I'm the host now. You're the host. You're good to go. OK. Good evening. I'm calling the August 6, 2020 meeting of the town service and outreach committee to order at 634. Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law allows us to hold this virtual meeting of the town services and outreach committee. I am now going to call on each committee member by name to confirm that you can hear me and we can hear you. Lisa Brewer. Present. Darcy Dumont, yes. Dorothy Pam. Dorothy, can you hear us? Can you speak? That's a problem. Evan, Ross. Yep. George Ryan. Yes, I can hear you. OK, Athena has left. Do you have any thoughts, Paul, about what we can do about Dorothy? Oh, we can't hear you. I can try to call her. I don't know what her situation is. If you could, that would be helpful. And Athena might be doing that, too. We can't hear you, Dorothy. Can you hear us? Yeah, now it doesn't show any audio connection for her. That's horrible. I am guessing that we should just go on because there's some likelihood that we won't be able to get her at all. But can you work on that, Paul? Thank you. All right, so I'm just checking to see if there's any. There's an attendee, and it's Art Keane. And Art, if you would like to give public comment, raise your hand. It does not look like he's going to give public comment. All right, so moving on, we'll ask at the end of the meeting also if there's any public comment. OK, so we have Paul double tasking here. Yes? So Dorothy is going to call in, but it'll take her some time because she has to write down the numbers and the codes and then that's what she's going to do now. OK, I know that she has looked at the town manager memo. So why don't our next item is the action item about the town manager appointments about this school building committee. And I think we could probably go ahead with that, but I do want to make sure that Dorothy is here in order to make whatever comment she wants to make. So I think we could get started with that. And if you want to just, so this is appointments of the members, the resident members of the elementary school building committee. And the town manager has provided a memo that's in the packet nominating three people. Yes? So thank you. So as you know, this committee has been before the PSO committee twice before, once for the sort of required positions that are built primarily by staff. And then a second time for the three positions, the two counselors in the one school committee that were appointed. This is the third and last memo that you'll get. And this is for the three resident members of the town. And so the three names I am putting forward to you are Dwayne Chambl of 489 Market Hill Road, Phoebe Marion of 20 Western Lane, and Jonathan Salvin of 48 Linden Ridge Road. So these three members all have children in the school district, all have connections or have been involved in our elementary schools, and all bring a unique set of skills and background to the committee. Mr. Chambl is the out of school time coordinator for Amherst schools. He's very energetic and brings a fresh perspective, has a seven month old at home and has another child in the district, and is familiar with the schools by his work and also as a parent. Ms. Merriam has been at the Crocker Farm School, is very well regarded there, has served on teacher interview committees, has served on the social justice committee, and has been working on the vision statement for the Crocker Farm School. She owns and operates two small businesses with her husband and was very interested in helping to diversify the schools. And I really appreciated both of them stepping up because they're relatively new to volunteering and to being part of this type of thing. And so it's really exciting to have new folks stepping forward and being part of this important committee. And the third person is Johnson Salvin. He is an architect. He chaired the Fort River Building Committee. He's an architect with Coon Riddle. He's, again, has children in the district, which was one of the things I was seeking. He has extensive experience. And architecture has experience with school buildings and is very familiar with the procurement process. He served on the design review committee for the town. And so I think these are three very strong candidates from a very rich pool of candidates. So we're really fortunate to have so much interest in this committee. Questions from the councilors. Can you hear me? Yes, Dorothy. I just wanted to know what the overall balance male-female was. So out of the 13 members, there's four women, nine men. Well, that is a little troubling to me. But I mean, I'm sure they're all very good. But I do think it's better to try to seek more balance. Any other questions? I have a couple of questions. One is, did you receive any applications from people that had expertise in net-zero building, school buildings or buildings in general? Yes. I'm sorry, I interrupted you. Yeah, I mean, Mr. Salvin has experienced in this. But I felt like we will be, as part of our bylaw, we are going to be doing, it's going to be a net-zero building, so the architect will be hired to build it. We'll bring the heavy expertise into the program. So are you saying that you received an application, at least one other application from somebody who had more expertise in zero energy building than Jonathan does? In residential, yes. And one concern I have is that Dwayne Chambl is an employee of the district. And we have so many other people on the committee that are employees of the district. And it feels like there are people are more constrained when they're employed by the district to say what their own opinions are. So I'm just wondering how that factored in with you. No, I did take that into consideration because I thought that the benefits he brought to the committee, especially with his connections to the community, were far outweighed his employment by the district. I understand what you're saying about that. I don't think that he will be constrained by his employment. And I think he was pretty clear about making that he's an independent maker. And really what he really identified himself as a bridge builder, as someone who went to hear from lots of different people as he moved through the process. I also have a concern about the male-female mix. That seems really unbalanced. And I think that there were a fair number of women who applied. And I guess I feel like that 4-9 ratio wasn't really necessary to have it be so few women on the committee. Do you have any comments about that, Paul? Well, the school committee and council had three appointments and one was a woman. So I think we've all had a say in what this committee's structure looks like. A lot of the positions, when I look at it, are prescribed positions like the town manager, the superintendent, the finance director, the person certified as a public purchasing agent. If any of those positions were to turn over, and it was a different gender than that would be, that person would shift it. Now, I understand what you're saying. And all things being equal, I'd rather have a more equal balance in terms of gender. Any other thoughts from anyone else on the committee? I'm probably going to abstain because I just have some feelings about the fact of the male-female balance and the zero energy building. And actually, most importantly, the fact that one person works for the district when we have so many other employees. So I'm going to abstain. So if someone else would like to make the motion, please feel free. Yes, somebody else? George could. What was that, Evan? I was going to say I'd be happy to do it, but my share point wasn't working.  Oh, OK. Well, I can tell you what the names are. Dwayne Shambl, Phoebe Merriam, and Jonathan Sullivan. And it's for appointments for terms that last the length of the MSBA process. So I'm willing to make the motion that TSO recommend the town manager's appointments to the elementary school building committee with Dwayne Shambl. We need the address. Thank you. Phoebe Merriam and Jonathan Sullivan for terms that will last the length of the MSBA process. One second. One second. I don't know how this works. Do I still run it? OK, so roll call. Alyssa? I was just wondering if we were going to have other discussion. The motion was made. I'll have Alyssa. So I was just going to state that I was comfortable with the process of the town manager outlined. And I understand the concern about the male-female balance absolutely and the faculty and men. So many of those already decided positions. But I was also not seeing Mr. Shambl's position as being, say, for example, if he was a principal of the building or if he was the assistant superintendent. So I'm seeing him as to playing a different role in the schools. And so I'm not seeing the level of concern that I would if he weren't like a higher administrator level that felt too much like he was like the superintendent or like the financial director. I'm seeing him as being in a different position and one that puts him in contact with parents in a very different way. And since such an important part of this role is talking to parents and families, I thought that was a really good fit. Other comments? I have a comment. I think in terms of committees overall, and I may be wrong on this, but I have a sense that there are more men than females on many committees. And I just think that we have to pay attention, more attention to this. I am concerned in general about anyone who works for the district. I don't think it matters what level their job is. I think the lower down you are, the more careful you might see you had to be because you're easier to fire. I do think that's something that we have to think about as well. I'm not going to make a big issue about it, but I just think in future we should look at the fact that you've got a lot of men making a lot of important decisions in town. And one place where women have felt they had to say was in education. And it does bother me a little bit to have this committee, which deals with the school, to be so heavily male, although I'm sure they're all great people. Any other comments? OK. So we will go to the roll call vote. Alyssa? Yes. Darcy, abstain. Doracy? Abstain. Evan? Yes. George? Yes. OK. So it passes. We need and to abstain. So thank you, Paul. Paul also mentioned to me at noon today that he is going to be providing some appointments of members of the HRC committee, Human Rights Committee. And I'm assuming that that's now going to get to us by the 20th, our meeting on the 20th. OK. Do we have anything else coming? There are a couple out there. I just, we have some interviews set up for next week. I can't just recall which one's Angelus or sets up once we have a critical mass. She does the interview schedules. I think the ECAC reappointments, they're there. They need to be done too, right? OK. I found those. There's a couple of people that need to, that have one year terms. So OK. That's it for appointments. Moving on to the TSO review process. So I'm going to pull up our document that we were looking at last time. And then we can figure out what the next step is. This might take a second. There it is right there. Yes, there we go. OK. So we were looking at our review process for the, we had been looking at subsequent weeks. And last week we finalized or semi-finalized at least some of the wording in step one and step two. So what we're doing is finalizing the review process that we're going to use to look at measures that come before the TSO. And last time we looked pretty closely at what we're setting up as a preliminary presentation process, which is basically just coming to the committee to try to ascertain whether we're ready to go forward, not whether we're ready, but what we need to go forward with a topic. So does anyone have any suggestions as to whether we should go back over some of the stuff that we did the last time or whether we should just start with step three? I have no way of raising my hand. But I can't see your screen. But I'm assuming that we're dealing with somewhere near the beginning of the paragraph. The chair