scenario would be to start it in May and have it done by the time the students come back in early September. So. Okay. How are you? I wanted to just, okay, so in the retreat, we had talked about starting off with limits. I'm not saying we should do it for this project because it's too late. That's something that should be done in the beginning of a project. But I just wanted to ask, is that a possibility that we can start off with, saying that this is 100, I mean, one million or 900,000 is what we want to and can we get people to design within that? So is that something we can look at in the future? That's one question. The second thing I was thinking, I was reflecting on with parking is, we don't want to think of this project in isolation, which I don't think we are, but just if we're looking at the bigger or long-term vision for a downtown and hoping that there will be a garage down the road, then making use of this space more for a plaza and a gathering space would be a better use. And even though it feels like in the short run, businesses are going to lose some parking, but can be fine parking somewhere else. But also just based on other downtowns that are thriving, creating gathering spaces, making the downtown walkable, bikeable is what brings more people and not more parking spaces. Even that seems counterintuitive, but yeah. And the third thing is I was looking at comparables. It does sound like a really huge figure for a small space. And I came across the Northamptons-Bulaski Park and I don't know if people are familiar with the renovation there. And it's a very similar area. It's a one-acre plot that was recently renovated. And they paid in two phases. The first phase, they paid $1,450,000 and that they got from CPAC along with $400,000 from Park Grant. And then the phase two, they just passed another $965,000 for that project. So it looks like these kind of projects do cost that much. Okay, Alyssa. So I wanted to wait because this is an odd situation in terms of us saying this is a first look and it's going to get referred to a council meeting and then we're hearing staff saying, yeah, we'll talk about that at the council committee level. But in fact, this is one of the things I've reflected on at our town council meetings before. We can't expect all of the town councilors to show up at all those council committee meetings. So it really was important that we get a lot of these questions out today. I appreciate that some people have saved some of them and we'll pass them along to the committee that this gets referred to. But we really did need to talk about this in this level of detail because otherwise how on earth would TSO know what were the questions that you needed to have answered in order for us to make TSO to make a reasonable recommendation. I will mention that I was really hoping Pulaski Park would not be invoked as a comparison here because it was invoked over and over again in the public meetings and Pulaski Park is way nicer than this is going to be. And that's just a fact. It's going to have way more, it has way more amenities and is way different than what we're able to do here. We're not making Pulaski Park and we won't have the amenities that Pulaski Park has. I appreciated that Kathy pointed out the deteriorating site amenities because this is a perfect example of our lack of maintenance. It is so frustrating to me that we say, oh, this is the jewel of Amherst. Oh, this is so amazing. And we have literally ignored it for decades in terms of maintenance. I've been on those walks. I've talked to the staff. And so I will hope that now that we said that two years ago and that we said it again tonight, that when it does get to the committee level, that we will actually see a maintenance budget associated with the amenities that this does have, right? Which, you know, is some, because we have to make sure like electrical cords aren't sticking up out of the ground when it rains, like they were here a couple of years ago. So I think that's really important. I think it was a really frustrating to me choice tonight to not give us the numbers ahead of time on this current situation. I think that's really important. I think it's important to be aware of the impact that we have on the community. There are a lot of different iterations, parking spaces. There was literally no reason not to do that except to get us to all fall in love again with the historic pictures. I do agree. We absolutely need to do something here. But we also just need to make clear about again, managing expectations for our community. What it is that they'll be giving up because it'll be such a great opportunity for us to make sure that we have the parking there all together. Let's remember that we already have parking on both sides. For most of boatwood for the entire length of the south part of the comment. So we can't add a lot, but certainly it would be great to see what we could add. This project has come a very long way in terms of adjustments. And I appreciate all the work DPW and planning staff and everybody has tried to, you know, take the best of what we can do and think what we can do with that. And I think it's a great opportunity for us to make sure that we have the opportunity to make sure that we have the opportunity to make sure that we are frustrated that we spent $64,000 with Western and Samson. And they at one point had the traffic running behind town hall through that parking lot behind town hall. So we have really come a long way in doing this, but also remember that when people said, well, I wish there really wasn't any parking there in front. A number of people at those meetings also said, I really wish there wasn't that parking at all. I think that's what they did, and that's what they did. And they really paved it so that the farmer's market could pull their trucks up onto it. And yes, I know there are farmers markets where they don't have their vehicles parked right there, but we specifically did that because our farmers said they wanted that. So as long as all those issues can be addressed, then, you know, I think we can move forward. But I want to remember that there were reasons that we had those conversations over the past several years and that those reasons still exist. to pull their vehicles up anymore, then that they're going to continue to need to use the way we redesigned the spring street lot for them several years ago. Thank you. Prior to calling on Dorothy, I'd like to step out of my role as president and make my own observations and questions. One, however, is as president and that is that TSL always has the right to approach me or their members or the president at the time and say we'd like to have a more public conversation and we can figure that out. So I don't think all of this needs to take place in the confines of a five member committee. And I just wanna make sure that people think broadly about how that conversation can take place. Second of all, this is an eyesore. I drive through towns of New England and I love their town commons. Just the other day, my husband's and I drove out route nine to the snow farm and through beautiful town commons and I look at this town common and I go, oh my God, it is ugly, I won't walk on it. It's rough to walk on. The mud is all over the place and we need to do something about it. So I hope whatever we end up deciding, whatever we see with parking, whatever we with picnic tables and so forth, we end up with something that in fact is a center of our town and that it is part of a broad plan that helps our town feel proud and reinvigorate our downtown. In a way, we are going to need to invest as we come out of COVID. And so I loved Evan's analogy or discussing what downtown looked like on the announcement of the presidential election and just other things that I think we've all learned out of this. So that's just, I'm all for figuring this one out. I don't wanna break the bank but let's get it done. Dorothy? Building on the beauty of New England, commons and greens. I think that's what we need and what we want in the park, the commons. So I think that we have to remember it's not one park or green or common to meet all the needs. We have Kendrick Park being developed as a more active park, although it will have beautiful areas of green. And we have Groff Park with some wonderful new interactive things. I do not like Pulaski Park. I made a big point a few months ago of walking through it very carefully and deliberately and thinking, is this what we want in our downtown? And I came away saying, no, too much paving, not enough trees. The, it's very interesting student playground, children's playground, which I could see in our Kendrick Park. It was very urban and it didn't keep that sense of the calm center where people can gather. And I grew up in Windsor, Connecticut. And when I drove by there recently, I said, my God, they haven't changed the common. And it was still there, like three different sections, like ours is in several sections. It was still there. And it looked pretty much the same. And it was just a wonderful feeling. Other buildings have changed here and there. But I think we want that sense of green and grass and paths that people can walk on something that's more accessible that just represents a calm green spirit in the center of our town. And I hope that we can do that. Steven. Yeah, so if we were starting from scratch, which is one way to look at this, and even if we had 21 spaces or whatever the number is, as part of the portfolio of things that had to be accommodated, there's no chance that we would say that the most logical place to put those 21 spaces, whatever the number is on the common. It just, we would be run out of town. So because there is a parking lot there now, doesn't mean that we should continue doing the parking lot there forever. But the impact of doing even a tiny parking space is extraordinary because like if we were to do just two spaces on the common, you still need a dry vial. You need a place for those people that park on those spaces to back up. So it's a really inefficient way of, is it particularly an inefficient way of handling small parking lots is to really basically to do what's being proposed. It's much more efficient to use existing infrastructure. Basically that's why on-street parking is always the best option for parking because you already have a road there and you're not creating new asphalt somewhere else. Okay, I'm going to make the motion and I'm going to look for a second. And that is to refer the Planning Director Memo of 111320 regarding the North Common and Main Street Parking Lot project. A first look to the town services and outreach committee for review and recommendation to the town council within 90 days. We're off second. Is there any comment? Can we just call it the North Common project and not the North Parking Lot project? That was a quoting in the title of the memo. Yeah. If the group comes back. I'll move, well, I'd like to propose a many, no. Well, I'd like to propose a many in the motions just to call it the North Common because if you call it the North Common North Parking Lot, it sends it in a different direction. Is there a second to that motion, Dorothy? Seconded. Okay, so here's a problem. Is that's not the way the memo is titled? No. And money is coming from the Transportation Fund. So to pretend that it doesn't involve parking or parking lots is kind of silly. I think if the committee can be back and says we don't want that, then it's a different. But the way the memo is written that is in your packet, I believe at least is a memo regarding the North Common and Main Street Parking Lot project. Hard to retitle a memo. That's my comment is the way the memo's title does not dictate the outcome. I'll withdraw my motion or I don't even try to make it as a motion. Dorothy, are you willing to withdraw? Okay, thank you. So the motion has been made and seconded. This is the original motion. Is there any further comment? Kathy. Yeah, I just have a quick comment to build on Alyssa's point. I completely support the motion and I would like the committee chair to reach out to us to have us submit any questions that we might have so we can get a fuller list and then potentially call a meeting of the whole if there's enough interest in it. Because I think there are questions and there's more things the town staff can tell us. So many of us thought it long and hard about this so you can just get the benefit of our questions. Thank you. Any other comments at this time? All right, I'm going to start with Darcy, no, Patty Angelis. Yes. Darcy DeMonte. Yes. Reese Merzi, yes. Mandy Jo Hanneke. Yes. Berthie Pam. Yes. Evan Ross. Yes. George Ryan. Yes. Kathy Shane. Yes. Steve Schreiber. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Yes. Sarah Schwartz. Yes. Barney Balmune. Yes. Alyssa Brewer. Yes. I'm going to pass it unanimously, 13-0-0-0. We are going to move on to my agenda. Tax classification. This was taken off the consent agenda. And so we, the motions that we will deal with include the suspension of 8.4 and then the other motions. However, Darcy, you particularly asked that this be taken off the consent agenda. Could you briefly speak to your rationale? Yeah, I just think it's an important issue that's probably really important to a certain sector of town residents that probably don't know that we're talking about it tonight. And if more than half of the owners of the residential taxpayers would be benefited by changing the formula, I think that they would want to weigh in if they knew about it. So that's why it doesn't make sense to me to vote on it tonight, that there should be two. So that, you know, there'll probably be some kind of news item about this. And then if anybody wants to know about it, I think that they would want to weigh in if they knew about it. So that's why it doesn't make sense to me and then if anybody wants to weigh in about it, they can come and give public comment at the next meeting. Alyssa? Yeah, I got a wholeheartedly disagree. This is exactly the same recommendation we've been getting for decades. The entire town knows that we do this every November slash December to do this. And this is not news, it was not news when it was discussed last year. And just because a newspaper writes an article about it, doesn't mean more people are going to be paying attention to it. We had the information out more than 48 hours ahead. We are not going to get additional valuable information and all we're going to do is push staff out further in terms of getting things continued on with the process. I completely disagree with delaying. This is not about the public didn't know, of course the public knew and they are not going to know anymore because the Gazette may or may not publish an article that may or may not have any additional information beyond what was already made available 48 hours ahead.  Mandy, Joe? Yeah, no, I'm just going to make the motion and then I can speak to it if there's a second to suspend council rules of procedure 8.4, rule 8.4 for the current agenda item. There's a second. A second. Yeah, I can see. Mandy, Joe? I made the argument, Darcy, that you're making this year, last year and the reason I support suspending this year is because in between those two meetings last year we heard not one thing. And so that I think supports Alyssa's contention and everything she just said that the people that are concerned already know about it and all.  Yeah, I just want to, we don't have an alternative. And so I do think it's important if we think we want to see, Darcy, you made a statement that maybe half could benefit. We don't even know that in terms of homeowners, not homeowners and the way this plays out. So I don't think we can make another decision right now other than to go with what we've had because we would need to know a lot more to make a change and we're not going to have that information in a week. We may not have it in a year given the amount of work it would take to get us alternative what would happen. So it's a clear shift within a category. So I think we don't really have options here. So people can't even know whether they personally would benefit or not. It really depends. And so I think there are strong arguments why we stay with this. And then the other thing, it wasn't stressed enough this time, but last time, and it was in the slide, just because someone has a high-valued house does not mean they have a high income. So this is a very clumsy way to try to target lower income people that might be hurting. And that's, we really don't have information about the distribution of income that goes with properties. Because some people have a property that's just gone up in value and they don't have a lot of money. And there are other people that are vice versa. So it's a blunt tool. So we don't really have an option of not moving forward. And we're certainly not going to know anything more in two weeks from now. So that's why I would support the motion to waive the rule so we can vote on this tonight.  Yeah, I would just say that there's a reason why we have a rule that we look at something twice. And this is the type of thing that really makes sense to look at twice because it has to do with our residents' taxes. And I guess I just feel like I learned quite a bit from the slide deck this time around. It was updated. And there were figures on there that were new to me. And I guess I live in a moderately priced neighborhood and I feel like everybody in my neighborhood would benefit from that change. Everyone. And so I guess I just feel like we are not looking at it from the perspective of those people that are the ones on the lower end that would benefit. So all this is about whether or not we would hear it twice.  Well, toward Darcy just said, I'm not entirely convinced that you can make that conclusion because you have to remember that there's a break-even point above which people would actually pay more taxes, not less taxes. And it's a house that's approximately $500,000 in value. So it's a pretty complicated question. You'd really have to go and look at the value, the assessed value of each house by tract. And I think that would be a fairly complex thing to do. I think that the other thing, and I have to ask staff, Paul or Sean or Shanya if she's still at the meeting to respond to this. But there's a process that follows once we take this vote and that is that a form is filed with the Department of Revenue. The Department of Revenue then certifies the tax rate and that enables us to then go ahead and bill for taxes for the remainder of the fiscal year. And it would be very helpful if one of the professionals who works with us can tell us what the consequence of the delay would be. Paul, do you wanna speak to them? Sure, so the concern we have on the staff level and speaking for Shanya and Sean on this is that we need the vote of the council in order to submit the information to the Department of Revenue. If we wait till December 7th, which is your next meeting, then a lot of communities are all piled into the Department of Revenue at the same time trying to get their tax rates certified. And then that just delays us in our ability to get the tax bills out on time, which have to be out. People like to get them out before the end of December so they can deduct the taxes on their tax bills. So the sooner we can get the information into the Department of Revenue, the sooner we can get our tax rates certified by the Department of Revenue, the sooner we can move the process forward from the staff point of view. And I'd like to comment. I heard two things tonight that convinced me that we are not in any position to change the direction that we presently have on our tax rate. One is we have not done a survey in 10 years and we need to have very current and very up-to-date data. And the second is there is impact on the town from a staffing standpoint that has budgetary implications that need to be taken into consideration as well. We are not going to have either of those pieces of information, particularly a survey that replaces something that's now 10 years old that would allow us to actually look at this with an educated eye. And so I don't support delaying. So are there any other comments? All right, there's been a motion on the floor. The motion is to suspend town council rules as a procedure rule 8.4 for the current agenda item. It's been made and seconded. We start with Darcy Dumont. No. Reese Mersey, yes. To Hanakie. Yes. Pam. Yes. Ross. Yes. Ryan. Yes. Jane. Yes. Driver. Yes. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Baumann. Yes. Brewer. Yes. DeAngelis. Yes. The motion passes 12-1-0-0. The next motion is to adopt a minimum residential factor of one. Equal tax rate for all classes of properties for a fiscal year 2021 in that no open space discount be granted. Is there a second? Second, Hanakie. Thank you. Any conversation or question? All right, we begin this time with Reese Mersey. Yes, Hanakie. Yes. Pam. Yes. Ross. Yes. Ryan. Yes. Jane. Yes. Driver. Yes. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Baumann. Yes. Brewer. Yes. DeAngelis. Yes. Mont. No. Okay, it's 12-1-0-0. The next one is to not adopt a residential exemption for fiscal year 2021. Is there a second? Second, DeAngelis. Thank you. This is the time we start with, is there any further discussion? We start with Hanakie. Yes. Pam. Yes. Ross. Yes. Ryan. Yes. Jane. Yes. Driver. Yes. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. O'Millm. Yes. Brewer. Yes. DeAngelis. Yes. Schumann. No. Grießmer. Yes. It passes 12-1-0-0. And we have one final one, and that is to not adopt a small commercial exemption for fiscal year 2021. Is there a second? Steinberg second. Steinberg seconds it. Any further discussion? We start with Dorothy Pam. Yes. Evan Ross. Yes. Ryan. Yes. Jane. Yes. Driver. Yes. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. O'Millm. Yes. Brewer. Yes. DeAngelis. Yes. Schumann. Yes. Grießmer. Yes. Hannake. Yes. Passes unanimously 12-1-1-0-0-0. OK. We are moving on to Item F, prohibiting the use of wild exotic animals and traveling shows and circuses by the law. This was reviewed and discussed extensively last week. Since then, Sarah Schwartz, one of the non-council sponsors, has provided us with an email addressing several of the questions and issues in response to one of the issues and questions. I'm sorry, Lynn. I think we're doing public ways first. I'm sorry. We have a couple of staff folks waiting to present. I am so sorry about that. Use of public ways. First discussion, Brianna and who is our communication manager and Ben Rieger, who is a planning person. Please proceed. Would you like your memo up there or? I have, Lynn, I have slides that I will pull up in just a moment. Good evening, counselors, and thank you in advance for your time and attention. As Lynn mentioned, my name is Brianna Sundred, communications manager for the town, working out of both the town manager's office and the IT department. I'll try to keep my presentation efficient and respectful of your time. This project, I'm working in conjunction with the Department of Public Works and with guidance from the planning and inspections departments. I am here on behalf of the town to propose to you our pilot project for three solar powered information and communication signs, as well as three solar powered charging stations into request permission for use of the public way for the duration of the pilot project in downtown Amherst. So if you'll bear with me one second, I'm in charge of my own slides, so I'm just going to pull up that screen. Okay, so as I mentioned, I'm here to give you a preview of our one year proposed pilot program for the solar information communication signs and charging stations. I will give a quick overview about what the sign component of the pilot project is. These signs would serve as a trusted source of information for residents to receive information on upcoming