The first item listed is local access contract Amherst media update, and it's dated 12-1 because that's the last time we had a substantive update on that, and I just need to go over where we're at associated with this beyond the December 1st last discussion we had. So the first thing I want to do is make sure it's clear that everyone's aware that I still have on file a disclosure of an appearance of a conflict of interest back from March of 2015, referring to the fact that my spouse, Stephen Brewer, an employee of UMass Amherst is not only a member of the Amherst media board of directors, but currently serves as president. However, he has no financial interest in Amherst media, and there is not actually a financial conflict. However, given that we are now past the Comcast stage and that we are moving into the Amherst media stage while I am still organizing the meeting, when it comes to anything that might seem to someone to be deliberation on a contract with Amherst media, I want to make sure I take myself out of that conversation. So here's how things are going to look tonight. We are going to have a presentation from the town manager. There will then be time for the select board to ask questions of the town manager and discuss issues among themselves. I believe Stephen Brewer intends to make a statement shortly after that. There is going to be time for a statement from Jim Lesko, the Amherst media executive director. There will also be a statement from Disha Baz, who served both as recent chair of our cable advisory committee and still serves on the Amherst media board. We definitely made time for Isaac Van Ezra, our former select board representative to the board to have a chance to talk. And so those are all the things that are going to be happening. I am going to be leaving the room while all those things are happening.  There probably aren't enough for everyone, but it will give you a sense of the materials that we're working from that we've just received. There's an RFP process for PEG services, which was in fact in our online packet. For those of you following along at home, you've probably seen that already. There was an amendment to the agreement with the Amherst media. I will also be putting that in the back of the room and also the IGR release. So see those handouts if you haven't seen them already. And Mr. Slaughter is going to take over from here, Amherst media, so you can focus on him. And then I will come back in the room once this section is over. So thank you. Thank you. So just to get started, one of the other things that we'll do is, you know, we have a series of people that Ms. Brewer just sort of listed off. They're likely to speak. At that point, I'll probably ask to see who else would like to comment on it. I would suggest we'll probably only take three minutes for each person's opportunity to speak to us, but also get a sense of how many people are wanting to speak to it at that point. And also, you know, feel free to not speak if you choose not, you know, balance whether your points have been made by other people or not.  Don't want to be compelled to that. I will try to keep people fairly tight on time just because we have a few things that I'm perceiving that there might be several people that are interested in that. But we'll do a quick tally of who's interested in speaking when we get to that point and sort of see where we're at. But we'll start out with the manager first place. Thank you, Mr. Chair. As I reported to you earlier, there's an agreement between the town of Amherst and Amherst Community Television, which is Amherst Media. That was first executed on February 16, 2007. The contract was retroactive to October 11, 2006. In essence, it expired on the same date as the expiration of the cable license buying between the town and Comcast, which was October 15, October 11, 2006. This contract with Amherst Media expired on October 15, 2016, which is when we renewed our contract with Comcast. Now, under the normal procedures, we would have entered into negotiations with Amherst Media, which I'll say instead of Amherst Community Television Inc., so everybody knows what I'm talking about, and have executed a contract. But the rules of the game changed, and we have had to comply with new rules issued by the state. In the meantime, the town continues to honor all terms and conditions of the contract, including all payments to Amherst Media. And Amherst Media continues to honor all terms and conditions of the contract, including recording town government meetings such as this. And I'm grateful for Amherst Media's cooperation during this period. There is no change in any terms of this business relationship. So first some background. In January of 2016, over a year ago, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of Local Services issued IGR 16-102, which is in the back of the room, which requires the town to account for peg fees in a different way than we had in the past. We reviewed this guidelines with our auditing firm, Mellons and Heath, and with our Department of Revenue representative. This is before my time. This is, I didn't start until August, so this is during the summer of 2016. We asked explicitly if we could simply continue as we had in the past, since we viewed the funds as a pass-through, and were not on our balance sheet at year end. Both parties, the auditor and the Department of Revenue, rejected this approach and said we would need to comply effective July 1, 2017, for fiscal year 2018. They allowed us basically a year to get this ready. In my FY18 budget presentation, I presented the revenue for peg, the estimated revenue for peg from Comcast as a local receipt. And I have budgeted an equivalent expenditure on the expense side of the budget. The goal is to replicate our existing business relationship with Amherst Media. In short, we're working to find a way to ensure that the designated funds received by the town from Comcast can be transmitted in whole to the organization awarded the bid. Unfortunately, complying with the law means that because we have money coming in, we can't just send it out. We need to follow procurement laws and publicly bid for the services that Amherst Media has been providing for the town for 40 years. This is a significant change in our past practice. We contacted the Inspector General's office to see if this category was exempt in any way. They said it was not. We're required to follow the state's procurement laws. We then asked if Amherst Media could be considered an intergovernmental agency of the town, but the answer was that they are not and could not be treated that way. That would have allowed us to transfer the funds automatically. So, seeing that this is the lay of the land, we are preparing a request for proposals which will move this process forward so that a contract will be finalized as soon as practicable and our accounting will be in compliance by July 1, 2017. I will assemble a committee to review the proposal that will include our procurement officer, our IT director, a member of the select board. And we will request the presence of the select board's Amherst Community Television Board Liaison. We have set a proposed timeline. The final timeline will be distributed upon the release of the RFP. But right now we're looking at, we would advertise the RFP on February 28th. We would ask for proposals to be delivered to the town by March 17th. We would review the proposals the week of March 20th in hopes to make a final decision by March 29th and have a contract signed by April 14th. In the meantime, I've offered a contract extension on the exact same terms and conditions to Amherst Media through June 30th, 2017, to secure any concern that Amherst Media has about the existing relationship. So that's my report. Thanks, Chair. Are there questions from select board specifically for the manager or comments? Yeah, I will have a, I do have some comments and then I have a question for the manager, but I first wanted to start by making a general comment because I've been one of the two people who was designated by the select board to work with the manager on this project and the lead person to work with the manager on this project, which I have been doing. And in that regard, I'm going to just start out by saying that the select board very much appreciates Amherst Media in all respects, including Amherst Media's right for free speech and to express its opinions. And it has an avenue to do so, which is above and beyond most members of the community because it is a media outlet. And so it has used its media, including a stream on the bottom of the town meeting presentation of last week's town meeting, to start stating its opinion. Of course, while respecting that, right, I'm distressed by several things. I think that there have been a number of inaccurate statements made and or misleading statements that have been made and the creation of fear that is unwarranted amongst a large number of members of the public that something has been intended or inadvertently will have the result of somehow damaging a very valuable institution, which is the institution to provide public access, education, and government programming. And that it flies in the face of decades of working relationship between the town and Amherst Media, and I think that it was unnecessary that that happened. We appreciate the fact, as noted by the manager, that Amherst Media has continued to provide programming on channels 12, 15, and 17, and the town has, as also noted, continued to provide funding, as in the past, as it comes in from Comcast, Amherst Media. The town has also noted offered to extend the written contract. But the fact of the matter is a couple of things. We can't ignore the fact that the Department of Revenue issued the regulation IGR 16102, that it does specifically state that there are two mechanisms. We appreciate the fact that the director of Amherst Media has come and suggested that there might be another approach to take. We have not seen that from conversations with either the Department of Revenue or with our accountant, it sets up a viable mechanism. And so we need to proceed with the reality of what the law provides to us, which is the RFP process that has been recommended. The other thing that I would note is that we met last week, Mr. Slaughter and I, who are the two select board people who are the designated people to work with the town manager on this, with two members of the board for about an hour, the Amherst Media board for about an hour and a half, talked about a variety of topics. And one of the things we pointed out was that it's not unprecedented in Massachusetts to have RFPs for the issuance of PEG services and that there are two towns, which we provided the names of, that have existing contracts with their PEG provider through an RFP process and that it has been, from all we can detect, worked very smoothly in the issuance in the contract, the execution of the contract, and the provision of services. And all of that information, we hope that everybody recognizes because this idea that something horrible happens with RFPs is evident from all of the buttons that are around the room, let's say, slash no RFP, is, creates this impression that it is somehow an unacceptable mechanism for procurement when it is a standard required mechanism for procurement and one that has been used in this very circumstances in other Massachusetts communities with great success and without problems for either the PEG