was the receipt of the letter from the superintendent of schools and the subsequent memo that gave the cost estimates. But not the actual content in those things, but just the fact that those documents themselves were newly formed. The content as well as the actual documents, yes, all of it constitutes new information. Even though the content and the numbers and all of those things we had prior to those documents being sent to us. We did not have a number prior and we did not have the ask about the CPA funds. And we have received a lot more information about the costs of those. But an ask about CPA funds is not necessarily new information. It's a question to be answered in terms of like process as to how CPA funding works and is allocated. I'm not sure if that's new information, rather than just sharing information that's already existing, because it's like a process question. And the numbers were given to us in the Weston and Samson report in 2019 with an escalation percentage, which can be used to calculate the exact number that was given to us in the memo from the town manager and the finance director. So Alicia, you voted no, which means you didn't agree to reconsider. However, your colleagues voted nine in favor of reconsideration. Yes. So I respect your question, but the real question that is now on the floor is the transfer order. Right, but I'm not asking in terms of like, I know the vote has already finished. I'm asking again for future reference because I'm not understanding what costs, like my fear is that then what stops anyone from reconsidering anything at any given time in the future? And so what constitutes new information to cause a reconsideration to happen? It's more of like a process question than anything else because I'm not asking, and like the vote has already happened. Okay. In this case, it was my judgment that the letter and the statement and the way the letter was stated and the information provided in the cost constituted new information. That's a judgment call. And then because that was questioned by one counselor, I submitted it to our town attorney and the town attorney's opinion is in the folder, is in the packet for tonight. Okay, thank you. Michelle. So the motion's on the floor, it's been made and seconded. Yeah, I'm going to move to amend the motion, but I just wanted to say that I was the counselor who asked for the legal opinion on that. And I would like to support Alicia's concerns to have a future conversation where we can maybe dig into that a little bit more for future votes. That's fine. So I am making a motion to amend the current motion on the floor and I can give you the exact language. Athena has it as well. I moved to amend the motion to add the number two and the word or after the word option in Perens. So with this amendment, the Perens would read option two or three in Western and Samson report dated February 11th, 2022. And Lynn, when you're ready for me to speak to this amendment. Could you put it up on the screen? We are going to put it on the screen. Athena is doing that immediately. So in up on top, you'll see in Perens, the word option and what has been added is two or three in Western and Samson report. Okay, the motion's been made. Is there a second? Shane seconds. Okay. So we now move to debating the motion to amend. Okay. Lynn, could I speak to the motion before we do that? Sure, please do. Okay, Michelle. And please bear with me. I'm gonna speak for a minute or so, maybe more. So as Lynn indicated, I submitted a resolution. So I am proposing two actions tonight, this amendment and a resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pelham Regional High School Athletic Complex, which is in the packet. While these two actions are not conditional on one another, they are complimentary, so I'll speak to them together. Before I do speak to the proposed amendment, I want to thank my colleague, Andy, for helping me to navigate this proposed amendment. Andy listened to my concerns and worked with the appropriate staff to ensure that what I wanted to propose was possible. He was a partner in this and I'm very grateful for that. So thank you, Andy. Since our last vote on this matter, I've taken some time to meet with Superintendent Morris and Athletic Director Dawson to understand the challenges and needs of our student athletes and school community. The morning after the big rain last week, I walked the fields with Dr. Morris and Victoria. There is zero question about the poor condition of the track and field and the need for the Regional School Committee and the town to take immediate action to remedy these conditions. I wholeheartedly understand why folks have been working so hard to remedy the poor conditions of the track and field and to make other positive changes to the athletic complex. As I wrote in my resolution, I want the Amherst Regional School Community and the Greater Amherst Community to benefit from a safe track and usable athletic fields, competitive athletic opportunities and a sense of pride in our schools and community. And many of us have significant concerns about the health and environmental safety of artificial turf and PFAS in our community. Sorry, excuse me. As I was reflecting this past week on the dilemma we are in as a community and as a council, I went back through old Regional School Committee meeting minutes to understand how it came to be that the town council was essentially being asked to make a decision on materials of which we are not experts for a single athletic field. The council doesn't make day-to-day decisions about these kinds of things. Our job, if we don't like that the town is installing PFAS products or that our firefighters are using suits that contain PFAS is to pass laws that prevent that. We as a town council can and should take legislative leadership and work with environmental coalitions and our legislative delegation to support actions that keep our community safe. These two actions, the resolution and this amendment if approved tonight, give our community a path forward. If approved, these actions give the Regional School Committee the