or the chair's designee will present a preliminary presentation. And I had a problem with that because I see the committee and the chair as working together. So I came up with some other words that might work. One is the chair in conjunction with the committee members. Or I got another one that came up. But just that the chair and the committee, because the reason I don't like this one, it sounds as if the chair either presents or the committee chair designates something to present. But that's not a really democratic committee. And I would think that the chair can bring up anything. And then the committee talks about it. And some things will be initiated by members of the committee. And then we will talk about it and decide how to proceed. And then people would volunteer, or the chair might ask somebody, but I think rather loosen and formal so that we all feel as if we're working together on this. So that is why I didn't like that sentence. I don't know if anyone has any thoughts on it. So I had said the chair in conjunction with the committee members will. OK. OK, so that's it. I've stopped. I am sympathetic to that idea, if I may speak. My hand is raised, but it may not be possible to see it. I like maybe wording it slightly differently if that would be acceptable to the rest of you along the lines of what Dorothy's suggesting. Perhaps the chair in consultation with the committee. Oh, great, great. Well, just lay it out and see what people think. They may prefer to keep the language as it is. The chair in consultation with the committee shall. I mean, how we want for the chair in consultation with the committee or the chairs designee shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation is a suggestion. So I don't know if I like that. I like that very much. I knew there were other words besides in conjunction with and I think in consultation with is really good. So it's a suggestion. Dorothy and I are both sympathetic to it. But I don't know how the rest of you think maybe want to leave it the way it is. But that's what I would suggest. I'll take my hand down. I just edit this directly. You certainly may. I think I have to somehow or other. Does it do I have to hit edit somewhere? If you go to the new up there. OK, yes, you do. Yeah, track changes. OK. All right. So it's changed. There's a suggestion that it's changed to the chair in consultation with the committee shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation. I think we're going to insert the chair. And we could say at the drive to say or the chairs designee right because I don't think you want and I don't think the chair wants to be solely responsible for doing this. So we have the chair or the chairs designee in consultation with the committee shall be responsible for or shall assist in perhaps is better shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation is what I would suggest. Do we have objections to that? Or is that OK to do once you make the change and then people can look at them and decide. And then read it again for me. Thank you. Because Dorothy can't see it. So again, the chair, right, the chair. Or the chairs designee comma in consultation with the committee shall assist in preparing the rest I think can stay shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation because the presentation in fact may be done by someone else and may be done by by the sponsors but they will assist in the preparation by doing these things. So that's that's a suggestion. The chair or the chairs designee in consultation with the committee shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation. Oh, yes. That's good. A little trouble here. OK, so. Yes, it's not perfectly edited here. But you get the idea. The chair or the chairs designee in consultation with the committee shall assist in preparing the measure for presentation by those four things. OK, and I'll bring that up. So anything else in the in the dark? I'm assuming that we have. Unless somebody. So I would like to if I may again, it's hard for me to raise my hand or I should be able to do it. If you want to just raise your hand this visually. OK, yes, large. OK, thank you. This is a suggestion that Evan made in his original document. I don't know if people like it or not. I'm just going to throw it out there. It seems possible at the end of step two that committee may feel it has all the information it needs. And it can go directly to deliberation. So it's very unlikely that I'm not saying it's likely that it would happen, but it seems there could be situations where for whatever reason we have all the information that we feel is necessary. And so we don't need to. We can go directly to deliberation. You may feel that's too much or too premature, but he had, I believe, Evan, you had that in the original in your suggestion in your version. You may not want to have it now, but I thought it wasn't a bad idea. We may never need it, but it gives us the option of at the end of step two. If we agree by consensus that we're ready to go to deliberation, we can go directly to deliberation. That was a suggestion. So it's something to the effect, you know, if at the end of step two, the committee feels it has sufficient information and may proceed directly to step four. That's a thought. I don't know what people think. I don't want to I don't want to step on toes here because I know Alissa has her hand up, but I think it would be appropriate actually in step one, because the whole point is we don't if at the end of step one, after the end of the preliminary, we're like, we're good. We don't need a formal presentation. We're ready to move. Then we wouldn't even need to need the preparation for a presentation. And yes, this was because I believe, although again, I apologize to you all because I am having some SharePoint issues. But we we wrote this process pretty broadly. And so while maybe bylaws, we definitely want a formal presentation, there may be other smaller things like goals was brought up earlier where we say, you know, we have all the information we need. And if we don't feel like we need more, there's no need to go and have a formal presentation. So yeah, that was something I put in there. But I would I would actually put that in step one. I think that I would agree with that. Great. No. So, Alyssa, do you have a comment? I I am not seeing anybody's hand. So if you could just it's fine to just raise them visually. Oh, we'll do the best we can. I I was just trying to understand where it fit if it fit under both one and two, like in both cases, we could take a step off. But I think I'm understanding better that it makes a sense that it would be after step one. So it's just before step two. The other thing are just truly technical things that we're all struggling with here. This dark green khaki is nearly impossible for me to read. Totally impossible for me to read as a Zoom screen. I've got it open separately, finally SharePoint cooperated with that. But it's funny how, right? It's like when people do slide decks and you never know how the colors actually going to look. Yeah, this is impossible for me to read. The other thing I wanted to mention was in terms of any public that might be present, this document isn't in our public packet. And I don't know why it's in our SharePoint, but it's not something the public's been able to access. So the town manager appointments and the agenda were in our public packet, but this was not. Yeah, I think that that was I don't know how that happened. I. I don't know. I don't know how that happened. But clearly my responsibility. So can you see it a little bit better now? Yeah, that helps a little. I think at least about on my screen. I don't know about this. It's a little better. It's a little better. Yeah. I wasn't even attempting to do that. So. I had a few minor changes before we get through with this, but again, maybe people have some thoughts about, well, actually we need to decide about inserting this. So I apologize. We're actually trying to insertion here. So we should. Could someone explain. Why. The language is necessary. Is it something that we would not. Be able to do. Anyway. I mean, which one are you talking about? Are you talking about going straight to deliberation? Are you talking about the inserted bridge at the beginning? Did we agree? About it. Evan's suggestion to put. In. Allowing us to go directly to deliberation at the end of a preliminary presentation. And I'm just asking. Why. Why. Why. Why. And I'm just asking. Why. Would it be necessary? I can, I can speak to that, I guess. Since it was my suggestion. I think it just provides clarity. Our hope with everything we're doing in this committee and every committee is that these processes. We're not going to have to go directly to deliberation. We're not going to have to go directly to deliberation. This committee's tenure. If we all are put on. These. In January, or if we're all put. On different committees in. 2023. When we're all. Re-elected. The hope is that anyone who. Hasn't served on this committee could pick up the process. And in that case, I do think it's. That you don't always need to do a formal presentation. Right. People shouldn't feel. Excuse me, a bludge to do one. Because they have, they, it's in the process. And so. You know, could we, could we. Essentially. Enact the spirit of that language without writing it in. Yeah, of course. But I do think it's nice to be able to have something in there that does. You know, I think it's nice to be able to clarify for us and for people who come after us. That the formal presentation can be deemed unnecessary. Many fields we have sufficient information. If we have sufficient. Information. To. Give a. Recommendation to the council. Go forward with something. Yeah. So, so for example, you know, I'm thinking Southeast street comments, right? We did what was essentially a preliminary presentation. And then we had a conversation of, do we actually want to invite. The developers in and we all sort of agreed. We have all the information we need. We don't actually need to do something more than this. And so we just went straight to deliberation. I think it's just good to give ourselves that option. And it's always good, I think, to clarify that so that. I always like when things are clearly stated rather than. Implied. I have a question here. I thought this process was about. Reviewing bylaws or presenting bylaws. And I didn't think it was. For every single decision that we make. Because then I think it would be a really truly kind of constipated process. But I thought it was for. Bylaws like the wage staff, like surveillance. So that's, I need that clarification before I can continue. Make thinking about this because. Is this supposed to be how we go about with every decision or vote that we make? Because. I did not think that's what this was about. I mean, I didn't think it would cover the Southeast street common. I thought that was just. That was something we were asked to look at. We looked at, we had a vote. We made a decision. Alyssa. I'm really not being obnoxious about this. Dorothy. And I realize you can't say that. I mean, I do, but I didn't think that was a good idea. I think it was. I did not think that was a good idea. I thought it was a good idea. I mean, I, I think that was a good. Good decision. Alyssa. I'm, I'm really not being obnoxious about this. Dorothy. And I realized you can't see it. But this, this pilot, this process has one of the longest titles ever. And what it says is. Council committee on T, blah, blah, blah, blah. Proposed process for review of bylaws. Public way requests. Town. And then. have set off to the side in red because that was the only thing it doesn't mention is town manager appointments okay all right so that's very helpful Alyssa I appreciate that and I couldn't I can't print without internet either right yeah absolutely it's really bad so um I guess um I would I would I guess I feel a little bit like like I don't want to set up a situation where where if somebody on the committee wanted a formal presentation that they would not be able to to get one at least