provider or for the community. So turning to my question for the manager, I assume that since this, the group that you're asking for to meet with to provide advice on the contract is only advisory in nature that it is not a problem to have a member of the Amherst Media Board of Directors as a participant in that process, but our liaison to Amherst Media is a member of their Board of Directors and has the requirements of a member of the board. So it's not a question that needs to be responded to immediately, but before you do that, I would urge that that issue be just confirmed that that, given the nature of how you want to use this group, that that, in fact, is not a problem. And so thank you. Connie? Well, thank you, Mr. Steinberg. I think you raised some really good points and I just wanted to add because I've said this in prior meetings a little bit when we discussed this. I've done a lot of work with request for proposals, not in this context, more around development, procuring consultants and housing development projects. And I actually support the request for a proposal process because I think it helps the town in clarifying what it's looking for. And it's an important statement about the direction we're going with our media services. It's not, that's not to say about controlling the broadcast or the free speech issues, but I find the request for proposal not a threatening process. It takes a little bit of work to craft it, but I think a useful exercise. And so I was taken aback that this was perceived as a hostile measure because I think I saw this as a sort of normal course of business and one that could be good for the town and perhaps including good for the Amherst media or the awardee of the contract. So I hope that people understand we're entering into this process in good faith and the manager has done a very thorough job of seeing what the legal options were, the regulatory options, and I think we're proceeding. We have a little bit of a broader responsibility than just one vendor or one contractor. We're trying to keep the town in good standing and in good compliance with lots of requirements that we face all the time. So if there aren't any other questions for the manager or comments that need to be made from select board at this point. If Mr. Brewer would like to come up and make his comment, please. Thank you. I'm Stephen Brewer. I'm the president of the board of Amherst media. I'm also the husband of Ms. Brewer who's the chair of the select board and I wanted to take just a brief moment to explain something that I think is important for people to understand. As with my wife, I wanted to win the town when Amherst media entered into negotiations with the town. I thought it was important to recuse myself to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest and had discussed doing that in consultation with the board. And for that purpose, I have delegated to the executive committee of Amherst media the responsibility of representing Amherst media in these negotiations. And I wanted to make clear that my lack of participation in the negotiation or making public statements was not misconstrued as taking any kind of position on the activities of the organization during this process. Thank you. And at this point, if Mr. Lesko could come up and I guess Mr. Thank you. Yeah, that's fine. Yeah. Yeah, that's all right. And just as a reminder, if you'll make sure to say good evening. Good evening. I'm Isaac Beneser. I've been your representative that is representative select board on the board of Amherst media and formerly known as ACTV for nine years. Nobody gets to be appointed for nine years in the town that I own, unless they're crazy. But I have to say that in my retirement has been a wonderful, wonderful marital relationship. And I almost felt I have to say this together with my chest. When I heard about we went, we don't want a divorce, but we want to look at other opportunities as a form of mediation. So can you blame me for feeling that way? I feel jilted. I feel jilted because the relationship that I've enjoyed with the town and then it's representatives that have been one of working together. So I feel like the bride that's being told, you know, you've done a good job, but I gotta look around. And I think you need to look at what we have before you look around because you might say to yourself, gee, what's keeping her from leaving the relationship, let alone being having the feeling that we're going to be scrutinized. And because I don't look at this as a one of conflict, I have to start out by saying, I love you guys. I'm not here to fight. I'm here to protect something that we have worked so hard to develop. And I've been fortunate to be on the board and to represent the select board for nine years. And I have to tell you, there was an attempt 10 years ago to make a CTV, a subcommittee of one of the groups in the in the town. And I think it's the recreation department. Everybody would was to hand in their resume. I just came on to the board and they were one and I'm and they're leaving. I'm not having a lot of luck. But fortunately, I believed in what we were doing. And and smarter and more thoughtful heads prevail. So now what I whatever happens down the road, I want you to know, the only thing I'm interested in in my retirement is to see the young people and the old people, and the people in the community who have been participating in making a CTV what it is, continue to be what it is. And I'm glad to hear that there's no we shouldn't worry about the future. Well, I have to tell you as a former mediator, divorce mediator, when I hear somebody say that, that makes me worry. Because it means that maybe I'm not doing so good. So I would ask you to investigate your relationship with us a little more deeply. Maybe it's we have lost, we've lost touch with each other. We've gone our separate ways and new people come in. And I can't blame them. They don't have a history. But the people around this table have a history. Everybody has been a participant for a long time. And and I say that. And I just want to wind up with saying this is contract that we've been living in for 10 years. Check out has my name on it. President. And Jocelyn Erez as a bro reporter, the manager at the time, Lawrence Schaefer, you know, Lawrence Schaefer came in and he was new too. And the first thing he did was to get to know us. And I think that would welcome that we find ways of making as part of the process of getting to know us. And that might help to realize what a gem we have, one that's revered by this whole town. And one another thing, we it's very hard to get good people. We are blessed with the kind of staff that we have. We're working on a minimum budget with a minimum amount of people. And when you say we're looking around in this job market, now is the time for them to jump. We've been training people. They've gone to CBS. And we see it's a shame that we don't pay enough to keep them. But one of the things we should be talking about is why can't we bring more resources so we can keep the people we've trained, who are members of this community. Now I'm going to finalize because I know you have a lot of big budget. But if you look at this, this contract, this contract was developed, not by lawyers getting together, but two people from a from a CTV, the late Paulette Brooks, and myself, who got our own lawyer. And then we sat down with the manager. And he came in with another plan, which would have made us a subcommittee of the the recreation department. And and I said, who you who you negotiating with, that's what I told paper. And he said, you you, I said, Well, let's talk about our contract that we have now and build, build the things that we think we need to add. And so that was a partnership from the beginning. And for years, I met with Lawrence every two weeks for lunch. And we talked about issues. That's why I became the town representative. Now, if I wasn't doing a decent job, you either would neglect and not paying attention to my responsibilities to you. Or I was doing a good job. But you didn't have time, you didn't have to worry about about what was going on. But we've never stolen a nickel. We have we everything's been awarded it. We have a community by the hundreds that have come into that place, young and old. And we have created a gem. And I think we it's not a matter of assuring us that will be okay until June. If you have any idea what it is to recreate this, let us know let the community know. But I think we were we were acting not defensively, but we're acting to protect the interests of the town. And we need to get to put our heads together to resolve this quickly, not to continue to have this kind of stuff going on. And you'll forgive me I have to leave. Because my handle is saying I can't hang around too long. Thank you for hearing. Thank you. Thank you for representing. Thank you. There'll be no odd price. What's that? I'm sorry. Yeah, that's perfect. So hello, my name is Demetria Shabazz. And I'm not only the VP of the Board for Amherst Media, I'm also a faculty member at UMass and the Department of Communication. So one moment. So thank you, town manager, for your attention to our contractual needs. I have communicated your offer to the to the board about the extended contract that arrived Friday afternoon at 4 30. We have not had an opportunity to look at it. However, February the 11th, we will be meeting and I'm sure the extension that you're offering will be topic of conversation. So first, I'd like to address my response to the offer that you have sent to us. Just real quick. Chair Brewer said if I went over three minutes to ask for more time, it just it might be about four, I will try to be brief. But the reason why I am asking for at least another minute is that I think what has happened is that there, there's lots of confusion and things have gotten a bit convoluted. So first, the memo also given today by the town manager to the select board has set up and proposed a timeline and next steps for the contract. This memo has as the person to assist in the process, Adrian Tourette, which is the town's liaison. And I've told Adrian this after serving with her on the cable advisory committee, I will go with her anywhere and we will be in war together. But because I have so much faith in her abilities and what she's able to do, I think it is unfair to split her position in terms of representing either the select board or will she represent Amherst media? And I can say after working with her on the CAC, she tries to look after both the town's interest and Amherst media and not having representation of Amherst media on any committee that will decide our fate, I think is a misstep. Okay. So in addition, in negotiations past, community members have provided review of contracts regarding the access center. And this RFP process would circumvent that. After going through the ascertainment process and seeing how the subscribers and people of the town really feel positively about the services that we provide. They had lots of criticism for Comcast, but for us, they really had faith in what we were able to deliver for the last 10 years. I would again hate to circumvent that process by putting in place RFP or an enterprise fund that does not allow for the input of the community members. The other item that I wish to raise tonight concerns a need for clarification regarding the information you've presented pertaining to the RFP. You've also discussed town manager in the media, the first article appearing December 26. And in various meetings held with the executive director, Jim Lesko at Severance, Adrian Turetsi, Steven Brewer and myself. There seems to be a bit of confusion regarding the requirement that you have articulated as this request for proposal or a setup of an enterprise fund for payment of services to Amherst media. As the board of Amherst media, we have been really immersed in these documents pertaining to enterprise funds, RFPs, et cetera, for some time. And it has become clear that what you are presenting as a requirement and as a required change from our vantage point and from our research is a recommendation. Historically, enterprise funds and RFP processes for access centers emerged as a means of making sure that access centers were paid by municipalities that for whatever reason, co-mingled their funds or misappropriated them. However, we have faith that this is not occurred. And we have worked in partnership with you. So these guidelines were meant not necessarily to determine or require that the towns pay through an RFP for the access centers through an RFP. But it was meant as an option. And I think the language within the informational guideline release for January 2016, under the summary, the third paragraph kind of illustrates that this is a guideline and not a requirement. So just an example, and I'm reading one of the very short paragraphs here, cities and towns may now designate cable, peg, access operations or services as an enterprise or separately account for all franchise fees and other revenues derived from enterprise activities in the same manner as other enterprise funds. And throughout this document, it stipulates guidelines and it says may, may do this. And it doesn't say they are required. Furthermore, mass access, which is our policy group within the state of Massachusetts, advises us that if we are already receiving direct payment, and there isn't a problem with direct payment, again, it's for misappropriation, mishandling of funds, that we should continue that process. So again, this is a choice. We would like to offer you that if you revisit, and I'm so glad to see Isaac bringing up the 2007, 2006 contract as our starting point, and recognize how constructive our relationship has been in bringing services to the town of Amherst consistently. We have provided you services at if we look at our report that we gave to you a couple of weeks ago, you can see all the many hours that our staff and our volunteers have provided in terms of services having to do with education, government and public. Looking at the next 10 years, how might we think and plan to go forward? The positive reasons I think we should look at why we as a board support the continued direct payment option is that it ensures continued stability, excellence, and responsiveness to community above all. And that's kind of been our mantra, providing excellence, stability, and services, responsiveness of services above all. This arrangement has allowed us autonomy, yes, something that we value, and an independence in terms of services that we provide, that are transparent, and that when needed, we are always there to serve. Indeed, we have gone beyond whatever was stipulated within our 2006 contract, placing the town always at the highest priority. Based on our knowledge of other communities around the country with RFPs, Andy Steinberg points out, you know, I appreciate that. Again, we've done our research since about 2006, actually, beginning on the West Coast in California. When RFPs and enterprise funds were introduced, so went those access stations. One of the best examples is Austin access in the state of Texas, my home state. Austin access had one of the most successful access centers, fully networked within the town. Once RFPs were introduced, a film group took it over. Nothing against film people, I study film. But the public part and the government part of access Austin went away. Now it's run by a bunch of folks who are into film, wonderful, but that's not an access center. That's not a center that invites the public in to have their own shows, to have their own voice really be shared with others in the community. That's not a place where you get government transparency. Okay. So I'm going to to wind this up. So for us, we have nothing monetary to gain in this endeavor. But as consumers, citizens of Amherst and of the Commonwealth, we wish only to continue to make available the means for others to produce their shows have transparency in terms of the government and remain informed regarding their community. So I just want to end with, if it ain't broke, why fix it? And if we try to fix something that does not need repair, however, we may do more harm than good, and go the way of other access centers that are no longer here. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Oh, I would prefer it's kind of like town meeting for those of you that watch town meeting, we prefer not to have sort of applause statements, but you know, we're trying to, you know, acquire information, do our work here. And so we'll, we'll try to refrain from expressions of support or dismay or those sort of things if you would please. Thank you, Jim, if you would. Certainly. My name is Jim Lesko. I'm the executive director of Amherst Media and thank you for allowing us this time to address you. I'd like to first thank the both Isaac and Demetria for coming in speaking tonight and all the others that have shown up that would like to show their support. Also, we've received numerous emails in support of what we do. I believe the town has also received some. I'd like to recap. I'm not going to really go into great detail because I've sent you many things in writing. I've been before you before, so I would just like to recap, okay, if I may. And this is in regard to what we, the community here is as IGR 16-102, which sounds like some kind of space shot. But there, there's more options out there. I've said this before, you just heard. But there's also exists that option that cable companies directly fund. The peg provider, in this case, it would be Amherst Media. The funding mechanism is currently being implemented in 17 Western Mass communities. As select board members, you have never acknowledged this existing option being utilized in neighboring Northampton, Holyoke, Springfield, Deerfield and 13 others. But the town manager continues to put forth written material to you and to the media, as though the town is being forced by the Department of Revenue with no other alternatives. Recently, we were told to look at the towns of Lexington and Concord to see what the RFPs look like, since our town officials are using those for guidance. I did just that. Lexington's RFP was formulated 13 years ago, when the town decided to start a community access center, instead of the one historically run by the cable company. This process is always used when initiating a new access center. Reminder, as a nonprofit organization, we have been servicing this community for 41 years. In Amherst, the select board is the cable licensing issuing authority for the cable contract. In Concord, the town manager has full control. Concord's town manager is currently moving forward to making the once independent nonprofit peg access center into a municipal department. Obviously, neither of these two examples makes me feel any better about an RFP. My two questions for the select board are these. Are you voting tonight or have you voted previously on instituting the town manager's proposed new procurement procedure? If I could get an answer, I'd appreciate that. Are you voting tonight or have you voted previously on instituting the town manager's proposed new procurement procedure? Well, you know, I mean, have you voted on it? You haven't. I take it. No, we haven't voted on it in the past. I mean, we've only had it in a couple of meetings. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I was under the impression we could have a dialogue. I'm sorry. No, it's a question. Well, just to sort of clarify, I think that, no, I mean, the procurement rules, I mean, just, you know, as far as that goes, are dictated by state law and are generally under the purview of the manager. So we don't generally take a vote. So like, you know, he procures a service like we'll hear about later on tonight. He procured a third party to provide some support around a different topic that's on our agenda this evening. We weren't involved in that process because that's still under his purview in that regard. Obviously, and things of a higher visibility will suggest our advice. And, and, you know, we'll work our way through it, but we have not taken any sort of formal vote, I guess is a simplest answer. I'm sorry, if you would real quick, if you want to Sorry, you know, I might have reacted prematurely, but I from where I sit, we're looking to our town manager to advise us and certainly have had lots of opportunities to hear input other opinions about how statutory requirements might affect us. But I very much look to the manager for that. We haven't actually discussed maybe the negotiating, you know, group has more and more of our preferences or balancing, but I think it's absolutely appropriate as a select board member for me to look to the manager to filter the information and make that recommendation. It's a different kind of standing than an informed opinion of potential applicant in a RFP process. And my understanding about Lexington and Concord is we're talking about RFP as to form. Here's a form, a format to look at and to structure something. If you're going to go the RFP route, I'm not sure, you know, the fact that their end result or their situations are different. And I'm just, I would like us to have that kind of dialogue. And I feel like we're squaring off. And as much as you, well, that's, that's just how I feel. Maybe it's, you know, a couple hundred emails, bringing that to this, and I'll try to let that go. But I don't think we're doing something out of the ordinary or particularly offensive, but it is appropriate for us to look to the manager for advice. Absolutely. And so anyway, go ahead. If I may. Yep. Thank you for the clarifications. And I'm very close to wrapping up. The town manager told Amherst media personnel at a meeting that he had asked one of the select board members to see if the town could run the PEG channels. He was told that, yes, there's enough money for two people to run it for the town. But the town manager stated he didn't feel that the town was ready yet. Yet. Perhaps the time will be right for the town manager in the town of Amherst, when in three years the RFP must go out to bid again. I will not, excuse me, I will not highlight again for you the many services beyond government coverage we do for the community organizations and the residents. That was highlighted for you in our annual report. I will not repeat the number 188 meetings we covered or the number of hours our interns, staff and members worked to provide you that coverage. But I guarantee you no two town employees could ever service all of the community as the independent Amherst media does every day and has done for the past 41 years. I believe you still can change the course you're on. I believe that you can immediately initiate contract negotiations with Amherst media and I encourage you to consider so. Thank you. Thank you. I think at this point, let me see if so we've heard from a few folks. Are there others in the in the audience that would like to speak as an ad public comment? And again, I would I would suggest we're looking for information that would be new that you haven't sent us to a email. So if you just have a quick show of hands to see how many folks are interested. All right, 123. So I've got three on this side. It looks like four on this side. And I'll start on this side. We'll take about three minutes. I'd like you to keep it to about three minutes. I'll be a little firmer on time than than we were with the previous speakers. Oh, yeah, you don't have to take three minutes, obviously. But I mean, but obviously, also, if if if someone sort of states the same thing you've you were planning on saying that's, you know, you you can defer and just say that quickly and we can go to the next person. So so we'll start on this side. If you would want to come up to state your name with the microphone and and and give us your remarks, please. My name is Gabriel C. Fuentes. I'm from the city of Chiquipi. I used to be an intern with Amherst Media. And this is why I'm here to speak to you today. First of all, I'd like to say thank you for having me. And I also want to say that I'm very grateful that we have the ability to have transparency in this room. There's something that concerns me. And I think this is something that hasn't been mentioned before. Is the way that the dialogue is happening in this room right now. I heard that there was this culture of fear from you guys that you believe that Amherst Media is overstating the facts, if you will. But what I didn't hear from you guys is why you believe that RFP that our discussion about RFPs is fearful. I didn't understand how it actually will benefit Amherst Media that is not something I heard in this room tonight. What also concerns me is that one of the select board believes that receiving emails from the public is some sort of confrontation as opposed to a dialogue. That truly, truly is very worrisome because for what I'm hearing from this side of the room is that this is supposed to be a partnership between the city of Amherst and the people that it represents. And it doesn't just represent the people of Amherst. Like I said, I am from Chicape. I've lived in Holyoke. I've lived in Northampton. I've lived in Aguam. But Amherst Media has always been there for me. As an immigrant, it has given me a voice that has not been offered in a lot of other ways. And I think that what we're seeing in this country right now is the pocket of people that get to have a voice is growing smaller and smaller. And we're seeing that in the media, but we're also seeing that in the loss of public spaces. And so we can't just see Amherst Media as what it offers digitally. We have to see what it offers in the physical sense where it has the ability to congregate all sorts of people from the community so that they can communicate with each other and offer a multitude of voices. Because I truly believe that a monoculture of thought is destructive to any sort of community. I also found it interesting that the city of Austin was mentioned earlier today. Because we have to realize how Amherst Media can be beneficial to the economy of Amherst as well. It offers the ability to create identity in the town. And that's what it did in Austin. It helped a lot of artists expose themselves. And it's what has allowed that city to be so vibrant. And so I think I'll conclude with that. But thank you very much. Thank you. That was exactly three minutes, by the way. So on this side, who was next on this side? In the front, or if you would please, can you please state your name and my name is Kathleen Lynch. I'm the executive director of East Hampton Media. East Hampton Media serves the city of East Hampton. We also serve the town of South Hampton with the select board. In addition to that, my experience, I also count my experience being a member of the Montague Cable Advisory Committee.  And let me tell you why. This issue. This is the issue. RFP. And so I understand RFP in how it relates to the procurement law. I understand everyone in municipal government wants to do their due diligence. I do not believe it applies in this area. I think that RFPs are intended for new things or for changes of things. For changes in services. For example, should the performance evaluation of the access center come up wanting and the town chooses not to renew that contract, we then at that point put out an RFP for service. There's been a lot of buzz in municipal administration about the enterprise fund. I've been hearing about it already for two years. Let's not get too excited about it because I have a really strong feeling that there's an addendum law that addresses specifically what we're talking about here coming down the pike because 30B was supposed to have this addendum law with it. And our legislature failed to pass that measure in package. Now, I want you to understand that as a person who is not from this community but interacts with this community a lot, I drive through here, I dump a ton of money into the restaurants here where my kids went to school down the street, they don't anymore. I want you to understand that Amherst being the kind of community that it is and the national climate being the kind of climate that it is, this particular issue gains exceptional relevance because it happens here in Amherst. And I want the municipality to try and understand that there is in this day and age no issue that can happen around the people's right and access to free speech that will not engender civil rights issues and now feels honestly in this community not the time to fight this battle. It does not feel like it is the time to fight this battle. It feels to me like an incredible display of leadership would be to extend a magnanimous branch from the administrative office and try to work it out with our non-profits who have already sunk an incredible amount of time, energy, resourcing and intellect to secure an excellent contract, much better contract for the citizens and for the town of Amherst than probably you would have gotten on your own. And I want you to try to look at these relationships with the non-profits and especially non-profits that you partner with as true partnerships because you serve each other and if it's a good partnership, you're serving each other well. I do not believe that the 30B restrictions require you to put out an RFP at this time and I really urge you to do that. In addition, I also have a prepared statement that I know was emailed into the board today and I would like to read it. If you could finish up please. It's a separate person who has a stomach flu and couldn't be here today. Can I read it into the record? It's short. It's already a part of the record. If it was emailed to us, we'll have it as a part of our record. Okay, well then this is from a former municipal leader of 16 and a half years who is asking you to do the right thing and please examine that. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Hi, I'm Sarah Littlecaress. I'm a resident of North Amherst. Myself and my husband Matthew King, we choose to live in Amherst and pay Amherst taxes because of the services that our taxes buy and that was really important to us. It was important to us for wanting to raise our families here. It's important as far as long term really wanting to be part of this community for decades. A couple of questions that I have of the 17 communities that, you know, where they have this other model, right, where they haven't gone through the RFP process. I'm really wondering how you've looked into how that process has happened, what have been some of the best practices, and really some way to kind of break out some of those pros and cons, as well as kind of wondering what your general counsel's opinion has sort of been. As far as whether or not this RFP process is in fact required, it sounds like there's been some question back and forth from folks and just really being able to have that, I think, would be really helpful.  But money is really important, but money isn't the vision, right? Money supports the vision, it buys the vision, it builds the vision. And I just hope, as our financial manager, that you kind of can see that our taxes and the money that comes into this town is part of trying to build that vision of what Amherst is to be, because it's really easy just to get lost in the bottom line and what kind of looks good in a balance sheet. But there's a context here and, you know, we're Amherst, only the H is silent. You can't take away our voice for that. But thank you. Just as a quick reminder, while she makes her way up, in general, when we take public comment, we'll, you know, so with questions, if you have questions, that sort of thing, we'll take them. We don't generally respond in a back and forth in general. There might be a clarifying question we ask just to make sure we're understanding, but that's about it. So we're generally not going to do a dialogue back and forth. I don't want to sort of set expectations for people as they, as they provide us with their comments. Hello, I'm Brenda Bush House. I joined the Amherst media board in August as the higher education representative. But what I do at UMass is I teach nonprofit management. And I wanted to speak to it from that perspective and also someone that's taught urban politics for many years. So a 501c3, like Amherst media, needs to have independence to fulfill its mission. Once the town takes the RFP approach, which it's not required to do, it will have control over that mission. Right now the board is made up of those that are appointed. We have very slots that are appointed, like me from higher ed, Rick Hood from the school, school committee, and then we have others. We have a pretty broad perspective of the community. And I think the board has to be operating in a policy position to fulfill the mission, to make strategic decisions for the organization. Now the RFP that could be put forward with for Amherst media through the town will be what the town wants. What happens then to a 501c3's independent board? I would really, really encourage you to consider that. And I think I'm very familiar with public management and the need for a partnership, but with you have an organization like Amherst media, who most of its budget is coming through this contract with Comcast. It's not like a housing or a RFP service net that has up to like who knows how many RFPs they go after to get the contracts. This is a 501c3 that is financially dependent on this contract. And so I'm very, very alarmed at the distortion that could happen to Amherst media's board in its role in an independent 501c3 nonprofit. Thank you. Anyone else on this side? If not, then we'll switch to this side. Let's start here in the front. Second row there. Thank you. My name is Stanley Marin and I moved to Amherst 11 years ago and just a couple of months ago we moved to Lathrop retirement in Northampton. But anyway, I have done some work with Amherst media, interacted on a minor level, and I found them to be very cooperative and understanding. And one thing is on my mind, wherever I go, there's a problem of austerity. On the world level, on the global level, countries have been asked to become, spend less moral austerity. In the community, all the way from global down to here, they want to cut. And what are they cutting from? The lady who owns a broadside bookstore in Northampton told me that George Orwell's book 1984 sold out. A lot of people are beginning to question what kind of a society we live in. As a matter of fact, right now, I feel as if I'm talking to the people's board of understanding. And you understand me, but the Comcast people and the 1% and the people who run the society with the greater inequality that's taken place don't understand. So I talk just to end as a viewer. When I turn on channel 12 in the morning, I enjoy Amy Goodman. That's the best journalist I know that tells you things that are happening that you don't find anywhere. After that, I hear discussions. Very often, it's people who are my age. Now, you don't see a talking head on any of the channels that's anywhere, they're one third of my age. So I begin to feel as if I belong somewhere. And I hear labor programs, rap shows, serious shows, all kinds of things on Amherst media that I don't hear elsewhere. And I think that we should make it a priority not to, as the woman said, not to fix it. It's pretty good now. It's real good now. Thank you. Thank you. So let's go here next. Jeff Lee, I was on the board of ACTV shortly after the current, the previous contract was started. I'd like to express my appreciation for what Amherst media has provided over the past 10 years. In my view, the direct payment model with appropriate oversight and the services being provided by an independent nonprofit have worked quite well. The, I think, among the biggest achievements of Amherst media over the past 10 years are totally renovating the studio space and bringing new equipment in. Starting new training programs, getting a cross-section of the community involved in production. And I'm just grateful for that. I think I'd worry about the problems transitioning to a new model and a new, perhaps a new entity providing the services. I don't, you know, I seriously doubt that they could do a better job. I think, by and large, Amherst media does a great, a great job. And I'm not sure if the vision is bringing the PEG services into town government. But if that is, I think it would be a mistake. I think independence is important for ensuring creativity and balance. So thank you. Thank you. So we'll go, we're confronted back, so we'll go here next. Sorry. My name is Sandra Carter. I was on the Executive Committee with Isaac Benesra and served for three years. And one thing I learned was that democracy is very messy and not always fun, but it includes everybody. Everyone has a voice. And that's one reason I decided to serve on ACTV. And now it's called Amherst media, but it was called ACTV then. One question I have from listening to all this discussion is I hear that the select board feels that they're compelled to do it RFP because it's ordained by the state law. But I'm hearing that other people have researched and feel that it's not mandatory. So my question to the select board is if you have other reasons for feeling that you have to do an RFP besides that it's compelled by law, can you please be transparent with the community of why you feel it's important to go out for an RFP because I pretty much agree it may not be perfect, but if it ain't broke, why fix it? So I'm hoping that you can be transparent with the community as you are also servants to the community just as I was when I served on ACTV. And as anyone in a controlling board is a service to the community. And the other thing that I just want to, it's very obvious, but it's the citizens of Amherst who pay Comcast. It's the citizen's money that is providing the funds that in turn the least we can do is control our cable access station. So thank you very much. Thank you. So, Vince, if you would please. Mr. O'Connor, I should say. So in this situation, Vince O'Connor, Summer Street precinct one time meeting member. So in this situation, I think I sort of have a nuts and bolts approach. The first thing I think that the board needs to say is if there's been no decision for the RFP process and you have four members before anything happens, I think the board needs to make a decision whether to go forward. Not everything the town manager, a town manager recommends gets approved by the select board. I've been here 40 years. I watched it happen a lot. Sometime the manager strikes out. And I guess it concerns me that we've gone this far since the contract with Comcast was signed. And, you know, maybe I'm wrong, but I understand that the people who work at Amherst Media have not gotten paid, which I think is not a good thing. This should not have gone this far without that happening. The second thing is that at the point where there is a genuine public dispute about whether there is a may or shall in the thing that somebody says the requirement other says is an option, then I think the select board goes from relying on the manager to provide information to becoming responsible for knowing the information directly themselves and making the judgment themselves. What Amherst Media does for this community with our money from Comcast seems to be really important thing to this community. And so the board, I think, needs to do those two things. Can't rely. I mean, there's clearly a dispute. The board needs to each individual member of this board needs to personally know whether, in fact, it is a requirement. And I think it would be a tragedy to destroy this organization for the reasons that appear not to be really meaningful. I haven't heard anything. This process doesn't seem to be being moved by anything by what some one person says is a requirement and other people say is not. And I just, you've got to resolve this. This is not a, you know, something you can rely on somebody else for. This is too important an organization in this community to say, well, they say this, the manager says that, we'll just rely on what the manager says. Okay? You can't do that anymore. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Adriene Turizzi and I am your current representative to the Amherst Media Board. I would like to be gracious in my appreciation for you taking the amount of time you have tonight. I also served, as you well know, on the Comcast negotiation team. I was one of five members that happily delivered with the help of Amherst Media and its staff, the 1.125 million that we were planning to use for addressing our government channels, our public channels and our educational channels. I still look forward to that. And I do want to say that following the completion of our negotiations, we were very hopeful before the select board stepped in to complete those negotiations that we would have an opportunity to have a public hearing. I think that's very much what we're getting tonight. And I do thank you for listening to everyone who has come forward to speak.  But I would like to leave you with one thought. I've taken my responsibilities in representing the town and being liaison to the town and trying to balance that with what I need to bring to the Amherst Media Board as a fully functioning equitable partner. I have to say that I am unconvinced that the route that you believe must be sought by the new DOR requirements isn't the best interest of either. So I would appreciate your thoughtful deliberation tonight. I would like to stay around and hear all of it and thank you again. Thank you. So I'm not seeing any other hands in the moment. Sure. This by the way will be our last speaker. I'm MJ Donahue living Amherst. I just want to speak to the education I got when I went to high school in Amherst and was an intern at Amherst Community Television. The director at the time was nice enough to sit down with me and give me one on one instruction on how to be a video editor. And I was able to leave school early and get school credit for that internship. And after going to college and taking video classes there and also using Amherst High School's video class I have to say that was the only place available for me to get that type of one on one instruction. And as somebody who did not continue with my college that type of instruction and the knowledge I got from it was invaluable to me getting further positions working in community media centers. I've also been a member of Cambridge Community Television in 2015. And I'm currently a member of Amherst Media and would like to be a part of them continuing on with the mission that they have been for so many years holding up for the community. And I also want to say this is an opportunity for us to think about what kind of community this is and who we are serving. I see the select board has a lot of Apple products. Not everybody has that ability to get access to a laptop or their own technology to create media and Amherst Media is one place they can go and for a very affordable fee be able to create their own media, have their own voice and not have any government, you know, getting in the way of that relationship. And also, you know, are any nonprofits going to want to be in this town if there is this type of hostility towards their functioning on a regular basis. So that has been my experience with Amherst Media always very supportive and giving me another way when some of the traditional methods even though I know this is a college town but not everybody is involved with the colleges or has access to those resources. Amherst Media provides that for people. So I just want to point that out. Thank you. Thank you. And I would like to say that we appreciate the comments of the community in regard to this issue and we take, you know, your comments seriously and under advisement to us. I think at this point does the select one of the comments. Well, just a couple of people had asked, you know, are we going to deliberate tonight? On our agenda, it actually says update, which, you know, I didn't realize we were going to do something similar to a hearing. We have a lot of other things. Maybe I'm not ready to decide tonight because I would like, as we always do, to go back and reconsider the information. I know as members, we have also done our own research and reading about the requirements. Some of it might be a judgment call and some of it might be more on the line of requirement. I think it warrants further exploration, as people had mentioned. So I wouldn't want us to make a decision tonight, but we might just go around so people know where we're at for the sake of transparency, kind of how we're approaching it very quickly so that we can, while everybody's here on this issue, you know, say a few words about what we're thinking and what our process is going to be, but I am not ready to vote a decision about our process right now. Thank you for that. And I do think that's a good idea to sort of have each of us kind of give a sense of where we're at with regard to this issue. And so I'll look to either your sign burger, Mr. Wald, who would like to go first? Good couple. So I've been talking to tonight. I mean, first of all, I think this is a good example of a good process. And, you know, Emerson is a town that's known for civic engagement. So I'm very glad that people came out to talk to us. And I'm sorry if it seemed confrontational at times. You know, I think we were responding in some sense of the fact that we were, in a sense, being accused of doing something improper, whether by design or by omission. And I want to assure everyone that's not the case, that we wouldn't be considering the RFP issue, as I understand it, unless we've been advised by professional staff with expertise in the field and after considerable research that we had to take this course. So, and as I understand it too, the RFP does not, does not, well, obviously RFP does not entail a given outcome. Anyone can apply. He was qualified for that. So, although I understand the concerns of the public, I think the public, I would ask them to understand the process that we're going through and the due diligence, the transparency, the fiduciary responsibility. And as Ms. Kribber said, the possibility is to state for the public what it is we're looking for here. So, I, I guess there are two questions. There's the abstract question of whether one would, issuing an RFP is the best way to go forward and finding a provider for this, especially given the long-time service, excellent service by a beloved community organization. And there's the legal absolute requirement there. And I guess I'm a little taken aback by the suggestion of government by Google that we're all supposed to go look up things on our own. I mean, I'm accustomed not to giving, giving rubber stamp, but to respecting the expertise of the town manager who was a trained professional and who was corresponded with people in the field, including our town council, who we retain at the taxpayer's dollar to give us an accurate advice about this. So, all things being equal, I take that as having a, a fair amount of weight. I, given that we have time, I think it is fine, as Ms. Kribber said, to do further investigation and be absolutely sure about the chals, maize, cans, and so forth. And looking at the calendar, I see that we're asking to advertise an RFP by February 28th, so basically three weeks from now. And I wonder whether the process, we could follow a two-track process that as we could prepare an RFP as we deem fit and continue to consider the legal questions we go forward. Yeah, I guess I want to do several things. One, first of all, I want to thank several groups of people who are in the room who have really commuted themselves to this community and to the importance of the service that's provided for public programming, educational programming, government programming. And that's, of course, people who served on the board of directors, people who served as volunteers for Amherst Media and either currently or in the past, and people who served on the Cable Advisory Committee who did a tremendous job of helping us to get to the point where we are now, which is taking a very good contract that would have not have been achieved but for the hard work of the CAC working in partnership with the Select Board. So I want to recognize all of that. And we are all about the same thing. We're talking about how we benefit the community. I do want to close with a couple of observations that I made at the beginning. One is that this is a new regulation. It was issued, and it does just offer two options. And it's not two options in some vague other that you can create. It states what it states. And the point that has been raised and I have thought about significantly previously is that there are other communities that do what we have done in the past of a direct pass through. But what's missing is where those arrangements made subsequent to the enactment of a regulation that isn't even enforceable until July 1 of 17.  If we didn't have the unhappy coincidence, as it is, that our contract renewal with Comcast was up when it was at, we would probably be in the same position as those other communities in trying to figure out what to do in mid-contract when there has been this new requirement. But we do have to deal with the fact as it is. We have a new requirement that has been put in place and we are about to issue a contract. And we have not just tripped upon this on our own, but have consulted with staff at the Department of Revenue and at our certified public accountant. And the last comment that I want to make is that I was a director of a non-profit organization for better than 25 years and we provided legal assistance to low-income people. And almost all of our funds was by grants and contracts that came through a process that had some type of RFP to it. And that is just the nature of how non-profits function and a well-designed RFPs, which is what we were always advocating for. And I certainly understand Amherst Media's board and staff arguing for too, for the same reason, are looking for an RFP that reasonably serves the public interest for the service that is the mission of the organization. But it is a common process. And I think that that's something that is, therefore, one that seems, just from my own personal experience, to be a logical way to proceed in addition to the fact that now that I'm on this side of it with the select board, the law requires it. The town cannot issue a contract without going through the requirements of a procurement process, which is different from where we were in the last round. So thank you. Thank you. I think I'll conclude this section. I'll just say that I appreciate everyone coming out tonight and sharing their thoughts with us. I can't speak for my colleagues, but I'm sure that they, like me, will take your thoughts and concerns under due consideration as we move ahead with this. And again, we appreciate you coming out tonight and letting us know your opinions and thoughts on the matter. Thank you. And I think we'll take a short recess so that we can pass. What's that? You didn't. I wasn't included in the go round, but I have set up already. I didn't know. All right. I'm sorry. I thought that initiating me would have sort of said what you needed to say. Would you like to add some more? I'm certainly happy to. I actually think I have said a lot tonight. Let's clarify. It's certainly a healthy thing when people correspond with us. I was, you know, people don't know what some people wrote. And you know, sometimes I know we're a public official, so I have to take the heat. But most people were quite respectful to the point that I was reacting to a couple of them. I just wanted to say about the RFP process that whether it's a requirement or not, I haven't decided yet for myself which is preferable for the town. But I just want to say from my own experience, it's a competitive process. So it's a little hard to sit here and say, well, you guys have it hand down because you can't hands down because you can't do that because we're designing a competitive process by law. But people write letters of support for proposals. And if the kind of response we've gotten is any show of support, I would say it certainly would be invaluable in responding to a request for proposal as well. Thank you. Thank you. Do you have any communication to the select board about this matter? He posted online along with the material for this meeting. I think it has been. What's that? I'm sorry. Mr. Bauchner. I presume that onto your individual. I take it under advisement. We'll certainly take it under advisement. I'm not sure I'll check with the chair as far as just general process and procedure. Generally, things that we get, we do put out in general to be made available publicly. And so barring it being onerous to folks to do, I think we probably would likely do that. But it's a fear volume. I mean, I don't want to diminish that at all. But we'll take it under advisement in that regard. Sure. So we'll take a short recess so we can find our chair and bring her back to chair the rest of the meeting. Thank you. Does he mean I'll call him once we get her? Yeah.


All right, that's kind of a nerve-wracking way to start a presentation. So anyway, just to introduce myself, I'm Mike Wilson. Some of you might know me. Most of you probably don't. I work for Mirantis and previously was at a nice place called Bluehost and did a cool deployment at scale of OpenStack there. Some of my colleagues from Bluehost are here in the audience lending me their laptops and stuff. So hats off to them, thank you guys. Even though I'm a trader. So I wanna start out this talk by telling a little story and it has to do with deploying at scale. And it will kind of give you a big picture for why I'm even giving this presentation, why this is even a relevant topic. So when my first at scale deployment, we had to spin up on the order of tens of thousands of compute notes for the particular thing that we were doing. You can go look at my Portland talk if you wanna hear more about that. But one of the things that surprised us is we started spinning everything up and we got to a couple thousand nodes and these were just Nova compute services and kind of the bare bones of an OpenStack installation, Nova compute, Neutron, Keystone. And my SQL just started crawling, man. The thing, it couldn't handle any kind of queries. Our API slowed down. It was just completely unworkable. So our first shot at scaling the database, which is the central piece that was so slow for all these OpenStack services was adding more hardware. So we put it on SSDs. We found the biggest thing that we could out in our server racks and whatever. Give it more cores, give it more memory. Let's give it SSDs, let's see how that goes. And that got us roughly double our capacity. So we got up to about 4,000, 5,000 nodes and we had the same crawling horrible MySQL not responding problem. So we took a little different tack this time and we started optimizing MySQL settings. And that, again, that got us to about 10,000, 11,000 nodes. And then we saw the same bad behavior that we had before. So we stopped doing the wrong thing and we started analyzing our approach and deciding, well, we need a fundamental change of direction. We need a place to offload this workload. We need to be able to scale it horizontally and reliably. So by the way, at this point, we really didn't have any API users. The only load that was being generated was kind of a periodic task, a baseline load that you would have in any OpenStack installation. So yeah, what we did is we took a bunch of that traffic that was being generated by periodic tasks and we offloaded them to replication slaves. All right, so there's the big picture. So I've wanted to, ever since that happened, I've wanted to get it into Upstream OpenStack in the Ice House release. I was successful at that. And I've wanted to kind of share this experience with the community at large. I've been thinking about this a lot. It's been occupying my mind for months now.  And I think I was maybe like in a furniture store or something. And I came up with this really succinct, pictographic representation of what you need to do. That was a joke. Anyway, if you haven't been by the Berantis booth, it was kind of inspired by our awesome swag. So yeah, here are your simple instructions on how to scale your DB layer for your OpenStack service. We start out with some tools. We have some instructions along the way. We end up with a nice product at the end. We'll go through each of those steps. So first of all, one thing that OpenStack service is having in common for the most part with a few exceptions is they have a SQL backend. This is generally MySQL or Postgres. Like I said, there are exceptions to this. I'm not gonna talk so much about Postgres today because I just don't have a ton of experience with it.  Feel comforted in your superiority or at least your analogous functionality with the MySQL things that I'll talk about. PG pool, anyone? You can feel superior. It's okay. So this picture here is kind of what we do in proof of concepts for OpenStack. We spent up a single database instance. We make sure that everything works. In production, we do not wanna go it alone. We wanna have database replicas. We wanna have help. Why? Kinda the first reason is availability.  That's no fun. So right away we need some sort of disaster recovery. Strategy. We also, nobody likes downtime. So we need to have high availability. We need to have active, active, active, passive setups. And this requires us to replicate our database in one fashion or another. Another reason would be scalability. Like I said, we started seeing with just baseline load not doing anything other than spinning up nodes and installing Nova compute and a few other things on them. Our baseline load was killing our database just because of periodic tasks. So I know we can go in and we can optimize our periodic tasks and we can turn them off and whatever we can go into the code and optimize the queries and stuff. We didn't really have time to do that. So yeah, anyway, that's a use case for the scalability of the DB layer. Also, since I've been at Mirantis, I've gotten acquainted with some of our customers that don't really have a lot of nodes. Way less than thousands. But they have really busy APIs. And those APIs contend on database resources. Again, I know that the database is not the end all to making APIs fast, but just another example. Another reason you might want to replicate and make your database everywhere else is a performance question. So you may have an application that is okay with running your database on some seven-year-old hardware that's running Nagios and is serving something via Apache Tomcat and it's on 5,400 RPM spindles. Maybe that's fine for your application. And by the way, that costs way less money than buying new hardware, right? So that's cool. We want to be able to support that use case. And we also want to be able to support the use case where round-trip time is the metric. It's how we recognize success in our deployment. So for that requirement, we can deploy a separate super nice hardware class and we can send our workload to that super nice hardware and enjoy the benefits of that super nice hardware. Reliability, I don't think I've named this point correctly, but I'll try and explain it well.  And so I'll tell a story that happens quite a lot.   My goodness, it's gorgeous. It's elegant. It works so well. You're so proud of it. You turn it over to operations and they go, oh, it's really complicated. It's hard to use. It's hard to monitor. It's hard to configure. And I don't understand what's going on. This is kind of the reliability, ease of use, not a pain in the butt factor that I'm talking about here. We want things to just work with minimal operational pain. So this may not be obvious right away, but we'll make a connection with why replicas helps out with this. Yeah, so there are probably other reasons. This is just a few that I came up with. Now let's move on to the moving parts. How we make it happen. By the way, if you guys have time, you really need to Google Ikea parodies. There's really some talented people out there. Hats off to whoever came up with the Rectabular Exclusion Bracket. It's not even Exclusion, Exclusion. The trichometric indicator support. Yeah, these are brilliant. So I put these complicated parts up here for a reason. Like we're looking at this guy right here. And it looks like it has three places that we can stick it into that other part. But is it really? I mean, whoa, that's, am I really seeing what I think I'm seeing? I don't think that's actually possible. And these ambihelical hex nuts, these are really cool too, but I'm not sure they can actually screw on. Right? So there's lots of moving parts in scaling out a relational database. I wanna talk about three strategies that are commonly employed. Sharding doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the database in and of itself. But it does address some of our problems of performance, reliability, and scalability. So we'll just talk about it. So sharding, especially when you have lots of really relational, strongly relational data, you generally are gonna take your sharding and you're gonna move it into your app. And that can be hard to do when you've designed your app, not thinking about doing that in the first place. We have an example of this in OpenStack projects in Nova. I don't want to make anybody mad by saying this, but Cells API was kind of an afterthought. And it's kind of a bolt-on and it's a way to shard Nova installations. And it's elegant and it's pretty freaking cool and it accomplishes its goal of being able to handle these scalability issues. Kind of the downsides to it, it's a bit more complicated. There's a bit more management involved. It's harder to develop features for it. And I guess the point that I'm getting at is it's just not transparent to the application. It's ideal to do this when you're writing the application and not after the fact. So yeah, this is just my opinions on sharding. Let's move on to the next model, which is a asynchronous replication. So there's some pros and cons to that. Your data is just kind of fired off and the master doesn't try and get any confirmation or anything that it was ever written. Point of async, right? It's fast and unreliable. And there's some misnomers out there in the MySQL community. They have this thing called semi-synchronous replication. That's just a lie. It's synchronous replication with some caveats. Don't pay attention to that and rush that aside. Another con to asynchronous replication is it's very sensitive to operational entropy and kind of external events.  Please don't do this. But I know you already have and I know you will in the future because it's just the way things are. You set up a database slave and it replicates from the master and then someone comes up with a brilliant idea of why don't we put another database on that slave? Or why don't we use this slave to do dumps so that we can do backups? Or why don't we run humongous locking report queries that take three minutes to complete? Yeah, I see some guilty faces out there. So we know that because of the single threaded nature of replication in Base MySQL, that's a problem. You kind of need to set those aside and use them only for what they're used for. Oh, there's some ways to speed that up to make that better. Bracona has some cash warming type stuff that will help you out. MariaDB has a parallel slaving model, which is pretty cool. But yeah, it's something to take into account. Now some of the advantages of asynchronous replication is it's very simple, it's very performant, it's very easy to understand. I also think one big advantage is it's not surprising. I think everyone that's ever dealt with databases across the industry has dealt with this asynchronous replication scenario at one time or another. So you have lots of people that know how to use it. There's lots of tools built around it. In general, it makes operations very easy and very familiar for a lot of folks. Let's talk about synchronous replication. I've kind of mixed synchronous replication with clustering. I'm sorry, bad me. But I feel like they kind of deserve a discussion together. So a big advantage of synchronous replication commits are guaranteed. I can read and write from anyone at any time. My data that is supposed to be there, that I've made my application guaranteed to be there, is actually going to be there. Causality, I guess, is the fancy word for that. It's not single-threaded. I can have multiple readers. I can have multiple writers. No waiting in line. It's transparent to the application. Hooray, my application does not have to care about the persistence of relational data. It hands it off to the database and it says that's your problem to scale. Go deal with it. Some of the cons. So Galera is kind of the only slash most popular way that you can do clustering and synchronous slaving into the MySQL world. And so it requires a little bit more package maintenance. You need a WS rep patch. I think there's packages out there, but you kind of want the latest and most up to date. The Galera certification replication model is exactly what it implies. It's a certification that things are gonna work across my synchronous cluster, but that certification can fail. And sometimes in surprising ways, and if you have enough of these certification failures, your cluster is foobard, right? So just, I mean, this is a way that Galera kind of reaches its hands into your application. Just be aware of that. Also, split brain I think is kind of an operations nightmare for anybody that's dealt with clusters and quorum. The split brain problem is not fun to solve. You should also be aware that if you're counting on a synchronous Galera replicating cluster, that your writes are only gonna be as fast as your slowest node. Or another way to say that is, if you have a slow node in your cluster, everything is slowed down. Also, writes are gonna be writes times n where n is the number of nodes in your cluster. All right, I'm pointing these out and I don't want to make this sound bad. This is just the reality of synchronization points. I think we're all familiar with that. In general, Galera is freaking awesome. Clustering is freaking awesome. So yeah, but I just wanna point out some of the pros and cons of all these approaches. So I'm not gonna claim to have done a thorough job of everything that can be done, but I want to take all of these, what I would say are imperfect approaches and I want to see how we can marry them and use them as a scaling strategy going forward for our OpenStack services. So this is my result of all the work that I've done. I have a shelf. No, no, this is a metaphor. But I actually have a way to put things into compartments, which is really cool. So I can have a compartment for writes. I can have a compartment for reads and do something surprising here. I could have a compartment for API. We'll go into this a little bit later. Just wanna explain the work that I've done in NOVA today, what actually works as of the Ice House release. So I talked about those periodic tasks earlier that they generate a lot of load and they're kind of heavy on the system and maybe you don't wanna go in and turn them off and on and tune them around and stuff. So I think there are 15, 16, 17 or so periodic tasks that run in NOVA and there are five left that don't send their reads to the slave. I intend to finish that in Juneau. But so for the most part, yeah, your reads will go to a slave if you have one configured. So that's really cool. And then we also have, so we have this part of the configuration that we're all familiar with. We give, in our NOVA comp, we specify a connection to an SQL host. This guy is supposed to have a replication relationship with another handle that we've called the slave connection handle. So you have that guy in your configuration.  