My name is David Bowes, I'm the Executive Vice President of the Institute and I'm very pleased to be able to introduce our speaker this afternoon. I am a big fan of the movie Amazing Grace that came out last year. It tells the story of William Wilberforce, a member of parliament who spent 50 years agitating for the abolition of slavery. One of the things that inspires me about that movie is that I've been telling libertarian audiences lately, you know, if it took 50 years to persuade the citizens of the freest, most literate, most educated country in the world that it was wrong to hold their fellow citizens in chains, then maybe we should recognize it might take a long time to bring about various reforms that libertarians would like to bring about, but it reminds you that working at it for a long time can succeed. I also, just this weekend, started reading William Hague's biography of William Wilberforce and I reflected there on William Hague was recently the leader of the Conservative Party in Great Britain. He's still a leader of the Conservative Party. Can one think of a leader of either of the parties in the U.S. Congress who could write a 500-page biography of a historical figure? Now I mentioned this to a colleague who said, and I sort of laughed and said, imagine Joe Biden writing a 500-page biography of Daniel Webster and he said, well, Joe Biden might tear the cover off this one and send it into a publisher claiming it was his work. I guess that's a possibility. But it's an inspiring story and I look forward to reading the rest of the book. It is one of the greatest stories in the history of the world. I was asked once by some skeptical neoclassical economists, what's the greatest accomplishment libertarianism ever had? And I said, well, the bringing of power under the control of law. And they kind of scoffed that that was not something you could measure, so how could it be useful? And they said, well, anything else, anything more recent? So, well, the abolition of slavery, that was a pretty important libertarian accomplishment. It is a truly great accomplishment. Charles Murray, when he did his book, Human Accomplishment, said, I'm thinking of this as a resume of the human race. What would you put on your resume for the human race? Now I guess he wouldn't have counted the abolition of slavery, because he said, you don't put on your resume, I stopped beating my wife. It's not an achievement to stop doing evil things, it's only an achievement to do something positive that didn't exist before. But if you have been beating your wife, then it is a good thing to stop. And if you have been holding people in slavery for thousands of years, it is a tremendous story to stop doing that. So our speaker today, Jim Powell, is a fellow of the Cato Institute, and he has been writing the history of freedom in both its positive and its negative chapters. For the past decade or more, turning out quite a number of books. Perhaps the first one in this history of freedom series was a book called The Triumph of Liberty. A 2000 year history told through the lives of freedom's greatest champions, and this told about great men and women throughout history who had worked for freedom. Then he turned his attention to some of freedom's adversaries, and he wrote a series of books starting with FDR's Folly, and then he did Wilson's War about how Woodrow Wilson's War got us into all the bad aspects of the 20th century. And a book called Bully Boy, which was not in fact about John McCain, but rather about his childhood hero, or his adult hero actually, Teddy Roosevelt. Now Jim got tired of being depressed and he's turned his attention back to the positive side of advancements in freedom. And he has a new book out called Greatest Emancipations, How the West Abolished Slavery. And in this book he asks, how is it that slavery, which was unchallenged in principle or practice for thousands of years, disappeared in a single century? I was going to say suddenly disappeared in a single century, well to the people who lived in the 19th century it didn't seem so sudden. And yet in the context of human history it happened all at once, almost all over the world. So he's going to talk about that today. So please welcome our one man publishing house for Liberty, Jim Powell. Thank you, David. It's always great to be back here at Cato where so much important work for liberty is being done. Emancipation is a great story and I'm glad to share a little bit of it with you. It's a reminder that even when terrible things are happening and the odds seem to be overwhelming against us that it is possible to change the hearts and minds of people for the better. As David noted, slavery has been around for thousands of years. Every civilization had it. Powerful interest groups supported it. Pro-slavery interests were well represented in Western governments. And if we were to imagine the scene in 1800 slavery was approaching a peak in the West. The smartest people thought that it would go on indefinitely, if not forever. It was just very, very hard to see how could you ever get rid of anything that was that entrenched and that widely supported. And yet, again, as David noted, it was, by 1888, shadow slavery, which is the worst form, was gone from the Western Hemisphere. And in most cases, the process occurred fairly peacefully. I mean, there was some conflict everywhere, but huge amounts of violence, such as we saw in the two major exceptions, Haiti and the United States, didn't occur. In Haiti, people could not get beyond the idea that if you didn't kill, you were going to be killed. And ever since the Haitian slave revolt that started in 1791, the people there have suffered through some 200 revolts, coups, and dictatorships. In the United States, although the North won the decisive military victories, white supremacists soon regained full political control of the South. And the killing and destruction of the war gave the losers an uncontrollable lust for revenge and there was nobody who could be counted on to protect the former slaves. And civil rights were subverted for another century. How then, one might ask, how did the more peaceful emancipations occur? Because we all know that slaveholders were always trying to delay emancipation as much as possible. They would always try to avoid any kind of deadline for setting the slaves free. Then if they did have to agree to a deadline, they'd try to push it back. How else could you achieve emancipation without a lot of force? Well, the story really starts with getting a decisive moral argument against slavery. And the argument was not religious. As pro-slavery authors kept reminding us, there was plenty of support for slavery in the Bible, injunctions to obey your master and so on. A legal argument against slavery was not possible because slavery found so much support in Western constitutions, statutes, and court decisions. The decisive moral argument against slavery came from the natural rights philosophy that individuals as human beings are entitled to life, liberty, and property. And the most basic form of property is your own body, the self-ownership principle. The natural rights philosophy blossomed in England during the 1640s and among a group of writers known as levelers. Natural rights was the revolutionary doctrine made famous in the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence. And even though the principal author was slaveholder Thomas Jefferson, the radical American abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison repeatedly referred to the Declaration as his gospel. The first abolitionist movement began in Great Britain in 1787. Thomas Clarkson was the organizational genius who did more than anybody else to make the movement happen. He was perhaps the first to seriously investigate slavery and the slave trade. He visited the principal slave trade ports of Bristol, Liverpool, and London. He interviewed thousands of sailors, sea captains, doctors, and many others with first-hand knowledge of slave trade. He became convinced that it was impractical to target slavery initially because it was so entrenched. Slavery had to be eroded and weakened before there was a chance that a frontal assault could work. Clarkson came to the conclusion that a powerful argument could be a powerful practical argument could be made against the slave trade because the British depended on the Royal Navy to defend their island and the Royal Navy in turn depended on their ability to recruit large numbers of sailors in an emergency. The slave trade had always been defended from a practical standpoint as the great nursery of sailors because the slave trade kept all these sailors active and in an emergency the Royal Navy would know where to go for people whose experience and skills were fresh. The Clarkson's research suggested that shocking numbers of British sailors died in the slave trade. More British sailors died in the slave trade than in any other branch of British commerce because the slaves were so racially treated that they were susceptible to all kinds of diseases and the sailors had to deal with the six slaves so they got sick and many of them died and the sailors on the slave ships were treated as badly as sailors on many of the other ships so in fact far from being the nursery of sailors the slave trade was the grave of sailors. This national security argument got the attention of British Prime Minister William Pitt. There was an additional angle here that in every Western society except the United States slave populations naturally tended to decline probably because of the harsh working conditions in the tropics and without fresh shipments of slaves the plantations were unable to maintain their workforces. So if the slave trade could be disrupted and eventually abolished that would in fact strike a pretty serious blow against slavery itself. Clarkson began to do a lot of speaking. He was dramatizing everything as much as he could. In his research he collected slaving gear, he collected shackles, he collected whips, he collected leg braces, neck braces, all kinds of thumb screws, all kinds of things that were used to discipline slaves or keep them captive in transit and he would display these things to people who had no idea because most of the people in England cared they didn't know anything about slavery it was something happening on the other side of the ocean and what they mainly cared about was to continue getting their slave produced products cotton, coffee, sugar, other things like that. One of the things that Clarkson would show would be slave ship diagrams such as this one where you can see all the slaves are fit in like sardines in as compact a space as possible it was a space that might be not much more than three or four feet high if that sometimes less it varied from ship to ship but people are just crammed in and this is where they were chained to one another so the sanitary conditions were awful people were shocked they had no idea. Clarkson talked about shocking practices in the slave trade for example the practice that the ships had of dumping six slaves overboard to drown and the reason for that was that a ship could collect insurance on slaves who were lost overboard but they could not collect insurance on a slave who was sick so if the slaves were sick this is a painting by J.M.W. Turner famous English painter he's pre-impressionist so it may be a little hard for you to see