Long from the corner is long Here is good with a pass with a great catch and swings it up What a play by Trayvon Bluett.  He likes that Edwards outside got it Edwards six six junior Kansas City Royals You know him very well And it is Edwards from the corner Edwards is hot. I mean he's three for three attacking the rim either just throws it in off the glass and he's Tennessee State Univerging over 10 per game. He's another senior who looks very confident today Cantor Posting up down low pain goes inside jerking gets it back and scores Jerking on the glass and nobody puts the body on him in Williams Swing it back left to Bradford Bradford slides through a beautiful Hesitation move and then the senior's other block and he's having trouble getting by his defender on off the dribble And an easy bucket on the other end for Jason Williams the story right there Good gets it over to Najee Marshall Marshall swings it back Great pass by Marshall to O'Mara Like the patients by Marshall good at Marshall left side open blue it instead And knocks it down It's a 14 point game right wing Gates Short with the three gets it back Couldn't resets the offense takes it in hard Seven foot plus wingspan It's a five point game Marshall backs away now slides in kicks it out to blue it Airball Gates with the save the hustle play 64 61 Side to the play Bradford slides in that page and somehow Finds glue on that rim and it drops home Wow to blew it Jerkin's defense has been ridiculously good Good all the way lays it up Good to blew it Gates is out Cantor back in Cantor will take the jumper It gets it back Will he be the man good and trying to front him to give it into Bradford his jumper Save your musketeers at one time down by as many as 20 points in the second half Trey walk us through that big-time shot and transition and uh You know I call for the ball and they call for a screen and I knew we were gonna try to get a good look one way Or another I was gonna throw it into the big or get a jump-side and I just ran the defense So I played saw they backed out then I just got raised up Now you're used to dominating games here at the Sentai center You got a big challenge today versus ETSU and you struggled Personally in the first half we knew you were gonna be aggressive in the second half What did it take to get you back on track? Just maintain the same effort, you know We can't let what happened in the first half dictate what happens in the second half So, you know, I just had a lot of short memory our team did as well And we just knew we wanted to win and that's what we did Defensively, I thought you guys made a really nice adjustment when you went to that one three one It really took the Buccaneers out of their offense. What'd that do for you guys getting your confidence and getting some stops? It raised it a lot, you know, man wasn't working for us So we went into the zone to try to make them shoot them And we just needed to rebound off of that and when we got two three stops We knew that we could start rolling. Now talk about your personal development Trayvon, I mean you've been a go-to guy from a freshman to now being a senior and you have a complete game Offensively, this has been a huge growth for you in terms of being that senior guy and being a guy that everyone knows in the gym You're gonna get the big shot. What's that feel like? I mean, it's a good feeling, you know, I've been working all offseason all season You know just to make sure I'm there and being a teammate that I am for my team and my teammates done a great job Putting me in position to score You know, I think everybody on the team, you know knows their role and they signed in it Congrats Trayvon. Keep up the good work. Appreciate that


Oh my god! It was supposed to be a normal field trip. It's the way my friends want to play. Oh gosh, help me, I'm being followed by EDP. It's like we're going on a little field trip to Oddworld. There's no way. Then we just flipped a sign. And now we're gonna die.  There's my- oh! Will we just crash? What? Uh, what? Somebody's dragging the bodies? What? What's going on, man? Welcome. I need your help. Hey, what is going on, bro? We're going on a field trip and we just crashed. Now we're like in this dungeon place. I don't think this is- my blocks fell over. All you have to do is find them and put them back. Hey, great. That shouldn't be too hard, right? Good luck. Nice. All right, uh, so let's go find these blocks. River, ride through Hemlock Woods. Oh, there's that freaking guy. Darko, realistic. What's up, man? What do we do here exactly? See the blue arrow? We go this way? Maybe here? Okay, there you go. We got two blocks. Oh, three blocks. Wait, what the heck's that noise? Is that the bluey guy? Okay, there's more blocks here. Oh my God. Wait, did he freeze? Okay, there you go. Bro, I thought we were dead. I know, right? He should have died. Okay, let's place these here and we need four more. Okay, we just need four more blocks. Okay, I actually have the last two blocks and everybody's waiting for me. And I was running around the map. Okay, uh, place them here. I got you, man. All right, thanks. Hopefully blue didn't get too many of you. I think like three people died, noobs. Like, how do you die to that? Oh, what the? Bro, what is that? This gave him like poppy playtime vibes. Get some rest. You'll need it for tomorrow. Sounds like green is awake. I think he knows you're in there. Okay, so it's blue, green. Don't need to worry about him though. He's blind. Hey, that is interesting. I'm going to catch you if he can't see you. Obviously he can hear us, right? Okay, you found. We need to find food packs. All right, there's one right here. Look at those dog treats. Look like dog treats, bro. What the heck? Okay, so I suppose we're supposed to crouch whenever green, whenever we see green and then we're supposed to hide in the box whenever blue pops up. Oh, I think I hear green over here. Green's right there. Oh my God. It looks like those inflatable things. I forgot the name of them, but can we get past this? Bro, what is he doing? Bro, what the? He got the EDP. Oh my God. Yo, he's like slamming him on the ground with a savage. All right, he probably deserved that because he's the EDP. Wait, I think he's actually coming my way. Am I dead? Okay, now we're chilling. Hey, nobody has found food packs. Maybe they're holding them. Bro, does he hear me? I don't know if I should go through here. Let's go. That is so risky. Okay, so once again, I have all the food packs. Everybody's waiting for me out. Where did we return them? Instead of go to the theater, got to be careful with green. Okay, no escape. Okay, theater. Bro, some moves just found. Everybody's dying. I made it. Don't worry. I think it's just like three of us left. Hey, so they are dog treats. Heck. Great. So now there's an orange one. That's a surprise. Orange left his cave. Hey, so maybe he smelled the food. Well, maybe the cave is a castle cave where he belonged. Bro, it's just down to three of us. Wow. Damn, I know. Right girl. Tell me about it. We will survive tonight's the last night after you fix my machine. I'll show you why. You're really here. Okay. Now we got to fix this machine. Why did the vent start leaking? I don't know, man. You tell me, bro. Great. Now we need to find 14 fuses. Okay. So I guess the only way to survive orange is to hide in the vents. I'm not too sure, man. Only my third date.  No. I hear something in the vents. The heck? Oh heck no, man. Oh my God. That's hide in the box. Hide in the freaking box, dude.  What the heck? Hey, we found a fuse. Bro, that is creeping me out. Why does it sound like someone's walking with some clown shoes? Okay, we have seven fuses so far. We're going to die. I think I'm dead. Okay, let's get out of here. Bro. Wait, what? Oh no, he's coming back. Am I dead? Bro, what the? He just... Okay, whatever. Okay, more fuses. Okay, let's put these fuses here. Hopefully this does something nice. Finally. I think it looks like it's about to blow up, bro. What's going on? That shouldn't be happening. Great. Oh, now the lights are off. What? Is the machine okay? It's too dark to see. They just had to make it more freaky, man. Okay, let's see what this next night brings us. Looks like you have to turn power back on. The dude has his doing everything, man. Find a way to power up the backup generator. Who knows?  Okay, so he's actually keeping us trapped in here. What? I'm confused. We probably need one of these. Right now, we got to find nine batteries. It was this, so it could be less scarier. Is that making it scarier? Looks the same to me. Oh my God. Oh my God. Turn off the light. Wait, can you see us with the light on? I guess you can.  