a minimal one yeah and that that would prevent that but it seems like there should be a way that our formal presentation could be minimal but to not have anything seems seems to deny the committee the ability to you know hear the substance of what's being put before us so I guess I have a little bit of trouble with that unless it was you know I could see where where if we all agreed it was a unanimous agreement to go forward yes but if one member disagreed go forward sort of like our consent agenda but I could see there there might be plenty of situations where we'd where we would all agree that we're that yes this is something we all agree that we should just recommend to the council but we kind of have to have a reason for recommending it and if we if we don't get any information what is our reason going to be so I can't see them Dorothy is your hand up yes my hand is up somewhere near the top you can say where we're talking about this is the process blah blah blah and then you could say the sense of the committee can decide how complete or how formal a presentation is necessary I had better words in my head but they flew out but just some sense of the sense of the committee all right you know we're talking we're saying okay we don't have to do all this for that and as Evan said we can go we can go move ahead and make this presentation there'd be no problem if somebody on the committee said no I think we have to look into this then I think we'd have to stop and spend a little more time thinking it through other times we're going to want to do all the things because if it's a controversial issue or something new or something coming from the outside we'd want to have this process to make sure that we don't leave something important out but there are times when we certainly don't need this to do some actions so some some sentence at the appropriate place that according to the sense of the committee this process could be abbreviated okay George I guess I don't know really what to say it should be allows us to to move to deliberation if we feel as a group that we have enough information if someone feels that we don't have enough information that's something that we would have to discuss as a committee and come to some resolution I assume we work together as by consensus yeah so if one individual simply put their feet down put put down or fix down and said we have to have a formal presentation I guess the group would have to figure out what to do and I guess if they really were adamant enough and hopefully could make a case for it we would we would yield and we'd say go ahead but this is just allows us that our possibility I really not I don't want to overthink it I guess it's conceivable that someone would want to go ahead and could not convince the rest of their colleagues so I don't know how to prevent that I'm not sure we should really worry too much about it but hopefully we'd be collegial and you know we would feel like okay if somebody really strongly feels we have to have a form of presentation and they have at least some reasons if we don't agree with them then I assume we would probably go to the formal presentation but I can't guarantee that and I don't see how we can wordsmith it such that so it's just a suggestion to allow us to move more quickly in certain circumstances and but if it's going to get this complicated maybe we'll just have to let it go but I just felt that you know having suggestion was a good one and you know if there is this situation that arises hopefully we would work together and resolve it to the satisfaction of everyone but yes it's conceivable that it could be a vote where it's four to one I would hope that never happen I think we'd all work to not have it happen but yeah I don't see how you can phrase it so that it can guarantee that it won't ever happen except by simply saying you must always go to a formal presentation which is at the way it reads right now I just assumes that that's be the case for everything this just allows you the opportunity or possibility to to go more quickly if consensus is reached we could oh Evan sorry yeah so actually George said a lot of what I was gonna say I mean I think that it's all you know Dusty says something about how could we make a recommendation if we don't have the content but the the premise of this is if we feel like we have sufficient content to make a recommendation then we wouldn't move on to the formal presentation because sometimes we have the I mean especially again using the Southeast Street Commons as an example we had a lot of documentation in front of us we had a good discussion among the committee and then we sort of said we don't really have any questions it'd be a waste of our time to drag the developer in here when we don't really have any further questions it would be it would be a performative act more than it would be a substantive act and so I do like this that option and I agree with what George said I mean we could say if I can we you know we could work with him we could say by consensus we could say majority vote or something like that I you know I guess I do have some issue if you know Darcy's example of well what if one person really wants to go to a formal presentation well we're you know we're a committee we're supposed to work together and so if I do have an issue of if four members of the committee are like we have enough information to make a recommendation and one person says no I really want a formal presentation but can't articulate a reason why in a way that's persuasive to then we have a busy schedule we have a lot on deck I was looking at our bike rack the other day why would we devote another meeting to a formal presentation when the committee as a committee feels as though we have sufficient information and so you know which is why I would say you know we could do we could do it as a vote there has to be a vote if we want to kind of find my original language but I'll yield to Alyssa well just while you're looking for that language I mean exactly so we are not one of the whole things of this process was not trotting people in unnecessarily and we found we didn't have to trot people in unnecessarily and to say that one person gets to pull it off like consent calendar is exactly not what we're trying to do here persuade each other of our cause and why it matters to us and why we think we can move forward without it or move forward without it and if push comes to shove and four members believe we can move forward without a formal presentation and one member has argued to no avail that they actually need a formal presentation then the report of the TSO to the town council will be four members thought we could tell you yes do this don't do this member really wanted a formal presentation we didn't agree that was necessary and the town council says hey I don't know what's wrong with you people why didn't you have a presentation and we learned from that but in the meantime we're trying to save ourselves time and save petitioners time whether those petitioners are on the town council or elsewhere and so we're we have this process that's supposed to apply to a whole bunch of different kinds of procedures and so we're just trying to give ourselves jumping off points rather than having to say well we have another page of checklist we have to get through here let's go ahead and do it even though we all know how we're going to vote on this so we're just trying to prevent that from happening where we're just I liked what Evan said about performative rather than a substantive act but of course the other member or members who are not sure they agree with that would have plenty of opportunity to say this is why I have a problem with that did you have something else to say George well I have I finally was able to so proud of myself using my own computer today but when we do this share screen I can't I just figured out how to get to the document that I actually had done some of this wordsmithing so what I had written that Evan is correct it should come at the end of step two right is ever we put it now at the end of step one the language would be at this point the committee may decide it has sufficient information and move directly to step four that's what I was going to suggest um so would that be a wait a minute not there so it's come at the end of step number one after three after four just at the end of it at this point the committee may decide it has sufficient information and move directly to step four IE deliberation what would people think about adding how the ad that if if four members like a little supermajority so it's basically saying if two members don't want to do that that should be enough to get a formal presentation but if only one then yes they should be able to we should be able to go to I'm I'm working right now on another document that's talking all about supermajority so I'm really into supermajorities anyway what you what do you think about that I think Darcy of two people are making a case that we need to move their formal presentation the committee would go to a formal presentation well then why don't we just say that why don't we just say that that we need four people Darcy I would like not to be that specific the thing that I reread Mandy Joe's memo to us that I found that today before the meeting and her point was we don't have to do everything we're making a recommendation to the town council and everything's going to go to if it's a bylaw it's going to go to go well so we don't have to do everything because it doesn't happen our vote doesn't make it happen it's just we're going to be taking it further and then it gets done so I would probably I mean right now we are agreeing that yes we would do it that way maybe we won't maybe we will end up with being three to two that could happen and you know three is the majority vote we would then take it to the town council and give the two positions they'll figure it out I mean I think our aim is that when we present something that we care about the town council we hope that we're going to be unanimous okay that's our aim because that's we though our interest is if we're going to spend time on something we'd like to get it passed but some some things may be really thorny and difficult and may end up being a three to two and they don't want to make us to do more than we've done well then it just goes to town council all right that's my thought me the language again the language that I suggest is at this point so at the end of section number one underneath four underneath four at this point the committee may decide it has sufficient information it has some sufficient information and and move directly to step four now I didn't have Evan's language in front of me when I did this he may have a better way of expressing it but that was you know what I suggest simple statement and that's that too distant for right no I'm just and may decide it has sufficient information and move directly to step four okay the only thing there was different in my language that's sort of substantively different is I had may vote to move and so it just stipulating that of the committee and not just like a we good we good okay cool but it sounds like actually from our conversation that we might want it to be a vote because that's better for the report yep yep I agree good I have no problem with that may vote to decide they vote that it has well no it would be may decide it has sufficient information and vote vote to it yes yep okay I'm sorry to interrupt I have two more small suggestions now that I have this document in front of me for what lies above us and then I'm perfectly happy with everything that we have here up through step till we get step three actually I'm happy with step three four and five and six myself but I do have small suggestions if people can bear with me for the top for the top portion first of all we have plans and goals I think we just need to decide if we want them in there or not right now it's red which means it hasn't been agreed upon I kind of you know I can live with it I'm not quite sure what it all means I know someone would come