what he's depicting here and all this spectacular displays of color but this is a ship which is in the process of dumping slaves overboard so they can collect the insurance because the slaves are sick and they didn't want them to infect the other slaves and further increase their losses. Well again these were ways of trying to take home to people what the horrifying meaning of slavery which was something that was otherwise quite foreign to them. To generate pressure against slavery Clarkson organized anti-slavery societies throughout England he organized mass meetings he organized petition drives that sent Congress that bombarded Congress with petitions signed by as many as 400,000 people in a single year and these are all techniques that had not been done before they're now quite familiar of course but he was he really pioneered that. Clarkson played a key role recruiting allies in Parliament and as David noted the most important of those allies was William Wilberforce who embraced the moral case against slavery passionately and promoted it with evangelical fervor. Wilberforce displayed extraordinary dedication as he kept introducing bills to abolish the slave trade he just fought this stubborn parliamentary opposition for years before opinion changed enough that something could happen and Wilberforce played a key role in securing passage of the 1807 law that made it illegal for British citizens to participate in the slave trade. The law took effect in 1808 two centuries ago during the 1820s Clarkson Wilberforce and a younger member of Parliament named Thomas Buxton launched another movement this time aimed at slavery itself and they were able to abolish slavery in Jamaica and the other British possessions in the Caribbean by 1838. This is an illustration from the illustrated London news from the 1830s a slave in Jamaica hears of his liberation. This was a particularly important one in my opinion the British emancipation it was the most it seems to have been the most peaceful of all emancipations and a principle reason it was that the Parliament had been persuaded to appropriate 20 million pounds to pay off the slave holders to get out of the slavery business. Now this policy was denounced by American abolitionists because after all it was the slaves who were forced to work for nothing who deserved compensation the slave holders didn't deserve compensation and of course a major reason why that bill was passed was the political clout of the Caribbean slave holders in Parliament but there was also a great deal of practical wisdom in that policy because there was a recognition that after emancipation most of the former slave holders and the former slaves were going to end up in the same society together most of them probably were not able or inclined to move someplace else and the former slave holders had a lot more clout there's going to be nobody to protect them nobody anywhere could be counted on to protect former slaves after emancipation so if there's nobody who can protect the former slaves after emancipation it really made sense to minimize the incentives that the former slave holders had to terrorize the slaves as happened in the United States. There was no way to protect either no way or no means to protect the former slaves from the former slave holders if they are motivated by revenge and in fact this was a peaceful transition this was the most peaceful there were you know other events that happened later but the strategy as all discussed was also used in Spanish and Portuguese America with very similar results the peaceful methods that were pioneered by the British abolitionists were later adopted by William Lloyd Garrison and his campaign for abolishing American slavery they were adopted by Elizabeth Katie Stanton and her campaign for women's rights and later by Mohandas Gandhi for his campaign for Indian independence and by Martin Luther King and his campaign for civil rights meanwhile the British citizens having withdrawn from the slave trade their places were taken by citizens from other countries in particular France Portugal Spain and the United States. British diplomats began a decades long process of negotiating anti-slave trade treaties with the European powers that had slave colonies in the West. Britain's Royal Navy worked to enforce these anti-slave trade treaties and it was quite an extraordinary campaign by the Royal Navy that went on for more than a half century. This is a picture of a capture that occurred this is the HMS Arab that's the name of it the Arab capturing a Cuban slave ship off the coast of Cuba in 1856 the artist you might be interested to know was one of the crew on the HMS Arab he was a 15 year old cabin boy named Jonathan Starris and he looked pretty good to me. So this was a hugely important factor the British did not go around starting land wars if they didn't have a treaty to use against the slave trade as they did not get with the United States the British Navy didn't touch those ships but they're basically trying to make it harder for slave traders to go they had to fly somebody's flag otherwise they're going to be considered a pirate and it was open game on pirates and the British flag was no longer available the American flag was still available so gradually they're taking negotiating they eventually they take out the Spanish flag and the Portuguese flag so it becomes harder for the slave ships to operate. The slave the British did a great deal as I've indicated to get the movement started developing the ideas the enforcement but emancipation would never have occurred if the slaves had not taken a great deal of initiative to help themselves. If the slaves had just been standing idly by waiting for somebody to save them nothing would have happened. The first way that slaves helped themselves ironically was to revolt. Now as I mentioned in the case of Haiti if the only thing that's happening is a great deal of violence it's very hard to get beyond that in fact Haiti was not successful in creating a free society however it was very important that Haiti that the revolutionaries in Haiti gain independence and prevent Napoleon from reestablishing slavery because that sent a vital message to slave holders everywhere that slavery could consume them all and it would be better safer to negotiate the emancipation.  Haiti was particularly violent because it was actually a combination of strategies there was a struggle for emancipation going on and there was a struggle for independence from France going on and throughout the period there was a constant switching of sides and you had this is in the 1790s you had the British and the Spanish coming in to try to take some territory so there were a lot of people going after a lot of people. Another example of a slave revolt slaves helping themselves was the revolt on the amistad the amistad was a Cuban ship 1839 and the slaves revolted and continued killed everybody on board except two of the Cubans. The Africans wanted to go back to Africa but they didn't know how to navigate and the two survivors the two Cuban survivors tricked them and the ship ended up on Long Island and the result was one of the most famous trials in American history. Eventually it led to a Supreme Court decision in 1841 that granted freedom to the slaves the 25 men and boys and three girls and Steven Spielmerg made a great movie of the subject 1997 I think it was. Another way in many ways the more important way of slaves helping themselves involved running away and running away had a number of functions one of course you're increasing the number of free blacks you're reducing the slave population than it would otherwise be this is a picture of slaves crossing the Rappahannock is that how you pronounce it Rappahannock River and you can see there are a lot of people a lot of them got caught but there was still a tremendous outflow and I would say that runaway slaves in terms of numbers and impact on the end result was actually more important in other countries like Brazil where the number of runaways was massive toward the end of the process they were just in places where there were more opportunities to to run away this is a great painting of a runaway slave by Eastman Johnson night writer so now in the winter time you had less supervision on plantations in the winter time you had less supervision on plantations but it was also the toughest time to run away because without foliage it was harder to hide in the woods when you had snow the slaves could be tracked down more easily and nobody in the south had winter clothing that would keep them safe and healthy certainly when they got north and unfortunately because of the situation in the United States where the president of the United States and mayors and governors were all supportive of slave hunters coming north the slaves were really not safe until they crossed into Canada so they could you know anywhere in New York or Boston or any place they could be snatched off the streets without much you know without any protection at all so this was a very serious issue I'm sure you all know about Harriet Tubman but she was such an amazing person she's on the left here with a group of slaves she escorted north after having escaped herself she then went back and got another 300 on many trips it was really quite a spectacular accomplishment and another aspect of running away was that slaves came with horror stories that were publicized by the abolitionists so what's going on now and the situation was changing they were bringing essentially news from the front lines and Frederick Douglass is by far I think the best known of those since he actually became a major author and orator but this was true elsewhere as where that there was propaganda tremendous propaganda value coming from the runaways what was happening the latest in shocking abuses and so on and that was a big help to the abolitionists and overall to the cause so they're doing very important things to help themselves it was immensely important now from the 1820s through the 1850s one South American Central American country after the other emancipated slaves we don't hear about them so much Venezuela Bolivia Mexico Uruguay and so on because they had smaller slave populations but the fact was they were they also had entrenched interests we've seen in this country with with many different issues how small groups such as Alaska bridge builders can still have a lot of political clout so you didn't need a whole lot of slaves to influence legislators install the whole process so it was difficult everywhere it was most difficult in the United States because we had the largest slave population four million in 1860 but by 1860 the United States was there were only three major slave societies left the United States Cuba and Brazil there was increasing pressure against slavery just coming from the movements of people and markets because immigrants investors inventors industrialists all wanted to locate in a place that had as much freedom as possible they were not interested in moving to the American south the workers didn't want to compete with slave I mean why do you want to compete with somebody who's getting paid nothing and you know there's just too much talent that you need so and you need an environment a free environment where talent can flourish and where their incentives for people to improve themselves now in Cuba the slave holders had a lot of clout the