Okay, there's one battery in here. Eight more to go. I got chased by the freaking dog-licking one. Looks like we're back in business. Thanks for turning the power back on. There's a reward. I'm going to let you all go. What? Just like that. But first, I'm throwing you a goodbye party. I don't trust this guy. I think he has us trapped and he's going to throw the party. Make sure you all redeem your party tickets. Oh, man. I feel like this is not going to be good. But we will see. After the party, I'll let you all go. I promise. Bro, why does he keep saying that? He says he's going to let us go, but he doesn't. Thus, I know, right? Look at that party hat. Looks pretty cool, though. I'm not going to lie. Okay, so we get our tickets and redeem it here. Okay. Hey, we got a party hat. That's pretty cool. We're free after this, right? I'm so glad you could make it.  Are we going to be the cake? What's everybody gets a slice of cake? I'll open the exit and you can all go. Have fun in here, bro. You can hear the freaking monsters.  Okay, what? Louis right there. The rainbow friends in Apocaballoons. Bruh, what the? Girl, I'm leaving. I'm leaving you behind, girl. Go, go, go, go. What happens if I pop the balloon? Will he actually kill us? Okay, get your slice. Get your slice of cake before we head out. Bro, what? The balloon just popped there. How do we get up? Bro, you can't jump. Yes, I'll be there in a minute. Oh, we're supposed to knock it over. Knock it over, knock it over. There you go. There you go. Big brain. Big brain. Oh my God. Come on. Hurry before he breaks the door down. Hurry. Bro, it's not working. I'm pushing it, but it's not working. I think I know why this, this one's in the way. Okay, go, go, go. We're so close. There you go. Oh my God. Okay. So now it's like we're getting chased by a huggy waggy in the vents. Left or right? I don't know. Let's go right. Oh my God. Oh my God, go. Bro, why are there so many planks? Why is there even planks there? Bro, where do we go next? To the dead end. Can we just wait? See a crack right here? What? Do we go over here? Where should go? Uh-oh. Oh, wait, that's nothing great. Oh, wait, what dragged him? Something dragged him in. Wait, we made it. Hey, you survived. GG. GG, sister. We made it out of there. That was way too close. Rainbow friends. Wow, that was pretty cool. I like the game. Pretty awesome. Can't wait for a chapter two. I'm pretty sure there will be a chapter two because there's like 50,000 people playing this game right now. Pretty insane. Oh, what is this? It seems I have underestimated them. Wait, I thought it was a teddy bear.  Things are about to get a lot crazier. Ooh, I told John there would be chapter two. Oh, nice. Created by Ray, Stanford, and Charcoal. You won. Can you do it again? Oh, thank you.


Immunotherapy has been revolutionizing the treatment of cancer with the most promising approach being the use of cancer vaccines. These vaccines are designed to harness the power of the body's own immune system to fight off cancer cells. However, despite their promise, there are still many challenges in translating these vaccines to the clinic. One major challenge is the lack of potency, which can be addressed through the use of novel adjuvants and tumor-associated antigens. Additionally, the tumor environment can be disrupted using biomimetic and bio-inspired nanotechnologies, which can mimic the stealth coating, pathogen-recognition patterns, and tissue tropisms of pathogens. This review discusses how these technologies can be used to advance the development of cancer vaccines.


other something different. And again we can't go back to the idea of well it's whatever your personal preference is in any given moment. I think we have to have some consistency within a meeting anyway. So I think there's two issues or two competing prospects with this rule. The first one is by us referring to our first names, each other by first names we make us more accessible to the public. And the second one is that the contrast of that is we're also less formal to the public so it doesn't seem as serious. But the second one is that's how we're perceived by the public. But then there's the how we operate to each other if we continue referring to each other by first names disagreement could feel much more personal when we get to a heated topic versus if we ourselves are referring to each other by first names and that allows us to maintain a good by doing it through counselor the argument is that would allow us to maintain good working relationships that are where the disagreement doesn't feel like an attack on a person, it's an attack more on an idea than it becoming more personal. So there's the how does the public perceive us but also does how we address each other alter our own working relationships either for better or worse and which of those might be might be the way which of those two ways more on the decision side. And I think Stan's point to this counselor that made this was using counselor and keeping it formal allows you to keep that sort of distance to allow you to work better in settings and I might not be wording that well but. Can we so wait what I'm hearing is that we don't want to personally get feel personal but adding the word counselor to me does not really change that but could we instead just say that we don't talk about like oh I didn't like what Mandy said but we can just talk about the issues and I'll go through the president find some other way of dealing with this rather than just making it formal. Am I clear? So we just make a rule that's more about the not involved personalities or counselors but always just speak to the issues. Well we do have that in our courtesy and conduct you know and I'm not sure whether shell or may is going to change our behavior that much so shell is fine you know I can understand Alyssa said we shouldn't be switching in each doing differently. The formalism particularly when you're at a national legislative thing people stay senators the rest of their lives you know I retired 20 years ago because they loved that title but I don't necessarily think you distance yourself more from a human by calling them counselor Shane and calling them Kathy you know I understand you might but I think you are still having a discussion with that person and you know in a courtroom one way you know I'm not sure that that works for me as an argument so I think if we feel like this is so I could see just being silent on it not making it a rule or changing it to me or leaving it as we had because I think it's working well so and I'm also really worried that it's I shouldn't call out time but it's 1225 and we're at what I consider still the more smaller ones if it's not causing a problem should we be trying to fix it. And I think the efficiency is improved so it improves the efficiency now working because it takes a whole lot longer to think of the counselor, madam whatever and yeah it's just the pros and cons of it I think so far and we can always change it if you think it's getting out of hand. So I say we leave it alone and just move on. It still says shout until we change it in the future. So the only other one was about a parliamentarian who is not a council member which they mentioned in 6.4. How on earth would that work? The only thing I could think of was that you could name the clerk of the council a formal parliamentarian and the president can get advice. They said they were the member of the public. Like I said the only thing I could think of was that our clerk of the council becomes a member of the public. So I think that's one of the most important things about parliamentarian questions. If we didn't want to do that. I don't think we have to write it in because we sometimes just asked what do we do here and gotten the opinion so I think we're good. Unless you feel the need for it. Every time I felt the need for it I felt I could either get the answer from Paul or Paul. Even then there's been more recently a time where I had to go back and read Robert's rules. I had to look at our rules and I consulted with at least two other people who for three other people and finally came up with what was okay or not okay. The biggest problem is at the moment and if you're going to either this is going to be a burden because this person would then have to be at every council meeting. I think the person who sent in that comment it's more when we had this appealing the decision of a president and we removed it. So that's out there but so I suggest we move to rule 7 and all I've got again is the market markup. There was nothing in the PDF at all. So Margaret's suggestion which everyone can see in the comment is do we want to add language that would if you're going to make a motion you know in advance you're going to make a motion get the written motion in ahead of time is the way I'm reading it. How does that work with open meeting law? I'm not sure I understand