I've got these imbalanced here. I've got this little balance scale going on. This guy still is doing the majority of the action by far. Like I said, in my scale deployment, this was about a third of the load, but my scale deployment is, it's kind of unique. It's kind of a different beast from probably what you guys have. So before I move on to the next slide, do we have any questions at this point? I just wanna answer any of those. Okay. So, all right, so this really isn't like a perfect solution for scaling going forward. I know that. I wanna talk about what we could do with this compartmentalizing of workloads going forward and what the advantages and disadvantages of this approach could be. So these two guys up here, oh excuse me, this guy and this guy would be the right handle or the normal handle that we're all familiar with today. And this new slave handle that has been added in Icehouse. There's a large case for something that I've called causal reads, which I totally just made up and probably makes no sense at all, but I'll explain what it means. Let's say for example, when you create an instance in Nova and you're using Neutron, not Nova Network, and you don't give it a port, you give it a network, one of the things that Nova will do is it'll call the Neutron API and create a port right away, right? And then in a later process of provisioning, it then asks the Neutron API, it builds like sort of a network information structure. And so it asks the Neutron API for information. If you pointed the Neutron API at this asynchronous replication cluster here, there's a possibility that you'll write the information to the Neutron API that'll get committed to the database, then you'll read it from a slave and it won't be there and things won't work right.  I use this use case because this actually happened to me. So there's a couple of approaches. I could just retry a bunch and make that work. I don't think that's optimal. I think what's optimal is being able to further separate the right workload and optimize a hardware class for that workload and separate any reads that are causal in nature that need the data to be exactly as you've written it to put those out in a separate cluster and give the application a separate way to send its requests there. And then we can end up still with this asynchronous replication guy. This gives some advantages, obviously. You can separate the workloads. There's a cost advantage also.  So that's kind of a cost advantage rather than having a big expensive database cluster. You can keep this cluster size, the synchronous relationship between a master and a synchronous slave. You can keep that pretty small, which is good. You have less chance of running over other transactions. You're doing less writes overall. You're buying less hardware. And this really fits into the availability requirements that a lot of people have fairly nicely. If this guy fails, we move over to this guy, right? And then we pick a slave from here and make sure that he's up to date and promote him to the new API handle. So I don't think this is perfect, but I think this kind of work, this kind of tiered replication approach, combined with some optimization and some not so abusive use of our database APIs and our services across OpenStack allows us to scale maybe not to what the charter wants, which is millions of nodes, but I think hundreds of thousands is very doable. So, oh, look at that.  Bad me. Any questions? Can you just say it in the mic so it gets recorded for the benefit of posterity? Where is the decision made whether you're gonna call the asynchronous instance or the fully synchronized instance? Is that done in the API layer? And how does that work? Does it first call, and if it doesn't get what it expects, it calls the other one? How does that work? So the decision is made by the application. So for example, in Nova, these periodic reads, they basically, they know that if a slave connection is configured, that they prefer to send their reads there. And so it's just kind of like, it's just a little Boolean flag that we pass on to the data, the object layer. And the object layer knows, oh, okay, I'll pass this through the database API. The database API is gonna use this other handle. So it's very context dependent for the asynchronous case. For this other case where reads have to, you have to have reads that are up to date and in sync. This is much easier to do actually. We can intercept any kind of read at the database driver itself. And we can just make the decision. We can say, well, this didn't go to the slave handle. So it must be going to our all other reads handle. Does that answer your question? So my question is, can you please go back to the previous slide? Certainly. So this node that is called casual reads, it seems like the most loaded one because it receives writes from all writes node and it is read by this async replication node. So does it actually helps to split the workload because you still have one node that is the most loaded and that becomes the bottleneck? So that is like a really fair question and that's up for debate. And I don't really have empirical data to say yes or no. But I'll just give you what I can from my experience in an at scale environment. There was kind of an unreasonable jump from being stuck at 12,000 nodes and being really slow to as soon as we moved reads off, we were able to scale horizontally. Right now that environment is at 20,000 nodes or something and it's just fine. Like I attribute that to contention, lock contention, row contention, table contention, other stuff like that. So I also attribute that to, in this environment, there are no reads going to that write master. There are no reads at all. It's completely optimized for a write workload. So. Yeah, but it is read by a sync replication. Right, yeah. So again, my gut feeling is that yes, separating the workloads allows you to optimize the MySQL instance here for more write stuff and optimize the MySQL instance here for more read stuff. But it's up for grabs. I still have to be able to say that definitively. If you're using synchronous replications that are synchronous and then you can actually load balance the API calls across those load balances. So what if you don't use Galera? So semi-synchronous is actually synchronous, right? That's another way to look at this and there are other synchronous slaving models out there. So with semi-sync replications, semi-sync on the bit log, so you're still single threaded, right? So. Right, yeah. So that's a sign. But if you're using Galera for the synchronous application site, you would typically at least have three nodes because you want to avoid that split-ranks there that you're using. Sure, yep. So you'd have your quorum, but then that allows you to load balance across multiple synced nodes. So I've seen this where you've got three or four nodes, how many ever, with the async off of those and that tends to work and that solves the problem that you just mentioned. Okay. Cool. Just curious what kind of experiences you have with the synchronous replication as far as quorum sizes. Are we talking like three, five or larger and maybe relative to the number of nodes in the cluster? So I'm fairly new to the synchronous side of things. I guess my limited experience is a quorum size of around five. That tends to be the average. I don't know exactly, but I think we'll keep that for hundreds of compute nodes. I don't know enough about the threshold of where we would consider a different setup. So for Nova, I know the workload pretty well. I'm actually gonna, there's a presentation that I'm gonna refer you to here that does a really good breakdown of the workload for each service. Nova is more reads than writes, I would say about 60, 40. But yeah, I don't have anything in my head about the other services. But yeah, check out this presentation because this is actually J-Pypes and he's done a really good job of breaking that down. Yep. So I think conceptually the way I'm envisioning this is I don't care about it inside of open stack services. I delegate that responsibility to the load balancer or the VIP or whatever you're using to distribute load. It should be doing health checks. Maybe it's your operations team that's sitting there watching Nagios and going, wow, the slave's really far behind.  But I'm not taking responsibility for that in a service. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. So like I said at my first deployment, all reads go to a slave and all writes go to another handle. So we ran into like that neutron use case that I talked about that that's one thing that we ran into. That's the significant ones. Kind of after we did that, we went through and looked at the API, IPIs that we exercised and we decided based on context, yeah, this is good to keep sending to asynchronous slaves or no, no, this has got to be up to date. But that deployment is a special case. The API is special. It's not used quite like we would expect it to be used. Another question that I have is failover and disaster recovery. Do you have some automation for this or what do you do if any of these nodes go down? So in this, so as far as async replication, there's lots of tools that are built around kind of providing HA with, you know, promoting a slave, figuring out which one is the most up to date and making that guy the master. With this little tiered model that I'm toying around with, you'd probably be able to mix that with the existing tool set that exists for clustering. But yeah, I mean, a Google search will show you all kinds of tools around asynchronous slaves. Is that answer your question? Well, for async, yes, it's quite clear how we handle it, but for asynchronous part, like what do we do in such case? So Galera has a scheme for that and I'm purposely not gonna talk about that because I don't know enough about it, but it's fairly automated in how it heals itself from what I understand. Well, from what I know, Galera sometimes have issues with bringing slaves back online. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, the theory is I take a guy that's pristine out, I take the broken guy out, I use the pristine guy to rebuild him, I do some certification, I put him back in and sometimes that doesn't work. But for the most part, I feel like it's a pretty good model. Let's see here. So I hadn't really thought about that part. I kind of just left it up to Galera and said, you know what, they'll work out some of these kinks, they'll work out some of these bugs. So it's like a half done and still needs some work? Yeah, it still needs work. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Yeah. Does it affect, oh. In NOVA, the periodic tasks don't care about data that's behind. Yeah, yeah, because the scheduler does get state out of the database. But in a general case, that's kind of an acceptable thing for the most part, right? The scheduler can get slightly out of date information because by the way, our schedulers are always out of date. So we're not really changing things a whole lot. But as far as other periodic tasks, they're kind of cleanup tasks for the most part. So they're not sensitive to old data. And kind of what we've put in the operations guide is please don't let your slaves get more than 100 milliseconds behind. That's your responsibility as an operator. And those are the assumptions that the code makes. Your work looks great for read, but I want to run a problem that we encountered by you which is focused more on write. Sure. So with 100 compute nodes and two services and over network and compute on each node, we observed a lot of contention for table services. Yeah. I don't think your work would really address that. No, but the service group API does address that very well. You have lots of back-end choices for the service group API. You can use ZooKeeper, you can use Memcache or you can use SQL. And the default SQL implementation is rather bad for any sort of scale. So I just recommend you look at some of those other back-ends because they're pretty cool. Cool, thanks. What else? Well, thank you all. You've been a great audience.  I am totally out of time. So thank you very much. You have my contact information. Feel free to go hold me on Twitter or IRC.