abolitionist cause had to advance with halfway measures compromises which American abolitionists didn't like the most effective Cuban abolitionist was Julio Vizcarando he was a Puerto Rican Creole he started agitating for emancipation in Cuba and then quickly realized that decisions for Cuba were made in the mother country in Spain so he went to Spain launched an anti slavery society there he spent his high school years in the United States where he came into contact in the north with some of ideas about emancipation in individual rights he married an American Quaker and he got things started there but as I said in the Spanish America you tended to get and Portuguese you tended to get a lot of these compromises such as in 1870 law in Cuba that began to free the children of slaves the free birth law and also slaves over 60 well that wasn't much that did not free very many people in practice the children still had to work as apprentices but what those compromises did when they came was to they were sweet poison because they asserted they underscored a principle that the government that had supported slavery for so long could withdraw its support and slavery although it was formidable in many ways slavery has always depended on a great deal of government support the laws making it illegal for slaves to travel freely laws saying the slaves cannot bear arms slaves cannot even wave a stick without getting whipped slaves cannot learn how to read all these laws the reason the laws were there clearly is because if you take them away slavery was in trouble the slaves would run away there wouldn't be any workforce to take the crops in so when political support is undermined in a variety of ways such as I have mentioned there's less ability to count on government to enforce the laws that prop the whole thing up so what you find in Spanish and Portuguese America in Brazil I might mention a man named Joaquim Nabucco who started the anti-slavery society in Brazil and Brazil is one of my favorite cases because it involves perhaps the widest variety of anti-slavery methods they had Nabucco started anti-slavery societies around Brazil the Brazilian abolitionist meetings became boisterous affairs with performers emerging through a shower of rose petals when slaves would be freed they would have parties they had competitions to see who would compete for slave free streets, slave free towns, slave free districts, slave free provinces and all of which meant that as the slave free areas were expanding it became easier to run away because all of a sudden a lot more people were closer to an area where they could go and the abolitionists would send secret agents to plantations and tell them how and where to go and by the late 1880s, 1886, 1887 entire plantation workforces were just disappearing and the whole political situation began to change against them and industrialist businessmen wanted to get out of this whole thing because the view became more and more widely held that you cannot have a modern society you cannot have a prosperous society with slavery it's just too backward nobody has incentives to improve when you cannot keep the fruits of your labor you need too much cooperation from too many people and as I'm sure you all know I'm sure you all know something about the history of invention of how many great inventors have come from the most humble backgrounds mechanics and people who were simply doing their work and were very much aware of what was working what wasn't you need to harness all of this energy and anyway so in conclusion I would suggest that the process of emancipation we need to understand Americans mainly know about the Civil War but in fact a great deal was accomplished if not almost everything through voluntary processes that are changing the hearts and minds of people as we saw in the south if you simply bring an army in there you're going to get resistance and it doesn't make any difference what the cause is whether it's nationalism or it's slavery or it's something else if you do not have a substantial buy-in from the population you are going to be taking three steps forward and two steps back and you're going to get embroiled in a civil war and guerrilla matters and other things like that so I frankly happened to believe that we would have been better off if we could have avoided a catastrophic war in the United States and you can say that about other places but there's so much so many wonderful things that took place in the story of emancipation through the individuals who were trying to change opinions, speaking, writing, helping slaves run away all of those things brought us to the point where we were and it's just such an extraordinary development in a few decades I might go one step beyond this story in my book I talk about the slavery in the Congo by the 18th century in the 1980s King Leopold when he was establishing his slave society in the Congo the European opinion was so much against slavery by that point that he felt he had to do it secretly and he conducted an elaborate public relations effort to portray himself as a great benefactor of Africans he set up a society and he was the head of it and he built statues and he did all these things in case there were revelations about his dirty work so that nobody would believe it but in fact despite his money and he had a lot of it and his prestige and all of that he was exposed and forced to surrender control the Congo by an abolitionist society in another country in England and the abolitionist society in another country was based on the work of just five individuals there was an African American journalist and African American missionary a Polish novelist an English shipping clerk and an Irish diplomat and within a few years Leopold was gone shadow slavery was pretty much gone the conditions were still going to be wretched for quite a while but when you look and see what's involved in achieving any kind of change it's a huge job and they came a huge distance and I think we can all be thankful for that. Thank you Jim we want to take some questions and you might as well stay at the podium since we only have one speaker here and we'll and just call on people we'll bring a microphone around and while you're getting arranged there I'm going to ask the first question everybody knows about slavery in the United States but you talked about and of course I saw the movie Amazing Grace about William Wilberforce's effort to abolish slavery in Great Britain and yet I have no sense of slavery in Great Britain I don't see it in the Jane Austen novels and the other things I've read about the history of England is there much slavery in England or is it England's overseas empire that Wilberforce and Clarkson were concerned about? It's entirely in the overseas empire there were a very small number of slaves in England during the 1700s but there were also a number of court cases there was a famous court case involving somebody from somebody from the Caribbean a captain or somebody brings one slave in this would be in the 1770s and that became a court case and you know the British don't have a neatly written constitution like we do it consists of or had consisted of an accumulation of centuries of court cases and various things that came to set precedence and be taken as policy and that's that particular slave was freed because it was found in some case or other that the system did not the English law system in England did not support slavery but overseas was different that was the problem the people but now in southern Europe in Spain in Portugal you did have you did have a fair number of slaves you know into the modern period yes sir now go ahead Chris Grieb first of all wasn't the slave trade in the United States abolished in 1808 American imports were there slave imports okay slave imports no not participation in slavery you can you picture another if Lincoln had allowed like the first five southern states to stay on their own would there have been a trip when there have been a tremendous amount of pressure in the rest of the south to again getting rid of slavery in words of the states like Georgia South Carolina Mississippi and Alabama had left and there had been a lot of the border states have been allowed to stay in wouldn't there have been kind of a lot of pressure when is there another can you picture another scenario in the United States are getting rid of slavery other than the Civil War yes now I think I would say at the offset there are some people Lincoln is not one of my favorite presidents and then some people really say he was he was a terrible terrible person I personally don't think the outcome would have made much difference with or without Lincoln because I think a lot of it had to do with a lot of the consequences had to do with the war and I say that because now I think I think it would be hard to avoid it would have been hard to avoid a war simply because there had not been a recent terrible war to make people afraid of it you think of the Cold War period where you had two superpowers and they resist why did they why did the United States of Soviet Union not attack each other well because they were afraid of a nuclear escalation there wasn't such a thing in during in 1860 both the north and the south were flooded with recruits this was going to be a glorious brief war they were all eager for it the earlier precedent was a Napoleonic war okay if war could have been avoided and the south the southern states the slave states had succeeded peacefully my hunch is that there would have been increasing pressure on them to you know slavery would have been under increasing pressure which is kind of the contrary most people think well if we didn't force them then we're letting them go on with slavery as long as they want but in fact I think it's quite subversive to have a long border with the non-slave territory I think the first thing that may be the first thing that would have happened if we had avoided war and let the southern states to see peacefully is that the politics of fugitive slave law enforcement would have changed completely as it since when everybody was in one country we had the president of the United States and we had governors and we had the mayor of New York and Boston say you know welcoming the slave hunters to get all the because they didn't didn't want free blacks in their in their town so now if the south secedes they are rejecting the north they're insulting and rejecting the north we saw part of the recruitment for the civil war was was a nationalist response so this is south now is rejecting insulting the north by by walking out of this great country we had is it going to be politically possible after secession to have slave hunters coming in are they going to get support from the president from the governor's the states I think now that now the south is a foreign country the Canadians did not permit Americans to go into their country and seize peaceful people off the streets we didn't permit Canadians to come in are we going to permit these slave hunters to come in as they have been is the fugitive slave law I think that's basically going to be by the boards and I would guess that the slave the the runaway slaves would have been substantially safe upon crossing the U.S. border they would not have had to go several hundred miles further north to Canada and so I think there would have been an increase in the number of runaways and