what she's talking about. She says when Lynn and I were in discussion about something that's now a potential rule she said are you going to make a motion? I said I think I am. It's being a total new one how I even do it. She said I suggest you do it in writing. So I wrote it up, got it to the clerk who fine tuned it a little bit so people could see in writing what I was going to say. I'm not sure if she refers to it that if you know you're coming in with something it's clearly always around something we're discussing. It's not a new issue. You've read a report. I'm looking at what she said. I don't think we need to do say that here. Right? It feels like maybe part of what she might be trying to get out of the meeting experiences where we did have specific rules of don't make a motion on the floor unless you handed out so she might be thinking about that. For our reality I think what she's probably trying to encourage is exactly what you did, Kathy. You went to her and said I'm thinking of making a motion and you get advice. As opposed to this saying this is what rule is and so if we need to add a rule someplace that says ask for advice you'll get some but I don't necessarily feel like we have to say that but I can appreciate the concept of encouraging people to ask for advice ahead of time. I suggest we since there were no other comments we move on to rule. There's something in 7.6 Margaret had a comment. She had a comment so should we discuss that? Right. I was lost on that timeline situation so I was going to ask Mandy Joe. So motions to rescind or amend something previously adopted have no timeline in Robert's rules. So they can be made they have to be made on something that was adopted. You can't rescind something that you didn't pass. A motion for reconsideration is either way. And that has strict timelines. We put this in here because we changed what the vote requirement would be otherwise it would just be governed by Robert's rules. So we just amended what Robert's rules requires for the vote quantum. So that's why it's in here. It never has a timeline. It's completely independent from motions for reconsideration because it's a different thing. It's not reopening the debate per se. It's saying we passed something and now I just want to rescind it. So it's similar but it's different and it doesn't have that timeline of that day of or the next meeting. It can happen at any time. So for example when we didn't know what Shoot's Berry was going to do with the assessment it would have been out of order because it had been too many days. But we passed that assessment method. We could have moved to rescind it at any time and rescission doesn't need to be by the person who voted in favor of it that last time. It could be by any of them. I think there's not a So my suggestion is that I would just not change it. So I would leave it this way but I think since she's all clear because she's been very carefully alerting us if we can or can't do something that you, Mandy, go and talk that rationale through explaining what this wording means. We're on rule 8. 8 and the only comments on rule 8 are 8.2a. Do we want the word shall for specifying the time period? Might we use may? Are there times when a time period is not necessary? So that was why we're doing that. The market's sort of doing that too. And then 8.2d and e which is referrals for town manager appointments and bylaws. These are essential. Keep them in. Those were the only comments on rule 8. So then let's go back up to so we're in 8 and 8 is so beautifully clean until we get to 8.2. And then it's then I got confused and I said in my note does not scan as rewritten. Is she trying to say any and every measure of any kind has to automatically go to a committee? I got lost in her rewording there what she was trying to accomplish because not every single measure needs to be referred but yet she said the workflow should be through the council. I don't think her edits I would reject her edits. I think she wanted any measure to go through a committee no matter what. I don't think we should we might consider some ourselves or we might be a committee of the whole. Frankly, there are proclamations that are considered measures that don't necessarily need to go through a committee. So reject. She's inserted the words the town manager and that might be useful for a measure or a body that's okay with me. Does that sound like something you might want to do? So it says may and refer and includes town manager. Yeah, absolutely. So as long as it says may and then we're not saying every measure then it just gives us more flexibility and it might as well be said I don't think I'm going to yell at you. I've made that change. I think the comment I read on 8.2a actually referred to be do we want the word shall for specifying a time period might we use may are there times when a time period is not necessary. So that was I think in reference to 8.2b not a a council committee shall report back so within 45 days. The only thing I'm just thinking about one for example the speed law thing. It was referred to CRC but in terms of priority issues and in terms of them working with TAC on it that 45 days just might not work. So I'm concerned. What we had discussed was when we put that in is the report back could be we're still working on it. Exactly. So it's not just an avoid forever it's that at least at 45 days you have to say something. Exactly. That's what I was going to say. The intention is just to check in pointed still on the agenda. And so I still want 8.2a which we altered to keep saying may but also add the town manager. I want the second sentence where it says South specify time period for a committee to work back. I want that to stay and it's fine with me if as a council we say we don't care when that time period is or that time period 30 days or it's 85 days but not saying it means we might forget to say it. So I think it's important to say something but it could be the only change in a now report back and all it says is we're making progress or we haven't dealt with it. That's fine. So the only change in a is to add the word the town manager there's no change in B. Correct. Now we're on C. And yeah, I don't know what that reference to the I think that came from some other from another town. It did. It was like we stole it from somewhere else. It really was. Can we just go on? Sure. Because then it gets removed out of 8.6 as well. It's the exact same phrase that we just borrowed helpfully from somewhere else. So we don't need it. Cool. We like the easy ones. Can I just raise an interesting issue? We had a meeting and I don't think it's going to refer. I don't think this is going to only occur once the president I mean the town manager is ordered to find it to file this budget on May 1st by this rule it's automatically referred that meant that the finance committee had to come back to the town council by May 30 because of the other rule that says they have to come back because we didn't happen to have this rule and we didn't have a vote to automatically refer the budget. We had to take the vote on the 6th which fortunately gave the finance committee until the June 3rd meeting to come back to the council. It's and because of the month of May always having 31 days it's always going to be an interesting thing. It's just one of those quirky calendar items. Because the 30 days is specified in the charter. The finance committee has to report back on the budget within 30 days of referral. So it's a report back. It's not the council then has to vote that report in which it may be distributed. Our language as we've written it is on May 1st it would have been in the finance committee's hands and then the 30 days would have been the end of May. But because we waited until it got to the first council meeting and then the clock started ticking on May 6th. Not on May 1st, correct Lynn? That's correct. To be honest it gave the town manager the opportunity to give us a brief presentation which I thought was a good way to count if you will to kick off budget season. I know the press wanted to know when I got here that night whether he was going to do that. So I don't know whether you want to deal with this separately or how you want to deal with it. I actually think we should do some. I would be do we... Is this required in the charter the automatic, Mandy? No, we're just trying to make things efficient. It's required to be referred to the finance committee and it's not required to be automatically referred. And I have no problem with the automatic. I'm just pointing out one little quirky calendar issue. So what we could do is every year we vote to refer the budget itself to the committee and so we would pull that out of C all measures and then the parentheses instead of saying except for printing of the annual reports as except for the annual budget. Can I just be moving the word automatically from this? What am I doing to change? No, we would have all measures authorizing a loan comma the levying of a tax comma or the expenditure of money except for the annual budget comma shall be automatically referred to the finance committee so that the council always has to vote on the referral of the budget so that we control the 30 day deadline on the budget since it has to be submitted to the council by May 1. Sometimes that might be submitted April 27th. That's a great change. I thought so too until I re-read this section of the charter. 