Welcome. I'm Melanie Greenberg, the president and CEO of the Alliance for Peacebuilding, and it is such a joy and a pleasure to gather here in the magnificent headquarters of the U.S. Institute of Peace to explore together some of the greatest challenges facing us today during a very tumultuous time at home and in the world. Today's theme is peace and democracy in a turbulent world. Why? 1.5 billion people live in fragile states where a lack of effective government structures and restricted space for civil society contribute to cycles of violence. We know that corruption is a major source of grievance in many states and serves as a key driver for extremism and conflict. We've seen recently with the Ebola conflict how a lack of trust in governance can exacerbate other kinds of crises. And we know that when security and police forces are either overly aggressive and restrictive or overly weak, that's a very important source of unrest and a source of lack of trust in government, which I might mention is not only a problem in the South Sudan's of the world, but in the Baltimore's of the world as well. Conversely, we know that when there's both an effective social contract between government and society and effective space for citizen voice and cooperation, these provide the scaffolding for resilient societies that can resolve their differences through consensus building and through politics rather than through deadly violence. What we'll explore today and in the next two days of our conference is how peace building and democracy come together and how we can develop joint approaches to the tremendous global challenges facing us in the years ahead. This intersectoral dialogue between peace building and democracy takes place within a larger initiative at AFP that we're calling peace building 3.0. And in peace building 3.0, we understand that conflict happens in very complex systems and no one field can take linear solutions and solve these complex problems. We need to work together as peace builders with democracy, development, rule of law, health, education, women in peace building and all understand our places in these systems and how to learn to cooperate between fields with very different methodologies, philosophies, ideologies. So this conference in our discussion today is part of that effort to bring different fields together to recognize our complexity. Before moving on to our wonderful program and we're just so honored to have Undersecretary Sarah Swoll here with us today, I wanted to make a few thank yous. This is one of the few times that we'll all be together in the course of the day. First, to thank USIP for hosting us today, to thank Nancy Lindborg, USIP's new president, one of my great heroes in the peace building field, and it brings us such pleasure to work with you here at USIP that we look forward just to wonderful partnership ahead. And great thanks also to Lynn Woodham and Sarah Ogosi who've made our planning for this conference. There were a lot of moving parts, just so joyful. So thank you. Also AFP staff in the room, can you raise your hands if you're here? I can tell you that AFP staff and interns have been working literally 24 seven for the last week and very hard of the last nine months to bring this all together. And I want especially to thank Emily Malotsi and Becca Weinstein for all the work that they've done. And I know all of you have worked with them to register and to say thank you very much. A quick thank you as well to AFP's board and our donors who are here today, many of whom have traveled across the country to be with us. But I especially want to single out Tom Farrow and Chip House for giving us the financial and institutional wherewithal to start doing this work around peace building 3.0. And also to Bob Berg who has just endowed a lecture series called peace building and the challenges to peace building in the years ahead. So we are now guaranteed of 10 years of discussions like this, looking at the frontiers of peace building. And finally, I want to thank my parents, Jane and Larry Cohen who are sitting in about the fifth row here. And my father's childhood friend, Tully Plesser, who's joined us as well. We have a sweep of history here in the room today. So thanks to all of you and we look forward to a wonderful day ahead. One note, everything today is on the record. We do have journalists in the room. It's being webcast to around the world. So this gives us a wonderful opportunity, but just to let you know that this will be quite open. Thank you. And it's wonderful to introduce Nancy Lindborg. Thank you, Melanie. And great to see everybody here today. There were a lot of hugs around coffee as we prepared to come in and that's always a good sign for people who are taking this opportunity to come together and really dig into some of these critical issues. Melanie, thank you for your comments. And I want to also give a special shout out to Melanie who's been a real thinker, leader, writer, scholar in this field who's really helped us think of peace building as a much larger endeavor that encompasses the kind of issues we'll be talking about the next several days. So Melanie, thank you for your vision and leadership. This USIP AFP conference partnership is really one of the signature activities that we do together. And I'm delighted to be here for it. And I very much applaud the title and the set of topics that will be looked at today. We are clearly in a turbulent time where there is the need for people to come together as Melanie said, across disciplines, across ways of looking at the world to understand how to bring all of this energy and knowledge to bear in a world that is definitely going through some difficult transition times with no indication that we'll be through it in the near future. I had the great honor of being sworn into USIP as the president just about three and a half months ago. And as many of you know, USIP is an independent, nonpartisan, congressionally funded institute that really dares to envision a world without violent conflict. And I can't imagine a better or more audacious vision and one that all of the people of USIP are pleased to be able to dedicate their work and their time to. We do this by really seeking to build America's national capability to prevent, mitigate, and resolve violent conflict. And we support peacemakers at every level, national, regional, and local. I've had a chance to visit a couple of our field programs in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and just recently Burma, and have been ever more impressed at the ways in which people at the community levels are connecting up to the national levels and supporting peace processes with a lot of creativity and a lot of determination. This is a great assemblage over the next three days that really does bring together people of very diverse interests. And I'm eager to see how the conversation evolves. I'm also very honored and eager to introduce our special guest today, Sarah Sewell, who is the Undersecretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights at the State Department. And Sarah was sworn into this position just over a year ago, a year in a court, probably seems like a lifetime, Sarah. I know that you've been on the road and working hard. Over the last decade, where a number of you have probably had a chance to meet Sarah, she taught at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, where she was also the Director of the Car Center for Human Rights Policy. And in this position, she launched the Mass Atrocities Response Operations Project, or MERO, and directed the program on national security and human rights. She served on a number of boards, and in her time as Undersecretary, she has become a leading voice for mass atrocities as something that we need to pay close attention to and get ahead of. She is a champion for action, and she's bringing her full energy, her vision, and her commitment to a very critical role in the U.S. government. Sarah, thank you for being with us today, and please join me in welcoming her. So thank you, Nancy, for hosting this super important conference. I'm really pleased to be here with you all this afternoon. And thank you, Nancy, for your assumption of the leadership of the Institute for Peace. I think that all of us who have watched the Institute have really high hopes for its evolution and the ways in which it's going to contribute to realizing that audacious vision that you described. And thanks, Melanie, for your introduction and for leading the Alliance for Peace Building. It's really... It's nice when you work in government to come to a meeting that is full of non-government people and know a lot of them. It's really nice, and to respect their work and to feel connected to their work. It's a privilege. And so I want to just begin by thanking all of you for your very important contributions to this audacious vision of peace that we are all working toward. So this morning, I would like to talk a little bit about, before joining in a broader conversation, about how the U.S. government is working to reduce the risk of violence worldwide. And to give you some sense, which is, I think, sometimes difficult to convey because the context in which government policy is made, and no one knows this better than Nancy, but is sometimes mind-numbingly bureaucratic and procedural and mechanistic. And feels very divorced from the kind of interpersonal relationships that you can see and feel in touch on the ground in the fieldwork that many of you engage in or support. And yet, the kinds of changes that fall into this category of mind-numbingness to an external actor are sometimes of fundamental importance for outcomes in terms of policy and therefore translating into action on the ground. And so I hope you'll bear with me if it seems somewhat arcane and abstract and just trust me that everything that I'm describing in our small world, some of my teams here in the front row, counts as a significant success and the result of a lot of elbow grease and hard work. So when I took this job as undersecretary for civilian security, I saw it as an opportunity to essentially continue the work that I'd been doing prior to rejoining government. It was an effort to strengthen the U.S. collective effort within government to pursue the American values that I think inspired most of us as we joined this work, tolerance, liberty, human dignity. And the values are ends in themselves. The values are our words to which we and our politicians pay homage. But they are more than our national values. They really are universal values, and they really do lie at the cornerstone of not just our peace and security as members of a global community, but indeed for the stability and the sustainability of the international architecture into the 21st century. So the office that I'm in now at the State Department leads the department's work at the intersection of security and human rights. Sometimes uneasy nexus that I've occupied for a very long time, I'm sure some of you would describe yourself as having lain at that nexus as well. And the bureaus within the undersecretariat range from the Counterterrorism Bureau to the Conflict Stabilization Bureau, narcotics and law enforcement, human rights, democracy, refugee assistance, human trafficking, global criminal justice. So when what is known as the J Bureau was created, for some people it seemed like a really odd melange of different bureaus with very different and competing missions. But if you occupy this nexus that I just described where you see as fundamental the relationship between rights and security between justice and peace, this constellation of bureaus makes all the sense in the world and offers hope in a very concrete if bureaucratic way that the United States can join together the strands of security and peace in in a form that has been elusive in some some periods of our history. So if you assume that human rights and security are closely interwoven, you see security as a means