I'll call a minute to order. It is 7 o'clock. The first item are the minutes of February 4th, 2020. Is there a motion? I move to approve the minutes of February 4th. Page one. Number four, Lake Urquois Association, cleanup discussion, second line, the sentence reads, updated the select vote on the permitting for use of herbicide in the lake to eradicate. And I don't believe they have any thoughts that they'll actually be able to eradicate Eurasian male foil. So I'm wondering if health control would be a better one. Better time. Page two. Sorry, I have two things on page two. Under number six, the Chintaninsala Waste District update, last sentence reads, the proposed changes will not impact the host town agreement. The first part, I'm having issue with that sentence is the proposed changes. There was only one change that would affect the host town agreement. That's with the Organics Divergent Facility. So associating with both facilities isn't correct. So it should say something like proposed Organics Divergent Facility changes will not affect or will not impact. And then the other part of it is, while it will not impact the host town agreement, isn't wrong. It doesn't really give what the issue is. And the issue is, is whether they can remain within their limits in the current host town agreement. And their answer is yes. And that's what I'd like the sentence to reflect. So I can provide wording if that would help. Perhaps if you change instead of impact, violate with that. Yeah, well, actually, yeah, that does work. Yeah, violate. Sure. I have the proposed Organics Divergent Facility changes will not violate the host town agreement. Yeah, I think that. Wow. No wonder you're the town manager. Got a little bit of experience. And I'm moving on to my next one under number seven. I can't talk tonight for some reason, noise control ordinance amendment. And under the discussion, it reads Jeff Ferris said he continues to have an issue with a number of core Saturdays. And I just wonder if down the road, somebody will know what core refers to. So I wonder if it should be changed to something like allowed or permitted permitted. Yeah, permitted. Okay. Good. Thank you. I don't know some page two. If not, page three. Hearing no more corrections. All those in favor of approving the minutes of February 4th, 2020 is amended to say aye. Any opposed for public comment. And if there's anyone in the audience who wishes to make any comment, any public comment on any issue on the agenda or not, this is your chance. No hands raised. So we'll move on to item number four. Police comfort dog proposal on Lieutenant Josh Moore is going to give us a presentation on that. Please. And chief only by like so it too. We do have your proposal that was given to us. So no, right here. Okay. Good. We got the pages here. Yeah. Okay. So before I start a little about me, so I started here in Wilson in 08. I was promoted to sergeant in 2015. And just recently I was promoted to lieutenant back in September. I can tell you in that timeframe, I've seen a lot of change in the police department. But unfortunately, most of that change has been in personnel. It hasn't been a change in new ideas, new thoughts, new programs. So one thing with the leadership of the chief, he's kind of given me free reign of coming up with different ideas on how to progress the department, how to move forward, come into the times that we're in now. So I went to some trainings and met some people from out of state. And this is a concept that's being used around the country right now. Mr. Kinney apparently doesn't like comfort dogs. So therapy dogs is what we're going to do. For dogs is fine. So this is it's a new concept. Therapy dogs in the normal span of life for people is been going on for a while. 2001 was a big time with 9-11. And in the last 10-ish years, they've been starting to be introduced into one more. The Chinning County State Attorney's Office has some personal ones that they use in their office. Wilson Central School has some volunteers that go in as well as go up to UVM Medical Center and introduce the dogs to kids and patients up at the hospital. As of right now, I don't know of any other department in the state of Vermont that's using this. Like I said, it's well documented and being used in other departments out of state. So with that, I say Greenfield Police Department, they were one of the top in beginning this entire program in the nation. So you'll see some slides through them. So with all that said, what is the Comfort Dog Program? What it is is it's a certified comfort therapy dog that is assigned to a specific officer that has training in this field. It's a, you know, we years ago, there was a canine program here in the town of Wilson, but it was the old-fashioned police canine program. My theory behind that is society nowadays is kind of going away from the attack German Shepherd drug type dogs. It's just not being used as much with marijuana being legal now. You know, a lot of dogs were being used for that purpose. So the dogs are not being used as much any longer. And changing with the times, we have a lot of issues with police and how police are perceived and everything like that. So a couple of the major issues that we face out there every single day are mental health issues. And how do we bridge that gap between the police department and the community? And when I look at it, this is something that popped up was bringing in a therapy comfort dog. So when we're interviewing victims of crimes, when we're dealing with children, I go back to the tragedy on the interstate, something like that would have been perfect to have this program up and running then when all those teenagers were killed on the interstate. Victims, other witnesses had to go down to the state attorney's office and testify.  So the idea is to help people in traumatic times communicate with law enforcement. And my thought behind it is not only is this going to be used on a daily basis with domestic violence type crimes, but we could be on call with the school district. The school could call us up because they're having a difficult time trying to get through to a child that may be in crisis or may just be doing it seeking attention. You bring them in, you can sit down with the dog, you can help them calm down and go to a different place in their mind and move on from there.  I did list out the applications that I see. It's not limited to just this. It could be a wide variety of other things, but these are kind of the things that popped right up. You know, investigating when a child is a victim of abuse, you know, we donate or we don't donate, but we provide a lot of money to CUSY as it is already, but we don't have an officer assigned to that unit. But there's nothing saying that we could not be on a somewhat of an on-call basis Monday through Friday with CUSY when they're operating to go in and assist them with any type of call or interview they may be doing. Like I said, trial testimony of a child or a victim or a witness. The critical incident for mental health support, not only can this help out with the people we're dealing with every day, but it can also help with first responders that are going through major stressful incidents or traumatic incidents, so fire department personnel, our police department, and, you know, statewide. School support, like I said, community relations, you know, the way I look at this, it's a home run.  This is kind of helping bridge that a little bit where people may feel a little bit more comfortable coming up to an officer, speaking to an officer, engaging with that officer. So that's kind of one of those things. And then the community justice board, I've already spoken to Crystal Lee. She predicted that she thinks about 75% of her clientele would probably ask to use this resource if it was available. Obviously being in house, that would be perfect to do, and it could be something scheduled around. So those are just kind of the highlight ideas when this may be used. We've done quite a bit of work on this program on how we make it go from an idea to an actual concept. Boonfield Labradors down in New Hampshire would be our top choice. We've already spoken to them. They have said that they will donate a puppy 100% cost-free. They'll also get it up and running for us for the certification portions of it. There are a couple other hero pups and puppies behind bars. They also have it, but as of right now, that would be our first choice. Then it comes into how do we do obedience training and who does that and how much does that. Tom Radford was a canine handler in Burlington. He had several dogs. He's still part of the canine group for the state of Vermont for law enforcement. He lives right here in town and his new company, now he's retired, is called Thin Blue Line canine. He's already committed to donating 100% of all of the obedience training and any other training that would need to be done for there. There is some therapy certifications which any normal citizen can go to and have that done. It's minor $35, $45 to get a dog certified. The feeding, the food. Guy's Farm and Yard, we've already reached out to. They said that they would donate all the food for the canine 100%. Also Agway, the prior owner of Agway, committed to doing it as well. It's been turned over. He felt that they would probably do the same. Petsmart also has a canine program that donates nationwide. The medical expenses. Mountain View Animal Hospital. If you look in there in the proposal, it actually spells out a little bit. Most of the things would be 100% covered for the animal for the length of its life. They did suggest having a $1500 a year kitty fund for the animal. As of right now, we wouldn't be asking for any money. Through our forfeiture account, there's plenty of money to fund that $1500 amount for the length of the actual animal's life. We don't think that. The $1500 is for emergency incidents. Obviously that would not be taken every year. But what we would do is, if you go down to the donors portion of it, we would open up a bank account for the canine program. It would be for businesses and individuals who wish to donate for the animal in the program. This money would only be used for the canine and the canine program. Just taking a shot in the dark, I think it would be a success. I think it would be a little bit overwhelming on how much donations would come in for it. The thought behind it is to open up an Instagram and Facebook account where there was an excess of money donated to organizations on the dog's behalf. Through the slides that Rick has kind of just opened around on, Greenfield, like I said, they have two of them. What they do is they've been to Sandy Hook during the Sandy Hook Mass during the Las Vegas during the shootings. They go down to Times Square in New York City for major incidents. So they travel around the entire country, which if there's an abundance of money, there's nothing saying that we couldn't