funding they need to move forward immediately and the flexibility to reconsider all available options to remedy the poor conditions of the field while considering among other benefits and drawbacks the emerging science related to the health and environmental safety of PFAS and artificial turf. Adding option two to the order gives us a way forward without giving up the opportunity as a community to continue exploring the safest and most holistic way to do so. It also sends a message to our student athletes that we have their back. And I think we can all agree on that. Thank you. Thank you. Mandy Jo. I just wondered if the manager or the finance director could speak to if there's any ramifications to this amendment. We have looked at the, go ahead Sean. I can't see you so I didn't know if you were gonna speak. We're okay with the amendment. If the grass option was gonna be pursued it would have implications for the original data authorization and the CPA authorization but this is sort of a standalone separate free cash appropriation. So this can be amended however you see fit or with this, not however you see fit but with this proposal. It does have to be spent on track and field. Right. Can't just be $902,000. Can't change the purpose completely. Yeah. Can't do that. Are there other questions from the council? Jennifer. Are we in discussion? I'll wait till the. We are in discussion about the amendment to the motion. Well, yeah, I had actually prepared something which I will change a little now that we have motion but so should I just. Please go ahead. Okay. I did wanna say for everyone who's here and was here at the last meeting that this is the most difficult decision in vote I've had to make since joining the council. And while I fully support and recognize the need for an enlarged and reoriented track and new interior field, the original motion that was before us I felt provided the narrowest of options. It was an artificial turf field or no field at all. And I was open to rediscussing the motion because I don't think anyone left feeling like a winner after the last meeting. So while I applaud and appreciate the work of the regional school committee in, this is my personal opinion, installing a synthetic turf field in 2022 does feel very much like going against the tide as cities and towns across the country are adopting policies to halt the installation of environmentally hazardous synthetic fields as professional athletes vote opposition to artificial turf that places unnecessary strains and is unjoint some muscles and is likely to cause injuries. And as we better understand the high maintenance and replacement costs of synthetic turf as well as the environmental burden we bear when non biogradable fields reach the end of their life cycle. For these and many other public health and climate action concerns, I could not in good conscience vote to appropriate funds that can only be used for artificial turf without the option to use those funds for a new grass field and track. The financial cost of option three exceeds option two according to Weston and Samson's own figures the initial cost of installing an artificial turf field can be two to four times that of natural turf and the replacement costs can reach up to 75% of the initial investment. Looking at these numbers, I'm not convinced that the additional funds for artificial turf will be raised and I would like to have the option that Amherst $900,000 gift could be used for a new track and field using grass both because it may well prove to be the only feasible option as it is certainly the more environmentally responsible choice. So my vote in support of Councillor Miller's amendment would be made from the concern that the original option three only motion could, you know, might pass and I feel that that motion is too narrow and they ultimately be self-defeating if the funds aren't raised. Councillor Miller's motion allows a selection of a natural track, turf, track and field to remain an option. I did wanna add, I did wanna state this that at least half the correspondence that the council has received has been in opposition to the installation of artificial turf. So it's not a few naysayers. The vote at the last meeting, which was split reflects the split in the town and that's also part of what makes this a difficult decision, you know, a difficult vote and decision. I do hope the regional school committee will address these legitimate concerns of half the residents in our town by continuing to do its due diligence and consult with scientists and public health professionals. I urge the school committee to consult with the UMass School of Earth Sustainability and its grass turf management and science program as well as other districts in the Commonwealth that have opted for grass over synthetic turf and make the choice that best serves the longterm health and wellbeing of our community. Thank you. Jennifer, I totally value the emails we receive and the public comment, but it is not statistically a correct statement to say that it represents half the opinion of the town. Thank you, thank you. I just wanna be very statistically correct here, okay? Thank you. And that is not in any way a statement that, I mean, I was so overwhelmed. I have not answered everybody's email. I am so sorry, I will answer them at some point. Kathy. Thank you. I just wanna say a personal thank you to everyone who's in this room, who came last time as some of you know, I wasn't in the room, I was in on Zoom and I was in a, because my daughter had surgery. So I was participating, but not completely. But I think none of us are doubting that there's an urgent need to act. My son and daughter graduated in 1998 and 2002 and we didn't hear these stories then. They both played on these fields. So we've had fields that have been in need for help and have been deteriorating. When I voted last time, it was as Jennifer just said, we had only one field proposed to us. And when I looked at the Winston and Samson report, it's a million dollar more expensive to put that one field in the middle of the track than it would be to put in our