of promoting human rights, and you see that crises and instability weaken the social and governmental structures that are necessary for protecting citizens from abuse. So our core mission at J is to encourage and support rights and justice respecting societies in which people can live freely and safely. And so since coming to the office, I've really put an emphasis on improving the government's ability to respond to mass atrocities, the use of systematic violence against civilians. This is not a unique focus of mine. You will all know that President Obama some three years ago identified the prevention of mass atrocities as a core national security interest of the United States in addition to being a moral responsibility. And he committed the United States to becoming a global leader in preventing wide scale violence against civilians. The President's National Security Strategy and the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review Q2DR, see I'm already numbing you, that was rolled out just two weeks ago by Secretary Kerry, reiterate the importance of preventing mass atrocities as a strategic priority. And as global citizens, as people who read the newspaper, we cannot help but understand that this issue looms extremely large for the world as a whole. Places, in particular, those that are already marginalized and vulnerable if not already riddled with conflicts, so places such as Sudan, Iraq, Nigeria, Syria, Yemen, all at risk. And to meet these threats to prevent conflicts from escalating, the government is seeking to improve the ability of countries and local communities to identify and quickly address the risks of large scale violence when they arise. We all have a role to play and I'm simply going to explain how we've been seeking to strengthen the State Department's role. First, the promise of prevention. Government policymaking, institutional policymaking, sometimes individual policymaking, we all know that prevention is the wisest investment of resources and yet it's often very difficult to actually work our systems and our choices to prioritize prevention efforts. It more effectively mitigates risks before crises erupts, it reduces the costs that come with full scale response, saves lives. Preventing threats is just not an automatic reflex for government nor is it typically reflected in the way that we budget. We respond to ongoing crises, that is sort of what catapults a complex checks and balances system to actually move. And prevention is something that because it works over the longer term and because it often works in avoiding the foul in the non-barking dog, it's harder to show the concrete results that so many are focused on whether they're in the donor community or whether they sit in Congress. So the importance of prevention is confronted by the difficulty of actually prioritizing prevention in complex decision making. And so the role of your organization's outside of government is to constantly press us to do just that. We are working within state to try to do that within the context of government decision making. To incorporate prevention thinking into the mechanics of government, we are seeking to institutionalize prevention in ways that go beyond what is commonly understood and talked about, which is the Atrocity Prevention Board as an entity. We're working to institutionalize prevention in all aspects of the way that the State Department thinks about and executes its responsibilities. So the fast moving threats, the wolf at the door, the urgent inbox is what tends to preoccupy the government. One of the advantages of being a functional bureau within the State Department is that we can think more long term and more strategically about what lies over the horizon. And we are better positioned to bring prevention concerns and priorities to the balance of our colleagues at state that are focused on the immediate crises. So we have worked to build mechanisms within our government deliberative processes and within our budgeting and within our are the way that we think about who's in the room for a given discussion to make sure that prevention is on the agenda in a way that is more central than has typically been true in the past. The APB itself, the Atrocities Prevention Board, scans the horizon to look for emergent threats and is charged with helping push the system to prioritize those challenges in a preventive vein. And the early warning indicators work that many of you have been involved in and that has gone on for a long time outside of government has now been incorporated within government, within the way the intelligence community thinks about its responsibilities and how it defines its priorities. And building on that institutionalized change, the Atrocities Prevention Board is better equipped to do that work of early identification. So we will look every month at a handful of countries that have been identified by the intelligence community at where the risk factors lie in that particular country or region. And we will see to identify gaps and opportunities that can be met in advance early on. So the Atrocities Prevention Board does in an interagency context in which Nancy was a critical participant when she served in government for AID. In an interagency context sets the tone, but the real work has to happen within agencies as they identify what it is that they can do and enable either programmatically or in terms of budget or in terms of diplomacy to work on the prevention angle. So let me take this abstract description and try to make it more concrete. And I do this with a great deal of humility because I'm going to talk about the example of Burundi. And as you all know, the current political crisis in Burundi with the president having asserted his right to run for a third term in contravention of the Arusha Accords has caused enormous dislocation and increased violence and refugee flows within the country. So I'm going to provide this example that looks at the Atrocity Prevention Board's efforts vis-a-vis Burundi starting from two years ago. And the claim that I'm going to make is not that we were able to prevent atrocities forever, but that we positioned the U.S. government, our ambassador in Burundi and the concerned international community in a much better place to respond to what are now the risks of mass atrocities and violence. So the APB, looking based on the intelligence communities scanning of the horizon that I just referred to, this institutionalization of the prevention of mass atrocities agenda into the way the government prioritizes issues, had identified Burundi as a country at risk. And some two years ago, the different agencies of government came together and identified gaps in our programming, in our understanding of the situation, in our peacebuilding efforts on the ground, in the communication among key actors within Burundi and worked to scrounge together some $7 million worth of resources to support programs and efforts that aimed to fill those gaps. So the funding bolstered coordination with partners, it enabled the department to deploy civilian conflict experts to augment what was a very small embassy team. And it laid the groundwork for a much deeper understanding and faster understanding within the government of what is going on now as we prepare to potentially respond to these increasingly worrying signs in Burundi today. So we're working within the State Department as I think about the atrocities prevention interagency process within the State Department. We have a responsibility to instill within the bureaucracy itself, not just have it lodged at the level of the whole of government, the prevention analysis piece and where that, I have directed that to reside in the Conflict and Stabilizations Operations Bureau. It is a redirection of the bureau in the sense that the bureau had become very programmatic in its focus. We are seeking to restore a balance between the analytic and policy side of CSO's work with its programatics. And what CSO is doing in coordination in most cases with AID that has really been a leader in this field over the long haul in terms of its conflict assessment work. But AID and State have come together to refine their conflict assessment tools as they relate to mass atrocities. And we are instilling within the State Department training, training that exists for foreign service officers and other State Department employees, but also creating toolkits that will go out to posts that are at risks and are available to anyone who is deploying to a country that is on our screen as being potentially at risk of mass atrocities. CSO is also rededicating itself to capturing lessons learned. I have been amazed as coming from academia at the difficulty that the, at least the State Department appears to have in capturing learning and conveying it in other than a person to person point to point manner. And so institutionalizing best practices, institutionalizing case studies so that those who come to the next crisis don't have to learn the hard way is a priority that we've established for CSO. Disseminating those resources because the regional, first of all, everyone within the Foreign Service at least is constantly moving and rotating through. And so while you may have regional expertise, as you all know, conflicts are very specific to a particular context. And so knowing what happens for countries over 10 years ago doesn't necessarily prepare you well for an emerging conflict in country X. That's that's different. But also the constant churn means that that there is, there is more of a difficulty in raising issues that are not considered to be the top priority of the crisis issues. So we, we have to both provide the tools for people to make the prevention case and we have to provide the reinforcement psychologically for people to feel that it is important and indeed expected that they will raise the prevention case. And so that is really what CSO is seeking to do within the Foreign Service culture and within the bureaucracy at the State Department. We have to look at our existing activities. This is another thing that CSO will be doing in partnership with others to investigate how existing investments in the rule of law in gender equality or political participation can lay the foundation that can contribute to preventing violence. There's a lot that the State Department does long term that with more attention and more tailoring can serve multiple purposes. And you know, the longer I am backing government, the longer I see the enormous, the more deeply I understand the enormity of challenges that are out there globally, the more I appreciate the limitations of our own resources and our own reach. The more I firmly believe that everything that we do, whether it is development or whether it is institution building, absolutely needs to be done through a prevention lens where it is, it is multi-purpose investment. And there are tweaks in the way that we can do this that I think will yield big benefits going forward. And this relates very much to the third emphasis that we've had in the State Department within the J under Secretariat since I came to it, which is this notion that's very familiar to all of you and that's very familiar to our colleagues at AID, but that is not typically the way the State Department has thought about its work because the State Department typically is focused on embassies that deal with governments and relationships that are intergovernmental and meetings and processes that are intergovernmental. We at J really look at the world through the lens of the global citizen. And so we think about strengthening communities. And so this this emphasis on what it means to promote sort of the strength and health and resilience of communities is something at the local level is something that we are seeking to to inculcate throughout the Department. When the forces of instability threaten the fabric of a society, we we the odds are increased that the community can resist those threats when we strengthen the health of that community.  