send that officer and that dog to different areas around to help support first responders and any other victims. They still actually go down, they're close, so they go to the Boston bombing. They went down for the Boston bombing, but they do go down for the marathon just as just a presence. So that's kind of that. There is the canine insurance that, you know, that was one thing that we had a question about. I went to Eric. VLCT has said that there would be no additional and then we just did a canine handler selection process. So we wouldn't be asking for a new position. It would be a specialized position with the officers that we already have. We would use it. We would go about it as any other lateral or promotional process where the officers would submit any type of resumes. There would be an interview process with them and then somebody would be assigned to it. Ideally, the whole biz that it would be a Monday through Friday position. So it would actually help out once we're fully staffed that we'll actually have an additional officer on the road Monday through Friday. But at the same time, they'll have this specialized training and canine where they can be available to go out in the community during school hours and business hours. So that's a quick overview of the actual proposal of it. If you just look up some of these are just different canines that are being used around as you can see most of the dates on those are recent 2018-2019 because it's becoming more common now that these police departments are doing it. Mass State Police just got theirs from the boom field where we would be looking to get. But I give credit to Greenfield because I wasn't going to rewrite something that they've already done because they have a track record of doing it well and so I give them all the credit to this but they have their dogs aren't going to be Labradors like what we would want. But like I said, they've gone all over the country for different type of major incidents to give support. Yes, we're not asking for any money, any additional people, anything like that. It would be 100% funded on its own. And like I said, I believe that it's actually going to have a surplus of money, which then actually gives us a little bit of a latitude on how we want to go move that program forward. Good job with all the background stuff and presentation. So are there questions from the board? Just a comment.  You'd have my full support. Absolutely. Also, if you need some other folks that would put your cause on their list of possible contributions, Chief, feel free to reach out to me because I'm a member of the community. It would be more than happy to add that up. A comment and a question. I'm very impressed with just all the background research that's done. Obviously, this is a valuable program and I would fully support that as well. Just like during the weekends, where's the dog house who takes care of? So it'd be run like any other police canine. So it would be owned by the department. And when that officer isn't working, it's a family pet. So that officer brings the dog home and treats it like an animal, any other animal. That was my assumption, but I just want to know it. That's how it goes. The nice thing with these types of dogs is they don't technically ever really retire. Like a canine patrol dog, they have a short lifespan and once that lifespan is over, it goes to the officer and it lives with the officer as a pet. This is something that could be in use for the whole length of the animal's life. A lot of canine officers get a slight increase in pay. Is that anticipated here too for taking care of the dog? Something that we would look at, my thought process behind it is we've always had two detective spots and those are Monday through Friday positions. There is a step increase with that which is a 2%. My thought is, as of right now, looking at the department, I don't believe that we need those two spots filled with the workload. My hope is that we could take one of those spots and flip it into this canine position. So that way there's no additional cost anywhere. It's already built in and it would be the same schedule and it's a specialty. In a lot of times, the type of calls that may be a detective may be investigating. This canine would be there anyways, major domestic violence type cases, sexual assault type cases, anything like that. Plus with the training, regular canine patrol, you're constantly going every month to do your training and then you have your certification, whereas it's not as intense. You get the basic therapy training and all that and there might be refreshments, but it's not a constant. Every month you're out of the office for eight to how many hours. My daughter actually participated in a training for Officer Dewey in Colchester with his dog. She hid in the woods and the dog found her and I think she actually probably helped hide drugs in her room too. I saw they were they were they were in a sealed box. But yeah actually there are a lot of different uses for this. I think it's a great idea. Yeah so I didn't mention Boonfield will donate like a two or three year old dog that's already certified, but I just I kind of like going the puppy route because I think with the schools if we could time it some right, you know you bring the the dog into the schools and do assemblies and you help you know the dog's not named, but you allow the students in the schools to actually help name the dog. And I've already talked to the schools and you know they want to be involved as much as I can. So I'm a little hesitant to admit this on the camera, but I am not a large dog lover. So I may not share the same insights that others on the board have about this program. So apologize for that. My questions should not be at all interpreted that I'm in any way opposed to it. It's just I feel I need to ask questions and make sure I understand. And you know based on the information you provided and talked about tonight, there will be no budget that is needed for this program. And I guess my question is is how certain are we of that and let me just give you a for instance of that is in the past we might have been able to get a grant to hire a new police officer in a sense that's free money and that's a good thing if you need a police officer. And I guess my point about this is is that while some of these today might be folks who are willing to donate things like food or medical supplies or that type of thing in the future, if they're not available, what can we expect the cost of this program to be? My philosophy about this is if we're going to run a program a program like this, it isn't a thing we do from year to year. Next year we're not going to be like, oh, should we run the program again? Once we make the commitment, we should make the commitment on some sort of a long term basis. So I want to make sure that down the road, if these things no longer are available because of, you know, the donations have dried up or whatever, you know, what are the potential costs to the town and just to make sure that, you know, we're aware of what that could be. So I guess I'm asking is can you provide information along that line? Yeah, I mean, it would be tough for me to predict what's going to happen in the future if you're trying to get to a cost basis, especially with food and medical. I can tell you the medical is not going to change. I can't imagine that the veterinary clinic would close. You know, the procurement of the animal would never come into effect later on. The training would not need to be done differently. So from my, it would be any excess medical expense and food type stuff. Looking at how our budget is already done with our forfeiture money, you know, I feel confident that if something arose, we would be able to cover it and cover it for many, many years that it wouldn't be requiring us to come asking for money for it. Let me ask you a question in a slightly different way. And maybe this is pointed a little bit more at Eric and Rick is in next year's budget, next year's meeting fiscal year 2022, believe it or not. Would you see this being built in as a line item, even though it would show that zero expenditures are likely required for it? If there's zero expenditures then no. It would not make sense to have this line item because there's nothing to show for it. Well, because down the road in future years, you might have the same light on, but want to show that, hey, this year. I still wouldn't, even if, and then here's why. I think that the annual expenses, if you were to total them up, would be less than $5,000 a year. And it doesn't make sense to create a separate line item. I could see maybe including it in some other line item, if you have a list of expenses, but not its own line item. Okay. And then the issue with there being an officer who essentially has to adopt this dog, I guess might be a way to put it, because they're bringing it home at times. And when they're not here, you know, working, what is, help me out here. What is the potential that will happen or correspondingly that there's a chance that there wouldn't be an officer who is willing to do that? Well, then we'd have to evaluate, but this is, if this gets approved, it's not something that's going to happen tomorrow. There's waiting lists for the litters for these dogs to come out, because now it's becoming such a high profile type thing for law enforcement agencies. So there's going to be some time. But I don't foresee that. I already have several officers that are 100% committed that want to take on the position. So I have a kind of a related question. There were quite a few years ago, and Jeff was on the board at the time, the select board did approve a canine. It was a different kind. It was right. And it's the program never really got off the ground, partly because the person, the officer that we had kind of pegged to have the dog was interested moved to another department or something, I think. So what happens if we get a comfort dog or therapy dog, assign it to a particular officer, and then that officer leaves? It's, as you said earlier, it's the department dog. So then I would assume that dog would then come back and get assigned to another person. Unfortunately, with this type of a canine, it could, it technically could have multiple handlers. So it wouldn't be a specific person that's been training with this dog for three years, 10 years, however long it may be. So that's why there are some departments that actually have an officer bring their personally owned dog in. I just see that that could cause more issues than not. So yeah, that's why we would go this room. That's very different than another kind of dog that's trained for searches or for drug detection or something like that. The last is, I assume we're going to have a vote on this. And I just wanted to let you know my position is when we have something new before us, I don't like to vote on it that night. And I've considered this new. I just