5.5 action on the budget immediately upon its receipt of the proposed budget which would be May 1st. The town council shall refer the budget to the town council's finance committee. I was thinking that we were being driven by the charter here. It doesn't say wait till whenever your meeting is. It says immediately, I would argue that's already an automatic referral that we didn't even ask for. The rest of it says the finance committee shall report back in 30 days. What happens when there isn't a meeting at 30 days? I'll be honest with you. If we were to make the 30 day law we would either have the report from the finance committee on the 20th of May or we would have to call a special meeting by the 30th of May. This is already I don't have to tell you all. We're meeting twice a week for up to three hours each time just to get the budget done. I think this ties the way it's written I feel like it ties our hands in the charter. It says immediately upon receipt refers and then 30 days within that referral. I don't think we did have that option this year. I think we didn't follow what the charter said. I don't think that's a problem. I think it depends on what is a vote to refer and what does refer mean. Immediately it's at the first stage of the referendum. I don't know if you've received we voted to refer because if you don't vote unless you've got a rule that says it's referred, somehow it needs a vote. Arguably it could also be that there's no vote here. That's true. That the town council shall refer that there doesn't need this arguably to say that no vote is required to refer. Yeah, so maybe we don't exempt it and the finance committee might logically talk to the finance committee in North Hampton and East Hampton about what they do. I don't think the 30 days was something we made up as a charter commission. I think it was generally in charters. See how they handle review of the budget. We've been doing it as our old finance committee does which was under a different system. Maybe in cities the finance committee does some other type of review that's not like we're trying to get done this year and it might be logical to talk to their finance committees to see how they do that review in 30 days. Got it. So we're leaving this language recognizing we likely have a logistical challenge and trying to figure out how we can somehow juggle the two sections of the charter that have the goes right away and reporting back in 30 days without it having scrunching. And I could you know in a once we understand what we're doing under this whole new even with the review if we have from the town manager I'm giving it to you on May 1st we had already this year every meeting was already organized with the notion of when the report back is and the report back since the council doesn't have to vote on it until the end of June can still be the first major consideration is that a June meeting. We just have to go what you're just saying is there's no way that we'll report back can report back be construed as the recommendation has been made available to the council but not necessarily at a meeting. The charter says review thoroughly review and make a presentation and recommendation within 30 days so I think the recommendation is in a report if the report includes I mean how do you interpret presentation that could be Yeah Charter commission always think things through always think things through but that I would absolutely recommendation can be in paper form not at a meeting I mean and this doesn't say at a meeting even if you see presentation it doesn't say at a meeting a report might be able to be interpreted as a presentation if it's descriptive enough. Okay so I have my notes I'm going to ask Northampton and I have to say when I first picked this up and was thinking if I get elected I want to be in finance I looked at this and said holy mackerel I have little thing really short timeline so moving on so we have identified a flaw that we can't fix via rules so so the only comment on rule 9 I think there's only one is 9.5 doesn't seem to include authorization of barring which I think Margaret caught 2 so I think she added something in about barring authorization that is the only rule 9 it's on page 24 I think oh it's in a different section it's on my 24 it's in like items requiring at least 2 thirds of councillors present and voting to vote in favour is where Margaret added it to barring authorization so she's already she's already caught that one that was a comment from the councillor and that was the only rule 9 comment from a councillor she has a comment under 9.2 she wanted to know what under certain conditions might be that was the way can we leave it vague enough that we don't know what the conditions might be those conditions are set forth in Charter section 2.10 okay so I'm happy not explaining all of this here if that is literally in Charter why don't you refer to the section of the Charter we do it's actually not in there any proposed bylaw shall be published no it is not prior to final passage each proposed bylaw shall be read at 2 separate council meetings except as provided in 2.10B so that's the non-emergency so 2.10B says you don't have to read it at 2 meetings so do we just delete that section so just do I just delete it under certain conditions am I deleting that sentence the reading maybe wave sentence because really it's just talking about emergencies it isn't like I've read in some other communities where they say if this, if this, if this we created the long ones if it's really long you can where does it say that that was in that might be in 10 is that in 10 we didn't have to read it no that's in measures and bylaws so that's in this rule 8 somewhere so we've got 10 minutes left the discussion need not include the specific language of the measure to be voted but shall include the substance of the measure is that kind of where we thought we covered that I think it's 8.3 I don't know there's something in rule 8 somewhere oh yes 8.3C in order to exit the deliberations may waive the reading of the proposed bylaw provided that a brief summary shall be provided and read by the town manager a counselor or by the bylaw sponsor so if it's 20 pages long they can read a so instead of referring to the charter section so in 9 so in 9 the charter section 210A reference should be for the reading sentence and then after so it should be after the first sentence of that line and then reading may be waived under certain conditions should be rule 8. was it 2? 8.3C 8.3C we're just creating our own waiver on reading exactly that's where we did that's why I got confused when I went back to the charter I'm like but it's not in here because the emergency stuff is what's in the charter right the charter reference goes between the two sentences and the rules reference gets added at the end of the I guess the reading is technically reading the change not just considering it it is an actual reading of the thing I have the council must read a proposed blah blah blah blah and then the charter reference readings may be waived under certain circumstances period 8.3C yes exactly so the borrowing thing got picked up Margaret caught the borrowing and I'm just except well I'm leaving it as a track but everything is fine as is it needs a period after MGL chapter 44 multiple sections just for consistency I think we're ready to move to 10 I was just glancing over the council comments again but I think we are indeed ready for 10 but unfortunately 10 had a lot yeah unfortunately do you want to can I take them just by rule 10-1 10-1 agree that committee should take no action that is binding to the council without the whole council being able to vote on it committee should not make policy on their own option for committee charges to govern opens way for manipulation and sophistry keep it simple another one said I strongly prefer option 2 a liberal interpretation option 1 could grind some committee deliberations to a halt or unnecessarily slow them it also is less efficient as it consumes more time the full count council for things that can be handled at the committee level it makes more sense for charges to be very specific about what committees