grass field. And that million dollars could buy us field three, field four and the middle school fields based on Western Samson. So not necessarily the maintenance. I'm just saying that same report that seems to be our written document. So I think this amendment allows us a way to move forward. And I do want to point out for everyone in the room, Amherst is putting over $3 million on the table. If we count the 1.2 we did for the track, we, the community, CPAC money, Community Preservation Act money and this new, and this is really a gift. This is went on the, what line is this on? It's on the grants and other. So it's a town gift to the regional school system. So it's a lot of money and we need to use it well and really think of the options in front of us and proceed wisely. Williamstown just this year reconsidered artificial turf because the price tag came in much higher. And I just saw in tonight's manager report that the price tag is now at $5 to $6 million for again, one field. And I don't think we can play all of our sports on that one field. We need the other fields, whatever condition they're in. So I just think we should have a close look moving forward. Stormwater is a new issue that's come up and we've been viewing it all over town with if you put an imperial surface it runs off. So it makes potential adjacent fields worse than they already are. We need to be thinking about these issues. So I do support amending it and I won't list the concerns with artificial turf that everyone has raised but I will say from residents, I have people saying, think about the skin scrapes, muscle exhaustion and joint pain that some of the elite athletes are now reporting from only playing on turf, especially playing competitive games. We need a mix and I think we need to be moving forward with that in mind and I'll stop there. I will say if my son and daughter were still in the school I wouldn't want them playing competitive sports on artificial turf, maybe practice but I want them to be on grass. Thank you. Dorothy. Just asking for some clarification. We're talking about this one field in the center of the track and yet the discussion has made clear that one good grass field can in no way solve the problem. So my question is does Michelle's amendment include work on other fields? No, it doesn't. And we would have to do that in a subsequent motion. Is that correct? That is correct. And we would have to do that based on a direct proposal brought to us by the regional school district. Okay. All right. So let's just say I welcome such emotion. Thank you. Okay. The amendment. Thank you. Shalini. I have a lot of stuff to share but first I just want clarification that with the amended motion that Michelle has proposed like what additional information are we expecting to get other than we already had a consultant look at it. And so I mean, I'm just trying to get a clarification like are we saying we're gonna hire another consultant to look at alternatives? We already got a sense of what it would cost to if we didn't have the turf and to compensate for the overuse of the fields what it might look like. So we already have a sense of what the costs are gonna be. So what are we, what is the additional information we could get that would then allow us to choose between the second or third option? Shalini, what this motion does is gives the regional school district $900,000. And it says it can be spent either on option two or three and I might add that that's in a parentheses, okay? So it basically goes back to the school district. It is now their decision. And it's, we've said we give you $900,000 and the other money we've given you and here's a resolution about PFAS, but it goes back to the school district. This is the end of our discussion about it. Does it delay the process in any way for the regional school committee and so forth? No. Superintendent Morris, would you suggest you would like to speak to that? Yeah, and I would do wanna note that the vice chair of the regional school committee, Sarah Veskeny is here as well in the audience. So thank you for being here. I do not perceive that it, up to the regional school committee, how they manage it, but I don't see anything in the motion as I understand it that requires a slowdown of process unless a regional school committee would like to do that. And I wanna make sure that I'm preserving their right to do that. They're meeting later this month and they certainly may or may not take up some of the pieces that you mentioned, but I don't see anything that a hurdle if this regional school committee wants to move forward at the same pace they were, I don't read that in the motion as drafted at the current time. I'm happy to be proven wrong if I'm misreading that, but that's how I'm reading it at the moment. Okay, Shalini, any other questions? It's not a question, I just wanna do share at least one comment that because we've been getting so many emails like why would you do this and why would you put artificial turf? And so I just wanted to share this one email that came today from Dr. David Rekhao and he was on the task force in the PFAS task force that many people have sent to us. And he specifically said that the task force did not discuss athletic fields because it was not considered a product of high concern. And that's the same decision that whether we look at the bill that Joe Comerford has is put forward or we look at the task force or we look at the European Union, the ban that they're considering is only on consumer products. And none of them have included athletic fields because it's not a high concern. And if we can ask Dr. Rekhao who is on the task force and he is an expert in research and water quality chemistry and treatment. And he also said that it doesn't leach. So it is not a, it doesn't impact the water quality because it's not likely to leach. And there are so many other studies that show that in terms of health and so forth, for all the people who are saying like why would you possibly do that? I just wanna clarify that there is in so much evidence right now at this point that environmentally or health wise, the artificial turf, especially given the newer materials is not gonna be harmful. That being said, there are ways that we can minimize by what the booster club said getting the best materials and they can be best practices which is what Netherlands and other countries are doing that the people who are playing the kids who are gonna be playing on it, they can be a handout for what are the best practices like wash your hands after using it, don't eat it or, you know, things like that.  So they can be ways to do this in a way that it is minimizing the risk but all that I've heard from actual scientific research not advocacy people but actual research has not shown that it is harmful to the environment or to the health. Okay, Shalini, right now we're debating the amendment to the motion, okay? Anything else, Shalini? Alicia? Yes, thank you Lynn. So I am in agreement to Michelle's motion but I just wanted to really quickly speak to some of the concerns that I have that were not already shared. So I do agree with like some of the concerns that were shared but I won't restate those but a couple of them that didn't come up. One is really personal in that I fear because like I am not a scientist and I am no, like I am no specialist in this or what's happening but there are concerns because of conflicting information and I would feel this way about any given topic where there's not a definite like, yes, this is the best option. And I know especially for parents that this is like really hard when we're talking about things that are for our kids. And so one of the concerns I have in terms of the information that I have been learning about the possibilities because it seems like there are a lot of different possible outcomes to the situation is that one of the possible outcomes is that it may be fine for now but we may have to remove it later because the science is emerging. So nothing is definite, things are changing and we see this all of the time throughout history literally all of the time things that we think are good for us and then we find out later are not. This is not a new thing that happens and there are things that we're promoting like for instance smoking cigarettes that they used to tell you to do. And then once we found out that it's not good for you, we make changes. And so I think that's the importance of staying current with issues that are changing and science that it's emerging and changing because things do change. And so my concern is that my children are very young and in 10 years they will be in the high school. And what if in 10 years we are told artificial turf is not okay, take it out and now where are my kids going to play and then what is going to happen and what funding do we have then to fix that problem if we're not also thinking about the other fields and other things because right now we're talking about one field. When we know there are eight to nine fields that need to be fixed. I was unsure because in the Western and Samson report it said eight, but in the town manager memo it said nine. So eight to nine fields that need to be fixed. And I think there needs to be like a further commitment to those things in case that that is the case. And so I fear that we're not giving ourselves a backup here. I fear that we're not, I feel like we're not giving ourselves room for something bad to happen which again is like just like a bumper, a buffer zone. And so for that reason I do support Michelle's motion and the other thing was that we did get a lot of input from the community, voices on both sides but we did get some feedback from other towns in the regional towns who would have to be supporting this project as well who did not support the project. And so that's also concerning for me because again I think the one thing that there is no debate on is that something needs to happen and there needs to be repair to the athletic fields. And so I just worry that we move forward full-fledged with one option and then it fails like a couple of months down the road. And then that also is prolonging just as much as a no vote would prolong perhaps the process in actually getting something fixed and actually getting something playable for the students. So those concerns and then again because I assume I don't know this to be fact but I assume that it's the money that is the issue in terms of us fixing like just all nine fields flat out it's because it has a price tag. And so we're hearing about how it's possible that artificial turf might be a more cost-effective option and that there are options for low PFAS but we haven't seen any numbers as to will that be an increased price tag if we then go for the low PFAS option? And what does that mean? So I just have all of these concerns and for those reasons I really support Michelle's motion because I also feel like it doesn't it makes me feel better consciously about my decision and I want to see change for the students I want to see their athletics fields fixed but I also wanna make sure that I'm making a safe and right decision for the town and for my kids also. So I feel like it takes a bit of pressure off of me because it's not me and myself saying yes pick the artificial turf as if I have all of the information I know for sure that that's going to be a good thing. So I do support this amendment. Thank you. The amendment's been made and seconded. Jennifer is there anything to add or can we move to the vote? Well, I just want to clarify in terms of who's gonna slow things up. I mean the boosters haven't finished their fundraising and the other towns haven't appropriated the funds but I feel that I have to state this since it was stated that some an expert said that there was no issue with PFAS there's experts on all sides. So as one of the people who offered public comment said the Children's Environmental Healthcare Center of the Icon School of Medicine at Mount Sinai strongly discouraged the installation of artificial turf. So there are experts on all sides and I would hope that as it goes back to the regional school committee since they don't have the funds in place to install the