learned about this program when I picked up my select board packet pretty recently. So I asked that there be a two week, we call it the two week rule, just hopefully so we get a lot of positive feedback from either newspaper article or folks who saw us tonight on channel 17, which helps with our decision. Yeah. So we actually, we haven't, this is like first step stuff. So we haven't gone to media or anybody like that. It's been in-house and next door here to Rick. So this is kind of the. I just brought that up because there is suggested a motion to approve it. And I would rather wait to do that. If the board chooses, there's no urgency on this issue at this point in time. And then the last thing, sorry. And maybe chief, it's best to ask this question of you. I heard tonight that there might be some reconsideration of whether there's a, and maybe I heard it wrong. That's what I'm checking right now of two sergeants positions in the police department. We have two BCI detectives positions that are vacant. Detectives position. Detectives, okay. So we would use, right now, every officer carries their own workload, investigative and all that. Something serious, the lieutenant helps them out, all the sergeants on duty. So we're still too short. So those two BCI positions are still vacant. So we're in a process of trying to fill and get us up to 17 swan, that we would create one detectives position. The lieutenant would oversee the BCI positions. And then the second position would fall to a comfort therapy slash officer that does that. Okay, okay, okay. I think that helps. Again, like this is a work in progress. It's a proposal before the board tonight. You know, we've told everybody, and I've been telling them, since I've been here for two and a half years, is that once we get up to full strength, the 17 swan, and we've been there twice for 24 hours, then we got back. But again, it's a work in progress. But I think it gives us time to make it work the way we want it to work and not rush into it. So it's just, you know, the process of building out a new program. From my viewpoint, programs like this provide some extra incentives for our officers. Right. It provides a little variety, a little interest. And I think that in the long term, that can serve as a recruitment tool. So it's more than just the benefit of having the dog serving the community. It's also a benefit to our officers in general, I think. Please don't get me wrong. It's not that I don't see the benefit. I just don't think I can see it through the same eyes as some of the other. I don't own dogs. I've never owned a dog. I'll never own a dog. So no, I understand what you're coming from. So interesting. You're the one who brought this forward. And the reason that I do it is because when I look at where we're at and what's going on around us, we can either just continue to be active out in the community and respond to calls, or we can try to do stuff that's proactive and that's going to actually make a change. So it's kind of, where do we want to be and who do we want to be? If nobody in Vermont has this program, do we want to be a leader or do we just want to stay stagnant and do nothing? And you mentioned the community justice program. We also have the community outreach program. And with this program, if it gets approved, it shows a whole different way of policing that's evolving here in our community and other communities as well. Absolutely agree. Thank you. Any further questions? Is the board an agreement to hold us off until the next meeting, which is actually a month from now, not two weeks. I'm actually not. I'd like to propose a motion and with all due respect to you, I just, I would like to be on the leading edge of this. And I particularly appreciate, officer, that you don't have a dog. I never intend to have a dog. That brings a whole different thing for me for this. So I personally don't want to wait. I would put a motion on the table. So a motion is in order. I'd move to implement a comfort dog program at the Winston Police Department. Is there a second? Motion is seconded. And is your discussion on the motion? I'm not sure what two weeks would do. That's where I was coming from. They do nothing. We may receive absolutely no comments. I just think it's the right thing to do. This puts me in an awkward position because I don't want to vote against it, but I'm also not ready to vote for it. So I'm actually going to abstain. If I may say something for you to discuss, and if you go to our Facebook page, we're doing stuff with rescue dogs also and trying to encourage people to adopt rescue dogs. And we're getting so many positive hits that they think it's a great idea of what we're doing. So if you go to our Wilson PD Facebook page, you'll see our rescue program. I have no doubts that the number of positive comments we would get if we were to receive comments about this compared to any, let's say negative ones, would be overwhelming. Nonetheless, I still think it's important to have that opportunity for the public to have an input on decisions such as this. That's just my standpoint. So we need further discussion. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. The opposed. The abstentions. One abstention. So the motion carries, and thank you very much for coming tonight. Thank you. So move on to the memorandum of understanding with the Dorothy Eileen Memorial Library. And Rick, you have given us a copy of the proposal now. So the board's seen a copy of this several times, I believe, and it's been a work in progress as we move through this process. The version you have before you now was reviewed by our legal counsel. One of the main changes was actually we had a bunch of warehouses, which I was going to add anyway, because I think it does help set the context for the agreement. This draft agreement that you have before you has been reviewed by the library trustees. There was one key issue that I wanted to discuss with the trustees, and I think I mentioned this when I last chatted with the board here. And that was the issue about if there's an grievance filed by the library, a library employee, how does that process work? And the draft version that you saw before said that if we would follow the personnel policy up to the point where the manager makes a decision, and then if the employee wants to go to the next step, then it is appealed to, and the last version said library board of trustees. Our legal counsel suggested that it be the select board. And after I thought about it, it actually made a lot of sense to me, so I discussed this with the library trustees, and they agreed with that change. And the reason they agreed with that was, first of all, it's the select board that sets the policy to begin with. And it kind of makes sense if there's a grievance concerning that policy, that it's the select board that would be adjudicating that. Secondly, when you're making decisions like that, among an employee group, some sort of consistency. And if you have two different boards making decisions, then you can have potentially inconsistent applications of the roles. And so it really made sense to have one board making those decisions. And they agreed with that. It was, there was no big controversy from their viewpoint on that issue. So the version you have before them, they are just have to approve, as I understand at their next meeting, they have not approved it at this point. But that's just because it was on their agenda just for discussion and not for approval. And they, we did have a couple of minor changes that they made at the meeting and it's been incorporated into the version that you have in front of you. So. Okay. Questions for Rick. That actually was my question. I'm not saying it's not to approve it. Pardon me? I said I'm not saying a reason not to approve it. Sure. Any other questions for Rick? If not, a motion is in order on this one as well. I'd move to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the trustees of the Dorothy Allen Memorial Library as presented. Is there any discussion on the motion? Actually, I did have, sorry, but I have one question. If the town charter is not approved, this doesn't matter. This doesn't affect this one way, though. Any further discussion? Hearing none, those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No abstentions. I'm moving on to the building use policy update. The Eric, I think you're taking care of this. So the, this policy defines parameters for using our town facilities, namely this room, fire department, meeting room, police department, community room. It was adopted in 2007 and it's been on one of our list for legislative policies to just have an update here. It's been about 13 years, just a few minor things you'll see with the red lines. We had listed before the annex as a space and we typically don't allow groups to use that. It's more of an internal meeting space. And the library is listed. And really the library manages renting out their space. It's contained in the library operating bylaws, how that space is used. It's all aligned with what we do for the other facilities and they manage renting that space, not renting but reserving that space rather. And it's like there's these other meeting spaces it's very busy and in high demand as well to use. The permitted uses, you'll see some things are rearranged in this section. And the major addition here is to add language to qualify group must be organized or affiliated with a recognized charity or private foundation turned by a 501c3 status. And we had a couple instances over the years where groups that didn't have this status, they're more of a private interest group or were looking to use the space. So this just adds clarity and policy to that. And we still have language for exceptions granted on a case-by-case basis if something were to come up. For the reservations piece, you'll see the red lines are just more procedurally. We really have people use our online form now. Those are the major pieces to this that staff proposes. Certainly the board has additional changes we can work those in. Questions for Eric? My one question why the town hall annex was being deleted. My other question is, and I remember back when this was first adopted, we had discussion about what if there were an organization that had, I don't know how to correctly describe them, but it was more based on hate than it was based on any positive message or something like that. And does this provide us with the opportunity to say no to an organization that might be viewed as distasteful by most? Is that a good way to, did I make myself clear? Because I don't even know how to talk about these things really. I think I understand the question and I guess the answer is no, this doesn't address that and it shouldn't. We have freedom of speech in this country and if we have an open public space that we'd let as long as it meets the criteria in that policy then the message shouldn't be, I mean it may be distasteful