can do and it makes sense that committee should be able to delegate work to subcommittees which is a more logical term than work groups so that must be a different sorry that's a different rule never mind I'll get to that one later and we we since changed this council committee shall take no action that would bind the council period we put that in people didn't see that before and that was so one of the comments suggested that it actually went further and said without the council first voting or something but I think so I know we had this conversation on the 6th though to be clear when we say take no action that would bind the council does that mean that as currently formulated Oka bringing a certain set of appointments to the council has already bound the council okay good no no because it's subject to a final council decision we're absolutely sure we're clear on that right bind means what and when we when we talked about this at the last meeting I had suggested that the sentence be council committee shall be advisory and take no action that would bind the council and I think two of us thought that was good and to didn't and Shawnee wasn't here so that was just like an additional two words and so just so Shawnee understands if you're looking at the wording here it says council committee shall take no action that would bind the council we agreed on that but we were two to two on having two more words council committee shall be advisory and take no action that would be would bind the council so we didn't put shall be advisory in so we're coming back to the full council now with an amended of the amendment so we should decide whether we like this wording or we want the other wording was adding the advisory shall be advisory and take no action that would bind the council she doesn't like being put in the hot seat here I'm turning to you just on it you weren't here to participate we actually said let's wait until next week when Shawnee will be here what does advisory mean I like it the way it is right now but I haven't heard the full arguments so I might be missing something I don't know if you want to go there or we just want to move on I like this I did see this and I like the addition that would not bind the council I'm just a little bit afraid that people won't understand exactly what that means what an action is and what binding the council is you know it's kind of like archaic language and so I think advisory is more clear and it says more what's in A and B are in option one and so it would just underline that committees bring recommendations and then the council acts on them when we say it's capturing more of A and B what you mean the A and B because we replaced all that with we replaced the options we previously offered with a new phrase about no action right given that you had I'm sorry go ahead given that there were so many suggestions on this and you rewrote it completely I would even consider going back with the rewrite the way you have it and then the advisory and in other words to some councillors think that's should be in there or not be there so I think the rewrite I really do I think it's much clearer but I'm just wondering if you don't want to give the council I don't think we've given them any other options up until this point I think everything else we've resolved up to this point and so I'm more comfortable with going ahead and choosing one and saying this is what I understand entirely what you're saying but given that we don't have a bunch of those option one option two situations this time I think up until this point we've resolved everything today maybe not to everyone's satisfaction but we've come to something that we can agree on presenting so I'm uneasy with presenting high calling this one out separately can I ask for a straw vote then because I would prefer adding shall be advisory and take no action so I would add those words and that would be an amazing of hands and just to get a sentiment how much does how much clearer to me that makes it even clearer it doesn't change it it just makes it even clearer so I would propose adding the words shall be advisory and take no action that would bind the council what was the argument for not having what advisory Alyssa I think I can't speak to me what the meaning to me is when you say can't bind the council is that they're advising the council and the council is taking the action that's going to bind it so they shouldn't go out and promote a certain way of doing things until we vote it so it makes it very clear that we're sending things to them and asking for a report back before we take an action yeah I just wanted to hear what was the argument for not having the word so what is the argument for not wording I'm trying to direct my brain I think some of it was that not everything a committee does is advisory but that doesn't mean it binds the council if you take GOL for example we simply declare something actionable or not that's not really advisory that's not saying yes or no on adopting it's just saying this is clear this is not um you know there's potentially stuff in the OCA committee on the outreach side and communication side that doesn't really isn't really an action for the council because they're working on outreach you know and how are we going to outreach that might not be they might decide we're going to try this that's not really binding the council to any particular decision but it is making a decision it's not an advisory action if they're going to say hey we're going to do this thing for district meetings or we're going to create this calendar that's not an action that binds the council to having to act or not act but it is something that is not advisory that a committee is doing so that's I think some of the arguments is there are things committees do that aren't necessarily just to advise the council as a whole they have some other duties and so putting those words in might restrict that so Mandy you think by shall be advisory means that they can't act at all is that the way you're doing it like even on you know because I think the actions you're talking about don't bind us in any way if they're trying different ways of doing act you know of doing outreach they're experimenting with does this work does that work I agree that it doesn't bind but it's also not advisory right and so when you add council committee shall be advisory they're doing things that aren't advisory either and so where does that fit into that sentence when those words are added I can't have a strong view on this other than I don't want the committees to bind us so that's the most important thing for me that's the clear cut Darcy I'm just looking at Darcy I like Lynn's idea of just asking the council the full council and I do think this is probably the most important rule that we're deciding on so and and we're kind of deciding whether it should be good or better because they're both you know they're both saying similar things one is just stronger than the other as far as making it clear so so we this is going back for May 20th the adoption of it that is correct and then the adoption of it doesn't have to be until June 3rd so if this were the only place in the document where we said we have choice A or B it would be easy to talk about it on May 20th and then to quickly go through other changes we've made that were responsive so I would make a motion to have one choice in this document and just these two this one as is and we go choice one or choice two I'm making a motion yes I second that motion I just this meeting has been long did we leave the the clapping one as a choice no we didn't make no she conceded because she thought we weren't providing options in this document if we're going back to providing options then we're going to have a different conversation I am really really think we all agree that it's true that the statement that's there now council committee shall take no action by the council is true and accurate if adding the word advisory from having to provide options to the council then I would actually concede that as well because we have taken more than 10 minutes to argue about this amongst ourselves and we aren't still 100% certain what advisory adds to the sentence 13 will not have that easy of an option figuring that out either so let's give them what we think makes sense and be done with it I'll back off my motion but here's a suggestion when this is presented can and we get to this that we changed the earlier and here's our new language that there was a discussion on whether we should add shall be advisor and we'd like a sentence so not put it in the document but just have the presenter I mean Elisa make that comment so that people can pause and think about this does the word yes okay so I withdraw my motion and now the way it looks though and