events, ways to get engaged, public works in general, or emergency town updates. They allow us to offer instant and flexible messaging to push out important PSAs updates, especially critical during times of emergency or COVID-19 related updates. The company that we are working with on this pilot project is called SUFA, and they are a Massachusetts-based company that is female-owned and led. Other cities, mostly in the eastern part of the state, such as Boston, Maldon, Somerville, Everett, and more, currently have these signs in place. Brookline is the newest one to join that list with over 24 signs in their downtown area. SUFA signs are also coming to other locations in our region. I can't say what those are at this moment, because I don't think it's official, but they are in discussions with other communities nearby. The signs themselves are a 30-minute, four-bolt installation, no wires, no excavation, and the sites that we've chosen have minimal site or prep work that would be done by the Department of Public Works. The signs themselves are managed and maintained entirely by SUFA, who come out weekly to maintain the physical structure of the signs. I'm gonna move to a quick example. Hopefully everyone can see this okay. There's four side-by-side examples of these signs in Massachusetts cities and towns. You can see on the far right, I believe it's Revere using the custom backside of the sign to share some critical public health information. I'm gonna show you next just a mock-up of signs in Amherst, obviously not to scale and not in that location. This mock-up was recently done for the Design Review Board, who reviewed this project last week, and they had asked to see the signs in line with current way-finding designs that are coming to town in spring of 2021. On the left-hand side is the E-Ink screen. Again, this is just a mock-up. The E-Ink screen is similar to, if some of you have a Kindle, that type of screen technology. The important thing about this is that we are able to push real-time information to the sign. If there is an emergency, or there is a change in protocol due to COVID, we could have that post to the sign instantaneously, as well as being able to display other applets in terms of weather. We could have the PBTA bus schedule display on these signs, as well as link up our social media and be able to pull community members and visitors at the signs themselves. I'll talk a little bit more about this in the next slide or two, but I wanna call your attention to the bottom left square, which is reserved for advertising by local business. And right now that would be a free tool to our local businesses during COVID-19. On the right-hand side of the sign, this is, again, just a sample mock-up. These have not been finalized at all, but you see a map in line with designs from our public writer's walk. And we can have a custom design placed on the back of these signs. It's a vinyl printing that they do at the facility and they're laid, overlaid on top of the signs. So that can be something that we change every couple of months or seasonally and is very flexible. Here is just a view of the structural plans, which the design review board was very interested in seeing. It's also included in your packet. So hopefully if you have questions on that, we can look at that in more detail later. So something that I think is an important question, hopefully we have some good answers are why are these signs right for Amherst right now? So is a new sustainable technology that provides flexible, instantaneous and widespread updates to our community members on whether that's on public health guidelines, general town information, transportation updates and more. We ensure information absorption by visitors. Those that have access to devices or internet or those not connected to our other official town communication channels. As I mentioned in a previous slide, the signs will also assist our local business community and economy deal with the impacts of COVID-19 by offering free advertising for local business in a dedicated small portion of the eating screen that I had pointed out earlier. This is a one-year pilot program to see if this is the right fit for our community. So I wanna emphasize that this is a very flexible project. We would sign on for these signs for a year and we would be able to change that agreement at any point within the year because it is a licensed agreement. The project is CARES Act funded so it will not impact the town's budget if the project is completed or purchased before the end of December. And I mentioned this in the last slide, the custom back design can match our way of finding. We can use it for public health reminders or any number of different uses. I talked a little bit about flexibility earlier in the project. So I'll reiterate again, the one-year pilot license agreement to test out the signs and the technology, the easy installation, we can relocate or remove the signs if needed. We can change the designs of the signs as needed. We've also discussed doing a staggered installation option which allows for us to fine tune the locations and the design of the sign. For example, in future slides, I'm gonna tell you a little bit about the solar powered charging stations that are another component of this project. We are proposing the chargers be installed first and then the signs in the spring. The solar charging cores are ours to keep as part of this project, which means if we decide not to keep the signs, they're not working for us, we can keep the solar powered charging stations without any issue. And these are also easy to remove in place in different areas based on demand or need. In future slides, I will show you the proposed locations of both the signs and the cores. A little bit about the solar charging core. These solar charging cores, which we're proposing to install three in the downtown area will offer our community members access to charging ports to charge their devices and stay connected to important information and online resources. This is especially important with public buildings being closed to the public due to COVID-19. We also aim to bridge the digital divide and provide equitable access to power sources. Here you'll see just an actual photo of the sign. The bench and the kids will not be included, just the actual charging cores here. On top, you can see the solar panel in here are the USB charging point ports. For the potential sign locations, we're proposing three in the downtown Amherst area as well as three cores. We've been mindful of existing signage, infrastructure, ADA and other standards working closely with the planning department, public works and the inspections department. And we're planning around and with the upcoming way finding signs, making sure the saturation of signage doesn't impact where we place the signs and as well as incorporating the designs of the way finding signs that are coming online in spring. I'm gonna skip to this next map and it's a little bit bigger. And I apologize for the busyness of the forks and the other icons, but if I can call your attention to the red stars as where we're proposing the charging core locations. The first charging core location we are proposing right outside of St. Bridgets where the current transit, a high traffic transit stop is. The second location is outside of what used to be Barts. And we chose this location for its proximity to the UU church, which as you all know, has come online as a shelter for this season. The third charging core location is going to be outside of the Jones library on the bench by the crosswalk or at least that's where we're proposing. And speaking with the library director, she mentioned how their building being closed has impacted folks who were relying on that site to charge their devices and use internet. The next three locations that I'm gonna bring call to your attention are the three proposed sign locations. And those are identified by the blue question marks. The first one is outside of what used to be Starbucks. And right now it stands at the crosswalk. There is a concrete post and a metal pole sticking out of it with no signs. So it's our intention if all works out, according to plan is to remove that concrete post and concrete and metal posting to place one of our signs. The second location would be at the Amity Street and South Pleasant North, or North Pleasant and Amity Street corner. And the last location would be by the PVTA bus shelter transit stop by the Spring Street parking lot. And again, those are because of the flexibility of the signs and there's no wiring components or excavation needed. Those are flexible, but that is what we're proposing. So the potential core locations we just reviewed on the map, we tried to be mindful to be in proximity to transit stops or other high pedestrian traffic areas. And again, like with the signs, it's an easy four bolt installation. We can move, they can be moved quickly without with relatively low impact to new locations if the need arises. I do wanna make sure that the council is aware that the design review board did make their recommendation last week with their decision DRB FY 2021-04. They voted four to zero to positively recommend the proposed locations and designs of the three signs and three charging cores. They would like to review the final design prior to installation of signs in spring 2021. And after one year of installation, they would like us to return to the DRB to review and approve before the town considers extending their contract with the company. They also would like to review the success rate of each respective sign and charging core regarding its location, displayed information and design layout. So with that being said, I would love to allow for questions or comments from the council members. Yes, Dr. Angeles, move your hand up. Thank you. First of all, Brianna, I can't tell you how good it is to just see your face even if it's virtual, really good. Likewise. I'm curious if we were to, I think this is wonderful. And I'm curious about what we go through the one year. What would the cost be approximately if we were to just maintain these three cores and three signs? Or if we, I'm assuming if they work, we would expand it to the village centers, but what would the cost be? So for the charging cores, thank you for your question, counselor, Dr. Angeles. The charging cores as part of the initial purchase and contract will be ours to keep in perpetuity. So there will not be any ongoing costs associated with those unless there were, we needed to remove and do any fixing of a site that had the bolts installed. And I can't say what that cost would be, but it's a one-time cost for the charging cores. How it works with the next year, we would evaluate as the end of our license agreement came up. Typically, these signs go into communities and after the first year, there's little to no cost to the communities. As I mentioned in earlier slides, there is an advertising component of this where local businesses would use this as an advertising option. Right now that's free for local businesses. The idea would be at some point post COVID-19 recovery when we get there, hopefully that that would be a paid service and would pay for the ongoing maintenance of the signs. So that is something we would evaluate once we got to the end of our license agreement, whether or not it was something that we would be able to continue doing and what that cost would be. So that's a lot of words for saying, I don't have the definite year two costs in front of me at this moment, but it's something that as we got close to the end of our license agreement, we would be able to evaluate that.  