that would I think the south probably would have been taken ever more stringent measures to stop the runaways probably ultimately maybe building a wall barbed wire shooting on site anybody trying to escape well that would have been a I think that would have had a likely have had political repercussions this can confirming everything the abolitionists were saying about what a barbaric system slavery was beyond that you had a long established trend in part caused by runaways in part by the economics of slaves in the in the middle south being sold to the deep south so every year quite a separate issue from runaways there are fewer slaves in the in the upper south they're being sold south among other things that meant that the slave holders could get something for them if they ran away then they got nothing so that meant that every year more slaves being sold to the deep south there are fewer people in the upper south who had a direct stake in slavery the slave holders in the in the upper south their political clout was was gradually going down at the same time the concentration of slaves in the lower south was increasing about half the population that's getting to the point where there's an increased risk of slave revolt so you have some instability in the existing trend plus as I mentioned you have all the migration coming to the United States was going to the north the all the immigrants to open up farms and investors inventors the industries all that was going to north so you're having an increasing gap economically and there are already 1860 there are already more southerners moving north because of the multiplying opportunities then there were northerners going south so you have another trend now also the the heavy reliance on a few crops meant that the south much less diversified economy they were just more susceptible to falling prices of those crops and in fact you did get falling prices later in the you know the 19th century 1870s 1880s now part of that I'll grant you was related to the contraction following the Civil War inflation but you know the point remains they're vulnerable because it's a less diversified economy so it's a then people say well how when do I think the slaves would have been emancipated without the Civil War I'm sure it would have come later but I would also imagine that full civil rights would have come decades earlier because if if a variety of persistent peaceful pressures have been brought to bear on on the slave states you would have been able to achieve emancipation without the uncontrollable backlash and I personally think the uncontrollable backlash is an absolutely fascinating phenomenon how is it that the north could win the war decisively and yet have the white supremacists very quickly begin to regain full political control you have the the the the the subversion of black civil rights is promoted by Lincoln's handpicked successor if you can't count on Lincoln to pick a successor and keep his humane policies going then what what can you count on and not only that by 1876 the party of Lincoln the Republican Party what do they do that you have this contested election of Hayes and his Democratic opponent and they they have you know they have a little back and forth going to figure out who's going to get what and the Republicans decide it's more important for us to get our guy in the White House then to have anything to do with the South so the deal was Hayes goes in the White House and the Democrats the the last three states that were still under official military occupation the federal last federal troops are withdrawn and Democrats go on to you know do what they did for another another century subverting civil rights so you get back to the fact that nowhere could could could blacks count on you know somebody to protect you know no nowhere could the former slaves count on anybody to protect them as particularly if if there was revenge and and killing and so on so it was hugely important to avoid a backlash if that because it was truly uncontrollable yes sir right let's see so I was listening to you and I read an article of yours that touched on the same subject as well a little before I came here so one thing that comes to mind I really don't believe that without the Civil War the southerners would have been white southerners would have been less violent towards black people I think they had embraced an ideology of white supremacism that would that left them predisposed towards terrorist attacks against black people and or sympathy towards those who committed that sort of violence and terrorism against black people so whatever losses the union may have inflicted on them I think they just provided a pretext for the violence that they probably would have done anyway even if slavery had come to an end another way and then also if let's say there was another means for slavery to come to an end other than the Civil War maybe it would have taken several decades you know William Wilberforce took what was it 50 years to convince the British public not to to put an end to slavery so then it wouldn't have been those people who were emancipated historically they wouldn't have been emancipated right then most likely it would have been their descendants so in terms of their those people's individual liberty the Civil War would have been the only option that that war that violence with all whatever cost there was to it those people the majority of them would not have received emancipation without it now of course they had to deal with the oppression and violence and terrorism afterwards but I doubt that any of them would have preferred to remain as as slaves even with that violence that was visited upon them and their descendants so well the first thing is that in response to your first point you're you're absolutely right of course conditions were terrible before the Civil War so whatever you want to call it you want to call it racism whatever that was one thing and now if you add to it a backlash against war backlash to get even revenge you're adding revenge to racism that is a worse mix than what you had both are bad but it's and it's a very similar phenomenon to what we saw in Germany after World War one you know in many other places it's not specific to the Civil War we saw this in in Central Europe after the Napoleonic conquest he did all these wonderful reforms and he enforced them with his army and people didn't like that and at their earliest opportunity they're going to strike back we've seen the British and the Irish go on for centuries so you're adding one thing to the other it's a much more difficult situation to deal with and it was truly uncontrollable in terms of you know talking about when and how quickly can you get emancipation that the underlying issue is that abolitionists were abolitionists were a minority in the north and blacks were a minority in the south you're dealing with a majority and even in the north as we well know there's very mixed support there's support you know maybe a quarter or a third of the people in the north were very supportive of the abolitionists a lot of people didn't want blacks in the neighborhood a lot of people didn't care then there were Democrats in the north who were hostile so if you start if you're a minority you don't want to get in a fight with somebody who's bigger than you are you've got to you know use other means got to use your wits you have to but you know it's like George Washington you recognize that he couldn't he had a small rag tag army that was leaving him every six months if he got into a direct confrontation that would just play to the strength of his opponent he had to I mean this is why guerrilla tactics the word guerrilla came from the Spanish fights against Napoleon they they had to be hit and run or like the French resistance against Hitler that's what you have to do if you're if you are small in numbers small in in arm you know in armed forces and small in economic power and so on right right right that's correct they would have the slavery would have I'm sure slavery would have gone on for a few decades longer and I think civil rights would have full civil rights would have come decades earlier by avoiding the backlash now the problem is we're talking about you know it was too slow the reform emancipation it was too slow if we didn't have a war we really should be emancipated so maybe war is the only way to go but the problem with that is the assumption that that as a minority and I'm not I could be speaking of anybody of any wars is the idea that that you know some whoever we're talking about can control the outcome of the war and as we saw in the United States fine you win the war but then they turn their back the Republicans turn their backs on it you you've gotten let's get some other people asking questions okay you raise very good questions I appreciate it yes sir I think this is really the counterfactual argument is really among the weakest points of your book because the war was caused by southern intransigence at even the prospect of not allowing slavery in the territories Lincoln himself said during a cabinet meeting when the war began no one would have dared to interfere with the institution where it existed the right Republicans refute abiding by their campaign platform of not allowing its expansion in the territories provoked the C session which any constitutional president would have been bound to resist by force so I don't see and the if you talk about revenge certainly seeing blacks in union uniforms was provocative to many southern whites but if you read the speeches given by southern delegates trying to convince the border states to cc'd you get the same kind of racist paranoia that took effect after 1877 was there in its noxious form from the beginning and Alexandra Stevens trying to make a point about what the south stood for said we stand for white supremacist this was not a controversial statement in Montgomery in 1860 when he was sworn in as vice president so I really don't see how you can get a counterfactual history of an alternate path and it's very easy to temporize if you're not a slave I mean this institution had been going on for over 260 years and that should somehow last it only lasted another decade other additional decades or centuries we could have avoided the civil war that you know there comes a time when when even at the risk of bloodshed I granted both sides couldn't see how bloody the war would be or how long it would last but this noxious institution had lasted over 250 years southern there was also constitutional pressure anti-libertarian movements by southern congressmen and senators to limp gag rules to censor the males to ban abolitionist species posing a growing threat to American democracy at home and trying to steer its foreign policy abroad by acquiring Cuba Nicaragua and extending slavery where it either no longer existed or where it had been abolished so I think you could I don't see any counterfactual history that could prevent the war at any realistic way well I started out by saying in my response to another question and I agree it would be would have been difficult to avoid the war mainly because there's nothing to scare people into avoiding it so that's why I'm I hardly say anything about Lincoln in my book I think if you take Lincoln out you're just looking at how eagerly everybody volunteered and the same thing happened in 1900 Teddy Roosevelt was