with that added concept during the report that I just wrote during report is that it's going to read council committee shall take no action and the track changes will show that both options have been removed because we no longer need any of that language because this now that's correct that's if you look at it it's simple that's the way it reads and then the other question I have is just above that where Margaret made a suggestion I disagree with her suggestion that this very body we said domains which I know was kind of a funky way to put it but she says approved charges and I thought this committee said that there might be some things that these committees perceive to be within their bail away I want to reject her change yeah I want to reject that change are we good with that in 10.1 in the introductory paragraph that was easy reject the change because we actually were leaving it open on purpose are we down to 10.2 now there were two comments on 10.2 if we're done with 10.1 the first one is 10.23 I guess we had numbers at some point prefer option 2 president ex-officio of all committees but without authority to make motions I'm afraid as members of the public the president oversees all committees so I guess that's just someone prefers that option and then someone else said I believe the current system has been working fine and worry about the increased power assigned to a president if given ex-officio membership to every committee prefer option 1 we did last time as we did go down back to option 1 because we took a vote and we decided that the vote would rule so we have already addressed that and the person would have liked the alternative but I think we made that decision so I think in the clean version we only have you know we don't have anything about ex-officio at all that's gone about oversea we put we went back and said the word oversea let's bring it back up and say one of the things the president does is oversea we added it back to the president's duties so I think we're moving then to I got comments on 10.5 but I think Margaret had something on 10.4 so I think what Margaret's trying to get at is as opposed to the work groups where we might include staff that ad hoc committees directly are counselors but then they shouldn't be counselor members they are counselors there is no such thing as council members and with FINCOM you could put residents that are non you could put non counselors on council committees and it's just the president appoints those I think she's asking us if we want to limit it are we on 10.4 right now I would not change of council members so let's just leave it alone leave it alone reject her change right because actually at the meeting we had this weekend TAC has some subcommittees so we don't have residents on them we may want residents on ad hocs exactly that brings us to the work groups and I will just read two comments on this one I'm confused by the statement quote work groups are usually subject to open meeting law and quote are they not always subject to open meeting law someone else said it makes sense they should be able to delegate work to subcommittees which is more logical term than quote work groups subcommittees must comply with open meeting law the work of the council should not be shared with people who are not elected except as specifically authorized by the council the authority should not be delegated to a committee that authority should not be delegated to a committee I read that comment and I wasn't sure no in terms of since this is my first time on a town council I know from these other committees in town that they can go ahead and create a subcommittee or a work group that doesn't have officially appointed people in it you know it's they're going after one particular thing that they're doing so could we as a legislative body not allow our committees to do that I mean can't we be permissive here I don't see that we would be more restricted just because we were elected and I think particularly of a committee like CRC they might you might well want to say you know housing policies come to us we need to convene a subgroup with some other people on it to think this through and then bring it back to we're not delegating our authority we're just asking for more study and then bring it back and it's still going through the committee which is only councillors so I think some thought would be housing policy and you don't feel you're expert enough to figure out the implications of a housing policy that you use the town committees that exist that are expert in housing policy to figure out the implications on housing of that and that you would use maybe the tact to figure out the implications of that proposed policy on transportation if the committee don't think the committee is expert enough to do those things and then the committee of the council is the place where it takes all of those opinions on that one policy potentially and says what is how do we weigh those pros and cons on transportation on this on that to make a recommendation to the council that maybe the best thing to do instead of creating subcommittees with new residents is to say well we have a town committee that knows how to interpret a policy and how it will implicate X and so let's ask them for their opinion on this policy even if it wasn't originated from that committee I think that's one thought process and another is well we're not going to use our town committees we're going to create our own subcommittees with our own residents that aren't that might have differing expertise. When we did this one of the things I was thinking of was the proposal that came to the town council of this super entity that's an analytic body I don't think committees are always neutral you know they were set up to do affordable housing or they were set up to promote whatever if you wanted a small group to weigh the pros and cons and come back with you with how this might work it could a committee our subcommittee our council committees might want to do that to say you know how can we go out and get more information on this and it might be a real crossover where we're pulling one from two or three different entities in town and a few from outside so that's all I read this says that it was permissive we didn't have to do these but we could create an analytic group that we send out that are more neutral than the entities that normally bring those proposals to us might be so my and I don't necessarily have a problem my intellectual option went to what Margaret asked who appoints and so I think we left that open on purpose because that changes if it's the chair of the appointing all of the members of the work group that would potentially also skew to an opinion that's why you leave it up to the you leave it up to the standing I thought what we said before was the standing or ad hoc council committee that's considering doing this is we need a work group to do all the things we just talked about how will we pick those people and this group might pick the work group by doing XYZ method and this group might pick the works group that we were not going to control that we were going to see how it played out does that contravene and I have no idea what the answer to this is the charter since it is a council committee creating this group does it contravene the charter that states that the president appoints all members of council committees ad hoc or standing since it is in some sense a subcommittee of a council committee would it contravene that to not have the president appointing those work groups and I don't know what the answer is I bring that up go ahead one of the things that I find confusing about this is that if we have a naughty issue okay that it should be something that's recognized by the full council and that we could decide to create a study commission and that's one issue the second issue and it may not fall within the purview of a committee but it might fall within the purview of a committee and I would still expect the committee to come to the full council before they start creating groups that's number one the second thing and this just comes from my conversations with both Paul and Margaret I'm not speaking for them but I'm just saying that they both have expressed to me serious discomfort in having combination of counselors and residents on committees like counselors walk into a committee and we have more we bring in a weight much more heavy and sought after than any other member in the group and then when we speak it is constantly clarifying that we do not speak for the council and it's just an ongoing debate that we've been having and we have created one of these committees and we all went with it and we'll wait and see how that goes but it's an issue of those two issues for me if we really need a committee to look at the