and people may object to it, but people have a right to speak and if we're opening up our spaces for public use and as I said if it fits the criteria then they should be able to use it regardless of the message. Okay, so the part that talks about association which wholly or in part benefit real estate residents employees would not be a reason to say no. I don't know, I'm trying to envision what kind of organization they would fit the criteria and at the same time be a, let's say we'll call it a fringe group that has a message that... Is distasteful to most. I mean I can think of a number of organizations that whether they not, they fit any of the criteria that we have, I don't know. But the general policy about free, you know... It's your point. Based on the message is. Okay. What would change in the permitted uses the... Yeah, all those criteria, you have to be a town board and a service organization and a government and a... Shell. Yes, okay. Question on the last page under reservations. We're at the end of the new language that says by making a reservation by calling the town office. Any one in particular or just a department of the town should be contacted or? Typically the manager's office is contacted but we have staff in the Lister's office that tend to manage that. It's kind of the responsibilities change hands sometimes. So I left it more generic but we can put under manager's office to ultimate authority on it. I just want to bring this up as somebody calls, they get an automatic reservation and dial it, punch it if you want to reach reservations. It's amazing how many requests we get though. Yeah. Multiple requests almost every day. Really? Wow. I would not have guessed that. High demand. The rooms are in very high demand. And you can see on the town website on the calendar for any of these outside groups using the spaces. It's updated by the staff person who books these. So you can get a snapshot every week. All the different groups that are using these spaces. So they're valuable to the community. Any other questions or comments regarding the building use policy? Nope. I would probably do a motion tonight just to incorporate into the motion the changes that we've made tonight. I would move to amend the town building use policy as amended. Second. So I just question on the motion. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Moving on to the groundwater control ordinance. Eric. This is another we've had on our docket springboard for a little bit. Some background. This is over on Commerce Avenue in 2010. It was designated a Superfund site. It was a business that caused significant groundwater contamination years ago. So just to be clear, there was no urgency to do this. It was a suggestion for the town to consider buy the EPA at the time. Just an extra precaution. The entire area is also on town water. I confirm that would public works. So we used an example on kind of a basis from Connecticut that we had to structure something like this for an ordinance in place. And you'll see article five, the area affected. I have, I've reached out to the EPA and thankfully the person who was listed on this investigation sheet, I've included in your packet, still works there. I found her in the directories center email. She got right back to me too that day. So my main question right now is the delineation of this area, the control zone.  It's in printout gray. But you'll see the circle kind of delineating where they looked at in 2010. I'm looking for some language from the EPA, and they also need to speak with the state how we wanted to find this area. If we need to call on every parcel specifically or how would you put it for an ordinance like this? Looking for their advice before writing that language in, but the framework is here for the board tonight that goes through our standard sets with it. The major piece to this is establishing this zone and then having these use regulations for no extraction, consumption, or utilization of groundwater for any purpose. This is kind of a starting point for it, but with the guidance from the board on the direction of this and where we should go with it. Recall that area that did have wells. It did have, yes. The ordinance would have had a whole lot more importance if we didn't have, if the area wasn't served by water. They were, at the time of the problem, they were, a number of them were served by wells. So I just saw a couple of typos that as long as you're looking at it, under article three definition, the second line, we would serve as water presence and scratch the S, present in aquifers. Let's find it. You find it? Yeah. Okay. And the other one I had was on the last page under article seven, part B, in addition to a person, firm, or corporation being owner, I think it's just a being owner or occupant of. Any further questions for Eric tonight? So there's no action to be proposed to be taken tonight on this. I think it's a good idea that whether there was danger to the town and they said there wasn't and where it was moving and how long it would take to clean up, which seemed to be forever. But I'm wondering if that's the kind of thing that they might be invited back to do again, or if that's maybe it's not that big an issue anymore. I don't know. I don't know if that's a good idea or a bad idea. I expect it's certainly reached out. Seeing it's been a decade since this was explored and the same person is still familiar with this project. And she had mentioned speaking with, I think it really was DEC at the state to look at the status of the plume as well. So it seems to be some timely conversation around this. I think that's a good idea. The person who worked for the state on this particular site just retired. There will be somebody assigned to it. He did reach out to me once saying they were getting close to taking some action and they'd want to update the select board on that. I assume that hasn't happened. That hasn't when they come in. It's a good idea to reach out to them. And that was actually my question, Eric. Have you reached out to DEC about this? I haven't yet the person that contacted Ms. Lamuno at EPA. She said she had a meeting. I reached out to her last Wednesday. She said she actually had a meeting in Montpelier last Thursday where she was going to discuss this with them. This is not my area at all, but one of the things I wonder about is do we actually have the ability to do this and hear me out is I know that there are, for instance, there's the Groundwater Trust. It's something from Mont did and created a Groundwater Trust. And so I actually kind of wonder if we actually have the ability to supersede the state's interest in whatever the right word is, managing groundwater with a local ordinance. I just, I don't know the answer to that. I could be totally off base, but I just think it's worth looking into. It may be where this would be viewed as being in violation of this Groundwater Trust, which, because it's the state's managing its resources, if you will, contaminated resources that you don't want anybody using. We can certainly check into that. I don't think there's going to be any conflict, but it's worth checking in. Yeah, yeah, I just don't know the answer to that. And then the only other point is, I assume over time that area that's being monitored, maybe they'll want it to be large enough so that the plume will never reach the edge of that area, but it may change over time. So it's just something to think about. A map may be only a map in a point in time. It may need to change with time. Yeah, I can see this with whatever time period they recommend a look at it. You know, if it moves between to expand the zone, the ordinance could be updated as needed. Right, right. Just like we do with some of our ordinance, we add some street to it or something like that. Okay. Do you see actually in the past two years recommended some money be put into capital bill for remediation to match federal funds and they withdrew that request? So it sounds like there may be something coming down the pike relatively soon for remediation of the public. I haven't started it yet, yeah. Seems like bringing this up at this point was a timely. Right, yeah, your timing is good. Yeah, how'd you know? Maybe you'll push them a little bit. And comment is great. Yeah. The only question out of comment is that it looks like the proposed ordinance is relying on the town's inherent power to govern health safety in general. I want to check with the town lawyer to see if that's a proper call out to the town power or whether it should be more of a zoning type thing or something else. Yeah, we have not had legal counsel look at that. We wanted to give the board first crack at it and then the next step before the second reading of this we'll have the legal counsel look at it and we'll follow up on all the questions that have been raised this evening. Any further questions or comments? If not, we'll move on then to the manager recruitment process. We probably saw a modified agreement that Joy and I actually asked to have some wording changed in the agreement that we saw two weeks ago just in order to make sure that we could have some things done by the contractor if we wanted to have it done and then how much it would cost. That's been outlined in the new proposal that's before us tonight. Authorize and we would request to be to authorize the manager to sign the amended agreement if you have any questions. I'll be happy to answer trying to answer hearing a lot of silence. A motion would be in order then. I'd move to authorize the town manager to enter into contract with municipal resources incorporated for recruitment of a new town manager. We have motions made in seconded as your discussion on the motion. If not, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. And they oppose. All righty, we're moving on. It will take up actually the annual evaluation of the manager at the last order of business because we'll be looking for an executive session motion at that point in time. So I guess we're on to the manager's report. So first off you have the financial report. It's included in your package. Anyway, I don't think beyond the comments that are offered by the finance director about having anything more to offer. If there's any questions, I can try to answer them. And if I can't, then I might be able to invite our finance director. Questions? All right, moving along then. Also included in your packets was the local options tax report. And this showed that the numbers continued to be very strong. Looking over this 10-year period, that particular quarter, we had the highest returns of any other quarter. The quarter that came the highest was last year. And it's quite a bit higher than the lowest quarter, which was in 2011. At that point the economy was still recovering from the big recession. As you can see, there's a pretty big difference between 2011 and 2020. Also, rules and meals wasn't quite as high as last year, same quarter, but still remains quite high. And so overall, the numbers are very, very strong and we're certainly going to take in more revenue, most likely, than what we have budgeted for the current fiscal year. And just as a reminder, for next fiscal year, what we did is I took a three-year average using the last most recent three years, not obviously including the current year, budget for rooms and meals. And there was a fairly large increase in that. I suggest moving forward at the board as the economy goes up and down to continue using some sort of rolling average, whether the three-year or five-year doesn't matter. Well, it does matter, but the concept is the same. And that way kind of levels out the humps and the dips a little bit when you're using a rolling average like that. But that's for to be determined in the future. Let's see, what else? Last big snow storm that we had on Friday, we had quite a bit of snow in a reasonably short period of time. Our crew was, we were down two at that point. And we struggled to keep up with the snow that was ranging between one and two inches per hour. And some people, we got complaints saying we hadn't plowed their street all day. Well, what had happened is if it was coming at two inches an hour and it takes four hours to do a route, there's eight inches of snow on the ground. And that's the way it is. Fortunately, it's very rare that we get a storm of that nature. And so, but people sometimes forget. But anyway, I think the crew did a good job, all things considered. And our sidewalk crew was really on top of a new guy. And he's really, I saw him out today doing a call. So he's really staying trying to stay on top of things. Let's see, the chief of the fire department provided an update to the board on the purchase process for the two fire trucks that were approved this past March. As a reminder, the town approved the person, as I said, of two fire trucks that didn't specify what kind of fire truck. But the police, the fire chief, rather when he was making a presentation, talked about a replacement for a ladder truck, which was kind of a quint, I think, which served five different functions. And then he also talked about another vehicle that would involve four-wheel drive, have a pump, a pumper, tanker combination. And after he did some research, and you can see that in his memo, they decided to modify that vehicle a little bit, keep it the same size, in other words, same length and height, but get rid of the four-wheel drive. And by doing that, they were able to increase the size of the tank. And they felt that was more important than the four-wheel drive component piece of it. And at the time that he proposed this, he said it was a two-year process, and so we're one year into it, and they're right on schedule as far as getting the equipment ordered. And we do expect an order will be put in shortly, and then it takes a good year or so to get the equipment built, inspected, and then delivered. And while we're on the subject of the fire department, the chief has handed in his letter of retirement, resignation, whatever you want to call it. He plans to finish up on July 8th. As you know, this wasn't entirely a surprise. He had been talking about this for a while. And so what I'm going to do is, I don't feel comfortable as the outgoing manager appointing the next fire chief. But I think it would be probably helpful for the next person taking my position to start the process. And then at some point bring in whoever that is to be able to help them make the final decision on that. If the board feels differently, then I can just wait. That certainly is less important for me. I feel like I could probably at least get the process started.  People lose interest. They find other jobs. So I've got to have to time this so that it's well underway, but not too far away. So that's the plan. And obviously it'll be a great loss to the community. He has 38 years of service. And it's just incredible the amount of time and effort. And I suspect that he won't lose total interest in the department after he retires. I would bet you're sure. And that's true. Oh, let's see. Eric, did you have anything? Nothing else to add. We haven't addressed already. We have our channel 17 budget show tomorrow evening at 5.25. And I guess the candidates are going to face off. Is that after the budget show? Yeah. Starts at 6. Separately or together? Together. Together. Yeah. Okay. Good. You can make a guest appearance and join us if you like. Thank you. I'm going to try to get there for the budget presentation. So under, well, anything else from manager report? I think that was it. So let's do other business. And I think we all got a copy of what was sent by email to Joy and to Ted regarding our request for meetings with the select board other than our usually scheduled ones. And perhaps either one of you or both of you could give us a little insight as to their request. I'm not sure that we really have the best understanding. I mean, these folks are clearly very unhappy with the whole development process. And I think they're just looking for, one, I think they were trying to understand how Tom governance actually works. And realizing in some ways they were going to the wrong place to try to get the answers that they needed. But now I think that they just would like to have a public vetting forum with a select board on Saturdays to discuss this and correct me if I'm off on that. You're right. Yeah, the idea was that set up a consistent schedule throughout the idea of a Saturday morning with a select board coffee hour before Town Hall Meeting Day. And I guess thereafter, I hesitate to be against the idea, but I am against the idea. I'm completely against this idea. I'm sorry, that's just, it's asking a lot of us to throw in this Saturday meetings. Yeah, it is. And it's also got, there are practical reasons that I think it would not be a good idea. And that we may recall that in the past, a moment of friction has occurred when people have gone out and done their own research and come back with their own information. This would be inviting that in many ways. This would be a situation where one select board member would have input. Now, that happens anyway. You know, we get phone calls. We get emails. We get stopped on the street, et cetera. But that's, you know, that's kind of the normal process of things. Something that would be more set up as a structural thing, I think, begs for that problem to occur. The other issue would be if it is a standard thing, or even if it's not, and it's just a one-time thing. If you're showing up as a select board member, if two other people show up as select board members, then you have a quorum and you have an unworn meeting. And that, so, you know, do you say, okay, well, I'll just have two of us. Well, that's not... And that, I think it would be a, I hate to say it, but I think the answer to this is the public comment session at the beginning of the meeting. If there is an issue like that, and if there's an issue that people want to come to bring to the select board's attention, that's structurally set up where we have to listen. And in fact, we do. And there have been times when we've had some great input and we've had times when we've had people who are there to carry out their own somewhat bizarre agenda for 15 minutes yelling at us about something. But, you know, that's, I think that's the right avenue to go. So I think it's a very well-intentioned idea, but I don't think it would work. The email was sent out to everyone, so we all maybe got a chance to see it. And there are two aspects of it that, you know, one, I think we all like the idea of better communication, better fostering input, that type of thing. The other was the emphasis on citizens for responsible growth, which to me is about an aspect of what the town does, which is regulate development and how development can or cannot occur in town. And the other part about it is, you know, select board may not be the actual appropriate entity. Where I was going, I don't think for the right source. The town plan is the document. And, you know, for years we've been adopting town plans with not a lot of input from the public, a lot of input from committees for them to help with the vision, a lot of input from the town commissions themselves, but from the public in general, not really. I can't explain why. It would be great if we got that. So I guess my point is that there are these avenues or venues that will be available for entities like a new Citizens for Responsible Growth to have input. And I hope they take advantage of it. I think Eric might be able to explain a meeting that the planning department had with, I think it was the Citizens for Responsible Growth. I believe they held a meeting here a couple of weeks ago and Matt Bologna, our planning director, came and was able to answer their questions and really explain process. And I know from the feedback. There's a poster on the wall there, actually, that they use for the process. Yeah, Emily Heyman in our planning department is working on different infographics like this to really illustrate the government's roles between bodies and documents. I believe the Planning Commission is looking at holding a session in March. I can confirm the date, but really a meeting just focused on town growth and development and planning processes to have the government engage in that dialogue and speak about planning commission role of the RE. I think the other thing I would add is that I know Jeff, you've been a long time advocating for the public to attend these meetings, get more involved. So this plays into that point as well as the public comment portion of the meeting. Staff can do some things. I would like, we've done that and we can maybe do, I think we actually have done a check our what's up Wilson segment on it too, haven't we? Did you have Matt? Yeah, we've done some of the new developments and I'm thinking about trying to, people know the board agendas are on the website, but just maybe doing a front porch forum post the Friday before. Here's the agenda put on Facebook. Great idea. Our newest employee in the planning department actually has been doing that in front porch forum. What's coming up on the agenda for the DRB and the planning commission. So maybe putting out a link to the what's up will list in channel 17 site. Are the select board agendas on the front porch forum? No, we haven't been posting this. Is that a good idea or not a good idea? It's well, it's a good idea. Yeah, it doesn't hurt. It's just it's a little extra work that. Yes, I get that it's just it is a way to get people maybe to see and be like, wait a second, they're talking about what? It's hard to capture people's attention sometimes with all these different ways they consume media. So I've taken a blanket approach we'll see it somewhere. Well, as a recent example showed, it's interesting how front porch forum does capture at least a segment of the community's attention, whether they read the whole article or not. And we have a Facebook page. I was looking for something today, specifically on that page. And there are so many posts that Eric was involved in, I'm sure that it took me a long time to find it. But the point is that he's been very active in posting all kinds of things on the Facebook page. Great. Interest and keep people informed. And as Eric just said, we kind of have to use all the blanket approach. There's also a summary on some of his efforts as a little bit of segue here in my report to the board on activities for this past year. So my thoughts were that essentially what we talked about tonight that we do have an open session at every select board meeting. And that if we were to have a special meeting I would need to have number one, it's got to be warned. Number two, I would certainly want to have an agenda rather than just have an open session on whatever and specific dates, maybe not monthly, but if we were to do it, it would be less frequent than monthly. And we would have to know from the agenda who we would, from staff, that we would need to have at this kind of a meeting. So I think at this point I agree that we can invite people to come to select board meetings and vent their ire to us at that point. So if there's nothing more on that, our next meeting will be on St. Patrick's Day on March 17th. And maybe some of us can wear green, but that's all. Which I have to say is also Ken Warden's birthday. Is it really? Oh my gosh. Oh my. So we are now at the last thing on the agenda and that's the annual evaluation of the manager and I've been looking for a motion to go into executive session. I'd move to enter into executive session to discuss the evaluation of the town manager. And I would actually, no, I guess I wouldn't. I'd invite the town manager after he sits in the silent. I'll second that. In discussion of the motion, I'll allow the senator of the motion to say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All who go downstairs to be in the executive session.


The next item of business is a statement by Neil Gray on a leading Scotland's journey to becoming a start-up nation. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement. Therefore, there should be no interventions or interruptions. I would invite the cabinet secretary around 10 minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am convinced that high growth entrepreneurship can power the transformation of the Scottish economy. The economic impact of new and scaling firms is colossal. They are 40 per cent more productive than the economy as a whole, act as a magnet for external investment and radiate innovation through customers and supply chains, driving job creation and wage growth beyond the walls of their own enterprises. In Scotland, the true value of our start-up community goes beyond what can be measured by hard economic analysis. Our entrepreneurs are people of vision, drive and imagination, and through the problems that they solve and the jobs that they create, they use those gifts to make better futures for our people and our communities. I think of Blackford analysis, which uses the power of artificial intelligence to improve patient outcomes. I think of Rusa, a Google-backed seafood trading platform that protects our waters by eliminating waste and empowers local fishermen to command the best price for their catch. I think of intelligent growth solutions. A rapidly scaling firm whose approach to precision farming is at the frontier of the push to deliver global food security. Those companies and dozens more dispel the myth that growth and wellbeing are contradictory economic principles. It is for all those reasons that this Government is setting a vision to establish Scotland as one of Europe's leading start-up economies. We begin this journey from a position of strength. Despite significant macroeconomic headwinds, our start-up ecosystem last year attracted record investment of £953 million, outperforming all UK regions with the exception of the so-called Golden Triangle between London, Oxford and Cambridge. However, our pride at that success must be tempered by the reality that, over that same period, the Swedish ecosystem attracted capital totaling £5.4 billion. That illustrates the scale of the prize and underscores the gap between Scotland's entrepreneurial potential and its performance as perhaps our greatest economic opportunity. What we needed was a plan to help us to realise that potential. That is why we appointed Mark Logan as Scotland's first chief entrepreneur. We have worked closely with him, producing a series of publications that together form a sophisticated and comprehensive plan to drive the systematic reforms that are necessary to establish Scotland as a world-class entrepreneurial economy. That new plan proposes actions across the strategic domains of gender equality, infrastructure, education and international presence. I will now proceed to take each of those in turn, describing our achievements today and our priorities in the current financial year. I will begin with the Scottish Government's response to pathways. Anna Stewart and Mark Logan's groundbreaking review of how we can support more women to start and scale businesses. I thank Anna and Mark for their work and recent engagement, which has helped to persuade me of the need to drive so hard on this agenda. The pathways review findings are stark and its recommendations are bold. Only one in five of Scotland's businesses are led by women. Start-ups founded by women receive only 2 per cent of investment capital. The lack of meaningful progress is explained by deep-rooted societal barriers that disproportionately impact women. The review correctly describes that as a denial of opportunity on literally an industrial scale. That is intolerable in the wellbeing economy that I am dedicated to building. We have a moral and economic duty to meet those challenges head-on. That is why I am proud to announce that we are accepting this report and will immediately work on its implementation. The report's recommendations are broad and powerful, encompassing cultural change, long-term intervention in education and more immediate support to women in business. I will therefore focus my remarks on the actions that we will prioritise in this financial year. First, we are committed to the creation of pre-start centres and pop-ups, focused on encouraging women to start businesses and providing best-in-class support to help them to develop products, adopt sound commercial strategies and get early access to funding. As part of that work, we will give early consideration to how we can implement the proposal for a concept fund, offering women the seed funding that they need to turn good ideas into growing businesses. Second, we will relaunch the Scottish Government's competitive ecosystem fund, with an explicit focus on supporting projects and address the review's key themes of entrepreneurial technique, access to finance and education. I am also pleased to announce that we will maintain our support for the organisations such as Women's Enterprise Scotland, Investing Women and Business Women Scotland ahead of a shift to competitive funding in future years. Third, we will work with our enterprise agencies, the Scottish National Investment Bank and private sector investors to open up investment avenues for women-led businesses and for other under-invested groups. And finally, we will improve our collection and reporting of data, developing a dashboard of measures to evaluate the extent to which our actions are succeeding. Moving on to entrepreneurial infrastructure, the Scottish Government is well in its way to delivering arguably the finest system in Europe dedicated to the creation and scaling of high-growth businesses. The £42 million tech-scaler network is a game changer for our start-up community, putting the wind of Silicon Valley technique into the sales of Scottish innovation. That is a complex project, delivered on time, on budget. Six of the seven physical sites are fully operational and already host 247 start-ups, with a further 1,300 members accessing virtual support and education, the length and breadth of Scotland. An end-to-end entrepreneurial curriculum has been developed, with courses ranging from beginner level through to the advanced techniques necessary to achieve scale. Reforge is Silicon Valley's most prestigious provider of scale-up education. Through tech-scaler Scotland is the only country in the world to hold a national licence with 47 entrepreneurs already learning and growing alongside the world's best businesses. A key objective is to ensure that the services offered by pre-start centres and existing ecosystem assets, such as NHS testbeds and the net zero technology centre, are seamlessly connected to the tech-scaler network, creating a powerful continuum of support for entrepreneurs in every industry as they progress through each level of scale. As part of ensuring that our existing ecosystem continues to flourish, I can confirm that we will once again support Scottish edges' excellent complementary work to identify and back Scotland's most promising new businesses. Just this Tuesday, in a speech to ecosystem builders in Brussels, the First Minister announced the publication of Ross Tuffy and Joe Little's report on entrepreneurial campuses, the Scottish Government's blueprint to position our universities and colleges as hotbeds of start-up creation and scaling. That work is about establishing an alliance with universities and colleges and catalyzing a movement that has already started to build in the sector through an increased focus on spin-out companies and the broader commercialisation of research. That movement is responsive to a shifting culture in which learners no longer view institutions merely as a means of acquiring a degree but as places where they can meet to co-founders, experiment with cutting-edge technologies and create the innovation-led businesses that are necessary to drive Scotland's economic future. The report sets out a range of initiatives to accelerate that mission, and we have provided £5.5 million increase in the 2324 university innovation fund to deliver it. I will turn to entrepreneurial culture and education.  