artificial turf next week or even probably January 16th that they really consider all the options and now that we also have the input about there being a water drainage issue that more impervious surface is not going to help that what this does is it which the other which motion didn't do two weeks ago is it allows this money to be used for grass field if in fact the school committee were to revisit it and have more concerns about get more information about artificial turf or if the funds are not raised because they're not in place to install the artificial turf now or perhaps soon. Dorothy? I have a simple question. We received a couple of letters in the last few days from Pelham and I think some from Shoesbury saying that they would not support artificial turf. How important is that to the process? Super 10 Rs. Weren't we supposed to get some CPA money or something from them too? Super 10 Rs. Sure. So I think put simply there's a target dollar amount and for the project to move forward by January that's a mix of private and public fundraising and so if there is some public fundraising that does not contribute then that would make the project more vulnerable to not move them forward. Hopefully that answered your question. Thank you very much. Okay. Pam, Rony. Thanks. I think one of the things that has really weighed on me in this whole process is that I there are a number of people from the community saying you really shouldn't question the outcomes of elected officials or committees that have studied this in great depth but when it comes to our desk we in fact are the ones that are having to sign off on the money for this. And I felt that the answer was being fed to us in so many different ways and part of that was simply in not accurately and carefully comparing apples and oranges or apples to apples. Some of the incomplete questions just in looking at the differences between the option one and the two and three on the one hand someone says well if we don't get a turf field we're gonna have to use a vented field somewhere else to accomplish our space need. And in fact, we may have to use rented fields or outside field anyway during construction whether it's for option two or for option three. No one has addressed the fact that we might lose fields that are surrounding the reoriented track. I think we're probably gonna lose at least one field especially since a softball field is being proposed as well. So all of these things should have been really in and a really nice table that says this is what you gain this is what you lose and who was going to pay for this shortcoming of $900,000 if it was not for this gift from the town of Amherst. It just wasn't clear how a lot of these decisions made and I just feel like we were fed a lot of carefully worded information to make the desired outcome most evident. And I don't think that's the way we should be doing business. Thank you. Well, I appreciate the comments that have been shared. I'd like to call the question. Okay. Second. Second, the question has been called and seconded. We move immediately to a vote on the amendment that's to the original vote on calling the question. Excuse me. Thank you. All right, we're going to vote on calling the question. I'm going to start with myself, Lynn Griezmer and it is an I, Mandy Johannity. I. Anika Lopes. I. Michelle Miller. I. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. No. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Hi. Jennifer Taub. I. Dr. Walker. Yes. Shannon Bowman. Yes. Pat DeAngeles. Hi. Anna Devon-Gothier. Hi. Now we go to the actual motion to amend. The motion to amend is to add the number two and the word or. So it reads two or three. And we will start in this case with Mandy Johannity. I. Anika Lopes. I. Michelle Miller. I. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Sadly, yeah. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. I. Jennifer Taub. I. Alicia Walker. I might echo Pam Rooney. Yes. I'm sorry. I need to hear that again. Yes. Yes. Okay. Shannon Bowman. Yes. Pat DeAngeles. Hi. Anna Devon-Gothier. Hi. Lynn Griesmer is an I. That is unanimous. We're now going to move on. I'm sorry. No, she voted yes. Sadly, yes. So it is unanimous. We're now going to go to the, Pam, did you say sadly, yes? I did say sadly, yes. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for that clarification, Pam. All right. So now we are back to the original motion and the original motion. Now we have passed the amendment. Now we go back to the motion. And the motion is for the purchase order and our financial order. And the financial order is where the actual sentence is that we just amended. Okay. So the motion that is now on the floor is to adopt appropriation and transfer order FY23-05C and order appropriating funds for a portion of the town of Amherst Capital Program school track and field rehabilitation recommended by finance committee on October 17th, 2022 and shown on page six of November 21, 2022 draft motion sheet as amended. Okay. That's the motion. Second. Do I need a second? It's already there. It's already there. Right. Thank you. We're going to move to the vote. Unless there's discussion. Is there any further discussion? Okay. Anika Lopes. Aye. Michelle Miller. Aye. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Yes. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Aye. Jennifer Tobbe. Aye. Alicia Walker. Yes. Shawnee Balmille. Yes. Pat DeAngeles. Aye. Anna Devlin-Goth here.  Come on. Pam can be sad.  