to us for our plans and goals but we can leave it in I don't you know but we just need to agree or disagree do we want to leave it in or take it out I would probably take it out but I'm perfectly happy to leave it in if people think that someday or maybe they can think of good examples where someone will come to TSO and say we've got some plans we want you to look at we've got some goals we want you to look at seems to me what we deal with essentially our bylaws public ways requests and potential policies of the town council and that's it I don't get plans and goals but I'm open to leaving it in if people want it but we need to decide I think that eventually at least Lynn has mentioned this to me before that when eventually we have a climate action plan that it will be it probably will be subdivided among different town committees for us to look at so I think that is that's a want one example of but that's down the road that'll be quite a ways but it's an example so this is a Dorothy stupid question for the moment so climate action thing would be called a goal or a plan it wouldn't be a bylaw it to start with it will be a climate action plan and it will have a lot of different pieces to it and some of them might have to do is owning some of them might have to do with transportation some of them might have to do with buildings and so they'll probably get farmed out to the different committees because it's going to be probably a fairly big plan right this is at least what Lynn has told me that she thinks might happen so but again that will be quite a long ways down the road but it's still well give an explanation I can see keeping it there it's not our little plans and goals okay which is why I thought that was weird there so given your explanation I would say let's keep it I want it gone yeah I'm really yeah we deal with policies or public ways requests and bylaws and and whatever they come up with in the end it should turn into either a policy a public way request or bylaw and we're not you know it's their plan not ours but we're so we're not going to come back and say you need to change your plan we you know tell us plan now what do you want to do you all we want to change a bylaw we want to make you know whatever then of the three things we have here it seems that's what we deal with I'm really struggling with what how we would be sending something back to the town council on some other committee's plans or somebody else's goals unless they actually lead to a bylaw change or a town council policy that somehow requires our input I I don't know I'm just struggling with why this is here okay you can you can be go ahead Dorothy I said his argument it convinced me I just needed to know how the words all fitted together and I think that so now I know okay we're gonna do a bylaw or policy policy would cover what the word plan had covered and I think that that's that's better so so I think if we look at the preamble and what what we are doing as a committee it would cover those climate action plans so how if they come to our committee how we're not going to support the whole plan we're gonna hear or little piece there that'll be either a bylaw or a policy I assume they're gonna ask us to be looking at some absolute some recommendation that affects the provision of town services and that's what we would wait if we were asked to we'd weigh in on that right and not a plan but I don't know maybe it's it is actually a climate action plan but we don't do it yeah we don't do it what do you mean we don't do it we're not gonna force the climate action we would do little things that they asked us to do that were specific so I guess what Darcy's imagining is that there's this plan has been created and a portion of it somehow affects the provision of town services and the council for some reason perhaps reasonably wants TSO to weigh in on that portion of the plan with our sort of advice or council I guess one could imagine that it's not actually a bylaw it's not actually a public ways request and it's not I guess not actually a policy they could ask for our opinion I'm not sure that we need to have that in this first header because we can still it seems we can still let we can tell tell them what we think I don't know I don't know I don't think if they came to us and said only electric buses can be bought by the school district that's a specific thing and that would be a policy so we're because we're not gonna be dealing with the whole plan but little pieces that affect town services we would have to go through and check it out we do cost and we check other towns and we do all those things and then if we decide yes we're gonna do it we would then present it as a policy to the town council does that make make sense so I don't think we need plan because it's not our plan Alyssa thank you Dorothy Alyssa what Dorothy said it's not our plan we're not going to be asked to weigh in on the plan we're going to be asked as George indicated to weigh in on specific pieces of things that are under our purview if for whatever bizarre reason a majority of the town council says just look at page 75 of the plan see what you think we don't need to run it through this process because it's just a separate thing so let's not confuse ourselves let's just take it out of the title and if something weird comes up we'll deal with it yeah because my other point is that this document does also does not address nor should it address town manager appointments or department head appointments and so this is a very specific document dealing with very specific things so I think again I would make the case we take it out because it and we have to deal with some unusual event in the future we'll deal with it but this is very specific to those three kinds of things and that's also why my next suggestion is a little bit down below we have an example of where we're using we don't use examples except in one case I'd like to take the examples out but the one example that's used to illustrate the point is actually a town manager or department had appointment and which document has nothing to do with either that so that's another small change I suggest but so and then I'll shut up I'm sorry you're being helpful so my my level of investment in this is pretty low but what I will say because I could go either way on this but what I what I will say is my my original suggestion which I know was rejected last time but I'm bringing up again is simplify this and just say for review of measures and I know before was people said I hate the word measures it doesn't mean anything but actually to me that's actually the point is it capsule it captures anything that might be referred to us and we could put a little asterisk there that says hello excluding town manager appointments or something like that but I hear I hear what George and Dorothy and Melissa are saying I also hear what Darcy saying which is something could be referred to us that is a plan and if it's referred to us by the council we have to act on it and what I what I like about what we just did before was that we gave ourselves the ability to basically do a short preliminary presentation and then say okay we're good we're not going to run through the whole process and so I actually prefer just saying look this process applies to everything that's referred to us except for town manager appointments and then once we do the preliminary if it's something little like they want us to give feedback on page 75 of the climate action plan we do the preliminary we go all right we have enough information here's our feedback I agree was that George I can live with it I mean just for review of measures and then down below just have a footnote either laying out what such as for example or you could just say exclusive of I don't really care so that you know that is okay by me for review of measures of are we just it you just you stop there for review of measures and then down below you somewhere you have a footnote that explains or just points out what it doesn't mean it doesn't mean town manager appointments and you could also say measures such as you know if you want or you could just leave it like vague I like the mention of bylaws public ways requests in town council policies because these are real concrete things that that actually this is supposed to help us with measures is obviously less specific nothing wrong with it so I can live with it but I don't know how I feel there is everything wrong with it measures doesn't mean anything it doesn't have a plain English meaning it's not defined in our rules it's a garbage term in the charter that didn't belong in there in the first place because it's all encompassing it doesn't mean anything it doesn't help town councillors who want to know which committee to bring something to it doesn't help members of the public who want to know which committee to bring something to if something other than the very specific words we already had which were review of bylaws public way requests and town council policies if we get anything that isn't one of those things we are going to need to decide what to do with it and that's exactly as it should be town manager appointments we probably need a separate page like this for those for weirdo junk things we've never seen but we might mythically see at some point in the future do not belong being covered in a process that is very specific for bylaws public way requests and town council policies if we start getting weird random things we may need a separate process for that because why would we get weird random things please don't put measures in here please don't put an asterisk in here let this be clear to everybody these are the three kinds of things we do preconceivably I'll leave the list in and then add and other measures oh god exactly wrong no there is no such thing as another measure there is no such thing that's coming to us the only things that are coming to us are those three things I don't think that's true but it is true it hasn't come to us yet and we have no future to believe that it will well I have hope but George I think Alyssa's made very forcefully the point which I have sympathy with which is something that's clear and says something that I can understand as opposed to measures which is you know sort of your guess is as good as mine so I think for the for the sake of all of us what I would suggest is dropping plans and goals and ending it with town council policies by the way is it public way request or public ways request anyone know doesn't matter maybe it doesn't matter my suggestion is drop plan it is with an S I don't think it's just public way yeah pretty sure okay well let's so take out the S get out plans and goals and let's get moving because I have one other suggestion I'd like to make that's my suggestion right or see do you have an opinion about that I'm fine with the conversation I take that as endorsing my position yes I don't want to put measures I don't want to get nuclear freeze measures I want to keep it specific to our all right so you don't like measures and you you're okay with dropping plans and goals yes okay so it sounds like there's policy did we include policies is still there that's fine okay I have one of the small change I like to make but I first I just guess I need to ask the chair if she feels like that's a consensus or she wants more discussion um I would vote against that so maybe we should have a motion well again Darcy what you would prefer to have just measures is that you're kind of sympathetic to Evan suggestion is that what you're saying well actually three of us agreed on that well okay but I would actually prefer to say to have the list and say and other measures just to to make it you know open to other things such as the climate action plan pieces of it coming to us that's not coming to us the climate action plan is not coming to us as a plan that's never going to happen what's going to come to us is the parts action plan like Dorothy gave the example of right but what do they fall under here they're by law they're policies or policy like buses would be a policy right right