Yeah, Breonna, I might have missed it. Do you have what the year one cost would be? What does it cost to do the licensing agreement and the initial installation of chargers? So that's question number one. And then I saw the design review board said, come back to them with an assessment of the use, how popular they were, whatever, how exactly would they get any information? Are these things, if I stop by this sign and look at it as it's changing, is it taking my picture? So how do we know whether anyone found it useful? How many people actually stopped to get the information there? Charging stations, I can imagine a different way of collecting information, but it's doing that. So that's second question. And then third is on the advertisements.  So just how do you think of being fair in terms of a space that would bring people or encourage people to use your server? Thank you for your questions, counselor. So if I, I'll start with the assessment, how we're going to assess the success of the signs. When I was speaking with the design review board, we discussed a couple of different options about whether we found the signs to be successful, whether that was polling community members and also working with the chamber and the bid to see from the business side of things, if they were perceiving that as a success. There's also a feedback mechanism that's built into the signs where we could poll community members and users or visitors by a text in response option. I don't think I had a visual of one of those, but it would be one of the squares that you see here we could use as a polling feature. And so we'd be able to gather feedback directly from users of the signs. And they also another thing that we would use as a measure would be the fact that they have pedestrian sensors. Now you mentioned, is it going to take a picture of you? No, it is not able to capture any identifying information. There's no cameras, but they do have pedestrian sensors in them. And I could get a little bit more information about that technology, but they are able to basically tell how many people are walking close by to the signs. But that process does not involve any identifying information collection or storage. Yeah, and I'm going to move on to your question about advertising. So the first year again would be, or during this time of COVID-19, there would be no charge to the local businesses in order to utilize the advertising space. And so Sufa works very closely in every community that they go into with the area's chamber of commerce. In some areas, in some cases the bid, if they have those in the other communities to promote this as a service, especially now as a resource during COVID-19 to ensure that all businesses in town who wanted to use it could be able to access it. And then when that goes into a paid model, that of course changes. And I can get more details about what that looks like, but since we don't have an end date to what we're going on, what's going on with the pandemic, we don't have specifics on that at the moment. Thank you. Thank you for your questions. Darcy. I'm just trying to envision what these would look like in a two or three years. And so talk to me about vandalism, Brianna. What have you heard about how you would deal with that? We've had to deal with that somewhat with our electric light boxes. Absolutely, and that's a great question. Thank you, councillor. So the signs themselves are maintained weekly by Sufa and their contracted service for maintenance. The vinyl designs themselves can be reapplied or changed out as necessary, especially in the case of vandalism. And so all of the maintenance and if there was any issue with vandalism, we would work closely with Sufa's team to have that sign maintained, taken offline or replaced with a different sign if there was substantial damage done to it. That would just be until the end of our initial contact though, right? So the maintenance of the signs themselves go hand in hand. If we were to continue the pilot project into another year or sign on for more signs, Sufa continues to maintain the design of the signs in terms of replacing the vinyls or updating the vinyls, which we can do several times of year just because we wanted to but especially in the case of damage or vandalism, they would still be the responsibility of Sufa. So that would be a contract with them in the first year. It's part of the pilot. And after that, then we would have an ongoing contract with them. Correct. We would need to, as we get through the pilot and get closer to, whether or not our decision is to keep the signs, remove the signs, expand the signs, that would all have to be part of a renegotiated process and contract. Okay. I have a further question. So at this point, this is a referral to TSO. You can take down the presentation. Yes. So the motion is to refer the Permanent Use of Public Ways request for public information and emergency communication signs to the town services and outreach committee for a report and recommendation to the council by December 21st, 2020, is there a second? Brian, second. Further comment? Andy, you have your hand up. Yes. I guess that I should have asked these questions before, but it was pertinent to the motion too, whether there's a time limit if we are using the remainder of our funds from the CARES Act, whether it's a decision that we have to have a contract in place by December 31st and whether there's what kind of pressure that's placing on us, if so, and then the other is whether, and this is partly a question for some members of the chair of TSO as to whether the finance committee looking into just the financial implications of the proposal is something that they would seek. Paul, Naps, and Brianna. You have an answer to that question. The last part of the question, it went, the audio went out for me. So I don't know if you could repeat just the last part, Councillor Steinberg. Yeah, well, the question was actually geared towards more of the TSO committee whether the chair of the TSO committee would feel that they would want finance committee's assistance to look just at the financial aspects of the arrangement not to look at the town services aspects which is not our role. So it's really not a question to you. A question to you is whether or to Paul when I find these people is what's the deadline? What's the deadline by which the decision has to be made? So the motion is by December 21st. Although, if you could do it sooner, the better off we are. There's a lot of communities all doing the exact same thing, let's do it at the same time. Since this is a pilot for one year and again, I think Brianna said four volts a lot of times. I think it's a low threshold to get to the yes on it. So Andy, one of the questions that Andy's asking or whether or not this should also come to the finance committee and Andy, do you wanna make that as a amendment to the motion? No, I was not actually unless TSO was feeling that they would wanted me to the motion. TSO also can ask us for assistance but they need to do it fairly quickly. Yeah, I mean, there's no problem with that or having a joint meeting with the finance committee but yeah, either way. Next, thank you. Alyssa, do you have your hand up? Yeah, I'm wants to comment in terms of the DRB part of this. And so the DRB actually obviously only met last few days ago for their second meeting but their previous meeting was weeks ago and I don't know why we only got their material today at 430 so that's a comment to the town manager that we can't be getting stuff an hour and a half before our meetings. We need more time to process information even though this is getting referred, it's very frustrating to have that happen and we're still in the season of recruiting other people to serve on town committees and in town office and telling them they have to read things when they're trying to make dinners making things much more complicated. The other part of it is in terms of that deadline so I just heard that definitely this has to be done the contract has to be signed by the end of December. We're hearing about it for the first time here at this meeting. We have to have the contract signed by the end of December, no later than the 21st for town council but be even better if it was a prior town council meeting but the 21st, I mean, I can't speak for TSO and I'm not the chair but we may well be able to get it done. We have three meetings between now and then so we may be able to get it done sooner than that. If that's really helpful, I think being really clear on that is helpful to TSO in terms of managing our workload that knowing it before the 21st just to give yourselves a little extra wiggle room in terms of the mad rush at the end of the year. Amanda Jones. That was gonna be my exact question and hearing what Paul said and all I'm gonna move to amend the motion to change December 21st to December 7th. Makes sense. Is there a second for that amendment? Brian. DeAngelis. Okay. And there's discussions.   Yeah, I just wanted to clarify we're saying that it needs to be back. It needs to be back by December 7th. The council meeting is on December 7th so it needs to be done at a meeting the week before. Okay, so let me just get my list. We have two TSO meetings between now and then. Right, November 19 and December 3. Yeah, so we can squeak it in. Okay, so that's enough time. We might even be able to start it this Thursday. Okay, right now we're voting on an amendment to the original motion and the amendment is to change the date from December 21st through December 7th. Is there, and that motion's been made and seconded. I wanna go back and make sure that we have voted on that piece of it and we start with Dorothy Pam. No, actually we start with Evan Ross. We're voting on the amendment. Yep, yes. George Ryan. Yes. Bang. Yes. Dribber. Yes. Steinberg. Andy Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Paul Milne. Yes. Drawer. Yes. D'Angelois. Okay, say it again. Pat D'Angelois. Yes. Sorry. That's fine. Emon. Yes. Greece Mersey, yes. Hanna Key is. Yes. And Pam. Yes. All right. So now the motion reads through for the permanent use of public way requests for public information and emergency communication signs to the town services and outreach committee for report and recommendation to the council by December 7, 2020. Motion's been made and seconded. So let's go to Ryan. Yes. Shane. Yes. Dribber. Yes. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Paul Milne. Yes. Drawer. Yes. D'Angelois. Yes. Mont. Yes. Greece Mersey, yes. Hanna Key. Yes. Pam. Yes. Ross. Yes. Motion passes unanimously. We're going to move on to the next item under this, which I believe is regarding the bus stops. Lynn, could I just ask a quick question? How do we see this timing wise happening? If we have two meetings, we want to get input from the finance committee. Do we also want to get questions from counselors before all of this happens? And so I guess I just want a little guidance on this. All right. I have a few questions from the counselors immediately tomorrow morning. And with regard to the finance committee meeting, I would work out a schedule with Andy to either invite the finance committee to one of your meetings. It won't be able to be the one, well, no, it could be the one that you have this week because you still have time to post it. But it has to be posted by a joint meeting, has to be posted by four o'clock tomorrow. Or 30 tomorrow, yes. Am I correct on that? Yes. Okay. All right. Is that sufficient, Darcy? Yes. Okay. I mean, the other option is to invite the finance committee to the one in December. Yeah, I'll figure that out. All right. We're moving on to the bus, PBTA bus tops. Yes, thank you all for having me. My name is Ben Breger. I'm a planner with the town. And I'm going to share my screen. I have a presentation. I will move through this quick. I know you all have had a long meeting. So a little bit of background. The town received a grant, $130,000 grant from Mass DOT for our shared streets project. Part of this grant is for new bus shelters for the downtown. And so I've been working with PBTA, the DPW, certainly the planning department and the town manager to figure out some of the details about the bus shelters, what they should look like, who's going to manage them, who's going