These are all risks that have security implications that can be addressed by strengthening community processes. And the State Department's tools, which tend to be geared toward government partners, can be adjusted and augmented in ways that really develop the community piece and focus on the relationship of the community to the government in ways that are also extremely helpful for community resilience and for governance in general. And so that's that's an enormous cultural change that we are just beginning to address.  So the long term peace building doesn't begin and end with a focus on national governments. And so this is why as we as we looked to, for example, the challenge in the Central African Republic, part of of our augmentation of resources, some 30 million dollars went to community and grassroots peace and reconciliation programs. Part of our effort was having President Obama record a radio address that was broadcast to the people of that country. Governments everywhere are strengthened when they work in partnership with communities. And so trying to create a balanced approach to peace means that we have to leaven our approach to foreign assistance and partnership to think beyond governments to think about not just civil society, where I think the State Department has evolved in terms of both who it communicates with and who it sees as partners in development or foreign assistance work, but also really focus on the communities themselves that are the the embodiments of that global citizen that we increasingly need to think about in a world in which borders become less important in many respects. A fourth feature of our approach is partnerships. I've touched on this already. The ways I was really struck in a really positive way when I returned to government in the State Department by the prominence that is attributed to civil society organizations in dialogue, both in the field and in Washington. The role of non-governmental actors I think will only continue to grow. We within the State Department increasingly see not just the layers, but also the breadth of multinational or multi-organizational partnerships as being essential to anything that we do. And it's not simply a function of limited resources. It's a function of the need to have multiple pressure points or multiple engagement points on any given problem set. So, for example, we at J have started a dialogue with the European Union, the Civilian Security and Development Dialogue that aims at bringing the EU apparatus to include DEVCO into a discussion about how do we strengthen community resilience and how do we work collectively when we are mutually concerned about a country at risk? We meet regularly with UN counterparts, both individuals who are special rapporteurs on issues like genocide or transitional justice, but also with the internal apparatus within the UN leaders of initiatives such as Rights Up Front that seek to help the UN make much of the same preventive change that we are seeking to institutionalize within the State Department. And at the local level, the community engagement, one of our big challenges is trying to learn how to bring our investments in communities back to Washington. And I have a feeling that we could probably learn from some of you in how to best do that, but we certainly do rely on the Institute of Peace because of its many events and because it's just next door. So it's so easy to come and hear from people who are in Washington from the field, from local communities about how programs and engagements are working and affecting them. So in some, when the Secretary announced the release of the QDDR, he said, power dwells increasingly in networks rather than hierarchies. We have to engage with an ever-expanding array of organizations, groups in regional and subnational leaders. This is really a fundamental challenge for us, but it's space within which you move seamlessly and so I hope we can rely on you to continue to keep us honest and evolve our efforts in taking communities and citizens seriously in national government policymaking. I want to just say a very brief word and we can talk about it more in the Q&A if you wish, but the emphasis that the President and the Secretary of State are now putting on the prevention agenda as it relates to the threat of global terrorism I think is a really noteworthy evolution and I want to flag it for you. It may not be what you all think of as central to your own work as peace builders, but I can tell you based on my travels, including most recently with the Secretary in Kenya, the issue of community resilience, the issue of interfaith dialogue, the issue of government community relationships is absolutely central to preventing the rise of violent extremism and that next generation of threat. And I believe that the work that you do and that we are seeking to do better within the Department of State and in conjunction with our colleagues at AID, at the level of the citizen, at the level of the community, at the nexus of government and community and citizen is absolutely vital for dealing with a panoply of challenges but centrally to this question of violent extremism and terrorism. And we have seen that as important as the use of force and intelligence tools may be that at the end of the day this is psychological, this is a question of belief, this is a question of pull factors, this is also a question of underlying causes and push factors that have to do with alienation, with marginalization, with a host of things that are really central to the work that many of you have studied and been active in. And so when the White House convenes a summit on countering violent extremism and the main word at that summit is how do we prevent violent extremism? That's a really important and positive and energizing possibility and an invitation to all of you to think about how you can contribute to that expansion, to that complementarity of our current hard security approaches to countering terrorism and how do we think about getting ahead of the curve? How do we think about preventing those next generation of extremists from emerging? How do we think about keeping communities healthy so that children can be protected from the lure of this, this aberrant, nihilistic, ideological and behavioral pull? How do we prevent that? And that, I think, is peace building at its core. That, I think, is a huge opportunity for all of us. I think it's an opportunity that if we fail to really engage it, if we fail to embrace it, to walk into that space that sometimes at an uncomfortable nexus, because not everyone in the peace community wants to talk about terrorism or wants to feel that their work is somehow connected to an anti-terrorism effort. But I promise you, this is an invitation that we do not want to pass up. This is a door through which we must walk because the peace building is so central to what it means to promote tolerance, those values that I mentioned in the beginning, liberty, tolerance, inclusion, freedom, human rights. This is fundamentally at risk in any struggle against terrorism. And the more we can use the non-kinetic tools, the more we can act earlier in a cycle of radicalization, the better we can harness all layers of society in fighting against intolerance and nihilism and violence, the closer we will be to the world that we all wish to see. So I hope very much that for those of you who are already engaged in work at this nexus, you will recommit yourselves and that we can support you. And I hope for those who have yet to venture into this space that you will find it possible to do so because we really do need your help. So sorry to go on so long, but thank you very much.


Williston Development Review Board for Tuesday, June 22, 2021. I'm gonna call the meeting to order at 7.04. First order of business is the public forum. This is an opportunity for anyone in the audience to make a public comment on any topics that are not on tonight's agenda. Is there anyone out in the audience on Zoom or present here in the building who would like to comment on something that is not on the agenda? It looks like Paul Christensen joined from the waiting room. If you're attending on Zoom and you'd like to make a comment, you can use the raise hand button on your toolbar or comment in the chat. For the past 15 months, there's been a statement read by the chair now that we are back in session, but in the kind of a modified session, is there a modified statement that needs to be read? I know we don't, not right now. I don't think so. Secretary of State says we can go back to in-person meetings, but now that there's a Zoom component, there's still a kind of informational out there that probably needs to be presented. So something to think about. Right, yeah, I guess for tonight, what we can say is that because board members can participate live during the meeting virtual and in-person that they can vote and hear testimony and vote and that if for some reason there is a technical difficulty that the meeting would get continued for the next meeting, July 13th. And we can write up a statement for Pete for the next meeting. Great. Okay, so no one out there for the public forum, correct? So far I'm seeing no raised hands and no chats. Okay. Okay, then we'll go directly into the public hearing. There's three items tonight. The first of which is Pizzagalli properties, LLC. Requests a discretionary permit to construct a sidewalk in front of a building to access parking lots at 188 Harvest Lane. Mr. Bouchard, welcome. If you would please state your name and address for the record please. Robert Bouchard, Pizzagalli properties. 462 Shelburne Road is where we reside. The property under consideration is 188 Harvest Lane. Thank you. Staff goes first. All right, I am sharing the staff report. This is a request for a discretionary permit to construct a sidewalk along the front northern facade of the existing office building at 188 Harvest Lane. A discretionary permit is required for this project because more than 1,000 square feet of site work is taking place and more than eight new luminaries are proposed. Tonight we are recommending that the DRB take testimony in close and approve this application with findings, conclusions and conditions as drafted. Project history created in 1987. This building was developed in the early 90s and not much has changed since then. This project was not subject to conservation commission or historic advisory committee review. Public works comments are included. They mostly pertain to how the sidewalk is constructed and it's with fire did not have comments and neither did police. No public comment letters were received at the time of mail out or to date. Everything that we're proposing in this application is a standard condition of approval. The parking lot, the sidewalks will connect the main entrance to the employee parking lots. The one condition that is noted is that the short-term bicycle parking be in compliance with 14.8.3 and I've been working with Bob Bouchard on that for final plans. No changes to the landscape buffers or street trees are proposed. The decorative landscaping in front of the building will be retained and outdoor lighting of luminary ballards along the sidewalk are being added. What follows is findings, conclusions as proposed by staff. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Emily. Bob, have you reviewed the proposed conditions of approval? I have. Do you have any that you have concern with? Only all the item five. No, I'm sorry. No, I don't. There's a comment that's made in the staff notes with regards to outdoor lighting that implies that they felt that our lighting plan was an error and I wanted to state the record that it's not. Oh, okay. Okay. Yeah, they were showing a single point of illumination as 12-foot candles. All the other illumination levels were between one and seven-foot candles. The DRB can approve this higher level of illumination along a pedestrian way. So I wasn't sure if it's an error or it is true and that's fine, this can be approved as a brighter point of illumination for a pedestrian way. So are you saying that 12 lumines is an error on the plan? No, it is not an error in the plan. Okay. It's correct. It's correct. Okay. Yeah, they're three-foot tall bollards and I guess sometimes maybe they get a little bright right where they are. Okay. Okay, I just wanted to understand. Okay. Yeah, on the plan, that data point is graphically under the bollard. The bollard? Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you. Bob, anything, any other comments? No, all the conditions are fine. We'll go to five feet wide with a sidewalk, not a problem. The bike rack, Emily, not a problem. Does the board have a desire to have the bike racks out front, out back? The bike racks, what we have right now is undercover and the new ones will be undercover. We're just gonna put the ones in that were specified. Do you have a, let me ask that question. Do you have a specific bike rack that the town has specified? This is what Emily had sent to me, which is just the reverse who? The blind lock says, should be visible from principal entrance, maybe short-term bicycle parking may serve buildings with multiple entrances. So I think where it's near the building entrance, whether that's the front one, probably the most sense or wherever it is currently is probably approvable as well. Okay, again, does the town have a spec that would like, for example, if I may present this, we use these a lot. Yeah, those would work as well. Mm-hmm. Okay, yep. Bob, would you mind leaving that with staff and we'll put that in the minutes? Thank you. Thank you, just for the record, thank you. And quantity? Quantity, how many do you want? We can follow up with that in final plans. It's based on the number of parking spaces. Okay. We had the bike rack there now. I know it does not meet current town specifications. It does not get a lot of use. Just, you know, there's not a lot of obviously, so the public that come to this facility, very intensive in terms of the security element at this property. That's all, just putting that out there. But I know we have conditions that we need to meet. Yeah, well, it'd be both for people visiting and also workers. I understand. Yeah. Bob, could you describe or let me inform me where that existing bike rack is? Yeah, it's in the rear entrance currently. That on our plans. The rear entrance. Thank you. At the back of the building? Right. Yeah, it's under cover. It's under that little port for share. The TRB may reduce the number of bicycle parking requirements where the location and or nature of the proposed development makes the use of bicycles highly unlikely. So I think there's a lot of vehicle parking. So the number of bicycle spaces that's required might be a little bit higher. So maybe one or two of those racks would be sufficient as opposed to like five or six. So that's something that we can work out at final plan. Okay. Members of the DRP, any questions? This side won't be open to the general public, right? Just for your employees. No, it's available to the public. General public. Yeah, but there's visitor parking out front. So I don't really see them walking from the visitor parking across grass to the sidewalk. They walk right into the front entrance. So this is, it's, you know, primarily there for employees. Scott, anything? Also. Steve or Paul, any questions? Nothing from Steve. I'm good too. Okay. Last call for questions. Bob, any final thoughts? Nope. No raised hands from the audience. Yeah, that was my next question. Yeah, the only question I guess I had was, does this require an additional review or do I have all I need? We'll follow up its administrative steps after this where you file things to our office and staff will prove them. Great. Yeah, so what will happen is we'll have a deliberative session after the public hearing and we will, I'm gonna close this hearing. So that means we're gonna make a decision on this tonight and you can check with staff in the morning. Final decision. Final decision. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. We're gonna close DP 21-14 at 7.15. Thank you, Bob, for coming. Yep, thank you all very much. Okay, next up, DP 21-15, Sign Pro Inc. Who is present from the applicant? That's Tracy. Tracy. Hello. Hi, Tracy. Tracy, would you please state your name and your address for the record, please? Certainly. Tracy Becker representing Sign Pro Inc. 60 Westfield Drive, Plantsville, Connecticut, 06489. Welcome. Thank you. Staff goes first. All right, this is a request for a master sign plan at a single tenant industrial building located at 71 Leroy Road. Tonight, we're recommending that you take testimony and close and approve this decision with findings, conclusions, and conditions as drafted. Fire Department did not have any comments. No comment letters were received at the time of mail-out. And I think I'm getting a little bit of feedback, Tracy, so I'm gonna mute you for the moment. Overall, this master sign plan complies as proposed. They are proposing a wall sign that's larger than 24 square feet, which requires a special finding and standard findings are shown below. The overall street-facing building elevation is 3,600 square feet. The maximum allowed sign area is 288 square feet, and they are proposing just below that at 260.3 square feet. What follows are findings, conclusions, and conditions, which includes the signage table, and we're recommending approval. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Emily. Tracy, have you reviewed the proposed conditions of approval? I have, and I don't believe we have any problems with them. I don't believe there's a free-state thing, so I don't think any of those conditions apply. So I think we are good. Okay, do you have anything to supplement to Emily's staff report? I just wanted to mention that all of the signs we are proposing are non-illuminated, so they should just fade away in the evening, so that won't be a problem. I believe overall we are proposing fewer signs in a smaller overall area than what was currently on the building or Harvey Building products. So I thank you very much for hearing our application this evening, and if you have any questions, I would be happy to answer. Great, thank you. DRB members, any questions for the applicant? Okay. So the one condition that Tracy brought up was that a freestanding sign must be landscaped at the base. I calculated this banner sign on the street as a freestanding sign. That's up to the DRB. That should be considered a freestanding sign and landscaped or not. Okay. Tracy, do you have a position on this? Would you have any angst if we had considered this a freestanding sign and you had to do some landscaping around the base? Actually, there are a couple of other people on the Zoom tonight that might be better than I can. So Matt Lehmann and Carl Ulfdrag are here from PowerPlay. They are actually the sign company manufacturing the signs. Yeah, I'm here, Tracy. Hi, everyone. So good evening. If you would please state your name and your address for the record if you are going to speak please. Carl Ulfdrag, PowerPlay Imaging 705, Johnston Willis Drive, Richmond, Virginia 23236. Matt Lehmann, PowerPlay Imaging 705, Johnston Willis Drive 23236, Richmond, Virginia. Okay. So the topic we are discussing is landscaping around that sign in question. And my question to you was, do you have any concern about doing some landscaping at the base of that sign? I wouldn't think, as long as it's not Augusta National golf course, I think we'll be okay with doing some landscaping around there. We're going for Shinnecock Hills, okay? Much better. I'd prefer Shinnecock. Yeah, I mean, as long as we're clear on what kind of landscaping is required, I don't think the building owner would have an issue with that whatsoever. The only challenge that we've come across on this property is there's, because there really is no traditional monument sign, as their customers drive by this building, that flagpole is really the only thing that they have to get them into the entranceway. That's why we actually moved the building sign over a little bit in between the trees so you can at least see it as you're passing by, but there's no other signage to direct the customers into the parking lot. Staff, so what are the landscaping requirements in a situation like this? Is there quite a bit of discretion? Paranium. Let me pull that up. The base of all permanent freestanding signs shall be landscaped with perennial and or annual plantings. Yeah, there's a lot of discretion. Usually people do a little mulch bed with some low lying annuals or shrubs. Not extensive. This could be a circle with some hostas and that would satisfy that criteria. No problem. This is not Augusta. No, it's not. It's a dog track I play on. That's fine. Municipal golf course. This is a municipal track. One par five. Okay. Any other questions? Any other questions from the board on this master sign plan application? Paul or Steve? No. Okay. Any members of the public that have comments on this application? If you're attending on zoom, you can use the raise hand button on your toolbar or comment in the chat. I'm seeing no raised hands and no chats. Okay. Final call for questions. Okay. Okay. We're going to close DP 21-15. At 723. Thank you very much for coming. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. MP 11-23. This is for the. Isham farm outdoor events at 3515 Oak Hill road. Who is present representing the applicant? Hi, Helen. Would you please state your full name and your address for the applicant? I'm from Houston. I live at 3515 Oak Hill road. Which is the Isham family farm in Wilson, Vermont. Representing the Isham family farm. Thank you. Okay. Staff goes first. Who has this one? This is a request for a reconsideration of the conditions of approval for DP 11-23. The D.R.B. approved on April 13, 2021. Among other things, the approved permit amendment allows outdoor performances to be held adjacent to the banquet facility at Isham family farm. The D.R.B. conditioned the approval such that no amplified sound would be permitted outside the banquet facility and the applicants are requesting a modification to this condition to allow amplified sound outside the facility. The properties located at 3515 Oak Hill road in the agricultural rural residential zoning district. The properties currently developed as an operational farm with retail sales of farm and forest products and a historic farm used as a banquet facility. Staff is recommending approval of this application with recommended conditions as drafted. So the project history is presented and, you know, in 2011, this DP 11-23 permitted the use of the restored barn as a banquet facility and successive amendments have added parking and modifications to parking and access. And then the most recently considered amendment was April 13, 2021, where modifications to parking and access outdoor performances in conjunction with the banquet facility were approved. And this is, so this is really the second time the D.R.B. is reviewing this particular west. So there were no advisory boards reviewed this and no other departments commented on this application. Five comment letters were received at the time of mail out and two additional comment letters from the public were received after mail out. So the D.R.B. is being asked to reconsider the conditions under which outdoor performances associated with the banquet facility could reasonably be allowed. Okay. Hold on a second. It seems like Helen, Helen, are you having a hard time hearing? Only because somebody entered the house and there was a lot of noise. I'm good to go. Okay. I was just wondering if the microphone wasn't close enough. No, it's all good. Thank you for that. Okay. Good. Sorry. So during the, during its previous review of the, of this proposal, the use of the restored barn as a banquet facility could be expanded to include outdoor events near the barn provided