so I think it's not that we wouldn't get so I don't think they are policies but they're not measures because measures are not what kind of buses to have it's not a measure it's policy yeah they're all measures they're all measures I think Darcy there's there's at least three votes to to leave this without the addition that you're suggesting and maybe four but at least three and plans and goals would then be dropped and we change the ways to way is what I'm hearing but people can weigh in here and say no no they disagree with that or they have some other suggestion but I'm hearing three individuals who want to just stop at the policies okay why don't you make that motion George all right I move that we delete the phrase plans and goals and that we change ways to weigh yeah thank you there's a second any further discussion well it's good so I Darcy no Dorothy yes Evan no George yes okay so that's three two minute taker who is probably really confused now well important is the document now reads plans and goals is gone and weighs his way if you could make those changes that would be great I did they're crossed out you just can't see that's right I apologize I'm looking at my document now and I'm terrified if I move to see my document okay step one is labeled preliminary presentation of measure thank you Evan so please I don't know who's laughing but Dorothy yeah that should definitely go out thank you very much all right thank you um strike of a measure shall we start on step three now I bear with me I'm sorry but under two timing issues I would like to strike the two examples certainly the first example time manager appointments to multiple member bodies versus department heads this document has nothing to do with that so that example shouldn't be there where are you where are you George under step one number two a so when will the town council actually needed in order to comply with the charter with MGL or with town council referral vote question mark I would end it there I agree with that totally is that good with everybody yeah that was that was in my initial version FYI that's fine I'm lost where are we we're under a step one step one number two number two letter sub letter a begins will town council and it's the only item that has examples a which I think shouldn't and be the first example is an example of something that this document doesn't even deal with right and so are we leaving in lead time I was gonna strike it all just on the grounds that we don't offer examples elsewhere okay so it's more conversational background than it is necessary to have in the process that's my we knew what it meant okay that's my thought all right all right that's all I have to say and then I was happy with the rest of this document except yeah down at the bottom yeah happy with the rest of it I will I will mention here that that Mandy Joe did mention how much research you're gonna put it at this level we have to put in on best practices in other cities and to kind of like pull back a little bit I was I thought that was a reasonable point there we're making a preliminary presentation to ourself we're gonna vote and then what as a result of that we're gonna make some kind of presentation to the town council they're gonna talk and then they're gonna vote and if they decide we need to check in some more stuff then we would do that but I don't I don't like it to be this arduous research process where it sounds like you say you've got a clerk who's gonna be checking out all the things that you think somebody says well you didn't check this city I checked that city and I just think that's getting very burdensome well again my thought is this is at the with consultation with the committee so if the committee says we really do need to do this then I guess someone's gonna have to do it it also yeah in some cases so I say in all cases just as in some cases seeking input on best practices but even that is contingent upon the committee agreeing to it yeah I don't think we have to worry about it not required Alyssa I'm sorry my hand must be up from before okay yeah um okay are we ready to move on to step three so yeah I think most of the rest of it is pretty boilerplate so let's just read step three seems pretty straightforward any objections can you see it Dorothy no I can't so it's a formal presentation the sponsors shall be invited to make a formal presentation to the committee presentation the committee may ask questions of the sponsors and if Dean necessary asked for further information or input yeah that sounds great step for deliberation I guess one question perhaps apropos what Evan mentioned earlier do we want to say and the committee has voted that it has sufficient information do we need to vote at this stage is that something people feel we need to say here or do we do by consensus so once what it reads Dorothy is once all presentations are complete and the committee has determined that it has sufficient information it may perceive the deliberation and then the committee may either employ the CIBD or both the CIBD and smart rubrics the question is do we want to have a vote here is that something we should require or we already have enough votes in this document as it is but do we want to vote I don't think I don't think we need to require the vote I think if we feel there should be one we will ask the one but in most cases by that point we should be a consensus so I don't want to rule out the fact that somebody may call for both I don't think we have to require a vote and I think it's May it doesn't say shall and that gives a little flexibility in leeway the chair and the chair is designee we're not in the same space here I'm not on the same item that you're on then I thought we were talking about whether or not we were going to vote under the commit step for deliberation sentence one and the committee and I thought George was offering to put vote in there and Dorothy was saying we don't need vote in that first under step for deliberation is that not that is correct that is where word may doesn't so oh no I'm talking about the second sentence ah right well it's actually a one it's all one sentence but it's two clauses so once all presentations are complete and the committee has determined that it has sufficient information it may proceed to deliberation well isn't it will isn't it will at that point that's a good question on this actually I think it probably should be will right because otherwise it's like what's our other choice like just to never do anything that always seems to me a perfectly wonderful you're right it probably may proceed or it may just give up hold it over to another meeting right doesn't mean that we have to deliberate at that meeting just means we're are we good with this should we change it to will I just did great perfect okay so Alyssa can you not see it either it's I can now I'm trying to flip between having it open big and having it open small as the actual word document as opposed to your zoom screen so I can read it better okay technical difficulties not your problem all right all right so um so I have my hand up oh sorry I'm so I guess I'm I'm think as far as how we're working through this the second sentence is actually the one that struck me a bit it says that the committee may employ either the CIBD or both the CIBD and smart rubrics and so I'm wondering if it makes sense for us to jump to those rubrics now since we're talking about framing the deliberation in terms of those rubrics and then also I like the word may there because we can decide not to use either with the word may but I just want to make sure that was the intention that we don't have to use these two rubrics if we don't want to my my thought is to have them as a guide and to be flexible about it but that's the decision of the committee I would kind of like to get through five and six and then go to it if that's okay because I just would get through this darn thing we agree with you and yes but it is relevant obviously so any other comments about four before we move to five okay so we're gonna come back to it though after we go over the CIBD and it's down below see there it is right but I'm saying I'm gonna go back to four because I'm not sure I'm good with that language either but I'm willing to move on till we see all right so the committee takes a formal vote on whether to recommend or not recommend the measure upon which it has deliberated again I just language here I wonder again those of you who are much more sensitive users of the English language one would perhaps expect shall take a formal vote or will take God help me with the difference here but we we've been using the future would seem to be we want to something like that the committee shall take or will take a formal vote which I like shall but don't ask me to defend it haven't you're the master of English here do you can you enlighten us or do you prefer honestly just for consistency sake it should need the committee shall take right all right that's good right and that that I'll suggest we should probably change will the shall above and for shall precede the deliberation so I want to ask a question here yeah to me shall I may be totally wrong but just as I'm listening to it tonight shall will is very strong you will do it shall says yeah you're probably gonna do it you can do it you very well may do it and maybe you should do it but it's not as strong as will so I guess I like shall because I feel it's just a little bit more flexible well you're not gonna hear any complaints from me but that suggests changing shall up above but we're to will the shall but we're gonna come back to four anyway I think Alyssa wants us to go back okay so we're good with five so five shall take a formal vote okay good and then six six report to town council are you listening Dorsey yes after deliberation and vote the chair shall report the result of the committee's action to the town council including the outcome of the vote the vote tally and a summary of the committee's recommendation if the vote is not unanimous and the report shall include a summary of the minority views or a minority report if requested okay a couple little typos I was first of all there's no posture is there actually there is a post read as the committee's recommendation isn't I apologize I mean I would insert of the reasons for the committee's recommendation and the posture is correct sorry was that a suggestion George well I think it's just I think English would what we have right now is and a summary of the reasons for committee's recommendation English would normally ask for a thought for the committee's recommendation or yeah I agree right just English the sound of otherwise I have no problems with it okay all right so I'll take this out here and okay have we deleted the foot there's a footnote here we're not as far as the footnote yet yeah so this looks good except especially because this language largely tracks our town council rules with one small addition where it says summary of the minority views or a minority report I will not vote for this process if it says or a minority report the report there's always one report every committee has one report which summarizes minority views but I don't support giving an option of a completely separate report that represents the minority report I understand your point and I don't I have no problem with that I I believe that our rules allow that and that what is saying here is that if a minority report is requested it can be part of the report no no no is it is allowed in our rules our rules never say anything about a minority report yeah they do they do actually mention what he reports and they minority opinion they say minority views they don't say anything about a separate report exactly right but they don't they don't say that we can't have minority reports so if I have a vote on this then we'll have a vote but and that's unbelievably crazy in my opinion that okay well Darcy let me give another position here the phrase minority report is a very strong phrase and it casts even if the minority is in fact less the majority because it's a minority