to own them. And then I also presented to the DRB kind of the same timeline as Breonna had to come back a second time. But I got my approval two weeks ago from the DRB and have incorporated their suggestions into the bus shelter proposal. Also similar to Breonna, this has a December 31 deadline to spend the money. Otherwise, DOT will take it back. Preferably also similar to Breonna, preferably its contract is well underway before December 31, just in case there's any issues. So I'm going to, this is kind of the presentation I gave for the DRB where I walked through the different design options. But just so you know, we're going with the existing Victorian shelter that DOTs are downtown, the Black Victorian shelter. And there's some variations to that shelter. So this is the one across from the commons, also the Peter Pan stop. This one is in front of the post office downtown and has kind of like the metal grill work on the bottom. This is down near North part of downtown. This is just an example of a solar panel near Crocker Farm. And then this is the apparently at least 25 years old, the Main Street shelter in front of Town Hall. So those are kind of the existing language of design language of shelters downtown. And so the proposal for the grant, this is what we put in the grant. We're for the new shelters downtown. The locations are, we chose high ridership bus stops that currently don't have shelters as our priorities. And then the third one is the Town Hall stop, which is an old shelter that could be updated to look more in line with the rest of the shelters downtown and could also be incorporated into the North Commons redesign once that comes underway. And so I worked with DPW as well with PBTA to kind of find and then got approval from DRB to actually figure out where exactly these things, the new shelters, would go at the proposed bus stops. Also working with Maureen Pollock, our fellow planner who focuses on ADA issues. So we wanted to make sure we're in line with ADA concerns.  UMass is to the North and towards Town is the South. And so the shelter width is standard 11 feet long by five feet deep. And then there has to be a loading area to get people from the front of the bus to and from the sidewalk. And so this was really the only place you could fit the bus shelter. There's an existing light pole here. And so here's just a quick rendering of what that might look like. Did this quick in PowerPoint, but the DRB supported the idea of having the Victorian shelter with the metal grill work on the bottom because that matches the one at the post office, which is right across the street from here. So there would be some that they would match well. Talk to DPW, they're perfectly willing to relocate this bike rack and move the recycling over. There's plenty of room for that. And so this is where the bus stop would go. I think the St. Brigid's Church is our busiest bus stop because it's not only all of the local UMass stops, but it's the B43 to Northampton, the R29 to Holyoke, and pretty much every single local bus stops here. And these benches are usually full. And so actually while I was out there just talking with taking measurements and whatnot, I spoke with a lot of bus riders. And a lot of them were saying, you know, whenever it's raining, they actually run across the street to the post office bus stop because they have to wait there to get out of the elements. And they would really wish that there was a stop here or a bus shelter here. So that's the proposal for this location. And then the second location is at the corner of Spring Street and South Pleasant Street. This is the Spring Street lot is right here. This is the corner of the Town Commons. And so this is actually where the yellow information booth used to be many, many years ago. Similar, I think, yeah, pretty much the same location. And this is also the Peter Pan inbound stop. So a lot of people get off here. This is what they arrive to. When they come to town. And this is also a B43 stop. And a lot of the local stops here. Here's what there is now. There's kind of a hodgepodge of different, say, furniture. There's a bench. The newspaper boxes, trash can, transformer boxes back here and the fire hydrant over here. And so this is what the, oh yeah. And I should know, coordinated this with Brianna because I was helping her with that project as well. The SUFA sign could be incorporated into this new stop as well. There need to be a new concrete pad laid. Or if there's some rearranging to do, possibly move these newspaper boxes and expand on this existing concrete pad could be an option. And here's just kind of another, oh, right. Yeah, incorporated the new color for the SUFA sign as well. And so this shelter would, the DRB recommended matching the one that's across the street that has kind of like patterned glass and but no Victorian, sorry, no metal grill on the bottom. So that's where that came from. And I've worked with other fire people to make sure that we're far enough from the fire hydrant and there's this transformer box that has some clearance around it. So we're all good there. The DRB did recommend just minimizing the amount of furniture here. Like if we have the bus stop, do we still need the bench and how often are these newspaper boxes really used? So that's kind of some of the questions I'm looking to figure out right now. Working with DPW on that. So yeah, that's kind of the basic overview. Again, these are the two existing shelters that we would match that are across the street from the two locations. And the, sorry, I'm just gonna go back. This is the one in front of town hall. I didn't do a rendering for this one, but this would be replaced by a updated Victorian shelter to match the rest of downtown. And it's same footprint. So it would just pop this out and put a new one there. So yeah, I'm happy to answer any questions and appreciate you giving me the time to present. Mandy, do you have your hand up? Yes, thank you. I answered my question about the bike racks in front of St. Brigid. So I'm glad to hear that they will stay because I had to put it right in front of on the bike racks. Yeah. My question's about the one where there's already a shelter. Do we have plans to move that shelter somewhere else in town to another look? Like is that shelter reusable to a place that may not be downtown? Maybe by the, I think we've got some new places by apartment complexes that might not actually have shelters. I'm thinking East Hadley Road where things just got redesigned and all. Is it possible to be able to use that shelter somewhere else where shelters are needed? Either on 116 South, I've heard near, not Pomeroy, but the apartments down there or the East Hadley Road apartments. Yeah. Yeah, I think that's certainly possible. In my conversations with PBTA, they gave me a long list of priority stops that don't have shelters for Amherst, even outside, certainly outside of downtown as well. So yeah, we could certainly look to do that. Are there other questions? I wanna clarify something before we start and that is this also cares money or did I hear it is a separate grant? Yeah, yeah, this is a separate grant, but it fully funds the cost of the shelters and any labor for installation and concrete pads. It's from the Mass DOT shared streets grant that we got mid-October or so. And what is the timing sensitivity with regard to the grant? Yeah, so Mass DOT, they've said they're, they want all the money spent by the December 31st or they will, they're gonna take it from us. Of course, there's some issues with that cause even if we get a contract underway by mid-December we might not actually pay that in full until the shelters are delivered. And so they've been a little bit flexible for some other things. I think if we had some shelters under contract for delivery in January or February and paid X% of that, they would let us hang on to that money after the 31st but I think it's imperative that we get a contract underway early to mid-December so that I can have time to work just kind of explain that all the DOT. So, and yeah, for what it's worth like I've been soliciting quotes for the shelters and I feel pretty comfortable that as soon as this is all approved I can place an order immediately.  Yeah, this wasn't actually, this wasn't a question about the project but a question of process although now that I see other hands going up what I say might be moot but I was going to say that given that they didn't seem to be a whole lot of questions about it and given that this is a much simpler proposal than what we just saw with the SUFA signs. I know the intent was a motion to refer to TSO and I guess I'm wondering if we feel that that's necessary. We've certainly not referred to TSO Public Ways request that we didn't feel that TSO would necessarily be needed on and I guess as a TSO member I'm not quite sure what added value we could provide here so I'd be curious to hear from my other TSO members but I know that I would be willing to not refer this and just have it come up on the 7th or even vote tonight although we don't have a motion crafted for it so I'd be curious to hear if the council feels that this needs to go to TSO and if so what value they would like TSO to add to this discussion? I'm looking at hands and with regard to other members of TSO and that's me. Could you please take the presentation down? Yes. D'Arcy. Yeah, I would just definitely agree with Evan on that that if the council just decides to vote on it tonight unless you have some questions that you want to refer. Okay.  Yeah, mine was actually on process two on the motion itself. Even the referral motion was missing one of the shelters because I didn't realize there were three not two. Substitute motion. Okay. Okay. Steve Schreiber. Yeah, so this is a relatively important decision because these are very prominent spots and we're kind of setting a branding. So you sort of talked about all the different almost the chaotic different kinds of shelters so there's a honing in a particular style for Amherst and I know that it's the DRB has been consulted but I'm wondering if this takes more time actually to think about this because I'm not completely convinced not that I have to be that the Victorian is the branding. I'm not sure exactly how we got there other than the fact that we already had some Victorian bus shelters and I mentioned this in part because if you go down South Pleasant Street towards West Street there's a really beautiful modern actually the next bus stop down near the Amherst golf club is this beautiful modern bus shelter. I've always wondered how that appeared in the portfolio of bus shelters but I don't know. I mean, I'm just one voice here but I just think about how much discussion we had about a transformer box on the common in that same area that there's a bus shelter and the idea that we might then approve two bus shelters on the common in a very short order that have more of an impact. To me that needs a little bit more pondering. Pat DeAngelis. I would like us to vote tonight I think matching the shelters that are there makes sense. I don't feel like taking the time to find a nicer design and then having to replace everything around town seems unimportant to me. And you know, because the shelter is a shelter it's pretty straightforward. I'd like us to vote tonight. Darcy DeMonte. I already vote. Okay, Alissa Brewer. I don't feel like TSO can address the issues Steve is bringing up and not in the time frame that we've got. So the most the previous item that TSO is working on has the added complexity of advertising and a little bit more twist to it. And I do actually not think that this has more impact than the transformer box did in all reality. So I'm good with going ahead and town council voting it tonight because I'm just not sure what TSO could add to it. I'm still seeing hands up. Can you put your hand down if you've already spoken? Dorothy Pam, I think your hand is new. I think Steve raises some very important issues about the bus shelters around the North Common. And I think we should take some time to think about it or to look at other possible design. Can I ask a point of clarification that if we look at other designs then this has to go back again through design review board. Is that correct? Yeah, they approved the Victorian shelters and gave me a recommendation for matching the ones across the street. Steve Schreiber used to have your hand up. You could also reconsider placing them in those places. You could not change the design but change the placement.  