these events didn't have amplified sound. The applicants have asked the D.R.B. to reconsider this condition because some of the performances require the use of amplified sound. So the D.R.B. should consider whether this can be permitted in conformance with the bylaws specifically chapters 31 and 18. So as far as the discretionary permit procedures are concerned, requests for reconsideration is not something you often see, but it's permitted under Vermont law. This is considered a request for reconsideration rather than an appeal or an amendment because an appeal of a D.R.B. decision would be submitted to Vermont environmental court. This is not an amendment because the applicant is not asking for anything different from the previous proposal rather that the applicants provided additional information and asking the D.R.B. to reconsider a specific condition of approval. So staff is advising the D.R.B. to focus the discussion on that specific condition of approval being being asked for modification. So permitted uses in the rural residential zoning district. So commercial non-agricultural events are only allowed in a converted historic barn. There's no discussion in the bylaw related to holding outdoor events in association with a converted barn or banquet facility because outdoor events weren't contemplated at the time of this bylaw revision in I think 2011. In your previous review of D.P. 11-23.4, D.R.B. decided that the first Earth summer series could be allowed in conjunction with the banquet facility. The D.R.B. established hours of operation under conditions 17 and 18 and the applicants are not requesting modification to the permitted hours of operation. There are some provisions of Chapter 18 governing noise which this modification or this request for modification has to is dealing with. So basically the applicant is requesting to hold these the first Earth summer series outside the barn. Sound levels are regulated by the Wilson noise control ordinance and enforced by the police. But they're also dealt with under Chapter 18 sort of referring to the noise ordinance. The applicant's original proposal lacked specificity regarding anticipated noise levels. They've submitted additional documentation regarding anticipated sound levels and staff is recommending that that documentation seems sufficient to demonstrate the proposed outdoor amplification can comply with Chapter 18 and the Wilson noise control ordinance. And so I've included a table with the bylaw excerpts and how the applicant has addressed those. So the applicants provided a sound study that's demonstrating that they can, that the anticipated sound levels are going to be in compliance with Chapter 18 and the noise ordinance. The conditions of approval, the findings of fact, conclusions of law and conditions of approval are the same as the previous review. Only a number 17 C and D have been highlighted. And I've not drafted a revised condition, but that's the condition that is being requested that you reconsider and discuss. That's all. Okay. Thank you. Helen, what do you have to add to Melinda's staff report? Recording in progress. I agree with what Melinda said that we are definitely asking for reconsideration for the highlighted areas. That's really what we're asking for is for all of us to take a look at our research that we did in regards to the noise levels and that they comply in terms of the decibels and the timing. And that we take a step back and look at it in terms of whether or not they do fall in with the plans of the noise ordinance, both with time and decibel levels. Is there. Is there a commitment on your part to measure. The decibel levels during an event? Yes. And I really appreciate that question. That's a great question. Yes, we are. And I have taken upon myself. To create a one page document that creates parameters per. Performance that comes to the farm. And the parameters, specifically state the decibel levels that they may not exceed and actually, and also the time of day that they may not exceed beyond. And. I am working with the person that is the big sound person with the Flynn theater and all the events that work at Flynn, such as the touring companies that come to the Flynn stage. And the gentleman that works as their, the Flynn stage sound person. And he also works with people such as Vermont stage, who's coming here and he works on the decibel levels. And I'm working with him on understanding which implement I must purchase to make sure these decibel levels are under the noise ordinance of Williston per event here at the farm. And that. Instrument is stated in the appeal that we. And thank you. Melinda for clarifying that there. The request, I believe that's what. Is the correct word. The tool that we're looking for that. It is just. It basically is a, it meets the requirements of the American national standards and just to, in regards to decibel levels. And I believe that's also stated in the noise ordinance of Williston. The sound level measurements shall be taken with a sound level meter that is the minimum requirements such as that. Okay. Thank you. Yep. DRB members. Any questions. Will there be any reporting of the, of the maximum sound level that were generated during a given event? Well, there will be recordings in regards to what?  No. To report back to the enforcing. Entity, which is in this case, the gentleman sitting over here in my right. That is going to be tasked with. No, it's, you know, you can say that it's going to be no more than 60. And you've done all the research and got all the instruments, but if it comes out, it's actually 70. Then we have an issue. Yep. I hear you. Thank you for that. Thank you for that clarification. So what I understand is what you're saying is when. I do take the measurements to monitor the decibel levels that I. Write those decibel levels down so I can have a charts, let's say, so I can show that for future references. I think that would be very helpful for us. Yep. That ultimately all of the best laid plans actually work. I hear you on that. And I, I will make a note. Yeah. That is on my plan, but I will. Star that down. Okay. Thank you, John. Any other questions from the DRB. Scott. No. Paul or Steve. I'm just searching it up right now. This is Steve. The Williston noise ordinance. I'm looking for it. What are the, what's the decibel decibel limit allowed by that ordinance? I couldn't find it at night. I believe it's 60. 60 at the day. And what's the definition of night. I think it's after 10. Okay. Conditions that they're not going to be. So 50 doesn't apply. Okay. Okay. No. No, the times are stated. No. In the noise. Yep. The condition, the original conditions of approval, which are not subject to this reconsideration already meet the definition of. All everything is a day event here. It's not a night event. But that, but it's controlled by the noise ordinance. Okay. Ellen, one of the things that we're going to be talking about in deliberative session is, is, um, and what, what will come from our decision is, is TBD. But one of the things that we're going to be talking about is what the possibility of you submitting evidence of compliance with the noise ordinance. And, um, and so that would, um, that would require either an automated measuring measurement with this device that you have yet to purchase, or some type of, um, manual reading and logging of the readings during an event. Um, I don't know what the board will decide on this topic, but it's something that we're going to talk about. Um, would you consider buying an instrument that has some type of automated recording. Of a decibel levels. Yeah. If I, if I understand your question correctly. That is what we are purchasing that it does. Record and measure. And if not, I will make sure that it does record. Record along with measuring. Great. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Uh, yes. Any other, any other questions from the DRB. Uh, members of the public, if you would like to weigh in, please raise your hand, please. Uh, Debbie Ingram has raised her hand. Okay. Uh, go ahead, Debbie. Thank you very much. Appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this evening. Um, sorry, I can't see you. Uh, but, uh, but I'll use my imagination. Actually, I do know some of you. Um, and, uh, for those of you, um, who might, I haven't met, um, I am, um, I, I served, uh, Williston on the planning commission for six years and then, uh, on the select board for six years and, uh, was, uh, most recently a state senator, uh, representing, uh, uh, Williston and other parts of Chittenden County. Um, so I, um, I just wanted to come this evening and say, you know, I know that you have a, um, an important and difficult job to protect, um, the, um, the application of the bylaws. Um, when I was on the planning commission and select board, I helped to, to write the new, uh, the new bylaws and the noise, uh, ordinance. And, uh, I know your job is to, um, as a quasi judicial body is to interpret, uh, the laws and apply them, um, uh, so that, uh, so that we're honoring all the, all the residents of, of Williston. Uh, so you have a very important job. Um, I would, I would commend to you the, the staff report. I think it's extremely well written, uh, and has considered, uh, all of the, the various factors. Um, uh, you've gotten a lot of letters from different towns, people who, um, you know, have listened, have cited other reasons why, uh, they want to support the, um, um, family farm series. But I know those aren't, those aren't really, they're kind of, uh, outside of your, your purview, your job is really just to interpret the, the, uh, the bylaws. And, uh, but I do think that with the sound study that was done, um, that, um, you have good evidence that, uh, the bylaws will be adhered to that the noise levels will be, will be met.   And, um, just, I guess the last thing I'd say is when, you know, when we were writing these, um, when I was involved in that process, of course, what our ultimate goal was is, is to, to, um, to protect everybody and all the different residents to balance the rights of the neighbors to be able to live in a rural place and to balance the, um, the right of people like the items to be able to, um, uh, be innovative and make a, make a good living and, and bring new things to our community. And, um, so I know that's your, that's your task and, uh, have every confidence that you'll, you'll do a great job with that. And I think that, um, that in this case, um, that, that can be worked out well and the, and that staff have identified, you know, what the, what the key issues are. And I, so I do hope that you will reconsider and, and allow them to, um, to have this amplified sound as long as it's under the, the decibel limits. So thank you very much for listening to me tonight. Thank you, Debbie. Uh, anyone else? Thank you. Um, Sharon Coburn. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, Sharon, would you like to speak or are you just. My hand. I apologize for the clap. Oh, okay. Cool. I noticed it was angle. Good evening. And I should have asked Debbie to do this as well. Debbie, could you please state your address for the record, please? Certainly. Uh, yeah, Debbie in room 21, 20 south roads, Williston 05495. Thank you. Uh, Sharon, if you could identify yourself and your address before you address the board, thank you. Thank you. My name is Sharon Coburn. Uh, we live at three, eight, seven, six south road in Williston. Go ahead. The floor is yours. Thank you. Um, so if you look at the map, um, you can see that Helen and the items have put together. Our property is actually adjacent to the ice and farm. Um, we're right below three, eight, three, eight south road, which is where the, one of the studies was done. And, um, we have lived here for about a year and a half now. And my three year old son sleeps in the bedroom that faces closest to the farm. And I could not be more supportive of what the oceans are trying to do. Um, Helen and Mike are so respectful of their neighbors and I have every belief that if there was a sound issue, if anything came up, they're going to do everything they can to, to make sure that this is done properly by how the rules are laid out. And so we just wanted to voice that we're here to support them. Um, again, we're right there. I think you can. Yep. So if you move the cursor to the right where the house, uh, yeah, if you go to the right, that's our house, right? Nope. Down one. Right there. That's where we live. Um, and so we would love to see them be able to have this amplified sound for these select events. The times have been outlined. We're more than comfortable with it. And, uh, we just hope that you really consider, um, giving them this opportunity. Thank you for your time this evening. Okay. Thank you, Sharon. Uh, anyone else, Emily, that's raised their hand. Uh, yeah, Paula is next. Okay, Paula, if you would please state your name and address for the record, please. Yes. Uh, I'm Paula cope. I lived at 108 made stone lane in Williston, Vermont. And I'm here as a board member for Vermont stage. Um, I wanted to first thank all of you for trying to balance the law with the needs of the citizens of Williston. Um, I would respectfully ask you to please reconsider. Um, I think one of the things the items are trying to do is to provide opportunity for arts organizations and artists to emerge from the pandemic with some hope and possibility and some opportunity for them to regain their own footing. And, um, I think that this is not a normal time. Um, and while the decibel level is essential and we have to follow that because that's what our citizens. Um, ask of us. I didn't want it lost that, uh, the ice ovens are doing something that is not only good for the community of Williston, but has a very direct effect to helping arts organizations like Vermont stage and the artists who will perform at their summer series, um, regain their footing in the economy. And I just didn't want that piece messed. So thank you. And I hope you do reconsider. Thank you, Paula. Um, anybody else, Emily? Uh, yep. Is, um, Christina. Christina, welcome. Uh, state your name and address please for the record. Hi, my name is Christina. I live at 49 Russell street. When you ski Vermont zero five four zero five four. Um, so I just wanted to sort of echo, um, what Paula said and just state my support of ice and farms reconsideration efforts. Um, I am the, um, executive director of Vermont stage and is one of the organizations that will be directly impacted by this decision. Um, in fact, we have, um, 14 performances planned at ice and farm this summer. Um, that we are planning to do outside. Um, with amplified sound with your permission. Um, it is essential for us to do amplified sound. The majority of our audience space is 55 and older. Um, that means that most of our audience members have some level of hearing loss and will not be able to hear anything outside. Unless we have some sound support, um, we will not be able to hear anything outside of our audience. Um, we will not be able to hear anything outside of our audience. Um, traveling. Um, so this is, this also impacts just our accessibility efforts for the general public. And I think that that I just wanted to make sure that that was very clear that, um, we will not be able to meet our ADA guidelines. Um, doing the show outside without, um, some form of amplified sound. And I, you know, of course, there are other things that were written in the letter that we need to be sort of put on record here. So thank you so much for considering this and I, um, truly hope you will reconsider your decision. Thank you. Anyone else Emily. If anyone else from the public would like to speak comment in the chat or press the raise hand button on your toolbar. So far I'm not seeing anyone else that would like to speak. But there are a couple other folks who are here who haven't spoken. Okay. Okay. Uh, DRB members. Any additional follow up questions. After hearing that testimony. Also. Okay. Uh, Helen, do you have anything else to add? Um, I would gently. And I really stress that word because I'm all about. Making sure that I look at everybody's thoughts and everything I do. Big, big part of how I was raised was to take into consideration of everything that was said and then critical thinking comes into play in regards to. Where we as a collective move forward for the common good. And I really truly understand why Williston wants places of rural character. I get that. I love rural character. That's one reason why I stayed in Vermont and after I was raised and I proudly. State that I'm a ninth generation, Vermont or and I want to stand Vermont and why I want my kids to stay in Vermont as we all want. I mean, that's why we love Vermont is because of the rural character. But the rural character comes as at a price. It really does. And if we can't step back and look at that. And it's not just the people that want homes and the rural area. And we have to recognize that the people that have created that rural character need to pay their taxes and they need to find innovative ways to bring forth. People to their rural lands. So we can afford to stay on our farms. And if we want our homes next to these farms, we need to support them through. Just our being neighborly and connecting with neighbors. And also by recognizing that farmers and foresters and people who work these lands. Have to find innovative ways because it's more and more expensive to live in Vermont. And I just asked that we recognize that rural character is not free. It, it's not free to the homes and the people who live in the rural areas. And that we enjoy these rural characters. It comes at a price. And I just asked that the Williston board steps back and, and recognizes that we created these, or you created these laws about a rural area versus a. Industrial area versus a suburban residential area. And know that farmers have to find ways to support. The rural areas. And that's what we're doing for these open lands. And I asked that in a very gentle and open hearted way. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Helen. Last call from the DRB for any questions. Okay. Hearing none. I'm going to close DP. 11 dash 23. Okay. Okay. That's a great question. I just wanted to add seven 53. Thank you, Helen. Appreciate it. Okay. DRB is going to go into deliberative session. At 7. 54. Yep. The public. I'll put you in the waiting room if you want to stick around for the decision. You're welcome to do so. second, 2021. The GRB is out of deliberative session. It is now 8.45. Is there a motion for DP 21-14? So as authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, Scott Riley moved that the Williston Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this, Tony presented at the public hearing of June 22, 2021, except the findings of fact and conclusions of law for DP 21-14 and approve this discretionary permit subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans, obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based. We are going to modify condition number 14 to read final plans, must specify short-term bicycle storage and compliance with WDB 14.8.3, the applicant and the staff to agree on the location and the number of racks to be used. Thank you, Scott. Is there a second? I'll second it. Dave Turner seconds. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Steve? Aye. Paul? Aye. Okay, six in favor, none opposed, motion carries. Is there a motion for DP 21-15? Yes, as authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, David Turner, move the Wilson Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of town staff and advisory boards required to comment on this application by the Wilson Development By-law, and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of June 22nd, 2021, accept the findings of facts and conclusions of law for DP 21-15 and approve the discretionary permit for master sign plans subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicants to submit final plans, obtain approval of these plans from the staff, and seek administrative sign permits, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which the approval is based. Thank you, Dave. Is there a second? I'll second it. Scott Riley seconds it. Any further discussion? No. Those present indicate by saying aye. If you're in favor. Aye. Steve? Aye. Paul? Aye. Six in favor, non-opposed motion carries. Thank you. Next up is DP 11-23.4. Is there a motion? Yes. As authorized by WDP 6.6.3 by John Hemmelgarn, moved with the Wilson Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory board required comment on this application by the Wilson Development By-law, and having heard and truly considered the testimony presented at the public hearings of April 13th and June 22nd, 2021, except the findings of the fact and conclusions of law on DP 11-23.4 and approved the discretionary permits subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans, obtain approval of these plans from staff, and then seek an administrative permit for proposed development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval will be based. I'm going to modify a couple of the conditions. By number 17C shall read, amplified sound, compliant with the Wilson noise control ordinance, shall be allowed outside of the structure. We're going to add a, I think we'll call it D, under 17, that says the applicant shall submit a law of actual level levels for each event, that interval and locations to be agreed upon with staff. Thank you, John. Is there a second? I'll second it. Dave Turner seconds it. Is there any further discussion? No. Hearing none. Paul Christensen, yay or nay? Yay. Steve Lambrick, yay or nay? Yay. DRB members present here in Williston indicate by saying yay please? Yay. Yay. Any opposed? None. Six are in favor. None opposed? Motion carries. Okay. Next up is the selection of the chair and the vice chair for FY 2022. So that goes for a one year period starting July 1 of 2021. That represents FY 2022 for the town of Williston. I will let people know that I'm interested in continuing on as chair if there's support from the other DRB members. Mr. Hemmelkarn, are you interested in continuing as vice chair? I am. Okay. Close nominations. Thank you, Paul. Is there a second? I'll second. Dave seconds it. Any further discussion? No. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Chair is re-elected and vice chair is re-elected for FY 2022. Next up is a draft staff correspondence relative to DP 21-11, the UPS application. What does staff have to brief the DRB on on this matter? They had a hearing. They requested a continuance and have since gone silent. So we're reminding them of their options. Thank you. And this is a draft letter that is to be finalized and issued. And this is simply a heads up to the DRB that this action is pending. Yes. Because I'm doing it on behalf of you guys. Great. Thank you. Yes. Yes, thank you. Okay. Next order of business is the approval of the minutes of June 8th, 2021. Is there a motion to approve those minutes? There is one correction, minor. You have myself Steve Lambert listed as being both in attendance and absent. I know you're better than they do. Well, you know, I wish I could be two places at once, but I haven't mastered that yet. I was not there. Okay. Okay. So noted, with that correction, is there a motion to approve the minutes? Yeah. You don't have me present. Okay. John Hamilton has made that motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Scott Riley seconds it. Any further discussion? You did catch the fact that I'm not present. I don't know what happened. Sorry. I'm probably Steve Lambert in disguise. Okay. So there was a friendly amendment to add Paul in attendance. Okay. You're good with that. You're good with it. Scott. Okay. Any further discussion? No. Okay. All those in favor indicate by saying aye please. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Is there a motion to adjourn? Okay. Thank you everyone. I appreciate it.