report it cast it almost on equal terms with the majority report so as long as the report the report from the committee includes the minority views fairly I think that that is fine but to call to have a separate minority report I think leads towards divisiveness and taking sides and we do that enough without anyone telling us how to do it so I don't think we need to I think I'd like to go for the kinder general ones as long as we understand that the minority views will be fairly represented in the committee report if I may large thank you also remember that every council has the opportunity to speak at length at the council meeting on their views so in addition to having the minority view expressed in the report the council or counselors are free to speak during council deliberation either elaborating on those views or revising them whatever so it's not I think I prefer Evan's suggestion of simply the report shall include a summary of the minority views period and strike for minority report if requested because it does in fact reflect our practice and our rules though it is not explicitly disallowed by our rules our rules don't really reflect it and secondly the counselor or counselors are perfectly free and should speak in council in defense of their views in addition to having their views expressed correctly and accurately in the report of the committee so we have a practice of committee reports we do not have a practice of committee reports and minority reports and that practice includes the inclusion of minority views and I think all good shares run that by the minority before they actually submit it so they say here's what I'm planning to write and check with the minority to make sure that it reflects their views accurately so I actually do think Evan suggestion is a good one that we stop after you know at the at the word views period Alyssa the only thing I have to add that's slightly more specific is our rules specifically say exactly what everyone has just said other than the minority report which is that report shall include blah blah blah pros and cons relating to any proposed action minority views comma a record of any votes taken blah blah blah so I think minority views has worked extremely well for the town council thus far it has been very frustrating for everyone when there have been separate minority reports and we have to work together absolutely as a committee to say our reports need to accurately reflect what the minority views were in any given circumstance because there could be a whole bunch of different reasons for them but as I have just expressed numerous times before it is not appropriate to have a separate minority report as a separate report now that doesn't mean that verbally somebody can't say could somebody at somebody at town council say even if like the minority person doesn't say why they want felt that way another town counselor just like at town meeting could say I know it says the minority views were this but could somebody tell me more about that absolutely like George said the minority views could up both express themselves at the town council meeting and the town counselors could ask for more information absolutely it's just that it's one report because it represents what the committee did together if you if one was going to go down a road of having a separate minority report to feel like you got to write your own report then that means the majority of views each get to write their own report to because they each get to say exactly why they voted yes on everything and then you just have a huge mess so I think minority views and we hold each other to the standard that we expect that it will represent the minority views I just want to say that the reason that that's in here is because I had advice from other committee chairs including Mandy Joe who does have the practice of allowing the minority to write their own piece a minority report within the within the committee report which is where it would be and so I find it extremely undemocratic for majority people in the council to want to squash the minority views it's I find it crazy and no one is trying to do that the chair is the one writing the report and if the chair is in the majority or the minority the chair is responsible for summarizing both majority and minority views no one's trying to silence anyone because you disagree doesn't mean you can call it undemocratic it's just it's uncommon on the chair to do that has nothing to do with the majority it has to do with democracy it has to do the chair should be offering the minority person the ability to write a minority report but I can see that four people are in the majority and they want to wash the minority view so why don't we have a vote I'm listening Darcy I want to say something you kind of mischaracterized what was said just then and when you talked about a good chair of course ask the people who are in the minority what their what their thoughts were and in fact runs the language by them and that is included in the report so it's not about allowing the majority to shut out the minority but the reason I don't like to separate minority report is that it polarizes situations that don't need to be polarized we have many things about which we really do have opposing views but lots of things we can agree more or less but still have some minority opinions and as long as those opinions are included in the report it's just it's democratic and it's a much much better way to go forward so I don't want it to make it act like there's always sides on everything there are many times when there are sides but on everything there aren't so I'd hate to have it so that we're just constantly polarizing ourselves with our separate reports but I do agree that a good chair will run the language by the people who had voted the other way voted in the minority and that they have a chance to look at the language and approve the language and I believe that is the practice in most committees of the council so it's not like they're being squashed everywhere. Mandy Jo asks the minority if they want to write the minority report. I've been in the minority on CRC I have never once been asked to write the minority views Mandy Jo has summarized my views in the report so I don't wish to have done that on occasion but when I have been in a minority on CRC I have not been asked to write my own report Mandy Jo has done a wonderful job as chair summarizing my minority viewpoints and so I don't think that's a practice that's done all the time so. But it is. We did not have separate minority reports but when you said she asked them for the words they were put in the general report of the committee where I believe they're stronger. So well anyway why don't we have someone make a motion and so that we can. So with with the chair's permission I will make a motion and the motion would be to strike the phrase or a minority report comma if requested at the end of step six. I will second that. Okay any discussion. Roll call vote Alyssa. Yes. Darcy no Dorothy. Yes. Evan. Yes. George. Yes. Okay. All right so going back to number four. Evan just suggested that we look at the rubrics and so here they are. They're almost verbatim what was sent by CRC other than changing the CRC to TSO and so we have a is the community impacts benefits and drawbacks review process and be smart. So I was really really hoping that rather than words if we were going to if we're going to be flexible and just use it as a guide and not make it mandatory I was really hoping that we wouldn't have to go through it line by line to wordsmith it but rather just adopt it as a guideline that isn't that is optional. I think that that's a reasonable request as long as as long as it's clear that the language doesn't say that we have to do every one of those things. Right it's kind of like a checklist if we have some topic in front of us that has broad based community interest this would be something we could look at to say oh we shouldn't forget this for that. So other thoughts Melissa? So I agree with not trying to reword Smith those two processes I would like to make the following two comments one is to back up one sentence at the end of the first sentence in step four which is titled deliberation the word deliberation at the end of the sentence should not be capitalized because it is never capitalized again. Then in the second sentence I'm just a little nervous about the wording where it says the committee may employ either or both it doesn't give us the choice of throwing them both out the window and so I know the first word is may but if we want to throw them both out of the window then I don't think that may is giving us that option now I don't know under what circumstances we might want to throw them out the window but I can see an applicant of some kind coming to us and saying one of these because it says you will you'll either use one or you'll use both and if we say you know what this is such a different situation we don't even need to do that we just think it's awesome um I don't where does that leave us are we do when we say may are we really saying we could use these or not or are we actually saying we either have to use one or we have to use both there is no third choice I just want us to be clear on what we're telling people we're going to do George I think Alyssa raises a very good question to which I'm not sure I have a very clear answer I guess part of me feels like these are useful tools which we may choose to employ or we may not choose to employ it it's up to us but if the language is taken to mean we must employ one or the other or both then I have a problem I think in most cases we'll probably I mean I have a problem with the whole thing I think the language the wording is just you know but we're not going to get into that we'll leave that aside the deeper question is must we use one or the other or is it simply these are tools we can choose to use if we wish I prefer the latter yeah we could just say may choose to employ right so it's an aid to your memory you know remind you to think to think about does this apply should I do this I mean that's where it's useful to me it's just purely as a memory checklist but I can say no don't have to do that one don't have to do that one oh but this is important and George do you still hold your hand up I'm sorry it should come down I'm pleased if you can take it down please do so I'm resorting to simply raising my hand or just pulling my way in which I apologize for because at the moment I can't let me see if I can get back in um so are we okay with that the committee may choose to employ either the CIBD or both the both of the processes guiding its review in guiding its review um honestly I still think that has the same problem but I'll refer it I don't know a better way of phrasing it because I agree I think I'm in agreement with people that we might decide we actually I think I'm in agreement that we do I mean I believe I'm hearing agreement that we may for whatever reason choose not to use either one of these but I'm not sure that may choose more may really solves the problem that reads in English so maybe Evan or Dorothy has a better phrase um I'm gonna go back guys 15 huge trucks just came in front of my house it may be every source to restore the power I don't know yay well we hope so we hope so so there were like so many huge trucks and police blocking things off I didn't know if because we haven't figured out who's supposed to get rid of the cut down my big tree um uh next door whether it's Chewattie's insurance they're my insurance so I thought maybe I'm gonna get the tree which I kind of didn't want them to do in the dark tonight but I think it's power so that's good okay so I'm back and I was listening to everything and it sounded all good I was agreeing with everything you guys were saying so okay are we are we okay with that language in four um I think it's it is hard it's just a verb that is mandatory you know it's it's it's it's it's saying may choose to employ um so um I think we might be done I what about they may may find these processes useful oh I