Could you also get a confirmation that the extra bus shelters can be put in South Amherst and other places that just get an assurance that they will be put because I know a lot of people in South Amherst have been without a bus shelter for a very long time. Are you asking? We confirm that there will be that done and your vote is contingent on that? No, it's just a friendly assurance. Thank you. Okay. Sarah, you have your hand up. Yeah, I was just gonna say that we're gonna miss out on having any of these things if we stop and look at our delicate aesthetics. So I just wanted to weigh the fact that we're doing a lot of things that we are hoping will help our downtown after or during COVID-19. And I think that this is one of the cases where functionality for me is more important. Okay. I'm gonna make start with emotion. I will list you have your hand up. I was just gonna ask you if we needed a motion to suspend rule 8.4. You do. Consider first motion. And I would consider it moved if I could say that. Please. To suspend town council rules of procedure 8.4 for the current agenda item, is there a second? Second, Ryan. Thank you. Any further discussion on that? All right, then we're going to vote on that one and we're going to start with Ryan. Yes. Shane. Yes. Driver. No. Steinberg. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Balmille. Yes. Brewer. Yes. DeAngelis. Yes. Vermont. Yes. Riesmerzy, yes. Hanneke. Yes. Pam. No. Ross. Yes. So the vote on this is 11 in favor to oppose no abstentions and no one absent. And so we're going to now move to. This is breaking the fourth wall a little more than normal. OK. To approve the following PBTA bus stops or to approve the improvements to the following PBTA bus stops located at one new bus shelter at the intersection of North Pleasant Street and Culls Lane in front of St. Bridget's Parish, one new bus shelter at the intersection of South Pleasant Street and Spring Street in front of the town common and one replacement bus shelter on the southbound side of Main Street adjacent to the town common. Is there a second? Second, Brian. OK, any further discussion? Alyssa, you have your hand up. OK. Then seeing no other discussion, we are going to move to a vote. We're starting with Kathy Shane. Yes. Driver. No. Steinberg. Yes. Boards. Yes. Ball mail. Yes. Brewer. Yes. The antelous. Yes. Mont. Yes. Yes. Neneke. Yes. Pam. No. Ross. Yes. And Ryan. Yes. The vote's 11 in favor to oppose no abstentions, no absence. We have one more item under this and this is regarding the town manager memo 111220 revisions to policy regarding the control and regulation of the public way to the town services outreach committee and to the governance organization and legislation committee for review and recommendation to the town council by December 7, 2020. Is there a second? Second, Neneke. Thank you. Who would like to speak to the motion? So this is a referral to the TSO to look at extending the current authority that you have granted to the town manager in conjunction with Article 14, which you had approved previously to bring it in compliance and alignment with how that works. In addition, it starts to address and have the conversation about how you want to start handling other types of things that are in the public way. And that's what there's. So there's a two pronged thing with this memo that we are asking the TSO to engage with. Is there a comment, Dorothy? Yeah, I just have a question about why. What is the time urgency on this one? Well, I don't think it's as urgent as the previous two items that you had actually. I don't think there'll be anything that comes into play between now, if you want to put it off to December 21, that's certainly feasible. That's pushing it to have so many of them that need to be back so quickly. Yeah. I wasn't going to accept that as a friendly amendment to go to the 21st. Mandy, Joe, you seconded. Is that an acceptable view? Actually, it's not for me. The current public ways policy that deals with Article 14 is allows the town manager to deal with them only for Article 14 requests for approvals not to extend 180 days past the effective date of the zoning bylaw, which ends December 14th. And so we're already on a tight deadline to get this change done before the current delegation we've given to Paul ends. Two readings, even starting December 7th, would put us to December 21st, which is past the 180 days that we granted him the approval for all of these. And beyond that, he has been operating on good faith with what the intention of that public ways request public ways delegation was. And I'm not questioning that at all. But many of what we heard recently about what we thought would be covered under Article 14 has actually been covered under a governor's emergency order. And that's technically not covered under this public ways policy. And so I think the sooner we can get this amended to bring what our intention for delegation was into what our policy actually states the better. Listen. Whereas I'm just confused by the memo itself, not all of it, not all of it. But the whole section, and that screen's gone now, about the 3D, I believe it is. That's the whole new section. That's about signage and bus stops. So is that am I to understand that that would be the same as what we've just been talking about in terms of signage and bus stops? And that would be permanent because I'm not seeing any time limit on that. So I'm just wondering if I'm just tired and confused, like when I read it the first time, or what that section actually means. Item G, placement of road and sidewalk signs, bus shelters and sidewalk seating. This is an entirely new section and it is giving away a significant amount of delegation authority, which if people are bored of the conversations we just had about signs and bus shelters, I guess that's a good thing. But if they aren't, then I'm not sure why we would permanently be giving this away, which is the way I think this reads. And I'm hoping Mandy, Joe, and Paul can help me understand that. Paul. Yeah, that's accurate. So it actually accomplishes two things. One is to extend the temporary nature related to zoning bylaw 14. And the second is to actually increase on a long term basis the actual capabilities of the town manager to do things such as we just voted on. Mandy, Joe, comment? Yeah, it's one of the reasons it needs referred to for policy discussion at TSO and GOL. 3D, I think it is, placements of movable signs. It depends on what you consider movable signs. I believe when it was drafted, it depends on who you talk to. It could contain the Sufa signs that we were just talking about. It could just be sidewalk signs and stuff like that that are much more temporary basis. But that language can certainly be looked at in committee for things. But bus shelters and all those things would be permanent installation, approval, placement of seating on public sidewalks. That is written as a permanent changes to the public way that would be delegated to the manager. So it definitely needs looked at. I guess one of my questions is if there's a seven day lapse between the 14th of December and the 21st of December that is related to the zoning bylaw and the emergency act, is there anything we see happening in that time period that isn't covered some other way? The requests would just have to come to the council for approval in that seven day period because the manager would no longer have the authority to approve them on a temporary basis. So we would have to deal with it for that time. And it wouldn't necessarily be just seven days, depending on what language comes back from the referrals. That the 21st, if we delay the report back to the 21st, that's the first reading. And it might not be final language at that time and it might go into the new year. Whereas if we have a report back on the 7th, there's a possibility that we could have a second reading on the 21st with amended language, depending on what the council discusses on the 7th. Well, any further comment on that? Darcy. I think that's asking a lot of TSO to have a fully fleshed out discussion and get an answer back within two meetings when we're also being asked to. We have several other issues that we need to deal with. So I think that we should say something like within 90 days. And I get I understand what you're saying, but I think that we're just going to have to deal with that or 60 days. I'm going to suggest the following, that on the 7th of December, we bring before the council a motion that deals with the emergency nature of get approved and that we have a second motion that is much more about the extensive nature of this giving people time. Does that work for you, Paul? Mandy, Joe, and if we if we if the report back on the 7th is only to dealing with, I think it's now the new section for I just closed my public ways policy for my file, the one that deals with the revisions to the COVID-19 section. I think that that would be fine with me. So it could read initial report back by December 7th. So at this point, no motion at all. On the table to refer. Oh, OK. So the motion that's on the table is to refer. The town manager memo 111220 revisions to policies regarding with control and regulation, public way, the town service and the outreach, MIDI and to the governance organization, legislation committee for review and recommendation to the town council by December 7th, 2020. But that makes it the entire document. So this tell me which section of this document by December 7th. And is that assuming that on December 7th, we would suspend rule eight point four because otherwise it would be expired before the 21st. Yeah, it does. OK. But I just need to know which section of the memo. Looks like section four. Yeah. OK, so the motion will now read to refer the town manager memo 11-1220 revisions to the policy regarding the control and regulation of the public ways to the town services and outreach committee and to the organization, governance organization and legislation committee for review and recommendation. Regarding section four of the memo to the town council by December 7th, 2020. That would be the new motion. We still need to I would rephrase it as I was the second regarding section four for review and recommendation regarding section four to the town council by December 7th, 2020 and the remaining sections, section four of the policy by December 7th, 2020 and the remaining sections by January. I don't know. When's our January meetings? Fourth or 25th? Probably the 25th. OK, so I'm going to withdraw the original motion. Mandy, Joe, you seconded the original motion. That's fine. Do you want me to make a new one? Please, that would be terrific. Thank you. To refer the town manager memo, 11-1220 revisions to policy regarding the control and regulation of the public ways to the town services and outreach committee and to the governance, organization and legislation committee for review and recommendation regarding section four of the public ways policy to the town council by December 7th, 2020 and remaining sections of the public ways policy by January 25th, 2021. Is there a second? Brian, second. Thank you. Any further comment?  