worst among them and war was glorious because now the Civil War horrors were 50 years behind and Europe was the same way in 1914 they were all eager to volunteer war was glorious it was the fulfillment of men and all that stuff well they hadn't seen any massive killing lately but the situation was different after World War II and the Cold War and that so what I'm really asking is if let's just imagine if we could have avoided the war then what would have been the likely consequences and I as the what most of the book is about is is trying to draw on the experience of other countries in the western hemisphere because they all got rid of slavery in the same short period and most of them did so with minimum levels of violence now the United States had the largest slave society by far four million and you know applying the insights of Wilbur forests and Clarks and they recognize that the British Caribbean which was 800,000 slaves and when they were liberated in the 1830s that's a much smaller target four million and the one paradox was it was the only slave society where the numbers were increasing without slave imports so it was a harder it's not that the methods were peaceful persistent methods of agitation and economic pressure and so on were less effective they're dealing with a much larger not to crack and that that would take long but we again the backlash that I'm referring to is if has occurred in many other places by people who are trying to get even we're seeing that in the Middle East right now among other places it's truly uncontrollable yes sir back there emancipation with compensation ever get off the ground as a I'm sorry did emancipation emancipation with compensation a buyout that ever get off the ground in the United States no no why not well I don't think they felt well there are cultural reasons historical reasons the Spanish Spanish and Portuguese America there was much more manumission and you might say this goes back to maybe a Roman times there's much more manumission the the Southerners in the United States are very much against manumission they didn't want anybody to buy anybody's freedom now there were Lincoln I believe did raise the idea of some kind of compensation but it never got very far in the United States in I'm sorry Washington DC right you're right thank you okay but there was there was much more acceptable in in Latin America and I think there are a variety of reasons for that which I probably need to go into sociological that the fact that men came to Latin America and so they often ended up with relationships with slaves and so they are much more tolerant of of Creole children and so there's much I mean it's things like that that is much more acceptable so it's a it's a shorter distance to go for for essentially paying them off to go away peacefully which is what it was and in the United States there was very strong opposition to it but again you're starting there there was opposition to to to compensated emancipation everywhere at first this is true in Brazil but eventually it became a very important thing that slave holders had to be kept under pressure and eventually they respond to what their options are and the amazing thing about the emancipation story is how long the pressure was maintained and and how much experience there is with with nonviolent means of of getting to a much better place yes man my understanding is that there certainly were racist attitudes for one of a better word there there certainly were continuing cultural views of blacks by whites but you did not have the terrorism that when in Jamaica for example I mean you still had you know elements of a you know traditional attitudes class society whatever you want to call but you did not have the terrorism that we saw in the in the American South after you know in the reaction to the Civil War in reaction you know they were driven by revenge the same thing in Brazil but you had much more you know much more diverse complicated society so it was harder for people to to you know to to to adopt those those views yes ma'am Jim Crow laws and stuff right all the other black the black codes before the Jim Crow laws yeah I mean whatever there's a sequence of quite a bit of that happen don't you think that and then with the government's passing of laws segregation the government even with Wilson taking off the you know not letting people to be in the government right all these things happened that just kept it another form of slavery shy carping and all these other things that came in and they're not being able to vote and it's the whole litany of things that went down it made it so that hey you had to go all the way up to 1964 to get civil rights right people who were emancipated in 1862 right the government has some some problems with it too like you say oh the laws in this country it went along with it right that crop is a form of slavery it's the same thing now with the immigration substandard wages for people people working at three dollars and fifty cents and sweatshops it's the same gambit all the way well it's it's a lot different than being in chains and being whipped and being owned so we're in reaction to your thought about the the aftermath of the Civil War I might say that one of the most bizarre things to me is when you say you think well the north was our favor of emancipation and I mean you know in given the sides available that was comparatively good guys but after the Civil War we had the beginning of Memorial Day celebrations and in the Memorial Day celebrations in the name of reuniting brother with brother you had Southern Confederate veterans and Union veterans getting together and for decades this began to just went on and on and the way they they they avoided anything controversial or upsetting in in their celebrations they were mourning the dead but the only thing they couldn't talk about was slavery and emancipation and so you got to 1913 the 50th anniversary of Gettysburg and Woodrow Wilson a president who many people admire both Democrats and Republicans Woodrow Wilson the 50th anniversary of of of Gettysburg gave a speech in which he described the Civil War as a quarrel forgotten the north is supposed to be on your side and yet the only thing you can't talk about is slavery and emancipation and any other related issues that so how much confidence do you have in being able to solve to achieve a social a major social reform by getting involved in a in a war you need to change people's hearts and minds and get a buy-in so you can turn your back and not having somebody coming at you with a with a lynch mob and and when you compound racism with revenge that is taking a step backward it's a much more difficult complicated thing to deal with and the ways that some of these other people I've talked about in in Spanish Portuguese America in the Caribbean and so on they were moving much more in a straight line sometimes they were taking half steps and have what might be considered moral compromises but they were they were at least moving toward the target instead of making these terrible steps backward yes sir let's take one last question and then we'll go up for informal questions what I wanted to say I may not need that no for them we like to have it on tape well first of all I'm a civil war reenactor and I represent the African Americans perspective during the civil war and I do presentations all over the country and as late as 2005 I spoke at a place called the Coastal Heritage Society in Savannah Georgia and one of the things the organizer said to me he said please do not mention William to come to Sherman but what I really wanted to say is that one of the things that the south thought about the north was that they were there was no difference between the people because all of the colonies were slaveholders because of the climate of the north it changed the economy you see slavery being abandoned by northern states simply because of the economy and a free labor system was was born out of economic just plain economics now the gentleman who said that maybe the civil war could have ended any other way other than the civil war I mean slavery ending any other way you see a lot of things that occurred by the government or by the politicians of the day to kind of end slavery you see it in the ordinance of 1787 you see it in the Kansas Nebraska Act which gave a demarcation line of demarcation they had a typography problem in the territories what would they have grown you had southerners who did not do the things that was necessary to replenish the soil cotton and tobacco were harsh crops they could not continue to grow them that was the reason for the expansion but they knew that they couldn't expand it into Texas they knew they couldn't expand it into the Oklahoma territory so slavery even though it may have taken another century it may have ended as it did in the north without violence it did not slavery throughout the original colonies there was no violence in the ending of slavery in the northern states and people forget that none whatsoever just as you had mentioned with other places around the world but the whole issue behind the civil war and the abandonment we this lady and I were talking about the abandonment of the Republican party you see a lot of changes Frederick Douglass stopped printing the north star because he thought that it was the time of deliverance and it wasn't we talk about civil rights it hasn't occurred yet to be honest with you you see all types of forms of slavery coming about in the southern states or replacement of the southern institution of slavery such as the penal institutions we still have one major prison in Louisiana and Gola that was a cotton plantation during the civil war those are for those criminals that get the sentences of two to three hundred years they never they all die in that prison but you see a lot of things such as the pig laws that was put on the books in the southern states we need to oh I'm sorry okay well my question was you know it was really a statement and a thank you for coming out a thank you for your effort to put this into print and to bringing about the comparison between the abolition of slavery and Great Britain that the case I think that you referred to was the Somerset case right the Somerset case really set the precedent for Roger Taney's decision in in 1857 when when they when you look at it it's the same principles the Somerset case was a slave who was taken to England who jumped ship a trial was held and he was determined to be free that case set the precedent for what Taney did in 1857 he took it the opposite way that any slave moving to a free territory was not free but I just want to thank you actually for doing that and just a mouthful about a few things