like that you know kind of feel a little weaker than employ um and yet that's what they're there for to make us think and say oh yeah is this is this you know like on smart is this specific enough and all that both smart is easier for me than the other one the other one uh you have to decide whether it's relevant to what you're doing well they're gonna do it but it's good to have the list there so you can not have to create it yourself Alyssa yeah I agree I mean I agree totally with the sentiment and I know you're trying to express it to Darcy and we're all trying to come up with words I appreciate what Dorothy just said because it's there is a guide for us what I'm trying to avoid right is I'm trying to look at it from the negative standpoint because that's so easy for me and I'm looking at it and somebody comes to us and asks us to review something and we get to this point and we make various decisions but we don't actually fill out like a chart with all those things on the rubric and they say you didn't follow your own process and like I don't want to have that fight I don't either I don't think anyone could say that if it says that it's not mandatory that we do it um so I guess I think that's pretty pretty loose language um Evan so I actually um I think that the language provides us enough flexibility I actually we kind of we looked at the rubric and then we said we're gonna use this as a guide so we don't have to talk about it and then we stopped talking about it which I'm not actually not comfortable with and the reason for that is um we sort of just took the rubric that CRC had and just said we're gonna use this but we're very different committees and we have very different scopes and and and areas of focus and so I'm trying to look at them also I'm noticing that the the one that CRC sent us is slightly different than the one that's on this so I don't know where those changes came in um because I don't see like a track changes but I noticed there are differences between what CRC sent and what we have in front of us um and I literally can't track where they came from um but the other thing is you know this talks about things that are within the jurisdiction of CRC right I mean this is literally designed for CRC by CRC and I guess I'm I would appreciate a discussion about whether this is actually relevant to us and if it includes things that we want to so for example the main purpose that we the main reason we exist in the main reason we get things is measures that may affect the provision of town services and yet nothing in this rubric even touches necessarily on the operation of departments or the provision of services so I guess I'm we sort of just took this and said yeah let's go for it but as I'm looking at it I'm like well a lot of these are really outside the scope of this committee and maybe we still want to consider them but I think it's worth having a discussion and then on the other side of it is there's nothing in here that actually touches on with the exception of transportation because that was sort of moved to our charge I think after CRC had developed this um that actually really gets at what's unique about our charge which is the departments themselves um so I guess well the health and welfare and well-being of the town you know as opposed to maybe historical cultural um and all that stuff but I'm thinking it's 820 okay I'm thinking that your point is really good um I I kind of thought those sort of things left over from that committee I forgot the name of it that wanted to the citizens committee that wanted to kind of do this with all of our measures I don't think CRC invented I think maybe we need to spend some time and then send things into Darcy of proposed language that really relates to town services and outreach which we keep forgetting but I don't really feel like doing it tonight but I will if you want to okay I mean I'm I'm game if you want to but I just thought maybe my brains would work better earlier in the morning yeah I would propose that we um stop here for today and um at some point we need to vote on the review process but you may I don't know if you want to vote on it before we uh figure out the outreach stakeholder outreach document um but I am glad that we got through the review document and um I do kind of want to look very briefly at our work plan before we um before we adjourn today um are we okay with taking this up again at the next meeting but um but I'm I'm hoping that we can take up something substantive at the next meeting um before we finish the outreach part of this um but I would like to look at the work plan so that we can talk about it like what what we want to take up next um and Alyssa is that a hand yes we said we were going to come back to the footnote because we were trying to flip around between the sections so the little footnote and references so I we just need those two sentences just gone because in our in because we already had this argument and because the word measure includes bylaw order resolution or other vote or proceeding adopted none of which only bylaw of these things is the only thing that applies to this committee so just sentences out and they just go away we don't need them anymore at the bottom of six both of those just go away do do people agree with that I do yes I think they should go um I don't mind it going because the that definition is the craziest definition I think I've ever seen um good so and I think the only request I would make Darcy if you if you would would be then to produce a clean version of this um perhaps for us to see in advance but certainly to have us for next time so we have I don't know I guess it would have to have the track changes but we'd like I'd like to see a clean version of of what we have done today and hopefully we'll be ready then to to vote on it next time sounds good yeah I have a question did we vote on some sections or are we going to delay that until we have the clean copy we've not voted on any sections do my no okay all right that's fine I just need that clarified so I think we're going to vote on the entire document when it's ready yeah okay what do we need before it's ready george besides a clean copy um I think there's still a question of these of the language of these rubrics which I understand now are optional so maybe we could say we could keep them separate and maybe that's wise and we're just going to vote on the process and that we could do that right now and then we can come back to the rubrics since they're out anyway and discuss them at at some other point that sounds good do we want now on the review process I think that might be appropriate I don't think I could ever vote for these this rubric anyway the way it's written yeah um so I as long as it stays as something we can use and we can certainly talk about it but if he actually asked me to vote on it I have so many problems with it I don't know where I would go but so yes let's let me vote on the process tonight and be done with it yeah that's good oh um but we don't have a clean copy in front of us so that's the only problem right do people feel comfortable voting for it without the clean copy um I do because I think that we were clear and um I have a level of trust so I think we could okay yes I agree I agree that I trust that we have we have really looked at this carefully you weren't just saying oh I'll write a note about later right you were very carefully changing everything we talked about and I just want to be clear that not only is that footnote coming out but we're also taking those two rubrics out of the process they're just now and so it's totally cool that they were in here while we were doing this but when we next time have the document that is the process that we're all going to vote for tonight that then we just say those are separate documents those are not part of this process right and we could we could look at that at separately but yeah if we're going to do that then in step four under deliberation we probably should strike c cibd and smart rubrics below that should be strict yeah right yes it's mentioned that's fine but we should strike that yeah and then I think we have a document we can actually vote on yep that makes total sense what what are you saying to strike in step four deliberation you have at the moment a sentence standing alone just at the end c blah blah blah I think you should strike that and the language above makes it clear that these documents exist and that we may choose to employ them but they're not actually part well right they're not actually part of the formal process itself so we're separating them out and we can talk about them separately okay I think we can vote who would like to move to adopt this I so move second I wish I could the picture of the guy going up in the white thing up to them up to the box okay that's great I second um any additional comment thank you all for all the work this has been quite a labor but I think we've gotten to where we need to be and so we can pat ourselves on the back yes I know comments about the document okay um roll call vote elissa I yes Darcy I Doracy yes Evan I George hi okay um so we have a review process that was a little excruciate all right trust trust me this has been happening at other committees as well this is not as easy as it looks yeah um so let's very quickly look at we don't have minutes to um approve tonight they they didn't get finished um so let me just save this that would be really bad if I lost we trust that um so uh let's look at our work plan for a minute just to see what what we think about it what's coming up let's here we go wait a minute Bob that was some little armada coming down the street okay tell me if you see it um just a minute do you see the work plan I do not moment shrink it a bit if you could it's a little off-center at least on my screen yeah and I see it still need to yeah thank you don't undo it till it's done Bob so um here we are on august 6 oh we've done a practice preliminary presentation of the surveillance technology by-law so we can do that at any time and Paul of course expected to see that tonight so on august 20th what we have coming up are some more appointments from manager we're going to have a preliminary presentation of the public way policy that Lynn is presenting and then we can you know we'll have more space to do something else like maybe a half an hour or to an hour where we could either do um the preliminary presentation of the surveillance technology by-law or we could do something else I've heard that Dorothy and George are preparing something about parking in Lincoln Avenue could you give us an idea about what's happening there well George and I have met and tomorrow we meet with um Guilford and Paul's suggestion also um Chief Livingston and so we will proceed and see where we are and um I think you know barring strange things happening we should be ready to do uh George stopped me if I'm wrong our preliminary presentation um by on the 20th or what do you think George I certainly think we could I think what's going to be important to us is is the feedback from the rest of you um and that you really can't give us feedback until we give you something concrete to look at right um and that's right it probably won't look right that much different from what you've seen before but it's still valuable for us to have the discussion if you if it's the agenda so we should be ready uh we will be ready by the 20th to make a preliminary presentation a preliminary site right mainly to solicit comments from the committee yeah and quite giving an idea of what we are proposing yeah and then do you think that um that a four you could have a formal presentation I think a lot's going to depend on the reaction of the of the committee the other three of you and what you think I think that's very obviously extremely important on many levels but um some of you may wish to have a much broader discussion right now we're focusing on Lincoln Avenue and that specific issue that the item actually reads DPWG parking slash Lincoln Avenue what we're going to be presenting is Lincoln Avenue um so there may be some feedback on that so we just need to hear you need to hear what we have in mind and then we need to hear from you what um you feel is lacking or is needed um or whether you want to go forward um we have to convince you as a committee that this is something that needs to be addressed and we're going to offer you um a proposal uh so uh that's I think where we'll be at is what what the reaction is from the rest of you right so it's a little bit beyond Lincoln in that it includes the streets that are part connected to it um McClellan and Cosby coming in and going up and fearing and whether whether there's impacts on sunset and we're going to be looking at the whole length of Lincoln Avenue as the last study did but we did do some really good discussions and I've done some drive-around to see if it was impact or tied into other streets and it doesn't really seem to be beyond those streets so um we want to present it to you we want to get your input and we want to make it something that we all get behind okay um whatever our final product is it should be something that the committee approves um so what kind of time do you think that it will require I think 30 minutes I don't think we're going to know until we talk to the people tomorrow yeah I think 30 minutes should be adequate I mean we and also you can just shut us up answering the questions that are in the preliminary presentation is not very I think normally it won't take that long that's that's my hope too our our discussion would might make it take longer um so but but the actual presentation usually shouldn't be long I'm sorry yeah I wasn't thinking I was thinking the entire show presentation we would try to make as brief as we could say what 10 15 minutes at the most hopefully right so presentation you mean George and me talking we were thinking George and me talking and the committee discussing I have to know yeah we're really interested in the committee's response okay so um if if um we have the public way policy and we have you are you definitely going to be ready or if you're meeting tomorrow going to decide whether you're ready or are you definitely we should we will be ready okay so um uh it seems like the public way policy and the Lincoln Avenue preliminary presentation and the appointments um we could put the surveillance technology bylaw on as a you know in case we get through everything which is unlikely we and we do have to finish we well are we going to discuss those the rubrics of things we look into at that next meeting are we going to that's right yeah so we have some stuff to do yes and that that could take up some time the rubrics yes yeah and if people have thoughts about the rubrics in the meantime if you could send them to me that would be good um and otherwise um and are we you know so Lincoln Avenue parking uh we had originally envisioned as being a much larger issue you know I understand and that that may be there may be the bone of contention I don't we can't guess what are the minds of the rest of you um but we are coming in with a fairly focused presentation and you may all just blow it to pieces I don't know but um or you may immediately want to tell us you don't want to hear from us until we provide you with a much larger presentation at that point we still would need guidance from you because I have no idea what that means so um that's where we're at so if they don't want to hear from us now we I guess we'll be quiet but we're ready to give you something okay this is the Lincoln Lincoln Avenue presentation I have volunteered and I think I have volunteered George and I'm not absolutely positive whether he agreed that we would after this is done we would then look at the whole but the parking report the downtown parking study which um kind of got scuttled it's got a number of good points which haven't been given fair discussion that's a more complicated issue um but we would do that separately because in George's my discussions we felt that the two were not interlinked but that we thought that the big parking issue for the further one that we would then look at that after the Lincoln Avenue thing is done is that still good with you George I'm sure you don't want to do it no I have no problem with that um I think okay okay that's I I think quick questions yes so a couple quick questions and then I think Paul might want to make an announcement if he's still here um so a couple quick questions are associated with um let's not put surveillance on just like I was really surprised to see it on today let's not put it on next time because I think between the rubrics the Lincoln presentation and the town council refer on the public ways policy we have more than enough to do and so just carry it forward in the work plan and then the other question I had um oh and I agree with what I think we're Dorothy and George we're going with the Lincoln thing maybe on the work plan we should go ahead and separate the Lincoln and parking preliminary presentation just to show that we're not forgetting about it it's still in the bike rack but we've kind of temporarily separated them so that people don't show up thinking we're going to talk about parking over the whole world and the other so and again with the surveillance I don't want people to show up and then feel sad because we didn't talk about but then the other thing I wanted to ask about is because knowing that open meeting law is always super tricky what is it that Dorothy and George might be able to send us ahead of time in writing meaning if it got posted with the meeting posting you know if it got attached to that like we've been doing um that shouldn't be a problem but I don't know if they really have time to do it before the 20th I'm just saying none of us likes to walk into a meeting cold with no information so were you planning it was purely verbal or were you planning to give us something in writing we should certainly provide you with some kind of written material ideally in advance at least maps um that you could look at begin and perhaps actually a written description of the proposal um would be also appropriate so I hear you Alyssa that um if we are planning to make a preliminary presentation it would be more than appropriate to have something for you to look at and ideally it should be posted in advance it has to be so um if we don't have it then we're going to have to just uh we'll do our best but yes we should have something but okay here's a question we're doing a preliminary presentation to our committee this is not in my mind the time for a public hearing that would be after a formal presentation yeah am I correct on that or please I think we're not talking about hearings dirty we're just trying to I think Alyssa would like to know would really like to have and should have some kind of written materials in advance of our presentation and she's asking well was she talking about in her share pack or was she talking posted uh for the public because earlier today can I tell you what I'm thinking yes open meeting laws our issue here Dorothy you're going to be presenting what you think is something we should do you're going to be presenting that to a quorum of the committee the only way you're allowed to do that is at a posted meeting however the way we've worked with this through both oca and at the town council level is if you attach it to the meeting posting which Athena knows how to do meaning you'd have to have it done 48 hours in advance you don't have to do it at the exact time if she posts the meeting a week ahead that's fine but you need to have it as part of the meeting posting 48 hours in advance that way you don't have to worry about breaking open meeting law by sharing it with us just like you can't email it to us normally because that's breaking open meeting law but if the public can see it and the public can't see the share packet and the public doesn't know it's in the other packet unless we put that little link there like Athena's been putting on the town council postings that say here's the information go to that right right but we didn't do that with town council town manager appointments or did we he has already posted that information with the town council and prior to the town council meeting our recommendations do need to have that 48 hour posting and that means sharepoint's not even part of the conversation that means that the posting not the packet but the posting has to either include the document or send you to a packet that has it in it yeah you know I follow so many meetings and this is not done well we're going to do it because we're supposed to do it okay okay um did did um Alyssa suggest that the town manager wants some kind of announcement for us just so that you wouldn't listen to anything I said because I said that first it's about the bonus that he's going to offer us for our wonderful it's about you max I I see something you know yes yeah it's not about combat pay for you guys sorry um the chancellor has announced that the university is making a significant change in their plans for the fall I haven't digested the entire thing but you all have it in your inbox he says while we remain committed to our previously announced instructional plan regrettably we are reversing our previously announced offer to provide on-campus housing for students whose coursework is entirely remote only students who are enrolled in essential face-to-face classes including laboratory studio and capstone courses which have been designated inspire will be accommodated in campus residence halls and be granted access to campus facilities in dining this fall all other students whose courses do not require a physical presence on campus should plan to engage in their studies remotely from home in the interest of public health we are also strongly urge our off-campus students whose coursework is remote to refrain from returning to the Amherst area for the fall semester for they too will not have campus facilities at their disposal research laboratory of which resumed operation in the spring will remain open um okay wow does that kind of destroy our downtown fall um so I think um he says I realize that today's announcement will cause disruption for many of you and as a major departure from the plan we released in June our intention at this time at that time with our with our plans to conduct most classes remotely while inviting all students back to campus was to strike a balance between the immersive residential experience so important to our students development and the health and safety of the entire community in the Amherst area unfortunately despite our best efforts in detailed planning the proliferation the pandemic has left us no choice but to pursue this very urgent approach um our deliberations our deliberations were also informed by the health and safety concerns expressed by our faculty and staff by the citizens and leadership in our host community Amherst in addition we determined that the risk of a mid-semester closing of the campus is real that making the decision not to bring students back to campus is preferable to sending everyone at the event in the event but out uncontrolled outbreak there's more so you can read it at your leisure yeah okay okay I guess it's the fear of students coming from all over the country I think that must be the main thing when we think that the COVID's all over the place now yeah yeah no that's very that's huge thank you for sharing that um all right I think we're done um uh let me just check and make sure that art doesn't want to have a public comment I think art is fled he's retired oh bled is a straw I apologize for that probably because I was going to offer him an order of merit if he was still here I'm just hoping Emily doesn't flee after this meeting thank you Emily well I wore I wore her but she didn't she's still here hey I could use a pillow thank you you didn't even fight no thank you Emily does that mean that art missed this huge announcement apparently it's in the press I got an email all right so um I declare this meeting adjourned at 847 thank you everybody thank you thank you thank you Darcy