Alright, welcome back to the channel. In today's video I'm going to attempt to answer a question that I get a lot and that is how do you add header parameters when you're trying to query an external API, whether it's REST or whatever it is outside of WordPress and you want to bring in that information into your WordPress, then you can use it maybe in your custom post type or even just display it on the front end. So what I'm going to do is I've found an API that is open, you just need to sign up and you'll be given an API key like what I have here and once you're able to do that you should be able to query this particular API and then use it in your WordPress. If this is something that you want to see then let's jump into the code. So I'm going to open up my editor in VS Code and I have opened up the plugins folder. I've added this new folder and I've added this file just to start up my plugin as well. I'll write some PHP here just to get us started and I have this little snippet that allows me to add the plugin starter information for any plugin that I want. So I can just leave it here bare and I'll say this is going to be add headers to API call and that will be the name of my plugin. You can as well go and feed in all this other information. So what that will do for us is that when we come to our plugin section in our WordPress install, we now have this plugin that we can activate. So I've activated it so that I'm able to run it at any time. Now I'll go back to my editor. In my editor the first thing I'm going to do is add some bit of security and that is just to make sure define the abs path so that I'm not accessing this file directly. So once I do this, this is just basic security and then I'm going to come down here and the first thing that I'll do is I'm going to add a new menu page which will allow us to see the results from my API call and then eventually I'm going to make the API call with headers. First let's tackle this. So I'm going to add a new action from WordPress and here I'm going to check for admin underscore menu. That's what I want to work with and I will say let's have this under the take a press add menu as a function and this is going to be the name of our callback. So I can add this function here with that name. So in here we're going to use a method from WordPress which is add underscore menu page and this requires us to have a page title. So I'm going to come to the next line and say our page title will be pinging the API with headers and that's going to go to the top of the page. Next we need to add a menu item where we'll say API ping and that will be on the side menu and next we need to add some capabilities. So I'm going to add a capability of manage options and then we need to add a menu slag. So the menu slag is going to be like take a press API ping live dot PHP then we need to add a callback which I'll say take a press underscore ping then we need to add an icon URL. So I'm going to use dash icons because these are free and I'll say let this be the testimonio and you can use any of the dash icons available and then finally we can add a position which I'm going to just choose to be 16. So I'll add a semicolon here and then with this we should be able to get a page coming here and when we come back here and reload this page you'll see we have this ping and right here it's telling us we don't have this take a press ping callback. So I'm going to come back to my editor I'll copy this I'm going to make a new function add it here and then of course in here we can do a number of things. So I'm going to close my PHP and open my PHP again that will allow me to write some HTML markup in here. So the first thing I'll do is write a div with a class of wrap and then I can add an h1 where I can say testing API results and after doing that I'm going to use a wp remote request function which is from one press itself it's part of the call and this requires us to pass a URL and in here we can pass an array of arguments like our code editor is highlighting and telling us to do. So I'll save this as ping results and I'll assign this to this variable now what we need to do is define our URL this is going to be a string we need to get it from our API documentation. So I'm going to come back here and you see we have an example of how to use this API in JavaScript you can choose even PHP like Carl and so on. So I'm going to use the URL that's in here but I am not going to use this particular endpoint because it requires us to have an ID that we don't have a clue about. So I'm going to go for the series and I'm going to copy this URL copy it come back to my editor I'll add this in here and then we can also define the argument. So the argument remember we say it is an array so you can use this square brackets or you can use the old convention of the array text now inside here we can define quite a number of things for example we can define the method whether we want to use a post get update put delete whatever it is and this particular case we're going to use a get method now after the method we can also have the headers and the headers is actually an array of items now you're going to see that in a little while and we can also pass a body to this and this is also an array of items I need to wrap this into quotes because it's a string I'll tab this in one place so that it makes it easier for us to read and then when I go back to the docs you'll see that in our headers we are required to pass these two items that is basically the X rapid API key and the X rapid API host URL I'll copy this I'll come back to the editor I'm going to paste them inside our header here so this is the finished product but we need to pass this as array items so I need to wrap these in strings and then pass our arrow function here I'm going to change these double quotes into single quotes and then I'll just do the same wrap these in quotes and then add our arrow so this is how we know that these are the headers that are supposed to be passed now in order to test this I'm going to do a VADAM and I'm just wrapping this up with some pre-tags so that it can format quite well now I'll copy our picking results here and put it here in the response I'll come back to our browser and make sure that this is ready for testing so I can test the endpoint if I want to from here but I can come back to my page that I've prepared click the API pink and you will see that we actually get back data flowing in from the body here now this is very good this is actually what we needed but if we go back to this API you'll actually see that I'm subscribed to be able to use this API but if you check out the pricing you'll be able to see I'm using the basic free version that has a limit of 250 requests per month and I can only do one request per second or 60 requests per minute so you might have to store this information somewhere maybe in a database or in a custom post type and I have videos where I already show you how to save this data in custom post types or in a database feel free to check my channel on how to do this but if you want to see how I actually get this and move it and put it in another place like a custom post type or whatever I'm going to create a video that I'll throw in my membership section so that the people who have subscribed to this channel and are members paying a little bit of money to support this channel can be able to actually see this in its full entirety let me know in the comment section about what you think about that otherwise enjoy whatever you're developing and you can be able to use this API whenever my goal was to show you how to add headers inside your request for the WordPress API ping


Welcome all, a hands-up date. I'm Petty Officer Mara Timberlake with your headlines from around the fleet. USS Freedom's Visit Board Search and Seizure team conducted a compliant boarding exercise with Singapore's Police Coast Guard July 17th as part of cooperation of Float Readiness and Training, or CARAT 2013. CARAT is a series of training exercises between the US Navy and Southeast Asian partners that focuses on exchanging knowledge and techniques between the services. The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group is scheduled to deploy July 22nd. Truman's service members have continued training and achieved all required operational certifications to maintain combat readiness following the delay of their deployment in February. The strike group will operate with Allied and partner maritime forces in the Mediterranean and Middle East. You can read more about these stories at Navy.mil. From all hands-up date, thanks for watching.


What is going on and welcome back to another rugby player reacts to the 2020 NFL draft video The NFL draft is something I really enjoy. I come from a rugby background. We don't have a draft for rugby We don't have a draft for professional rugby. We don't have a college system like The NFL does we don't have a you know a feeder system like the college football system is to the NFL in Rugby or at least I don't know about it. Anyways guys, so this this you know concept of coming through college Doing a combine doing pro days trying to impress, you know having negotiations with different teams then Coming to something like a draft, you know waiting for your name to be called. It's it is really really exciting. It's really Captivating and every single time I see one of these guys break down in tears when their name finally gets called after They've put in years and years and years of work Makes you feel some kind of way man And that's why I'm reacting to these because I really enjoy it and I hope you guys do too. Anyways in this video guys We're continuing on from round number three. Who was the biggest steal from night two of the 2020 draft? This is a short video. It's just a little bit of analysis. We're gonna hear from well I actually don't know what these guys names are night number two of the draft cover round number two and three We had a total of 32 plus 42. So what's that 74 players picked? And we're about to find out who the biggest steal from that was let's do it Wow. Yeah, I swear to god. I'm with it I don't see nobody in my lane.  Oh Please tell me wasting my time with that business. What's that bill for you? Oh logan wilson from wyoming is the biggest steal. That's the biggest steal because I think he's a value pick And much like joe sherbert Popped for the cleveland browns and became a pro bowl player I think logan wilson can be a pro bowl player in time and the reason I like you You just don't find guys that are tackling machines and ballhawks 400 plus tackles 10 career interceptions. And I don't know if I've seen a better guy running down the scene 400 college football career tackles ever to the logo. Well, this guy's gonna be absolutely everywhere on the field That a long time. I think this guy in this deep He's going to have a chance to end up being a star I think it was a great steal for the system to be who's gonna be the top of the third The logo wilson in a long time. I think this guy in this defensive system That he's going to have a chance to end up being a star I think it was a great steal for the system to be who's gonna be the top of the third Yeah, I would agree and uh lance. Do you have a steal that you want to give us here? Yeah, I thought jordan elliott lasting until into the 90s Um from from Missouri, I know he had a little bit of an issue with the knee Which some teams are a little bit concerned about but when I turned the tape on with with uh with elliott I mean, this was a grown man. I think he's probably going to be the top two Maybe top three. He's got a chance. I think to come to finish right behind Derrick brown in terms of the best defensive tackle in this draft even ahead of kim He's got that chance. I'm not saying that favorite, but he's excellent with his hands. He's very very powerful He can two gap it up. He can play all up and down the line.  He needs to make more plays though He's got the ability but we need to see more production and needs to get a little better from a pass rush standpoint But to me, this is a steal. This is a this is a dead red second round Defensive tackle who can control gaps and he's sitting there late in the third for you. That's great value. That's a steal I'm going to uh, I'm going to piggyback off that with talk about toughness and uh, boy a big Huzzah and tip of the cap to the university utah and what uh, kyle woodingham has done there since joining the pack 12 He said when they moved over, you know to the big conference that uh, it was going to open up a lot of doors And it certainly did he's a heck of a recruiter and man you look at the defensive backs That came off the board uh two safeties and now a corner and at pick number 50 to get jaylon johnson Uh, you want to talk about tough a guy that played with a torn labrum? I mean suffered at the camp and ends up playing all year and all he is is an all american and uh, Bucky lance, you know, I mean, this is someone that can do it all I mean he could play press he is going to man handle you at the line of scrimmage And you know how important that is uh with the athleticism to keep up with someone If that's the way you're going to play and you can also play boundary I mean he can do everything um, and and I think really of all the players on that team This is one that was kind of that tone setter For a team that you knew when you were going to play against them in a pack 12 contest You're going to get punched in the mouth and you better better be able to survive it They win the south they make it to the pack 12 championship game doesn't end up working out there against organ But man an impressive team and and I think really truly one of the tone setters for a squad That did great things in the pack 12 this year and I expect him to be a heck of a pro Yeah, I had him in the 20s in my first round mock draft and Expected him to go off there among some of the top four five six cornerbacks and ends up lasting set into the second round So I'm going to go to a guy that maybe had the biggest drop in this entire draft He was a guy that we had mocked at the tail end of the first round Look if none of them mentioned running back jonathan taylor, I just don't know why he ends up lasting all the way till pick number 74 it's not him the third round and it's zack bond out of wisconsin I think he's also a symptom of the current situation and Circumstances that we're dealing with because of the coronavirus pandemic. He had the The diluted test come back from the combine the diluted drug test They're too much water in the system there And I think because of what we were dealing with here You were going to see guys with injury concerns and guys with whatever you want to call it red flags off the field character concerned drop And not saying it's a character issue But a red flag popping up there with the diluted test for bond I think that dropped in saints trade up With the cleveland browns to come into the third at 74 and make the pick for bond They actually gave up a 2021 third They felt that strongly about bond and they made him that selection there at number 74 All right, that'll look at some steals there night two of the 2020 nfl drafts when we come back A whole lot of fun. We all all right, mate That was a quick video. I feel like we're probably going to combine that with this next video Which is the biggest winners from night two of the 2020 draft. But before I do that, I feel like I'm Missing something. I feel like no one that is talking about this jonathan taylor. I feel like is he being treated Exactly the same way that dk metcalfe got treated after the combine and throughout the draft jonathan taylor draft Okay, let me see here the nfl cults have selected former wisconsin badges running back jonathan taylor with the 41st pick The running back not being valued as high As really hurt taylor's stock if this would have been 10 or 15 years ago taylor would Probably have been a top 10 pick. Well, if it had been five years ago, he probably would have been a top 10 pick I want to read some more about this the nfl cults have selected former blah blah blah the running back not being valued as high So they're saying just due to the position of running back not being valued as high Nowadays, that's why his stock got pushed down.   Look at these stats Oh Wow, bro. I would have got this guy with my first pick. I'm not even gonna lie It would have been a crazy move But in five years time, we would have all known why because this guy Oh, mate, I cannot wait to see him play jonathan taylor was an impact player for wisconsin from the moment He stepped onto the field in 2017. He rushed for 1,977 yards and 13 touchdowns the next year 2018 he rushed for 2,194 yards and 16 touchdowns in 2019 his next year as a junior Unbelievably it was his best season yet He put up 2,003 yards and 21 touchdowns The career awards at wisconsin was long jonathan taylor won the doke walker award twice and was a two-time all-american in 2018 and 19 his freshman year He set the freshman season rushing record and was named the big 10 freshman of the year jonathan taylor looks like the prototypical running back and has impressive power size and speed He looks like a big bruising running back, but he also has impressive breakaway speed He is very patient which allows him to wait until the hole is open. There aren't many knocks on taylor's game But there are a few. Okay. It's the first i'm hearing of it He had some fumbling concerns with wisconsin coughing up the ball 18 times in 41 game Okay, that is definitely concerned jonathan taylor also wasn't a great threat catching the ball out of the backfield He's shown some flashes of being able to adapt that into his game and the hope is that Can be something that is improved on in the nfl and I guarantee Anything that this guy puts his mind to he's going to improve that jonathan taylor should be able to contribute right away for the Colts It wouldn't be that surprising if he was in the top 10 in rushing this season And I'd have to agree and that puts a massive smile on my face because I can't wait to see it Yes, you know what guys that's enough for this video in the next one We're looking at the biggest winners from night number two of the 2020 draft The draft only happens once a year. I want as many videos as I can to put on this channel So you're gonna have to bear with me if you have enjoyed this video hit the like button If you want to subscribe, please do and I'll see you soon peace out


This is the VOA Special English Health Report. Not all cheaters are creative, but apparently enough creative people cheat to interest researchers like Francesca Gino. Professor Gino is a behavioral economist at the Harvard Business School in Massachusetts. There are actually a lot of examples in the literature, novels, movies, comic books about this idea of the evil genius, but really no empirical evidence for this relationship. Behavioral economists use ideas from psychology to study how people make economic choices. Professor Gino tested volunteers to see how creative they were. Then she tested them in situations involving small amounts of money, where they could earn extra by cheating. For example, they took a test and had to copy their answers onto another paper. But on that other paper, the correct answers were already lightly marked supposedly by mistake. The test takers knew they would earn more for correct answers. They were led to believe they could cheat without getting caught. The results showed that the more creative people were more likely to cheat. By comparison, people who were more intelligent but less creative were not more likely to cheat. Professor Gino says creative people are better at creating excuses to justify their actions to themselves. What we find is that that creativity leads people to be more morally flexible, so they are much more able to come up with justification for the behavior that they are about to engage in, and as a result, they are more likely to cheat. She says workplaces that value creativity also create openings for that moral flexibility. Original thinkers may be less likely to follow all the rules. We think that creativity really helps people resolve this conflict between something that is more longer term, which is the idea of being good and moral, and then something that is more short term, which is the idea of advancing your own self-interest. And that does not necessarily mean getting money out of cheating, but it could also be getting other types of pleasures or utilities. The study shows the dark side of creativity. So it's not that we are trying to say that people shouldn't be creative. We are trying to say that they should be creative, but they should be thinking about the fact that their creativity can be used for the wrong reasons. Her research with Dan Ariely at Duke University appears in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. For VOA Special English, I'm Alex Villareal.