So, hello everybody, this is the Jones Library Building Committee. I'm Paul Bachman, the town manager. I'm convening this meeting until we get to our first item on the agenda. We are holding this meeting virtually under the laws of the Commonwealth that are in effect until April 1, 2022 at this point in time. And the first thing I want to do is make sure everybody can hear and be heard. So I will just go across for the members, Sean Mangano. Yes. George Hicks Richards. Yes. Sharon Sherry. Here. Austin Serrat. Here. Anika Lopes. Yes. Christine Gray Mullen. Yeah. Alex Lafebvre. Yes. And we have guests as well. Ken Romeo. I'll call you. Good afternoon. And Ken Gayet, you're there. Here, president. Thank you. And Angela Mills. Yes, thank you, Paul. Great. Thank you. So the first order of business that we have is for officer elections. So we need to have been serving as a chair pro tem, but we need to have someone who's willing to serve in this seat permanently in the way we will. Well, at least not permanent, but for the time that they want to. And the way we will do this is ask for nominations. Once someone, you don't need a second for a nomination. Once there is a nomination, I'll ask the person nominated if they would like to serve and I'll continue that process until there are no more nominees. Then we will go through the committee and ask for the name of the person they would like to serve, who they would like to have serve as chair. So I will open the floor for nominations if there's anyone who'd like to nominate someone and you can also allow self nominations. Sharon. I would like to nominate Austin, Sarah. Austin, do you accept the nomination? Is this instead of the Supreme Court vacancy? It is. Okay, then I accept. Good. Are there other nominations? Seeing none. No one eager to raise their hand. So we do, we do need to vote. So I'll ask you to vote by saying yes or Austin's name. Oh, Christine. I support the nomination, but we had had discussion at the last meeting about waiting until we were a full committee and we're still down the other member and I was just wondering what the status. Is that going to take so long? This is why we're going with officers. Good question. So we don't have that person yet. We're still in the interview stage for that. So that would happen could happen as soon as February 7th, but there are no guarantees on that. I think the need for a chair at this moment is more fairly urgent and the committee can always change that. But it's up to the will of the committee if they would like to continue with the process or not. Any thoughts? Christine. So what you're saying is the earliest it would be as the 7th, what would be the next so then is it the next possible date is the 28th I think. And when do we think we would have our next possible meeting? Like, are we going to go another month? Do not have that discussion. Yeah, so I was just wondering, you know, if we're close to getting that other member, it would be nice to include them. But if it's imperative or a whole nother month or we need to take votes like that. So I'm just pushing back a little not wondering what the big push, because you do such a great job Paul running.  Any other thoughts from members? My own view is, and again, this has not to do with me personally, we need to get this is the second meeting we need to get in motion. We've got a lot of things already on our plate. And I think the new person comes comes on can be consulted and if necessary, we can change anything but I do think we should get on with the business. Thank you, George. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the motion that we go forward with the process of. Electing officers. Okay, sir. We already are in the middle of a motion. For the chair. So what you're saying is you're expressing the interest in moving forward. That's correct. Rule on that motion. What do other folks think? Sean Alex. Anika. I agree with the second grade. I agree with the second grade. We consulted when you remember rather. We consulted when they come in. I agree with an ECA. Okay. Alex. In second grade, this means I agree. Okay. So we will. Continue with the rule with the vote for the chair at this point in time. And the next item will be a vice chair. Okay. Sean. Yes. Okay. George. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Austin. Yes. Anika. Yes. Christine. Yes. And Alex. Yes. Okay. So I turned the proverbial gavel over to Austin. Thank you. Thank you, Paul. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I think it would be helpful if we could put the agenda up on the screen. So I'll actually be able to remember what's on it. The next item is as I recall the question of, do we want to elect a co chair or a vice chair rather? Excuse me. Vice chair. Do I hear a sentiment for a vice chair? Would anybody like to speak? Yep. Sharon. I nominate Christine Gray Mullen. I'll accept that nomination. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Other nominations for vice chair. Okay. Are we ready to vote? I will call your name as I see you on the screen. Sean. Yes. Sharon. Yes. George. Yes. Anika. Yes. Christine. Yes.  Yes. There you go. That's much better. Alex. Yes. And Paul. Yes. Great. Okay. I am going to ask to put the agenda up. Angie, do you have the agenda? I do. Can you put it up on the screen? Absolutely. Thank you. Okay. I'll ask Angie. Angie, are you going to be the clerk so to speak of the committee? Are you going to take notes for us? Only until you fire me. Okay. That's totally fabulous. That is, that is totally fabulous. So. Are you going to screen share the agenda? There it is. Fantastic. All right. So the next item on the agenda of the minutes of January 12th. And we need a motion to approve the minutes. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? I moved to approve. Is there a second. Second. Correct. Corrections to the minutes. Alex. Yeah. On the third page.  Sorry, Angela. On the third page, second line where it said Lafayette question, whether or not there needs to be a subcommittee for historic aspects of the building. I just wanted to remove the word committee because that's duplicative and. And Angela has these changes. So she knows what I'm going to say. And add since we just received a historic structures report to guide those aspects of the project. Because that was why I was questioning it. And then. On the fifth line about. The sustainability where it says Lafayette was hoping these individuals could be woven into the design and build process. Change was hoping to stated it was the intention when this subcommittee was formed that. And changed. Could to wood. So just clarification on why. What I hope I said, I tried to go back to the recording, but I don't know why. But I do. I don't know whether these changes look correct. Are you seeing that minutes? Yeah. Hold on. Let me get it big. I've got half screen. Buildings. We just. Yep. Yep. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Other. Other corrections to the minutes. Okay. Yeah. Christine. I had done you. It just says four o'clock. Was it four or four 30? I thought we started it for last time. That's my recollection. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Christine. Just other questions about the minutes. Okay. Are we ready to vote on the minutes? Again, I'm going to ask you to signify vocally. Whether you approve the minutes, Sean? Yes. Thank you, Sharon. Yes. Anika? Yes. George? Yes. Christine? Yes. Paul? Yes. And Alex? Yes. Okay. Again, Angie, if you would screen share the agenda. I think the next item is we're going to hear from Sean. Yes. So there's not much of an update since the last time I did have another meeting with our financial advisor just to update him on the progress of this building committee and that we're moving forward. We both agreed sort of our next step is once we get the designer on board and the designer and the OPM and this group have developed this project a little bit further in terms of the timing and the cash flow, an updated cash flow for this project. That's when we'll reengage with him to map out whatever financing options we pursue. And then the only other thing I think we're going to talk about soon is the contract for the designer. And that will really dictate the rest of the world. It'll be the next big financial element to this project. And I think that's it. Great. Thanks. Any questions about the financial update? I promise they'll get more interesting as we dive into this further. Or at least I hope they will. I can't promise that. I take that back. May I just ask Sean, just could you just talk to us a little bit about how you foresee making the decision about the timing of borrowing? Yeah. So again, I think the timing of the borrowing, the big interest for those who are following interest rates are starting to rise. And so there's interest in borrowing as soon as we can to get the funds locked in at a low interest rate. And also because we have these other building projects coming up that start making payments on this one and get this started. So we have two options. We can borrow potentially this June and lock in that interest rate and start making payments as early as FY23. And if we did that, we would use the funds that we borrow to pay for all the costs of the project up until the point that we run out and then we would switch over to the grant funds. And as I said last time, the benefit there is we can generate returns on those grant funds and then put that back into the project. So that's sort of what I'd like to do. The only caution I have and I talk about the cash flow and the timeline is once you borrow money, you generally have a certain amount of time to spend it. And until we get real, you know, until we get clear on when the construction costs are going to start, you know, the real significant bills for this project, we don't want to borrow too far in advance that we can't spend that money within really a year to two years or, you know, or most of that money, there's certain thresholds that you have to hit to keep for the bonds that we have to keep certain types of tax statuses. So, so that's sort of the, the only caution I have to that option is, is the cash flow and making sure that we can spend the money within a certain period of time. Great, thanks. Okay, if I see no other hands. Okay, so thank you Sean. Next, Ken from Colliers, Ken. Thank you, sir. So first thing I wanted to just touch on really quick is just introduce you to the newest team member of Team Colliers for this project. While he is a new team member for our team he's been with the firm for over 20 years so he's one of our more seasoned senior project managers, and his name is Ken Romeo can I don't know if I wanted to say a quick word. Please do. Sure. Thank you for inviting me to this meeting and looking forward to this exciting project as Ken and I've talked about I've worked on some library projects but nothing as historic as this one I've worked on other historic projects and private schools so looking forward to going through this whole process and getting the project done with all of you. And thank you we're really looking forward to working with you and appreciate all that you will do. Ken, thanks. Thank you so yeah so Ken Romeo will be the one that will be, you know, the day to day contact, obviously still be heavily involved in this project, and anybody can call me at any time as well. But Ken is going to be is definitely going to be the senior PM moving this thing forward. So the first item on the agenda that we had was the design firm the overview so we did finally hear back from fine gold. Last night around 6pm with their fee proposal, it's about 10% over budget right now. We reached out to Ellen to get a time tomorrow to meet with her and her team to get that number down there was also a series of additional services that they had in that in that fee proposal that we want to see if we can just wrap up into one fee and just have everything consolidated into one fee that that meets our budget. So we're still ongoing. That is, I anticipate that that will be, hopefully, tied