speed limit I would not expect CRC or ATAC to create a subcommittee I would expect them to come to us and say you referred this to us this is what we'd like to do and happen to and I think that's exactly what we talked about we talked about it and we said that's not what we want we want these groups to be able to do that on their own because they're already studying the issue because they want this on a very permanent term not permanent basis they don't want to have to go back to the council to get permission to assign one person who's already on that committee to go talk to somebody who's on the housing trust and a staff member about a particular issue that's not forming a committee that's just going and talking to that's why we're calling it a work group I think that it was an attempt to establish something innovative and flexible and you know giving the opportunity especially to residents of which we have like a wealth of smart people out there to be able to use that you know to use that resource that we have to be able to get some of the information that the different committees need not in a political way but just to be able to use all of the people that are interested in helping out with a new form of government and I don't disagree with that what I disagree with and I can wait to the council meeting and say this and not delay this any longer I disagree with committees just going out and creating other committees if somebody comes back some committee comes back we have a recommendation well how did that form oh well it formed from this work group well who the hell employed appointed them so if we I'm looking at our wording so we can actually want an ad hoc committee to do this as I look at I think we're more likely to want one of our standing committees if a standing committee decides they need that they think we would benefit from a work group like this they should come back to the council with the suggestion of creating is that because it might not be at the council level we saw it first and this is written under 10 which is all about committees back in the council we didn't say the council can create a study group or create a commission when it needs to so this was our the opportunity the place we put how do we pull in on all these town people that might know a lot to bring to bear on a complicated issue where we're not ready to vote on it yet but we want them to go out and come back with us so the more I think about this I'm in favor of deleting work groups completely we have provided for if it's a study commission or a select committee we've talked about those terms before and we just said standing ad hoc council town if a council committee comes back with we need more experts to really investigate this matter that was referred to us our recommendation is create a new committee to deal with that that goes to the council the council has all authority to create a town committee to deal with that it can be an ad hoc committee it doesn't have to be a standing committee it would have to comply with open meeting law we probably want committees dealing with gnarly issues to comply with open meeting law and so maybe we have the ability in other sections to do what this does but in a manner that is actually more transparent because it comes through a full council meeting instead of a subcommittee that might create something that may or may not be because it's not clear and that's one of Margaret's things subject to open meeting law that might go under the radar how do people know that they can is it really an open process for applying to be on the work group or not the more I think about this the more I think just in my opinion delete 5 10-5 well I think conceptually we need something like this so to me what I was hearing is placing it would you want an ad hoc committee of the council to set this up usually the ad hoc committee was already set up to deal with something short term you know that it's more our standing committees or the full council either one determines they need something like this it's not the same as a committee it is you're being sent out and you know over the next two months and we want to report back on this particular set of issues it feels very different than a committee you know which has a charge it is a work group a study group but everyone to call it a work group that isn't the same and then I understand we're going to like who picks who goes on it is an issue you know how do we get the right balance but it is you know assessing a more complicated issue that might could well not have any council on it other than reporting back to the council so I just don't know you know I think we've got two issues I did only under committees rather than the whole council and you might well want the whole council saying yeah we need a group like this it's not just finance decided they needed it or rules will be gone but and we base this on practices that other towns had many towns had this this wasn't a one off I found it in a lot of towns and I thought they were trying to say that on our council we don't necessarily have what we need and sometimes we need to send it out with a come back before we pick up what the policy should be because we don't have enough information and my only issue is that I don't think a committee should do that I think they should come to the council I think we've got it placed in the wrong place here we need to a committee might decide we think we all need this and they come back and they tell the council I think we need one of these and we we authorize it you know we figure out what it looks like so all that understood my problem is logistics this was always meant these were always meant to comply with open meaning law meaning if one person on a standing committee so you have a standing committee that decides it needs some expertise on something you know a standing committee who is in fact of course a counselor because that's who's on standing committees and they send them off to meet with a staff person and a chair of another committee and they say go often do something that's actually not subject to open meaning law because it's one counselor and that's why it says usually subject to open meeting law there is no rule under what we envisioned that it would have to be two counselors it could very well have been one who was sent to the committee to negotiate what has been said about well you could just do that informally already without calling in a work group and maybe that's something we need to make sure is clear to our committees because what what's being proposed as well we could just change that I think is completely unworkable in that I sit at a committee meeting and we say you know we really need three people to get together and work on this for two weeks okay so we'll go to the next council and we'll look at that charge at some point then we'll have to argue over who gets to appoint the members of that committee and by that time it's now two months later and like we haven't done any of the things we said we were going to do so is it more that we feel like because of the weird logistics is who appoints and all that authority given to the council versus to standing or I would argue ad hoc committee might very well have wanted to send a person officially off to some place to meet with all of this is moot because we should all feel like we can do that now and that we just need to be cautious that if we're sending two members of a committee away remember don't screw up open meeting law is that a real bottom line? Can I ask two things OCA formed a subcommittee would that be considered a work group or is that something else completely because OCA's already got a subcommittee where does that fall in this grouping because I think they had every right to form that subcommittee of OCA members we don't include anybody else subcommittees don't need a new rule I don't think and what you're describing GOL did GOL in a meeting said hey have we talked to so and so select board members about public ways and their experiences hey Mandy go off and do that we need to meet three times to do that rather than to have one conversation I'm going to make a suggestion just because we have another meeting starting at 2 o'clock that is going to be a three hour meeting so just for some of us that even though you observed I didn't need a bathroom break I actually need water right now so I think we've raised a series of concerns about this in terms of what it exactly would function so we may in the draft this is I'm thinking this through in the draft that we're sending back for the council to look at leave this yellow saying this needs more work we need to figure out how to write it where to place it a series of things have been just leave it the only real yellow shaded if we can't fix it right now we don't know where to put it but we rather than delete it or edit it and then my next suggestions there were a series of things coming later that wanted to give the president the appointment for J appointing power for JCPC and BRG not leave it this new way we propose didn't want liaisons to be chosen by a straw vote and we left it that liaisons we figure out it later so do we need to talk through all of those now if we're willing to spend like four more minutes on it how do we do that we need a draft for next Monday in order to get to the draft point I want to take work groups out and put it on the list of issues that GOL needs to address in the future I'm unwilling to say because we don't want them to vote on this we don't want them to vote to accept it when we still have so many unanswered questions so I think we can pull it out and if we have to just put it on a separate page and say this is really important to us but this isn't part of these rules and can you copy and paste the entire wording on this to say we didn't say we don't want these we just need them to figure out how to organize them and I just you know when GOL does it Mandy I'd really like to be there because I think this is essential for us to figure out a really nimble way of doing it to uphold them committees and sometimes they're going to be two months we don't want them to come back in two weeks this is really go out and find out a lot more and come back with us and it's not quite a study commission you know it's not quite that big mm-hmm really really important to us and so yes did we want to change anything now that we've heard the input we listened we read over the last couple days the JCPC and BCG did we want to change that because we had made a point of having a rule about that and we got councilor comments that said no just have the president do it we skipped over 10.6 10.6 I needs to say 3.5 a minute shall comply with 3.5 a which I think takes care of the comment we received on that matter the person was saying that minutes contents already coverable that's not true minutes content is covered by those things plus our rules and then there was the that was the only 10.6 comment so 10.7 was the JCPC someone said president a point did anybody change their mind on that having processed that theory I don't think anybody changed their mind on that so thank you for your input and we don't agree so I realize we're skipping around J yeah what does right an obligation to be creative mean we left that highlighted anyway so it won't be highlighted anymore in the new version nothing's going to be highlighted in the new version so unless we want to change the wording now and in response to that comment it's just going to have the highlight removed and be accepted okay and 10.7 actually had two comments that said president appointment yes not just one sorry if I misled on that so where am I get me quickly to it just saw the second so that was just me we're up to 10.7 yeah and there were two counselors who disagreed with our theory no that I know but where is the so that was they disagreed but we I said so we're we haven't changed our minds but where's here to know the edit well we were simply talking about just above that in 10.6 we already fixed the reference in letter I and then in letter J we were just taking the yellow off although we were cognizant of a counselor opinion that said I don't yellow will come off everything but they said we don't know what it means but we decided we have decided by not deciding that we don't have any further way of elaborating no I have that so I would already fixed the reference we had we roll 3.5 right a 3.5 a that's what Mandy just said right 3.5 a and J we're just even though we got the comment that they're not sure what that means we're leaving the wording alone or they come up with a new way of phrasing it if we didn't we didn't my new way would be to just delete it so I think it was important to some people I'm not going to push that one but that would be my way of taking care of that comment would be to just delete the whole letter do people still like it do people if people still want it in there I mean I personally am completely agnostic on that particular statement I think it's a good message leave it in so I think I'm caught up so then we've got liaisons and I think we dealt with both of those 10.8 Margaret okay so before we get to all that we're still in 10.6 because we last week added something in K that the council's never seen so that will they will see it as a track change yes they did not ask for this we came up with this last time and so that will simply be a track change that they see versus 10.6 10.7 we're not changing thank you for your comment anyway and then 10 point now are we at 10.8 10 point yet there is no comment which doesn't have any counselor comment but it does have a comment from Margaret yes and you know we were trying to be clear we can't vote the appointment because it's not our appointment to make we can just vote who to send to the manager to appoint so I would refuse someone will appoint them by sending a memo that we're saying we're appointing them via some kind of vote we take at our meeting so our wording we don't need to believe I'm just we would just reject I would just reject her change and then the we know what we know so her language but we're not voting to appoint and her new language implies that we are the appointing authority we're trying to work around the charter in our language I think she did it to go to make us the appointing authority because that made it clearer to her so what that's why we worded it in this very odd way to say we were voting on which counselors we wanted to recommend to the town this still is acknowledging the legal the charter wording and I think this is entirely clear I just I really need to end are we rejecting it or accepting so I'm rejecting hers because I think we're already be labeled labor last time that it was argued that we can't be the appointing authority here so we can't turn ourselves into and we came up with this is odd wording it's odd but we but we like it we like 10 the comments on 10 9 I think we already dealt with the non-voting liaisons one is I didn't like drawing straws president survey members that make a decision it has worked well so far this allows the president to work towards balance and fairness overall and the next comment was there may be a reason why a counselor has special expertise that makes her the appropriate liaison for a particular multi-member body there may be links between councils and committees those factors should be considered in the designation of liaisons but I think we took care of that with the change that we made last week because right except there's a typo in it but other than that I is good I think the council shall establish a procedure and then we figure it out and that just makes it clear we just have to fix the typo yeah we just have to fix the type except that change that we made last week not Margaret's change or anybody else's change but our new change from last week and show the council that we change draws straws to establish a procedure that makes it clear that we are not accepting Margaret's change we are not accepting Margaret's change we are rejecting Margaret's change that's unnecessarily restrictive in small rooms and it's not appropriate to complain about it was it was are not expected so that's what people need to know but it's shall not like it's like ridiculous it's rejected it's rejected and I fix the typo it was a typo that council shall establish a procedure that council shall establish a procedure for assigning liaisons that fairly distributed all that's what it was trying to say that fairly I was typing really fast I can't believe how much you've incorporated Kathy you've done an amazing job thanks you've done an amazing amazing job we got there okay okay yes so the only things more things I'm going to do to this document is remove all the yellows which I haven't done yet okay and to the extent when I read it in simple format I find literally typos like double words where I'll fix those otherwise you'll see it tomorrow and I'll signal to you all that there is a v8 it is v8 it's not the juice but it is a v8 waiting for you I'm amazed by what you've been able to incorporate Kathy and then what we get will be the thing that's different from v6 to now I think I kept up because I was reading back so people should look at it tomorrow particularly Mandy's been following the council comments and Alyssa's almost been editing along with us just to make sure I caught everything but we should have a draft by tomorrow Alyssa and Kathy like you did last time would be useful if you highlight what you want yep and today is Tuesday so is that by Friday morning what time of adjourn I moved to adjourn