Although there appears to be a perception that entrepreneurs must somehow be different, the evidence suggests and repeated studies have shown that consistent exposure to quality entrepreneurial education and networks is a powerful means of instilling the necessary mindsets, attitudes and skills—in other words, we can train our entrepreneurs. That is why I am pleased to announce that, over the coming year, I will work closely with ministerial colleagues, our partners at Young Enterprise Scotland, the Prince's Trust industry and, crucially, our teachers to systematically embed project-based entrepreneurial learning in schools across Scotland alongside other measures that we are working on for our schools. As the flywheel effect of our interventions across infrastructure, education and investment start to yield momentum, we will also have an eye to what that means for Scotland's presence on the global stage. The best entrepreneurial ecosystems are synonymous with the nations that host them, acting as a magnet for talent and inward investment. Our ambition is therefore to establish Scotland as a global hub for start-up founders and investors, akin to the reputation previously and presently enjoyed by Sweden and Finland. Recent events to showcase Scottish business in Helsinki, Silicon Valley and New York revealed strong interests from external investors in the quality of Scottish start-ups, an impression that we are keen to reinforce. We will embark on an exciting pilot this year to establish a branch of the tech-scaler network in the heart of Silicon Valley. That will allow the stars of the Scottish start-up scene to live and work for an extended period in the world's leading hub for innovation, exposing founders to expanded networks, world-class technique and enhanced opportunities to raise capital. As well as being hugely enriching and experience for the founders, the idea is that the quality of our companies will stimulate broader investor interest in the Scottish ecosystem. As that interest takes hold over time, we will look to build links with other leading ecosystems such as the Nordics, Canada and Ireland, bringing new ideas, talent and investment to Scotland. In perhaps the most challenging fiscal environment in living memory, the package of support represents an investment in our start-up ecosystem of up to £17.5 million this financial year. It is a package of vision and aspiration that sends a clear and powerful message to Scotland's innovators, entrepreneurs and disruptors. This Government believes in you and we are prepared to back you. I will close by reminding the chamber that it was a Scottish start-up led by James Watt that ignited the industrial revolution that transformed global living standards and lifted millions of people across the world out of poverty. With the health and demographic challenges post-pandemic, with the cost of living crisis, with climate change and the economic damage caused by Brexit, the challenges that we face today are no less profound. The world needs Scottish start-ups to get to work and we will help them on their way. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes, after which we will need to move on to the next item of business, and I will be grateful. Any members wishing to ask a question to press the request-to-speak buttons? I thank the cabinet secretary for his statement and for his advance site offer. I welcome the focus that he puts upon promoting entrepreneurship and the new initiatives being announced today. Those are much needed. The Government has had a troubled relationship with the business community, not helped by the fact that the junior coalition partners are actively hostile to economic growth. Our track record on business start-ups is poor. In 2019, the last year before Covid, Scotland had 48 new business registrations per 10,000 of the adult population compared to a UK average of 72. Excluding London, the UK figure is 62. Even on that basis, we are lagging far behind other parts of the UK. In welcoming the announcement today, I ask the cabinet secretary the following. Firstly, does he have a target for increasing the business start-up rate for Scotland? If so, what is it and for when will it be delivered? Secondly, in relation to the serious issue that he raised of the lack of start-up capital for women entrepreneurs, when does he expect the initiatives that he announced today to be delivered? Thirdly, in relation to entrepreneurial learning in schools, does he intend that that will be mainstreamed across the curriculum and taught to all pupils, or is it the intention that it will be an optional standalone subject? I thank Murdo Fraser for the constructive way in which he has responded to the statement and our statement of intent around making Scotland the start-up hub of Europe. He thanked me for advanced sight, some of the statements that we discussed last night with Daniel Johnson as well at the RBS dinner. We were discussing some elements of the issues that were before us, including access to finance, which I recognise as a major challenge for some of those who are looking to get access to start-up. That is exactly why we are looking to and instill the confidence in the market to ensure that access to finance can continue to come. I have mentioned in my statement the fact that we have already seen a record investment in Scottish start-ups coming over the last year. We want to build on that, but that is not enough. We heard last night evidence of where there are challenges. I will keep working with financial colleagues and with the business community to see what more we can do to ensure that access to finance can continue to flow. I do not have a particular target. I am happy to talk to Murdo Fraser about where we might see this ending up. I think that we have seen not least in what Murdo Fraser highlighted in his contribution, where we have room for growth and we certainly have room for growth. The work being done in schools, I will be working with my colleague Jenny Gilruth and education colleagues around how much further we can go in terms of ensuring that there is access to this type of education within our school environment. Daniel Johnson to be followed by Adam McKee. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I too thank the Cabinet Secretary for Advanced Sites. I welcome that focus because, undoubtedly, I agree with him that start-ups are a potential to drive new jobs and growth for the Scottish economy. I also welcome the reintroduction of the Scottish Edge funding. I know that that interruption led to a reduction in the number of awards that they were able to make this year, so that is welcome. However, can I engage in something of critical consensus? I agree that, while there are strengths, there are issues in Scottish start-ups and, indeed, in terms of the total number of start-ups, the only English region Scotland beat was the north-east. We lack at high-growth firms. We have 1.5 high-growth firms for 10,000 people compared to three. Indeed, my stat from last night that is ringing in my ears is that 40 per cent of Scottish businesses have never accessed any formal finance at all. Following on from the point about targets, the cabinet secretary said that there would be a score card. When will we have that score card and what metrics will it contain? Indeed, will it have a broad spectrum rather than just high-tech, high-growth start-ups? On the point around growth in small and micro businesses, we know that many businesses start but they install, so what initiatives will there be to help investment in growth amongst the broad mass and broad base of small and micro businesses? Can we make sure that there is no over-focusing of particular sectors? I am happy to have a further discussion with Daniel Johnson to answer some of those points in more detail and to get to some of the questions that he was perhaps looking to get to. In his questions, he diagnoses exactly why we need to take that intervention. He is absolutely right in terms of the statistics that he and I saw last night from RBS in terms of the work that is still needed to be done in terms of access to finance, in terms of encouraging greater numbers of start-ups. I am happy to engage with Mr Johnson over the summer months on answering some of the questions that he poses. I thank the cabinet secretary for the statement and I am hugely encouraged by the amount of work that is going into taking forward that entrepreneurial agenda. It is worth noting that Scotland's business start-up rate for young people is amongst the highest in the UK, thanks to the good work of young Enterprise Scotland, Princess Trust, Converse Challenge and others. Can I ask what the Scottish Government is doing to build on that good work, making starting a business be seen as a genuinely aspirational career choice and positive destination for young people, including information and support for young people thinking of becoming entrepreneurs? First of all, I pay tribute to Ivan McKee and Kate Forbes for starting this work that I am now able to build upon to ensure that we have the foundations of the support network to ensure that we not only have the infrastructure that allows for people to be able to start their own business but that there is an encouragement from an early age to be able to do that. He is absolutely right in terms of the work that is being done with the likes of young Enterprise Scotland. I remember that I was involved in young Enterprise when I was at school with a wonderful initiative that is done alongside the Princess Trust as well, in addition to ensuring that young people are exposed as early as possible to that type of mindset. I also point Ivan McKee to the announcement that was made this week by the First Minister around entrepreneurial campuses. I think that it is going to make a transformational change. Liz Smith, to be followed by Rona Mackay. Can I also welcome what the cabinet secretary has said, but can I ask him if he also agrees that this is only going to be deliverable if there is a broader perspective on economic policy which enhances productivity, economic growth and reduces the tax burden for businesses? Liz Smith and I had a very interesting discussion this morning around some of those issues. I am looking to foster a wellbeing economy in Scotland, where we recognise that there cannot be a good, strong economy without a good society. There cannot be a good society without a strong economy, and the two need to work together. We are looking alongside the work that has been published this morning on re-aligning and our relationship with business and making sure that we deliver on some of the points that have been raised there. We need to make sure that we have economic growth, but that economic growth is for a purpose, and that purpose is about making sure that we deliver on the wellbeing of our people as well as our businesses across Scotland. Can I thank the cabinet secretary for such a positive statement? I am particularly delighted to hear of the start-up initiatives for women. However, start-ups will be facing additional financial pressures, given the current challenges that our economy faces. Can the cabinet secretary provide any information as to the steps that the Scottish Government can take to mitigate those pressures? Obviously, we are acutely aware of the challenges that operate in the operating environment that businesses continue to face in the wake of Brexit, recovering from Covid, the current conflict that Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and the resulting cost impacts. The Scottish Government is well connected into the start-up ecosystem and is in constant dialogue to understand the pressures that start-ups are facing, as well as the opportunities that we must capitalise on at pace. We appreciate that start-ups are operating in a complex economic environment, but that is why our £42 million national network of tech scalers is committed to providing founders and leaders with the necessary skills on funding models, investor attraction and pitching. Alongside other initiatives, including enterprise agency support, we are committed to fostering an environment in which access to funding is seamless, despite economic pressures. The universities are at the forefront of innovation, medical sciences and renewables, but, despite that success, people working within the city of Glasgow have expressed to me concerns that their expertise is not being converted into jobs growth on the scale that it should. So, what plans are there for the Scottish Government to capitalise on the skills and innovation that is being developed in Glasgow universities? Absolutely. That speaks to what I just referred to in answer to Ivan McKee around entrepreneurial campuses, making sure that we have continued to enjoy the benefits of university spin-offs, but also the recently published innovation strategy around ensuring that we have a really strong economic performance in terms of the incredible work that has been done by our researchers and academics at universities, including those in Glasgow. Like other colleagues, I greatly welcome the statement and its relevance to the energy sector. The North East-based Zero Technology Centre's techX programme has, to date, supported almost 60 start-ups, successfully accelerated, eight technologies commercialised, over 200 employees hired and at least £80 million in start-up equity funding raised. Given the significant success of the techX accelerator programme, will the cabinet secretary support having an enhanced clean energy technology acceleration programme such as techX accelerator as part of an energy transition cluster in Scotland? I am certainly happy to meet Audrey Nicholl to discuss that potential, because I recognise the enormous economic and entrepreneurial potential of Scotland's expertise in net zero technologies, paired with the abundance of our natural resources. Supporting the growth of the sector is a priority for this Government, and businesses seeking to start-up, grow and scale in this field will be supported through our entrepreneurial ecosystem. I look forward to hearing more about Audrey Nicholl's proposals. This is an eminently sensible proposal, but the minister will understand for years that this has been as much about a cultural change as it is about a system change. I welcome the proposals, particularly for women, to make sure that we tap into that potential. Universities are going to be important to make this a success. Is he sure that we have the right balance of freeing up intellectual property? Secondly, how is he going to reverse the decline in the performance of Scottish university research compared with the rest of the UK? First of all, Willie Rennie is absolutely right in terms of the cultural change. That is what I have set out in my statement in terms of ensuring that we work with the financial centres and other agencies to ensure that there is that mindset shift and a cultural change to support a greater diversity in our start-up ecosystem. In terms of universities, I have set out in response to Pauli McNeill and I did to Ivan McKee around pointing him towards the entrepreneurial campus model, but I am more than happy to have a discussion with him further on the areas that he raises. Social enterprises are key to creating the inclusive and power communities in the fair and more equal society that we often speak of. The 2021 social enterprise census recorded a £2.63 billion contribution to the Scottish economy. Does the minister agree that social enterprises will be key to the innovation that lies at the core of solving many of Scotland's societal changes that he touched on in his statement earlier? And what role does he see the social enterprise model playing in supporting Scotland's journey to become a start-up nation? Yes, the Scottish Government's long-term vision of social enterprise is to be at the forefront of ethical and socially responsible business in Scotland, far reaching and becoming central to the way that Scotland chooses to do business. Social enterprises in Scotland are supported through a world-class system of support. That includes a pipeline of social investment into the sector from pre-start-up through to loans for growth-ready business, as well as innovative funding for those in between. Last year, through Scottish Government investment, we funded the start-up of nearly 100 social enterprises, and in addition to that, a range of business support for the social enterprise sector continues to be provided. Maggie Chapman, to be followed by Jamie Halcro Johnston. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. He will be familiar with the need for successful start-ups to consider both scaling up and scaling deep, as we have heard from Professor Logan. Following on from the previous question, he will also be aware of the value and social good that co-operatives provide, building community cohesion and resilience, placemaking, creating and sustaining social capital, community wealth and more. They do, by their nature, like social enterprises, scale deep. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how this business model, specifically co-operatives, will be supported by this positive vision for the benefit of local people and community economies across Scotland? I thank Maggie Chapman for that question. She is absolutely right in terms of the scaling up and scaling deep. Alternative business models such as co-operatives—I declare an interest to the member of my co-operative myself—will continue to provide support to co-operatives in Scotland, and I will write to Maggie Chapman to provide more detail on the support that has been provided. My colleagues, Murdo Fraser and Liz Smith, have already highlighted that the number of start-ups in Scotland lags behind those in England, which concerns that Scotland's tax policy is one area that impacts on this. I am sure that nearly all in this chamber will agree that it is vitally important that we foster a pro-business environment in Scotland to ensure that start-ups have the best possibility of success. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how the Scottish Government will ensure that entrepreneurial interests are being considered right across all relevant policy areas? I thank Jamie Halcro Johnson for his question. I would challenge slightly his assertion around our tax policy putting off investment in Scotland, because Scotland is outperforming the rest of the UK in terms of inward investment, so that does not quite match up. I accept that we want to ensure that having the best place to do business in Scotland was part of the theme of the New Deal for Business Group and ensuring that we continue to talk about the package of support that is on offer, some of which I was talking to Liz Smith about this morning is my job. To sell Scotland as being a good place to do business, I will continue to do so and ensure that, as he suggests, I continue to listen to entrepreneurs in the work that they are doing, not least our chief entrepreneur, Mark Logan, behind which we base our plans. There is no doubting that entrepreneurship can better be driven by tapping into the most diverse talent group possible. Can the cabinet secretary advise what steps the Scottish Government is taking to break down social and economic barriers to entrepreneurship and to support diversity in start-ups and business? Yes, absolutely. As the pathways report sets out, unlocking Scotland's full entrepreneurial potential offers a significant, huge opportunity economically. As we fully develop the delivery plans to implement pathways recommendations, we will widen access to entrepreneurial support and education across all underrepresented groups and deliver accessible support where it is needed, when it is needed. There is no doubt—I have said this previously in the chamber before—that unlocking the economic potential of women and ensuring that we close the gender pay gap and close the employment gap and ensure that we close the gap on female start-ups is one of the greatest economic potentials that we can invest in. Scotland has always been an innovative and environmental—sorry—in entrepreneurial countries, including in start-ups. However, the gap lies on what happens next in that early growth. Previously, the SCIS and EIS schemes have been a vehicle in which public sector and private sector have been able to work together to invest in early-stage companies, giving them that step-up. Can I ask the Scottish Government what it will do to encourage private investment in early-stage business growth, including tax-efficient use of funding from investment houses and high-net worth investors? Yes, that is part of the challenge that we heard last night in terms of where the private investment comes from. A lot of that comes internationally rather than domestically, but I would also point to the support that we are looking to provide our entrepreneurs and our start-ups with the investment in the text scalar network and ensuring that that is married and matched to the likes of the NHS test rates to give better certainty to the projects that they are working on from an investment perspective. I am more than happy to provide more detail of that to Brian Whittle so that it gives some confidence as to the work that we are doing. Thank you very much. That concludes this item of business. The next item of business is consideration of motion 9765, in the name of Marie Todd on the online safety bill, UK legislation, and I call Jenny Mental to move the motion. Thank you. The question on this motion will be put at decision time. The next item of business is consideration of two parliamentary bureau motions, and I asked George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move motions 9821 on committee membership and 9822 on substitution and committees. Thank you. The question on these motions will be put at decision time. There are two questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that motion 9765, in the name of Marie Todd on online safety bill, UK legislation, be agreed? Are we all agreed? Yes. That is agreed. I propose to ask a single question on two parliamentary bureau motions. Does any member object? Thank you. The final question is that motions 9821 on committee membership, 9822 on substitution on committees, in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau, be agreed? Are we all agreed? Yes. That is agreed, and that concludes decision time. We'll now move on to members' business. We'll have a brief pause, actually, to allow members to leave the chamber, but please do so as quickly and as quietly as possible.