up in completed prior to our next meeting that was the intent. And so, I will have more definitely more information for you all on that as we get towards our next committee meeting so when I get that final proposal that seems to make sense from a budget and scope stand standpoint I'll make sure that that gets out to the entire committee prior to our meeting so that we can be able to have any conversations and answer any questions we have on it by then. Any questions in that yet so far. Okay, great. But the next item on the agenda is the project schedule so as we discussed last time this is going to be there our first real big deliverable with the design team coming out of the gate once they're on board is to make the large macro schedule that we have whereas broken out the big chunks of time and break those down at the individual milestones with individual day dates that tie back to that overall schedule to make sure that we're, we're moving in lock step and getting the project done on time and under budget so that's something that can myself and Ellen and her team will be developing. And so as they're, they're on board. And we will, if we are able to come to some sort of agreement on the fee in principle before our next meeting, then we'll work on that schedules that will have not only their feet to look at but also a scheduled draft schedule for you to look at as well. For our next meeting. The last item that I have the agenda, which may see can be for you before you go into the interim location I'm sorry to interrupt you. There's more work that find go will have to do in the so called schematic phase before design development. I think so I think they will have to revisit some of the items that came out of, you know, the last couple of years between the time that the, the, the grant round started to where we're at today and make sure and confirm that some of those things are really going into this package going forward and make sure that they tie all that into that design development set as we start moving moving the project along. It's more of a scope confirmation I think at this point and you know again making sure the programmatic elements are appropriate and that you know the team is comfortable with that before moving into that next phase of design where it starts to really get locked in. Thank you. So, sorry, I just wanted to point out that one of the things we'll have to do is meet with the MBLC like ASAP, because they still have some concerns, and, and a benefit of us still being in schematic design phase is that we'll be working with ever source on the energy credit so it's important to get in early. Yeah. Thanks, Sharon. Okay, Ken. So I don't see interim location. I know this seems like it's a long way off. I mean, we're probably a year away in reality, for far for the existing building to be moving into his temporary location. So this is going to be extremely important that 1213 months is going to go by in a flash. And there's a lot of work that has to happen between now and then we've got to work with Sharon and her team and the MBLC to confirm program that's got to go in this temporary locations, temporary location we got to take a, you know, take a look at what spaces are available for this temporary location and how that is going to meet the needs of the temporary library whether it's on, you know, public transportation, adequate parking things of that nature. So once we get to a point where we've located a space that's got adequate square footage, what's it going to take to get that space up to a level of construction that satisfies needs of the temporary library as well. Are we going to need a circulation desk is there restrooms, you know, accessibility all those things that are going to have to tie into this it's a very lengthy process and we want to start on that immediately so that'll be working. We'll start on that in tandem with the with the larger project with Sharon and her team and just want to just again make the committee aware that we'll be coming to them sooner rather than later with with information on that as we as we move that forward. And can a question and I'm sorry Sean. Thanks Austin. Ken is, is there a contingency already within the project budget for the costs of that interim location. I mean I am currently in the budget that carries costs. And, you know, again, without knowing what that space is going to be in the size of it. You know we put in what we thought was appropriate based on historic. We've done this before you know and you know the cost seemed appropriate but it's going to really depend largely on where we're going to end up and we end up partnering with. And that covers things like moving expenses and then physical adjustments to the location potentially if that's needed. That's correct. Yeah, that's the intent. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Sean. Thank you, Ken. Paul. Paul, you're muted. Thank you. So a couple questions. One is interming in determining. Explain to me the process for determining how much space the more space we require the more expensive it will be so how do we get the most efficient use of space with the mandatory. Requirements of the services that we want and need to provide, and then how to follow up question about how to branches play into that. And thirdly, does it have to be we're looking for space for a couple building or one building and it doesn't have to be within the bounds of the town of Amherst. Go ahead, Sharon.  Great question. So first off, I've been working with this staff. So they've been putting together the list of their requirements and they're pretty reasonable. We're not looking at pie in the sky requirements. We realize, for example, programming space probably isn't going to be a priority. As you said, the more space the more expensive it's going to be. So let's start with the staff on what they think their needs are. We do know that we will have access to both branches will be able to add staff there will be able to add open hours there. Hopefully we'll be able to use the hall at the months in so that that can be a great place for collections. So in theory, the North Amherst library expansion project will be done. And so there is a small ish meeting space there. Maybe collections could go there. It's to be determined. And yes, it does have to happen in Amherst. So that's definitely going to be a limiting factor. I think that's everything. Okay. Yeah, Christine. Thank you for putting up on that. So is it actually two spaces like I assume that stuff needs to get put in one place that doesn't get touched and then there's the actual running of the library and then there's stuff books and media that you'd want to get to in the short term. So is it one place to place. How does that work. I have a feeling that it's going to be multiple places because we take up a lot of square footage. So that's just my gut. And I have a feeling there isn't going to be one place that will hold all of us. Yes, certainly stuff will be stored like a lot of our furniture. I mean arts collection that can be stored, but by law, our collections have to be made available. So, so there's that. And I take it Sharon that it would be appropriate to this conversation but the location will also involve the board of trustees of the library. And we'll be thinking with the staff and working very closely with the town. Yeah, so what I understand from the, the committee charge. It's our job to make recommendations and then the town manager and the board of trustees would approve. Great. Okay, any other questions for Ken, can thank you and thank you for the work you've already, you've already done. And I'm going to ask you now to take down the agenda if you could. Great. Thank you. The next item is the discussion of committees. And on the agenda are listed a design committee, an outreach committee a sustainability committee and a committee called other. So I'm going to actually ask Sharon, if she can talk us through a little bit about what she sees these committees as doing and what her vision is of the number of people that should be on the committees. So Sharon. Yeah, so I'd love more input from Ken about this. So certainly because of as many committees as we have they're all going to be publicly posted open meetings with meeting minutes and all of that so I don't think we want to have a ton of committees and maybe we don't want to have a ton of committees all at the same time. I envision several different committees over the lifetime of the rest of the project. In my mind, the design committee is like, number one, I think the outreach will be super important, especially once we get the, are this building committee fully, fully formed. The sustainability committee. So I included that as Sean had said, we, the library trustees have an existing sustainability committee, you know, for experts in this field. And so if we could somehow incorporate them into this work that would be really lovely, but as far as the actual makeup how many committee members I haven't thought that far in advance, I'm not sure. I'm hoping Ken has recommendations. That's, that's exactly right. I do have some recommendations. So typically for a design design subcommittee, it may be two or three members of this committee. You know, obviously the director is going to have a big role in that in her staff her staff will get pulled in as needed. We'll have other consultants that get pulled in as needed other town departments, fire police things of that nature that get pulled in. As we're going through the design process and it's really just, again, it's, it's, it's a, it's a committee that's able to get down into the weeds of the design and be able to report that back to the, to the full building committee. So the full building committee gets, again, gets their, their input into the design of the project as well. And likewise without reaching sustainability. These are going to ebb and flow. There are they are typically not going to happen at really at the same times. We're going to, we're going to be focusing more on design early on. Obviously outreach is going to happen like like Sharon said, once the committee is fully informed and sustainability will probably get our marching orders early on and then check in periodically through the design phase to ensure that we're still meeting those those goals that that were established. So really it's, it's, it's, you know, two or three individuals per per committee. I think at this point in time that will expand with people outside of this committee as needed. And just to be clear, Ken, from your experience design outreach and sustainability is a reasonable place to start. Are there other committees, subcommittees that you think we might need. Yeah, there. So some districts and projects depending on the project may elect to do what we call a finance subcommittee as we get into construction. And they're predominantly looking at change orders and things of that nature at a greater degree after we've done our initial review will sit with the subcommittee and review it in detail so that when we report back to the building committee, the building has the assurances of the subcommittee that it's been thoroughly vetted. Right. So, one other question, Sean, and that has to do with the timing so the design committee design subcommittee are kind of at what point do you imagine that group needs to begin to do its work. So I think