Yeah, the only thing I was going to add is that I think it's reasonable to give town council the heads up that I as a TSO member, I'm certainly going to ask that in section four, we take out the reference to the brand new section 3D and that still enables us to do this motion. But the recommendation might say that item four, the way it's written here, except for the and 3D part because GOL is going to be working on this. TSO is going to be working on this. And it's possible we'll all come to a meeting of the mines prior to December 7th. But if we don't, we can just take out the words and 3D. Okay. Darcy. That's fine. Okay. Motion made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? I would just say, if we're not acting on the rest of the revisions, 3D has to come out because it won't. Well, a different 3D would exist when we vote. That could be part of our recommendation on the 7th. The bottom line is by the time you come back, you'll have a revised policy. Okay. Steve Schreiber. I'm sorry. Yes. Barry Schwartz. Shirley Dillard. Yeah. That's Melanie Balmarone. Yes. Mr. Brewer. Yes. That's Andrews. Yes. Darcy Dumont. Yes. Ruth Merzias. Hanneke. Yes. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Megan Ross. Yes. George Ryan. Yes. Kathy Shane. Yes. I am going to make a decision given the lateness of the hour to defer the voting on the prohibition prohibiting the use of wild and exotic animals in traveling shows until December 7th. I object to that. We've had people waiting for four hours now. Oh, I'm sorry. They're still waiting. Yes. Okay. All right. Then let's move on. We're going to go to F, prohibiting use of wild and exotic animals in traveling shows by the and circus bylaw. I mentioned earlier that directing myself Rebecca Schwartz, one of the non-council sponsors of the proposed bylaw, sent us an extensive email. In addition to that, and that email is in your packet, responds to a question that was raised. I asked, and David Zomek did confer with Carol Hepburn, the animal control person, and her comments are as follows. She's been in her role for close to 20 years as the animal welfare officer. In that time, she has rarely, if ever encountered any issues in Amherst related to captive wild and or exotic animals. With that said, she is supportive of any measure that protects the health and wellbeing of all animals and she supports the bylaw. Are there other questions? George Ryan. Not a question, but just a brief comment. I appreciate the fact that you reached out to Carol and I appreciate the response of Rebecca Schwartz, her email was very informative and certainly answered some of my concerns and reservations. So just an expression of thanks for people taking that extra effort. Saloni. Yeah, I just also wanted to add two things. One that Carol also reached out to me, the animal welfare officer, she reached out to me and I spoke with her. And one thing she said that really helped me also think about this issue is that she said that in Amherst, okay. So she said that in Amherst, we tend to believe that nothing bad's gonna happen and then we don't plan for it. And so from her point of view, it would be really helpful from her perspective as an animal welfare officer to have a plan if this did happen. And she did say that it hasn't happened so far but that doesn't mean it's not gonna happen in the future. And if it did, it would be great to have this by law in place. The second thing I think I just wanted to emphasize like we already spoke about the human aspect, humane aspect and also public safety. I also wanted to bring out some points about wildlife protection and climate change and maintaining a biodiversity. So for example, humans represent just 0.01% of all living things. And according to this study, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of the plants. So scientists consider this the sixth mass extinction of life and we've lost since 1970, 68% of animal population. So this is resulting in biological annihilation and leading to serious ecological, economic and social consequences. One of the strategies that's proposed to promote coexistence of people and wildlife is public policy and having bylaws. And since the state level has not been enacting any of this, it's important for local governments to enforce these bylaws. So as a town that supports climate change, I think this is just a no-brainer that we should be supporting these bylaws to protect the biodiversity and our interdependence. So I hope you all will pass this bylaw. Are there any other comments? So I'm going to make the motion and then look to Shalini for a second and it's to adopt the prohibiting the use of wild and exotic animals and traveling shows and circumstances bylaw as a general bylaw as presented. Is there a second? Second, Shalini. What was I proposing? The motion. Second. Hear their comment. Okay, then we start with Wendy Steinberg. Yes. Sarah Schwartz. Yes. Shalini. Yes. Alyssa. Yes. Pat. Yes. Dorothy. Yes. Rick's Mary's, you ask. Mandy Jo. Yes. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Evan. Yes. George. Yes. Kathy. Yes. Steve Schreiber. Yes. It's unanimous. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for all that has taken place going into that bylaw. We did the schedule by consent. We did the appointments by consent. So we're to liaison reports. Mandy Jo. Nothing to update. We have a meeting tomorrow. We'll be continuing to discuss zoning including the 40R consultant report that was presented at a forum a couple of weeks ago. Andy, finance committee. Yes. I submitted a written report, which you have, but we had one item that came up after the report was written. Sharon Povinelli, one of the resident members of the committee has resigned for personal reasons that she stated in her letter of resignation. She's in a term that ends on July, or June 30th of 2021. I have consulted with the chair of GOL and since GOL is the committee that deals with it, I believe turning it over to George and just wanted to report that to you. GOL, George. Well, we now have something else to do, but we've not had a meeting since the last report. So there's nothing to report. Okay, Matthew, we know JCPC is not meeting yet. Darcy, yes, sir. Yeah, we just had a brief meeting last week and came up with the recommendation for the seventh member of the community safety committee that we passed, we approved by our consent agenda tonight. And I'm fairly overwhelmed by the number of referrals that we got tonight after not getting any referrals literally for months. But so that's exciting, that's exciting. So yeah, we are going to look at the surveillance technology bylaw on Thursday and look at townwide residential parking policy. Please let me know where you stand on the surveillance bylaws as to whether or not it will be coming to the council and when, okay? Yes. Any liaison reports? Matthew. Just briefly that the Community Preservation Act is now, group is now at the point of ranking and thinking of all the proposals that are before them to come up with some ranking. They started that discussion last week and it'll be continued. They're on a fast track to try to come up with the final slate. So one of the things they're grappling with this year, there's some large requests that have all requested to be debt finance, bond finance. So to the extent they do that, it means there's less money in future years. So trying to think of the multiple year impact on it. So for any of you who are trying to follow the individual proposals, they are now at the point of looking at which are gonna be voted out. Are there any questions of any of the committees or the reasons? Yes, Alyssa. I was just gonna say that since TSOs would need to, we talked earlier tonight, feels like hours ago, about the signage issue, right? And the possible finance committee opinion on that. If we're going to do that in a timely fashion at TSO that it feels to me like we need to have that on our agenda for Thursday, which as you indicated earlier tonight, we can do that by updating our posting tomorrow. And that finance committee needs to come to that discussion, not just say, well, maybe finance committee will come because otherwise we're not gonna make people come twice. We're not gonna make staff come twice to listen to that conversation. So either finance committee comes at that time or finance committee can talk about it separately because I don't really think TSO and finance committees parts have to be together. Even though in an ideal world, they would be. I'm gonna leave that to the chair of the two committees to sort out whether or not it's a joint agenda items or agenda items at separate meetings, okay? Anything else? No minutes to approve. Paul, town managers report. That looks like I have five things I wanna mention. One is we had great, just wanna congratulate and thank my colleagues, fellow town employees who on Veterans Day delivered 65 gift bags to our veterans because we couldn't bring them together for the breakfast at Mary Beth O'Gilovitz had organized in the past. She conspired to make this happen. Town employees came out with their families, little kids and dogs. And it's a really fun thing to do. Second is the town clerk report that this afternoon, they completed the count and certified the count which was submitted for the election. And I'll send the results to you. It's not different than what it's already been posted on our website, so it's all official now it's completed. Want to mention that I've appointed a group to support me on the North Amherst Library Group. Five members, two members from the community, the representative of the library trustees, the library director and DPW superintendent to move this project forward, and help to get the reaching out to the public going forward on that. And I just dropped one out. One last thing, today we handed over the keys to a facility in downtown Amherst that has five showers plus restrooms to Craig's Doors. Congratulations to Rob Mora and Dave Zomac for securing this location. Again, supporting this through the first few months of operations. This is where we have the money to do that. And so it's really great, it's very beautiful facility. It's the old, so very close proximity to the Unitarian Universalist Church. That was the big problem with that location. They didn't have showers available now. We do have showers available and hopefully Craig's Doors will be able to manage that successfully. So. Thank you. Any questions of the town manager? I've seen none. I just want to mention that I have referred. Dorothy has her hand up. Oh, thank you. I'm sorry, I didn't see that Dorothy. Dorothy. It takes a while to get the hand up. Justice Suggestion, something I mentioned earlier tonight on your project update, why not include the Civil War Stones in that project update so that we don't have to ask about it every time? Any further questions or comments? Okay. So under my report, I referred the resolution affirming the town of Amherst's commitment to end structural racism and achieve racial equity for black residents to GOL. And that is a joint sponsorship of Pat D'Angelo's, Shalini Balmille and Elisa Brewer. Get that right. And then also regarding the Piner Valley Planning Commission Alternate. There has in the past been a opportunity for, in the long past, the select board to have somebody being the alternate to Piner Valley Planning Commission. This is a town manager appointment. So consistent with past practice, I will send an email out to the full council, ask who else might be interested in being an alternate to Piner Valley Planning Commission. And we'll come back to the council and then we will vote on recommending someone to the town manager.  I vaguely remember from past discussions that the alternate under state law is the town manager and that it's an executive position. So I'm not sure why we have anything to say about it or why it would be one of us. So it is a town manager appointment. And right now the chair of the planning board serves as the representatives, but we also can have alternate positions as well who can participate in lieu of that. You can have a vote in lieu of the appointee. And we've always had that. In the past, it's been a member of the planning board. It's been a member, it's been the planning director. It's been a member of the select board. So I can appoint, and if there's a person from the council who wants to do it, the process the council has is to pull its members, see who wants to be the member, then that name comes to me for a review. Are there any questions? I don't understand that either. So before we get this poll asking us for our opinion, I'd like to see the regulation and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission's bylaw that says this is what we're supposed to be doing. Cause that's not how I remember it from the last time either. Okay, we'll check on that before we do anything. Okay. Any further discussion on that or questions? Any future agenda items or councilor comments? Then we have no topics not anticipated. We have no executive session and I'm going to call the meeting adjourned at 1130. Mm-hmm. Good night. Thank you.


In this topic and the subsequent few topics, we are going to discuss about various different approaches to international compensation. There are various approaches which are used to calculate the compensation packages and design the compensation packages for international assignees. Those are the going rate approach. Second one is the balance sheet approach and now another approach is emerging which is called the local plus approach. So these are the approaches that we are going to discuss in these coming topics. In this topic, we are going to talk about the going rate approach. What is the going rate approach? It is basically the going rate, the rate market. So your expatriates, for example, they are moving from US to Pakistan, they will be paid according to the market of Pakistan. So in the Pakistani market, what salaries are being paid to the executive? For example, if you have to appoint the head of finance, what is the payment to the head of finance? In the Pakistani context, you will follow that, that is the going rate approach. It is based on the local market rates. For this, there are certain surveys that are conducted and it relies on survey comparisons and these survey comparisons could be made on different dimensions. You can do a comparison with local nationals. How much is the host country nationals paid? For example, head of finance, how much money is taken from an organization in Pakistan. So that is one way to calculate that. Second way is that expatriates of the same nationality. For example, if Americans are working in Pakistan, what is the payment to the Americans in Pakistan? If someone is appointed in American Pakistan as head of finance, what is the payment to them? According to that, if they want to keep the head of finance in their own company, in the same type of industry, in the same type of situation, the size is also the same. And then another way to compare is that how much is being paid to expatriates of all nationalities. In that country, for example, in Pakistan, expatriates who work from foreign countries, how many salaries are given to them? So you can equate with them. So either you can equate with the host country nationals salary. Or you can equate with the people of that particular nationality with their salary. Or you can equate with the generally expatriates who are being paid in that country. So these are the three different comparisons that you can make according to the going rate approach. And compensation is then based on the selected survey comparison. Then you select the survey with which the compensation is done. But if the going rate approach takes you and makes the employee end up with a very low pay. For example, if someone is working from America to Pakistan, there is a huge difference between the pays in America and in Pakistan. So in America, the managers who are given salary have no comparison with Pakistan. So in such a situation, base pay and benefits may be supplemented by additional payments for low pay countries. So if there is a low pay country, then you will supplement additional payments with it so that if there is a requirement of expatriate assignments, then people are ready to come and work there. So it is all a combination of what is required and what has to be paid to the people to make them work in that particular situation. In the going rate approach, it has got certain advantages and certain disadvantages. Let's take a look first of all at the advantages. Advantages are that first of all, there is equality with the local nationals. Local, who are working in subsidiary, they don't feel that there is any discrimination between the parent country national or the host country national. Then it is something which is simple to administer. So you can just calculate what is the local payment and you can administer it. Then it also creates an identification with the host country. Your compensation package, your organization then identifies with the host country rather than it implements packages that are conversant with the parent country. It is using packages which are conversant with the host country. Then equity among different nationalities. So if you are paying according to the going rate approach, there is going to be a perception of equity between different people who are coming from different nationalities. So if you are using the going rate approach and people from different places come and work with you, which is more prevalent in the developed countries, then the going rate approach is more implemented there. Because if people are working from Japan, Pakistan, America, UK, for example, if there is a firm in Australia, they cannot give salary according to the country. They will implement the going rate approach. And the equity is created between different nationalities. What are its disadvantages? There is variation between assignment for the same employee. If someone is working in Australia first, then he is working in Pakistan, and on the going rate approach, he is getting compensation. So in Australia, he will get a lot of the salary, he will not get it in Pakistan. That is why there is going to be variation. Then variation between expatriates of same nationality in different countries. Once again, it is the same kind of situation. So expatriates, if they are moving in different countries, they will also feel this kind of variation. And potential for re-entry problems. For example, if you send them to a subsidiary, where you give them a very good compensation, and the going rate there is higher than the parent country. For example, if you are sending someone to America from Pakistan, and you are giving them a going rate salary, then when you call them back, you will repatriate them. When the re-entry stage comes, they will not feel like coming back from America and working in Pakistan. So in this situation, there is going to be a potential for re-entry problems. These are the certain disadvantages of the going rate approach. So the organization, it must take into account the situation, and what approach would be more suitable for that particular situation. And that approach must be taken according to the context, and the context of the organization as well as the context of the parent country and the host country. So that was the discussion on going rate approach.


So here we are outside the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the Congress and they have been having hearings on Iran in this committee. I also just came to the committee hearing in Homeland Security on Iran and it's really interesting because on the one hand we have the vote this week in the war powers resolution where the majority, almost all of the Democrats and a couple of the Republicans joined in to say the President has no authorization for war with Iran and that passed in the House and that will be going to the Senate soon. So we do have to contact our senators and say hope for that. And you also have on the positive side the presidential debates last night where the candidates were all saying we didn't want to go into war with Iran, the Iran nuclear deal was a good thing, of course someone more forceful than others, but you know the general sentiment among all of the candidates that we've got to stop this march of war. On the other hand, when you go to these hearings you see so much Iran bashing from definitely from the Republican side but also from a lot of people in the Democratic side and it's very disinteresting. So there's weird dynamics going on and I think this means that we have to really be pushing from the ground up. So one thing January 25th is an international day of action against war with Iran, against sanctions on Iran and against the US troops in the region. But there's another thing that we can do and that is we can send an apology to the people of Iran. Why to the people of Iran? Because when Donald Trump pulled out of Iran with the deal, he just put on an ideal. He imposed these draconian sanctions that say to the entire world you will not do business with Iran. Iran will not sell any of its oil on the international market. And they are just choking the people of Iran, destroying the Iranian economy. And these are people of nothing to do with the political scene. We're talking about 80 million people. It's a very, very large country. And they're having a difficult time. The price of food is skyrocketing. Medicines are hard to find.  Look how impressive this Iranian regime is. They want chaos. They want Iran to be like, you know, Iraq for the last 20 years or Afghanistan for the last 20 years. Just chaos.  They don't want to live in a state of chaos like has been happening in so many different countries around a good congresswoman. Hi. Thank you for being so wonderful. There are some good ones. She's a man and then she's a very rich and peony. But no, the policy of the administration is to create chaos in Iran. And so we want to apologize to Iranian people for this devastating policy, this horrible policy. I mean, look what we've done. This pregates Trump. It's been since the Bush administration. It was continued during the Obama administration, except they signed the nuclear deal and things are going well. And in fact, human security, hearing I was at today, one of the witnesses said, well, you know, they have a lot of cyber attacks and they might be a big cyber attack that could be devastating for the U.S. But we've seen that when the Iran nuclear deal was signed, he said the cyber attacks almost disappeared. So, of course, they talked about how are we going to protect the American people. And they said, we've got to get more money on human security. We've got to visit this and this to secure ourselves. And here I am saying, how come they're just not saying we have to rejoin Iran nuclear deal? We have to make sure we don't go to war with Iran. We have to lift the economic sanctions that are courting them so much. But, you know, that wasn't what they talked about. They talked about the sleeper cells of Iran inside the United States. They really tried to make people feel very afraid about the Iran attacks. But really, it's Iran that has been attacked time and again. So, one thing we want to do is have this apology letter to the people of Iran. We wrote a very beautiful letter. It was a short version and a long version. I would really love you to go and read it and then to sign it and then to pass it around. And you can get to that letter by going to codepink.org backslash letter to Iran. We want to get many, many thousands of signatures on that letter. We're up to about 7,000. We need more than that. And then we have a very creative way, I won't tell you right now, but I'm disseminating that inside Iran, where many millions of people will see it. We're also going to take it in a beautiful art version of it to the Iranian intersection here in Washington, DC. That's kind of like the equivalent of what the Iran embassy would be if we had an embassy. So, please, go to the codepink.org website, sign the apology, and get as many of your friends to sign it as well. Let's stop this morning code.