You know, it's these young kids. You know, you just got to watch them. Lynn Griezmer is an aye. Mandy Johannike. Aye. It is unanimous. I would like to now put on the floor the motion to adopt the resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum Regional High School Athletic Complex as presented. Is there a second? Second, yes. Okay. Jennifer, did you want to speak to it? Actually, it's Michelle's resolution. Before she speaks, I just want to clarify, as presented means which version from today? As presented in the later version today. Thank you. Okay, Michelle. I think I've spoken to it in my initial commentary and I do thank Mandy Joh for making some very good amendments and suggested edits to it, which have been incorporated. It really is just to very strongly say that the town council is fully committed to remunerating this issue, has the back of our student athletes and coaches and also has significant concern about the health and safety of PFAS and artificial turf and so encourages the regional school committee to give further consideration and does some other things you can look at in the resolution and happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Andy, comment? Yes. As Michelle said earlier in the evening, I worked with her on crafting the process, not the motion that's on the floor, which she drafted with others, but I think that it really does serve the purpose that she and I talked about at length. And basically, where I had been coming from on this is that the last vote in this whole discussion has been very agonizing. I think it's not just been agonizing for me, I think it's been agonizing for all of this because it really was dealing with a lot of technical issues that are beyond us and that it was really a decision that doesn't belong to the council. The council is making a decision on appropriating money. It is the regional school committee that has to make the decision and own the decision as to how to go forward. And it is a complex problem because as has been noted in other people's comments earlier in the motion to amend through eight to nine other fields that need to be repaired and either way. And the last thing that I wanna say on the motion on the floor is that I hope that the regional school committee takes this resolution seriously and does all of the work that we have asked them to do because while it is their decision, we're recognizing it's their decision that as a council, we are resolving to say these are important questions that have been raised by the community and we really need them to take the time that's necessary and take the steps that are necessary in order to make the right decision with the right information and not just assume that prior actions were correct. I don't think that's what we were intending or in the prior motion that it's just passed. So I hope that in addition to everything else that if more time is needed that the regional school committee will look at the question about whether it can propose a process to give itself enough time because I think that's what this entire community all four towns need is a regional school committee that considers the information and takes the time to do a very thorough study and make a very knowledgeable decision. Thank you. Jennifer. Well, I just wanted to thank Andy for that was, you know, expressing that for real no matter how we voted. I'm sure appreciate that. But I just wanted I guess to address the resolution because as I think Michelle said and that's probably what led her to draft the resolution is that the town council, you know, is tasked with passing laws as a legislative branch and we, I know that I felt with all the different information. I mean, I know how I, you know, how I, where I came down on the different information but I also knew I was out of my field of expertise in really trying to act on the different information that I got. Although I would personally choose natural grass turf I would air turf field. But I think what the resolution asks us to do as the town council is decide if we want to look into passing a bylaw that addresses artificial turf fields or PFAS and I think we should consider because that's, you know, within our mandate to do this. We couldn't, I felt I couldn't approve funding that had to go for artificial turf but it is the school we approve funding for the school committee. But I think if we want to not have any more turf or PFAS or whatever chemicals we don't want to add in our town that we should consider, I don't know if we form a committee but addressing how we might keep that from happening in our town. So I hope we would follow, you know the spirit of the resolution. Anna. So I am, I'm really struggling with this resolution. I think for a couple of reasons and partly this is, you know this is new on our plates and so I'm still digesting. I think that there's a couple specific lines I'm concerned about, right? I don't, there's, I can't count the whereas is we got to start numbering these things. One, two, three, four, five, six. The fifth whereas it talks about the Amherstown council acknowledges that artificial turf has recently come under scrutiny with several Amherstown counselors, one Amherst Pellum Regional School Committee member and many members of the public expressing concern about the health and environmental safety of the artificial turf, et cetera, et cetera. I think I know a few of you are on the most recent Amherst Pellum Regional School Committee meeting where they talked specifically about how public comments made by residents who also happened to be on the Regional School Committee were made as residents. And I think that I get, there's a lot for me that feels precedent setting in this and I'm concerned about it and I apologize you're getting half mold thoughts here but I don't believe we should categorize specific individuals beyond the council in a council resolution, especially when those members spoke as individuals at public comment and in public meetings, not as their role as a school committee member and I think a no vote on a school committee vote which also didn't happen would be a different thing to reference. It just feels a little off to me. So I would ask to strike that particular part of the line. And then I think the other thing that I'm concerned about here is the, again, the precedent of are we asking through non-binding resolution which means we can't do anything about it to have other committees reconsider their votes. And for me that is worrisome. I think that it feels like a scope of weird perceived control even though it's a non-binding resolution that we think we should be asking these elected bodies or non-elected bodies to reconsider or something they've already done. So I