what we the first thing that we have to do is is kind of get to the point where we've established the schematic design, and once we get through schematic design is we're working through design development. That's going to be a good time to get that design subcommittee on board, so that they can inform that that development as it moves forward. Okay. So discussion of committees, do you have thoughts about the committees that are before us that are the right committees. What are your thoughts about committees, Sean. They seem like the three that we've identified makes sense. And I'd be all for a finance one once, you know, we get more into the weeds on that. But they make sense to me. Great. Thanks, Paul. I agree with that as well. And I think if we need committees along the way, or if we need some committees might have more work like the design committee might have more participation. But also, I think Sharon mentioned, these are all public meetings. So any member who would like to attend can attend. So I agree with starting with this group and then having finance ready to go when the time is right. Paul, Sean may just ask one other question before Paul. Again, drawn on your experience, the outreach committee. Could you talk a little bit about what the vision is of that committee again and when you think it really ought to begin to do its work and could you say a little bit about what from your experience the work of that committee would entail. So other people can weigh in as well. I think the success of this project will be measured in many ways by how successfully we can engage with the community along the way in terms of the design. And I think making sure there's, there'll be a lot of voices who have opinions and things to say. And we want to make sure that we have ample opportunities for people to express those opinions, I think. And so I think that's why an early and often focus on outreach is going to be really important. And I think there's a lots of different ways to do it. And we're going to use lots of different tools. You know, electronic in person. You know, whatever it is that it takes, but I think the most important thing on this project is to be incredibly transparent and inclusive as much as we can. But there also, we need to measure that with being able to make decisions in a timely, timely manner. Thank you, Paul. Ken. Oh, can you say something else about the outreach committee? Yeah, actually, that's, that's a, that's a great segue, Paul. I, the one of the things though, the last thing that you said is really the thing I want to caution the committee on is just paralysis by analysis.  We do want to absolutely get impact and get input from the community community and from other constituencies, but you know, there's, there's, we have to weigh that against what the professionals that are that are utilizing this building day in and day out that that using services day in and day out and weigh that against each other and just make sure that we're still pushing this project forward as we're as we're doing this. That's going to be the critical, the critical aspect. Right. Other thoughts about committees. Yeah, Sean. So, if it's not part of the purview of this committee, then I'm totally fine with that is the is the relocation part. Does that fall under this committee or does that fall under the library trustees, the relocation process and decisions around that. Well, can what is your experience been. My experience has been is that the building committee is handled that typically because it's part of their budget. So that's the case and we may want to consider that as a, again, I don't know if the full group needs to discuss all the right or details of that process or you may want to committee that's dedicated to that. Great. Thank you. Okay, other thoughts about committees. So what I got a propose if it's it makes sense to you is that Sharon and can and I will get together Christine and talk about these committees and maybe draft a charge for each of the committees. Are you good with that. And I take it Paul that the three of us and can don't constitute a group, or do we have to notice the meeting. Look at he's smiling at me. This is always the hard part is what's open meeting. So you should post something I would think if you're going to have this kind of conversation. If we're good if the commit if this committee is delegating something to you to do. It's as if this committee we're doing it. So, even if two people are dedicated to doing something. If you were Austin on your own, we're going to draft up something and bring it back. That'd be totally different. You know, I'm outside and I like company. So I think we'll the four of us will get together and and talk and then come back with proposal. Okay. And we will set if it's okay, we will set our, our meeting to do that offline. And then we'll notice the meeting. Okay. All right. So thank you, Sharon. I think you can that item on the agenda is a regular meeting schedule. So as I recall last time we had agreed to meet every couple of weeks. Is that what we had agreed to. So, let's plan our next, let's plan our next meeting couple of weeks from now. So, going to the calendar today is the 27th. The meeting would be. February. February 10th. Does that work for people? No. Okay. That's what he said. That's not a good time. Again, I'm going to just. Are we thinking about Thursdays as a good day? Alex. Okay. So the capital planning committee starts meeting on Thursdays from five to seven. And that'll be for the next eight weeks. So. Okay. In two weeks from it is also, there's a four towns meeting for the school department on that same evening. So shall we go to the following week, the week of the 21st of February. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. What day are you talking? Tuesday. Tuesday, the 22nd. What did we decide for the week of. I thought that there was a lot going on. So we were going to just wait a week. So that's school vacation week of aim is that it doesn't impact me, but I'm not sure if it impacts other people. Yeah. I'm off. Yeah, I can't, I can't do that week. Okay. I resign as chair. Okay. Stop smiling. Okay. So let's see whether we go back to the previous week. So the week of. Let's see. So that was the week of the 10th, the seventh. Okay. So the week of the seventh. The week of the eighth. I mean, here's a, here's a Ken question. So that's a little less than two weeks. Will you have things back from find, go, Alexander, for example, in that timeframe. Yeah, that's, that's the hope, Austin. Yeah. That's definitely the intent is to try to get something back from them by next week that we've got vetted and I can get off to the committee. Great. So does Tuesday, the eighth work. Okay. That is fabulous. So let's put in. In the book. Tuesday, the eighth at 430. At 430. At 430. Is that, is that good for people? Or would you like it at four? Was there anyone. Well, so does that work for you and equal 430. Yes, it does. Great. Okay. So let's say 430 on the Tuesday, the. Eight and then my question just has to do with whether or not we can. Kind of now do you want to use Tuesdays as our. Meeting day and try to put. Every other Tuesday in the book for a while. The only thing I would caution on that. Mr. Chairman is just the fact that the design team hasn't no pine yet on their availability. And we would need them to be part of those. Building committee meetings. Okay. So we'll, we'll, we'll set our meeting for Tuesday, the eighth, and then we'll. We'll go from there. But again, I just want to ask us our Tuesdays. A good day. Yeah. Okay. So let's put in pencil. And then we'll find out what they can. What they can do. Okay. Thank you. Okay. The next item. Topics not anticipated by the chair. So are there anything, anything else that we need to talk about that wasn't on our agenda? Paul. Anika had her hand up before me, I think. Sorry. Anika. I just wanted to confirm. So the will the meeting stay at 430 p.m. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And Paul. So this is a question, I think. For the, for Ken, I think, or Sharon is as, as we start taking on our charge, are there libraries that you would say, go visit this library? This is sort of what we're thinking about.  To prowl around other locations that are like, I think we're going to be able to see what's going on. So that's just a question. So what are the types of things that we're looking for? These are, look at these three or five libraries over the course of the next month. Could you come up with a list like that for us? Sure. Yeah. That's great. Sharon, do you, do you have preliminary thoughts on that list? Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, my initial is go see Cambridge. I think that's a great example.  The, the sight lines are perfect. You know exactly where the elevator is. You either go up or down. It's just very clearly laid out. Don't laugh at me. So Cambridge is my number one. But yeah, there are certainly others that are in the area. They have more money than God. So. You're right. You're right. Christine. I know the professionals can weigh on this, but the Providence was very open last year with the renovation. They utilized an existing, like 1920s building. And it, it seems to me that it's, you know, because they were confined to using the space that they had somewhat. We have a little bit more with an addition on there, but is that one that people could look at? Sure. Providence is my hometown. Come with me. I'll take you to some good restaurants. George. I would just say more locally, the Holyoke public library is another example of old meets new. And they did a really good job of like bringing some of the old into the new with their transitioning. So if you wanted to go somewhere local, that's, that's a good option as well. That's, that's an FAA project too. I think correct. Fine. We'll do that project as well. So we'll come up with a list. Right, Ken. You come up with this. Yep. That's great. Thank you, Paul. Thanks for raising that George. Your hand is still up or. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Oops. Okay. George back. Georgia not back. Alex. Did we, I don't see the agenda, but do we need to do public comment? I'm not sure if that got. Comes next.  There you go. Newster. Yeah. So anything else that we need to discuss that was not on our agenda at the time that this meeting was noticed. Okay. The next item is public comment. And I'm wondering if any of the attendees. I would like to make a comment. If so, if you could raise your virtual hand. Or signify in some other way. Okay. I see no, um, no, no public comment. I want to thank the just mentioned that there are five people in the audience just for reference. I was going to thank them for attending. Thanks for your interest in the, in the project. Okay. I think we have completed our agenda. And would entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. This is second. Thank you. So again, I'm just going to, as I see you on the zoom screen. Sean. Hi. Thank you. Ken. Excuse me. Not you. You don't get to vote to adjourn. Okay. Although you are anxious to adjourn, you don't get to vote George. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Anika. Yes. Christine. Yes. Paul. Yes. Thank you, Alex. Thank you all. And we look forward to seeing you in a, in a, in a couple of weeks. Stay safe, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening.