So seeing the presence of a quorum, I'm going to call this meeting of GOL to order. It is in fact, 1030 on February 17th. This meeting is being conducted by a remote participation pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law. This meeting is being recorded. And I'm gonna take a moment now and just make sure that everyone who is present can be heard and can speak. So I'll start with Lynn. Present, but not a member of the committee. Right, and I'm going to go to Mandy. Present. And Pat. Present. And I just, oh wait, there's Sarah there. Sarah. Present. Thank you. And we have a guest this morning. Jan, if you just let us know that you can be heard. I'm here, thank you. Thank you very much. And of course we have our note taker as always. So everyone is present and can be heard. And I have up on the screen the agenda for this morning's meeting. We're going to begin with a discussion with Jen for about 20 minutes or less on just basically proclamations in general. And I'll try to explain how this came about. And I have a little overhead I want to put up on the screen in a moment to guide us or at least to be as a reference point as we talk. Then we're going to turn to the rules of procedure. We have a couple of things I think we need to look at based on the council discussion last Monday. And then we want to look, we just got the TSO public ways policy. And so that document is also in your folder. We'll take a look at that. And then we will turn to the timeline for time management goals. So we want to get to that as quickly as we can because we need Lynn's involvement there. And then hopefully we'll have time for bylaws for future consideration. There is an issue with the minutes and it may very well be the chair. I'm pretty sure it probably is, but I don't actually have the January 20 minutes, though they may very well have been said to me. What I got was the February 3rd minutes. And that's actually what's in your folder. So I'm going to call that a typo, a Scrivener's error. But Athena, at some point, we might want to just help the chair clarify what happened to the January 20 minutes. They probably buried somewhere in some file. I resent them earlier this morning. Thank you. I lost them.  I will, that's okay. Somehow they, I miss them. Okay. All right, so if you will bear with me, I'm going to close the agenda file. Actually, I'm going to just, yeah. And I want to open it up. Just hang on for a second. This may take a moment. That should be okay. Let's try it again. Share a screen. I want to take a look at this.  So Athena has put together on the website and Lynn sent this to me a list of not, I think all of the proclamations we've done over the last three years. And so what I picked out here, and I need your help, and I think Jen can help us as well, the kinds of proclamations that we have done multiple times. So every January, we've done a Black History Month, we've done an MLK, and this year for the first time, we did Chinese New Year's Spring Festival. In March, I believe every year we've done it to Beth Day proclamation in June and May. In June, we have lots going on, race, amity day. I'm not sure about Memorial Day. I think that wasn't done every year, by Juneteenth and the LGBT proclamation. And then September of Puerto Rico, though I don't think we did it last year. So I had a question about that. And then we've done small business Saturday and human rights day in December. So my sense is what I'd like to create, not necessarily today, but over time, it's just a list of what we regularly do. Obviously, there are other proclamations that come along and we just do them when they come. But some of these, I think all of these perhaps are things that we regularly do. And a gentleman came up at the last meeting, unfortunately, the counselor who brought it up is not here, but I thought she made a good point. Where do these say like the Chinese New Year, the Tibet Day, the Puerto Rican, right? These come from ethnic communities within the town. And so there's a question, first of all, about the Chinese New Year, one, where did that come from? And is it something that we would expect to be doing every year? And then in general, a question about how these kinds of proclamations get generated, could we perhaps create more? There are other communities in town that we should reach out to was one question. Are there some missing here from my list that should be added so that the future chairs of GOL and future GOL committees have a pretty clear sense of what to expect each month? And so it was questions along that line. So Jen, first of all, I guess, tell us a little bit about the Chinese New Year proclamation, how that came about. George, before you do that, all I can see is, I can't see the list, I know you read through it and I don't need to see it, but if you're screen-sharing, all I see is documents with names and a lot of them. So I'm not sure what you're trying to show right now. Okay, so is that true for everybody? They're not looking at a, basically, everyone's seeing the same wrong document. Well, it's not a document, it's a list of documents in PDF form, so it's in like all of them. Yeah, like all of them in use. All right, what I see on my screen is the document I open. So maybe let me stop screen-sharing again. Okay. Sorry, but- No, no, thank you. I was gonna say the same thing as that. Okay, I hit share screen. This is the, I'm clicking on the document that here, and then I'm gonna try share again. Yes. Yes. All right, I don't know what happened that I apologize. So please, if that happens in the future, just yell out. Don't be shy. Just say, that's not the right document. So this is what I put together. And so one question is whether this is accurate, whether it could be added to. That's the kind of thing maybe for the future, but I welcome some help on that today or future comments. But for Jen, the question is first of all, in the case of the Chinese New Year, how they came about and how in the future we can reach out to other communities within Amherst in terms of proclamations. And also the question of whether we want to. I mean, so there's a lot of questions here, but let's start, Jen, which is how the Chinese New Year one came about. So part of being a community participation officer is engaging with the community. And so I personally happen to know a lot of the African-American geared holidays and celebrations. So it is a lot easier for me. That's how we ended up with the Juneteenth proclamation is. I just, I created it knowing that Juneteenth was something that needed to be recognized last year. The Chinese New Year, I wanted to do last year, but I didn't, you know, I have, there's a Kwanzaa and then there's MLK Day and then there's Black History Month and I couldn't quite squeeze it in. So I was able to get it in this year and so I just created one and reached out to the community members to have them review it, to make sure that I was accurate with what was being said and to make sure that I wasn't being insulting because that's the worst, the last thing that I want to be doing is the goal is to be more inclusive. We have a large Asian population that I think should be in, we should be more engaged with and it's a way to start opening up the door for engagement and communication and- I agree, yeah, yeah, yeah. Thoughts for my colleagues, questions for my colleagues, Pat. Yeah, I really like the idea of including more ethnic groups and in our proclamations. So, and I know that there's a large Cambodian population. I don't know the holidays. So, yeah, go ahead, Jennifer. So we don't do anything that's religious-based, but there is a Southeast Pacific Islander Heritage Month that occurs in May. So last year I had joined, we in town have a South Cambodian Southeast Asian Committee that's not, you know, part of the town. And so I joined that and we were trying to come up with something for May, but then COVID happened and it kind of, you know, I don't, just COVID, that's really all we can say about everything at this moment is just COVID. So, I'm gonna try and have a proclamation prepared for May for their month. There's no flag raising during that time period because there's so many countries and then there's a conflict, I think, I believe between which flag to utilize and not, and so to stay out of that part of it, a proclamation and maybe some type of online event would be great. You know, it's really about us educating our community about the different cultures that are here in Amherst and having them help celebrate it. There is a Middle Eastern or Indian, I think it's more Middle Eastern though, holiday, I believe in October that I would like to reach out to some more community members to create. And Mrs. Musanti, John Musanti's wife reached out and she would like to do a proclamation for April for Child Awareness Day. So that will be coming shortly. We had a proclamation from years ago, so I gave her that as a template to use to create a new one. So for the most part, those heritage ones, and if you know people who have different cultural celebrations than they should all be included, I think we should try and include as much as we can. Pat. Yeah, and I'm assuming these get posted to the town website. But it's unclear to me now that we don't read proclamations when we're voting on them. How does this get out to the public? How does it, and I'm putting quotes around this, how does it matter? Well, I try to host an event to surround it, right? And so that will go out in the news announcements and if we can get it on our social media platform so that it can be sent out, then I can grab it on my Facebook page and share it out and members of the community can do as well. But I typically try to attach it to some type of event. Thank you. Vandy. So I must say I really support what you're doing, Jennifer, and I think it's great to try and expand these beyond or the traditional ones we've had prior to the last couple of years. I do have a question. I liked hearing about which other ones you are. In terms of sort of the Latina ones, it's really only Puerto Rican Heritage Day or the Puerto Rico Day, which I think we did not do this past 2020 because we were asked sort of not to from the schools. I think the schools have normally driven that one. And there wasn't going to be, given COVID, anything in person for that one with the school. With the new Cominantes program, is there more than just Puerto Rico Heritage Day that we should be sort of honoring regarding the Latinx community? I don't know. And so given that program and that they're going to be teaching Spanish immersion and all, that would be one that I'd, if we could explore whether there's anything else, that would be fantastic, I think. Yeah. So last year, I spoke with Marta Gwovera because she's the one who I connect with for the Puerto Rican Heritage Month. And so they did not want to have the proclamation and not be able to have the celebration that they wanted to honor it with. So they decided not to. And then there is like a Latin or Hispanic Heritage Month. But when I spoke to her about that, and there's a specific day, there's a cultural conflict in there somewhere that I don't have all of the background, but I was like, okay, I won't move forward, right? So the important piece of it is that whatever proclamation, whatever culture you're trying to help the community engage with, you have to be careful to make sure that you are not being insulted. Because had I ran with that, the Hispanic Heritage Month, that would have been quite insulting for many. So I'm glad that I didn't. And I'm glad that I kept in touch with Marta. So I'm very, I try to be very mindful and conscious of the proclamations and what's in them, like for context and then what it means to the community as a broad as a whole. Thank you for that explanation. On a sort of a non-question thing, more of a, I guess, a clerical thing for George, I will send this to you, but I added what was helpful to me was, you put in January, say Black History Month. Well, Black History Month is February, not January. And so this is organized by when sort of GOL and then you need to do it. So what I did was in parentheses after Black History Month, I went in and added February. You know, and so we have an idea of when each of these are celebrated too. So I will send that to you because I found that helpful to me, especially for the May, June ones, like which ones are in May, which ones are June, which ones are June, are they? Right, no, it's a draft. Yeah, I'll send you what I did. Thank you. But I found that helpful and it's probably helpful to Jennifer too, to sort of keep track of when it needs to be in GOL. Right, so, and I think that, so for like December, the human rights days is December 10th, so that's pretty close. So you might wanna move that one up to November. So it just appears that some of them are in the actual month that the proclamation is read and then, or the event that surrounds it. And then some of them are based on when they have to go through. So if you just even that out a little bit, that would be perfect. Good, that's why it's up here and I appreciate it. This is great. I think, yeah, go ahead. I don't know that we've, if we've had a Memorial Day proclamation, I think that's only if we've had the actual parade, I can't quite remember. And I don't know Labor Day either, yeah. We have the files here though, so I can look too. I think that the focus is appropriately, especially given your work, on the many ethnic communities that are in the town. And I really, really do like the idea of making the community aware of the diversity and richness of what we have. And this is one small way in which we can do it. And so that I think is fantastic. I thought Pat raised a good question though, and this is maybe something Lynn might wanna weigh in on or she may actually not like to hear because in the sense that one of the things we're trying to do is get our meetings to go a little bit more quickly. We really do spend an enormous amount of time. On the other hand, I've always felt that having, back in the days when we could meet in person, having members of that community present and having the proclamation read or at least recognize in public was really an important piece of what we're doing. And right now, understandably, given the pressures of our agenda, they end up pretty much in the consent agenda. And so it's just sort of, it's just like an aside. So I kind of share with Pat, I think the sense that we need to think about as a council and maybe GOL could help a way in which we can actually take a few moments at the beginning of our meetings if we have proclamations and at least with some of them that recognize a specific community actually either read them or somehow have a few moments where we recognize them and acknowledge them not just putting them in the agenda and passing it as a consent item. So that's something I have felt a sort of torn between the desire to get our meetings to move more quickly but also the importance of recognition which is exactly what you're doing, Shannon, it's really important. So any thoughts there? I thought Pat, yeah, go ahead. Yeah, I really thank you for talking about really bringing it back. It's not what makes our meeting longer. It is the issues, it is, let's just be honest about that. It doesn't, you know, we're talking because it's already been voted on, it's done and we're honoring a community. The problem is us and grandstanding and important arguments maybe, you know, so I think what we really need to do is get back to honoring, what does that mean? It doesn't mean an incentive agenda. Right, right. So that's something, Lynn, go ahead, please. Yeah, so one option might be that in the, after we call the meeting to order in the announcements, we, you know, make a statement like, tonight we are particularly honoring the following group. And there is a proclamation in the consent agenda. I mean, I suppose if people felt it was appropriate, we could, you know, ask somebody, but here's where Jennifer I think is extremely sensitive and that is if you ask one person to speak from one community, you end up potentially offending five others. So I wanna be very careful about that, but just maybe in an announcement of saying we're honoring them and there is a proclamation is at least a minimal start to this. I don't think it's enough. Well, Patti, yeah, Mandy, please. So I've torn on this because I don't necessarily agree with Pat on the reading at the same time because our meetings are for our business and proclamations in some sense are our business, but are some sense not. And I know that sounds very strange, but, you know, we're there to get our work done as a council, but there's a couple of things I wanted to bring up. I was gonna suggest the announcements, but I was gonna suggest it in the print, but also in the verbal, many of these proclamations are associated with actual ceremonies and festivals and celebrations, as Jennifer said. We have been a very bad about announcing them and if we're gonna pass a proclamation that includes asking the community to go to that, we should be announcing that in my mind more than reading the text of necessarily the proclamation because that gets read at the celebration. Melrose does it in a way that might be nice, but might also really add time, and this is where I'm torn. Melrose actually after they pass the proclamations, this doesn't work in Zoom, but they actually then read it in the meeting and they bring up the person that sponsored it and they have a full council photograph with the actual formal proclamation that is signed the really nice thing and they probably have seals and all on it. We're not there yet because we're so new, but just that an actual ceremony during the council meeting, that obviously adds more time, but so I bring that up. I don't know whether I support that per se, but there are maybe ways to learn from other councils throughout the Commonwealth as a way to do this that does recognize stuff. And I guess it would be interesting to see how Northampton does it, how some, Eastampton some of the councils that are similar sized to us or with similar sized towns to see whether they actually read them in their meetings or whether they generally read them at the event that they are happening for. Because I personally like the reading at the event, but we need to as a council notify people of the event. Yeah, I think there's a ceremonial aspect to our job, I guess, and I think that you're right, that it creates issues, a number of issues we have to be careful about. One of them is obviously we do not wish to offend any members of the community we try to recognize. And secondly, we do have a concern to get our business done. So this is, I think for a future discussion, I wanna honor my commitment to Jen to get her out of here no later than 11. But I think that this is something, what I hear from Lynn and I think I hear from my other colleagues is at least take a first step by acknowledging these when they come in some fashion. I still personally would like to see if it's appropriate, a representative, a sponsor, whatever from the community, realizing that there might be cases where that just isn't possible and that's fine. But if it were possible, I think there is something just very effective in moving about that. Obviously easier when we could physically be present, now it's a little bit more complicated. So maybe this is for the future. But what I'm hearing is that there is a sense that we'd like to recognize it a bit more and we have to work on how to do that. And we also are very grateful to Jen and what she's been doing and want to encourage her to keep doing it. So this was an attempt for GOL just to get a sense of the lay of the land. And this has been very helpful. So... Jen have your hand raised. Oh, please Jen. Yeah, I just want to chime in and then I'll have to go. So everyone knows I'll be on the middle district's live broad show broadcast. So I'm very honored to do that as well. All right, good. So, A, the select board used to require that whoever was sponsoring the, whoever brought the proclamation to the select board would go and speak. And typically that meant if there was an event behind it that a flyer to the event would be included in the packet. And so that was helpful. I can't quite remember if they read the proclamation there as well live. I don't necessarily think that that's a bad idea. I think you guys have a different platform of listeners that might attend these events. And so to read that proclamation and to give that historical piece about it is very helpful to the culture and the awareness. I also would like to say that, you know and I don't know if you guys have time and also the proclamations probably take like three minutes to read, right? So, but also, and I don't know if appropriate or not but just something for you guys to think about like the land acknowledgement from the Indigenous people and the African-American contribution that was created by a town community member, Lauren Mills is something that you guys should think about reading at the beginning of all of your meetings. And, you know, like I don't know if that's too how that lies, but it shows the community that you guys are working on improving and acknowledging and recognizing the history of different cultures. So that's it. It's been a pleasure. I have to go. I'm very nervous. And I'll break a leg as we stay in forming. If you guys have more questions, please feel free to email me or I can come back anytime. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Bye. I want just to say, Sarah, I cannot because I'm sharing screen, I cannot see a hand raised. So I'm trusting my colleagues to speak up if Sarah is trying to get in and speak because all I see is her name. So once I go away from screen sharing, I can see everyone again, but at the moment I can only see a name. So, Sarah, if you have something to say, please go right ahead. Otherwise, I'm just, I've actually thrown it out to you for just to the committee as a whole, what our next steps will be or are there any next steps at the moment? Obviously I'm going to work on this draft and bring that back to you and we'll get that fixed just as an internal document for our sake. I'm hearing that the committee would suggest to the president that we do, at least initially we make some effort to just acknowledge proclamations at the beginning of the meeting and then maybe in the future. I mean, TSO technically is the outreach committee. As I was listening, I was thinking, where did outreach go, right? Remember OCA and outreach went to TSO. And so maybe this is something I can raise with the TSO chair as something that that committee can work on a bit. Because technically, GOL, we're just management, right? We just sort of make sure things are done. And so any final thoughts on this in terms of where you want to go, other than a better draft would be helpful. The calendar would be better. Sort of a message to the president who's present anyway. Anything else that you'd like me to work on? Do you want me to reach out to TSO? Does that even make sense? Since outreach is technically part of their charge. I don't see why it needs to go to TSO. Okay, just let me just saying, they could continue the conversation with Jen. Okay, all right, that's fine. I mean, we could be the contact person. There's no problem with that. Okay, so unless there's further thoughts, I'm going to move on to the next anybody. I don't see any hands. I can't see Mandy at the moment, but I'm assuming that we're done with this item. Okay. All right, we need to go to review of rules of procedure based on the council discussion last Monday and my sense. So I'm going to stop share for a moment and we'll see what happens. See what bad things happen. And I'm just hopefully find, all right, put you away. My reading of the meeting was that there were two rules of procedure that we need to review based on the council discussion. And if I'm missing something, please speak up. One was rule 5.7. Councilor Brewer raised a concern that I feel we need to at least discuss. I'm not sure how we're going to address it. I'm kind of hoping Mandy will be able to enlighten me here. And then the other was the rule procedure 6.3, both D and E. So I was going to take them in order. Did anyone have a sense that there were other rules that I felt everything else pretty much? There were no objections that I could see that were raised. I felt those were the two rules that we need to spend some time on this morning. So if you'll bear with me for a moment, I'm going to try to put this document up. This is a, yeah, we'll see how this works. So this is the word version with the changes in it. And I'm going to move away for a moment. Sorry about this, guys. All right, that's not what I wanted. I have too many things on my desktop. It's pretty sad. Okay. All right, share screen. Let's see what happens. Okay. So this should be it. Yeah. Okay, so if I, sorry. And so I'm going to move this up. So you should see the very first page of our town council rules and procedure. And I'm going to scroll down to 5.7, try not to get dizzy. Okay. So open meetings and my sense was it was 5.7 D. This also may impact the appendix B, but Councilor Brewer had a concern about how this is notified to the public. And the document says that this should be, there should be a published notification of the open meeting on the town bulletin board and the town calendar. And so she felt this was not adequate. I'm hoping some of you actually understand why because I don't, since it's on the town calendar and the town bulletin board. So Mandy, please help enlighten me. I'm not sure I quite understand it either, although I think what I got from her concern was that D does not actually require it to be a council meeting. Even though it says town calendar, and I think Councilor Brewer wanted it to be clear that this would be called as a council meeting. Section 8.1 doesn't require that either, but I think that was her concern is that it be called as a council meeting with a council agenda, quorum requirements, all of that stuff. And so how you might be able to modify this, that determines the request meets the requirements of Charter Section 8.1, and since the date, time and location for the meeting, the clerk of the town council shall publish notification on the town bulletin board. And as a council meeting on the town calendar, maybe. Okay, that would perhaps address it, but the question I guess the bigger question is why does it need to be a council meeting? I think can somebody enlighten me there? It doesn't have to be, I think Councilor Brewer was asking for it to be. And why? Why does she want it to be? Because there might be, yeah, anybody help me there? I didn't quite get a sense of why she felt it had to be a council meeting. Is it because, I don't know. My intention is, is because she wants to make sure that councillors can and that not be just seen as, you know, a group of residents have a meeting, but it's not considered a public meeting. It's not considered a specially called meeting, but I am just speculating. I didn't get a clear sense from her comments and I did not reach out to her, which is my fault. But I mean, this isn't that kind of meeting. I guess my first thought is just that this is a different kind of meeting. It's called by the residents to have a, you know, but okay, I mean, I guess the argument would be it's called by the residents to address the council on some topic. And so Alyssa thought would be something to the effect that well, surely that should then be an official meeting of the council. So may I guess that's the argument that, you know, we're not talking about talking to the school committee. We're not talking about a meeting addressing the library. This is a meeting called by the residents to address the council about a specific matter. And her argument would be, I take it surely that should be, you know, listed and acknowledged as a official meeting of the council. It's not just a kind of get together a chit chat. So I guess that's the, and that does make some sense to me since they are gathering to address us on a specific item, it would seem to be appropriate if only at the level of courtesy, let alone anything else, that it'd be an official council meeting where we expect counselors to be present and minutes to be taken. So I'm beginning to see, I think what she's trying to make the point, there should be a record of it. And the question is, is that what we want? So that makes more sense to me, Pat. Oh, I'm sorry, go with Sarah first. I'm sorry, Sarah, please. Athena also has her hand up. And so I'm wondering if she might, what I would say is that if we're not sure on this, but it was important to Alyssa, because Alyssa knows a lot more about process than I think most of us do, except for, you know, maybe Athena who has her hand up. I think before we make any decisions here, I think that we might want to speak to Alyssa and find out exactly and find out why this was important to her and also find out what process we should be following and why, just my suggestion. Okay, okay. You would ask that we reach out to her first before we make any changes, okay? Athena, please. I advise that we post these as open meetings. I think they meet the standards of open meetings. We're discussing things within the council's authority among a quorum. I don't see why we wouldn't. I advise us to always post them as open meetings. I agree with Alyssa that it should be posted that way. We've done it the last time we did an open meeting of the residents. I think it was about the DSRO project on Northampton Road. We posted that as an open meeting. I think that should be our standard. Okay, I think I'm seeing the logic behind that. I think that's exactly what Alyssa was saying. I just didn't quite follow it at the time, but so the question then goes back to this. I know Athena can weigh in here that maybe Mandy's suggestion. I just need language now that would ensure that it's posted that way because it shall publish notification of the open meeting which sounds to me in my simple minded way as exactly what we want, but it's not. I think we can add the phrase as a council meeting. You know, after, you know, so it would read shall publish notification of the open meeting on the town bulletin board and town calendar as a council meeting or something. Or a special council meeting, I guess. Or a special council meeting as a special council meeting. And where do you want that inserted? Do you want that? I think before the between and in town calendar and as a special council meeting on the town calendar. My only concern about using the word special is that special is used when we don't plan. It's sometimes used when we don't plan to have public comment. But it's not a regular meeting and we can still have public comment special meetings and it is a special meeting. It's under charter 8.1. Yeah, I actually agree with posting this as a public meeting. I say that again, Lynn, I'm sorry. I feel these need to be posted as town council meeting. Yeah, I think we'll, yeah. Okay, I think there's agreement there. Sarah, would you be satisfied with the sense that with this discussion and with Athena's input, this is exactly what Alyssa had in mind and that by adding this language, we would be meeting that concern because otherwise this would require us to meet in two weeks and I don't see any reason to postpone it. Also the language, if there's a problem with the language, we could change it at the actual council meeting. But I'd like to have this before the council at the next council meeting and not have to go back because if I do reach out to Alyssa, we'll have to postpone this until March 3rd. I'm fine with that. I think maybe this is just a heads up for us. I mean, George, you're the one that was like, I'm not so sure. And I don't think any of us said anything ahead of time. So maybe this is just a good reminder for all of us more reading things. If we don't really understand, maybe we should at that point, either if you catch it or if we catch it, try to say, well, maybe we should have that hearing out to them before or that we should invite them, but I didn't catch it. So there's no, I mean, I don't find any blame on that. I'm just saying, oh. It would have been nice to have her here. I agree. Yeah. George, I just have one clerical thing to fix in C. C, the request to be. When I put the hyperlink into town council at AmherstMA.gov for the hyperlink, it added into the actual wording instead of just the hyperlink, the mail to colon. So I think in the wording itself, we just need to delete the mail to colon. It won't delete the hyperlink.  What wording was hyperlinked? Let me see if I can do this. Who failed us, Mandy? I don't know, no, I should do this. You weren't perfect. I was not perfect, Pat. Yeah, what you did was fine, George. Just like that. And no colon, so it says the council or by email at, and then town council at AmherstMA, okay. Yep, and it'll be hyperlinked in the document that way. All right, so what we have now, and this is a change to the document. So we will need to vote on this in a moment, but let me just make sure the language is what we want. D will now, we're suggesting amending it to insert this phrase. So we'll now read, once the council president determines the request meets the requirements of charter section 8.1 and sets the date, time and location for the meeting, the clerk of the town council shall publish notification of the open meeting on the town militant board and as a special council meeting posted on the town calendar, comma, and notify the first 10 residents who made the request. Notifications shall be published in at least 10 days in advance of the open meeting. So essentially we're inserting that phrase after and. Do we need the word posted? I guess that's a good question. I don't know. I don't know the answer. As a special council meeting, we don't, is that? As a special council meeting on the town calendar. It just seemed to be an important word for Alyssa, but is it, is it just redundant? Well, we're publishing notification as a special town council meeting on the town calendar. Right, right. That's, that's posting. Okay. So let me take that out. So now reads as a special council meeting on the inserted. Okay. So, okay, Mandy. I move to add the phrase as a special. Council meeting on the, between the words and and town calendar in rule section, no, 6, 5.7 D. Second. So we have a motion and we have a second. Any more discussion? Realize I cannot see all hands. So if you have anything to say, just yell it out. But otherwise I'm going to move immediately to a vote. And so I'll start with Mandy. I and Pat. I, Sarah. I, the chair is also I, and we have one absent. So the vote is four is zero with one absent. The motion carries. Now, does this again, try not to get dizzy, but does this effect do we need to make any changes to appendix B in terms of making it clear to whoever signs this or reads it that. So it says the following residence, the town of Amherst, submit this request, blah, blah, blah. Okay. And so where in this does it say that it's going to be what happens against the question becomes, does this document need to state somewhere? What happens after this is submitted and supposedly happens? Do we need to say anything on this document? Or is this sufficient? I think we decided this was sufficient as long as you have the rule stating what happens afterwards. So I'm hearing that there's no desire or need to change this either based on the discussion at the council meeting or I'm based on what we've just done. This is adequate. This is fine. I don't remember anyone raising an issue with it, but it sounds like I'm that's true. Okay. All right, I'm going to move then to six. What is it? Six D and E. Point three. Oh, yeah, 6.3. So again, try not to get dizzy, but let me just scroll here. So I attempted to come up with a modification of 6.3 D. OK, before let me I'm sorry. 6.3. So right. So currently we have this language and it raised a whole host of concerns, I think, amongst people. Our intention was simply to encourage people or to remind people that they have the tool of calling the question. But yeah, first of all, this needs to come out. Mandy has some language she'd like to propose to fix this. I have an even more radical suggestion, which we can perhaps wait until after we look at Mandy's language. But my thought is that we might not fix it at all. I know who just take up just leave it the way it was. And so let's start with Mandy. Let's see, Mandy, what are you suggesting we do here to? I know three of us were here when we initially made this proposed recommendation, but Sarah was not.  I originally proposed at least the point of adding the previous question into D. And then we came up with we didn't like that being allowed to be interrupting. So we were adding this phrase or speak without recognition. Because the goal for trying to add the previous question into not needing recognized was it's hard. It could add time to the debate or to the time it takes to get to a vote if you have to be recognized before you can call the question in that at least in the Zoom era, your hands are in an order. People might be ready to be done, but people might continue talking. And it just might take a while to get there, even if people were ready to be done the discussion. And so I wanted to propose something that might, if people are ready to be done the discussion, because you have to remember a previous question requires a two-thirds vote. So nine people who are actually, if we have all 13 voting, it would require nine to actually end debate, to figure out a way to get to that question more efficiently if someone wants to actually call the question. And so the point that there was concerned that people would be able to interrupt that it's not allowed in terms of Robert's rules or why are we restating Robert's rules? So given that, I'm going to read what my proposal is. It changes and adds a couple of things. It will be two sentences, but indeed, I didn't add an extra E. I don't know how people will like that. And I came up with this, or at least this proposal originally, because of one thing of efficiency. But I remembered when the Charter Commission visited Brookline, and I actually went and looked up Brookline's rules, which is a town meeting. We were all as town meeting members and Charter commissioners surprised that Brookline allows someone who has not been recognized to speak to call the question in Brookline town meeting. They can just at the end of a speaker between speakers call the previous question. And that surprised us all and was something that we all thought of, oh, wow, that is potentially efficient. You still have to vote. But it might be a little more efficient in getting and plays less games, as we all know from town meeting that moderators would, in some sense, play a game on who they call in an attempt to, if they had figured it out, get to someone who might call the question. And so just allowing you to do that without recognition sort of stops those games. So here's all that is to say, here's my proposed change. I will read the whole two sentences and then discuss and then explain what my changes are. Counselors shall not interrupt a colleague except to raise a point of order, to express a point of personal privilege, or to assert the Charter right to postpone. Counselors shall not speak without recognition, except to call the previous question or doubt the presence of a quorum. And so what I did was I moved the doubt, the presence of a quorum from interrupting a colleague to speaking without recognition. I added to interrupting a colleague to assert the Charter right to postpone because our Charter seems to imply that that can be done at any time during debate. The other two point of order and point of personal privilege, I went back to Robert's rules, those are interruptible points. There are a number of other points where you can interrupt someone speaking, but those are two of them. And so I left that with interrupting a colleague because Robert's rules are default already allows that. Robert's rules does not allow someone to interrupt a colleague to doubt the presence of a quorum. So I actually removed that from that sentence and added it to speaking without recognition. And then that's where I also added the call the previous question, because that's what I felt the original GOL's position was on calling the previous question in terms of recommending this change. Good, now I'm prepared to start writing, putting this text into the document, but maybe first before I start that, just general thoughts on what Mandy's proposing. So, and again, I cannot see Sarah's hand. I can see Lynn, Mandy, and Pat. So if anyone wants to just make some general remarks, or do you want us to put this text up first? I mean, I want to reinforce, I guess, the thought that the reason, this is more for Sarah, I think, the reason this was done was to allow people the opportunity, not by interrupting people, but by speaking without recognition to call the question to help move the debate along. In other words, it's been going on for 15, 20 minutes or whatever, and you're waiting to be recognized. This would allow you in a period where there is silence to say, I call the question. And I guess the question is, for us, is that something people are comfortable with? So not interrupting someone, not so Mandy speaking, I just shout out, I call the question. That would not be permissible. But once Mandy were through speaking, but before the president or the presiding officer recognized another speaker, this would allow me or someone to say, you know, Madam President, I call the question. Are people comfortable with that? The idea behind it is that, first of all, it's a motion, it requires a second. Is that correct me? It does require a second, and then it goes to another. Right, a vote immediately without debate. So it's a motion, it requires a second, and it goes immediately to a vote. There's no debate, and it requires two thirds. So the whole series of, you know, sort of breakers there to prevent people from abusing it. So that's the question. Are people comfortable with that? Because Mandy's language would allow that. And that is what GOL was trying to do. And so thoughts on that. Or do you want me just to put the language in and you can look at the language as it's written? Pat. I'm comfortable with the language that Mandy would like to insert, but at the same time, I was really uncomfortable the night that it happened around the apology. Now, it turns out that I found out later it was done for very good reasons. But Darcy's charge of this is undemocratic really bothered me. So I guess, you know, I think what Mandy was talking about, it gets rid of the games of the town manager, the town moderator playing with the vote. I don't want this to be used as a game. And I do support the language you're saying, but I am, and maybe it's just a wait and see, but because I certainly supported the reason to call the question. Absolutely, but not knowing it, it really set me off. So I've said enough, I don't wanna keep repeating myself. I think it was that experience that caused a number of us to have a second thought, but then I had a third thought, which is that it's perfectly permissible to do that. And it's now up to the counselors to decide whether they wish to have debate on this or not. Now, it occurred to me that you could, and Mandy can speak to this and maybe others, but you could perhaps have a rule of procedure that would say that the question, calling the previous question cannot be, will not be accepted if there has not been any debate on the topic. In other words, we would require there must be some debate before that question can be entertained. So if it were, if somebody said, you know, I call the question before there had been debate, if you had a rule in place, assuming it's permissible, the president could say, well, that's out of order because we've not yet had debate. In other words, no one has spoken one way or the other. After people have spoken, even one person, someone could then call the question. But in the case that we had, counselors were perfectly free to make it. I mean, if people felt it was undamaged, they should have voted no. Right. But they didn't. So that was a perfectly, you know, free vote. Well, you know, in this instance, if the information I have is correct, it was a really good decision. But I, and I'm not having a problem with Mandy's language. I think that we have a right to call the question. And if debate had happened before we were able to call the question, I think it could have been a very negative experience for the whole council.  I want us to pay attention to whether this gets used inappropriately. But how do you know that in advance? Because I, go ahead, Mandy. Yeah, you asked the exact right question, Pat. How do you know it in advance, right? And, you know, in coming up with this language, I actually went back and looked at Robert's rules because I wasn't sure whether this was one, given my experience in various places with interrupting and not or not being recognized whether it was one that could or not. And one thing I saw just for information purposes is Robert's rules, you're perfectly, does not require actual debate to happen before this motion is used. So it can be used immediately. And it specifically says, and it's up to the body to determine whether they want to have debate with that too. That being said, this proposal changes the Robert's rules default, right? That's the point of this proposal is so we don't default to Robert's rules which would require being recognized before calling the previous question. Cause that's what Robert's rules requires for at least the previous question and actually the presence of a quorum. And so our local rules can change the default. We've done it a number of times, this is one that would do that change. And so it could be changed by rule to answer George to require at least some debate. I'm not sure I would support that on an initial ground because number one, who's the first one that gets to speak? Is it just luck of the draw? If you're gonna require at least one speaker versus all 13, if you're gonna require all 13 to be able to be given an opportunity to speak before, I think that gets too complicated and might defeat the purpose versus making the counselors make that decision on their own and have two thirds agree that yes, debate can essentially not happen if it's the first motion that's made, right? Versus no, we wanna hear some more to give you an idea what Brookline does. And maybe this is something we would consider for a president, I'm not sure I'd write it in because it's so confusing already. Brookline, I pulled up their rules because I was interested in what they say. Four, to close debate, a motion may be made from the floor without the need for the moving party to be formally recognized. If a motion for the question is made and this is again, and if in the moderator's judgment adequate debate has been heard on both sides, the moderator allows the motion to come before the meeting. So that's another Robert's rules change that they've done. Prior to the vote, this is the one that I think maybe we would want to consider. The moderator can read the names of those who have signed up in advance to speak but have not yet been heard and points out or calls out the names of those who are standing at the microphone waiting to be recognized. So one thing they do, and so for those of us that have been in town meeting, Brookline runs their town meeting speaking a lot different than Amherst ever did. You had to sign up in advance, basically. So there was an actual list. But what we could suggest to the president is if there is a motion for the previous question and the president has recognized or on Zoom, it's a little easier, has a list of people who still want to speak, the president could read that list out before the motion is voted on. I don't know whether it's wise or not but that's something that could be done. When I was in Brookline, the moderator used it to point out that there was a teenager who wished to speak on the matter when the motion to close debate had been made and the town meeting decided to hear the teenager before they close debate. I was on a school issue. I think so. George, I'm wondering if Sarah is very good and knowledgeable about rules, et cetera. Also, Sarah, do you have any comment that you'd like to share? I guess the only thing I would say is that in using Robert's rules, all the rules sort of build on each other. And so if a body is abiding by open meeting law, the entire time, then it wouldn't be anything undemocratic about us changing the default and doing it this way. And I think that as long as the body was conscientious and was following open meeting law and wasn't trying to play games and everybody knew that this is something that you'd use with discretion. I mean, I think that there are times when it would be appropriate and useful. I mean, I can't think of any real reason to say we shouldn't do it this way. And I understand people saying, it's rude to interrupt or you wanted to have something to say, but I don't necessarily think that the way this is written or how we're talking about doing it would be doing that. So I can't think of a reason why not to do it. I mean, if you use properly, I think it would be very useful. Okay. So what I'm hearing, if I may, is that we should put the language that Mandy's proposing on the screen and we should look at it and then we, assuming emotion is presented, we should vote on, is that acceptable? So I was going to have Mandy dictate to me the language again, and I will put it on the screen and then we can discuss it and vote on it. So I will start with the two blue sections there that are added would be deleted. I'm gonna delete this. Where they're added. And you would also, and then now after the or, before the to doubt the presence of a quorum, you're gonna, we're going to add after that or. So or, right here? Yep, right there. Or to assert the charter right to postpone period. Okay, so council, yeah, okay. Counselors shall not speak without recognition except to call the previous question or. Okay. And then the rest is what I had moved it to or to doubt the form, which is. All right, so let me read this out loud. And if there's any change in mistakes or errors, please speak up, but counselors shall not interrupt a colleague except to raise a point of order, to express a point of personal privilege or to assert the charter right to postpone period. Counselors shall not speak without recognition except to call the previous question or to doubt the presence of a quorum period.  That's all right. I'm used to it. What is a point of personal privilege? I wanted to add that as well. My point of personal privilege might be, I just want us to shut up and get to a vote. But can I just say, Madam President point of personal privilege, I want us to shut up and vote. That certainly can't be right. So what is a point of personal privilege? Mandy, please. A point, well, there's a couple of examples here. Point of personal privilege is things like I can't hear. We use them similar to points of order, but things like I can't hear, I can't see, stuff like that. You can't say I can't stand it anymore. That's not considered. That's a lack of enduring. Why is that not a point of personal privilege? I just can't take it anymore. Okay, thank you. I won't waste our time anymore. But basically it has to do with some kind of issue you're having personally that's preventing you from participating in the meeting. It's not expressing an opinion. Which is, I don't understand what's going on or something. Exactly, right. But in neither case, are you expressing an opinion? You are simply right. Thank you. Otherwise, that was the only question I had. Any thoughts on this? Because if I don't see any hands, but please speak up, Sarah, I don't see a hand. But if there's any thoughts, otherwise I'm prepared to entertain a motion. I guess I'll make the motion. Okay. I have to make the motion to remove what our previous motion already had. I'm wondering if you could simply move to that, to accept the amendments or changes to 6.3D, something of that effect. Recommend the changes. Right, right. I guess I'll move to recommend that we add the phrase ish, you know, the phrases after the word or, and before the words to doubt the presence of a quorum, the following, to assert the charter right to postpone period. Counselors shall not speak without recognition, except to call the previous question or, in as a replacement for the previously recommended changes. Okay. Was Emily able to get that? I think maybe I might like that repeated. If you could do that Mandy one more time. Emily, I'm sorry. I'm going to switch the wording of that motion. I moved to recommend the council replace the prior recommended wording or revisions to 6.3D with the following phrase, between the words or, and to doubt the presence of a quorum, here's the phrase now, to assert the charter right to postpone period. Counselors shall not speak without recognition, except to call the previous question or. Okay. And I think it's the very first part Emily, you're okay with the first part of that motion. I think the rest of it is there on the screen for you to read, but are you okay with the first, maybe if you could read back the first part of that motion to make sure that you and Mandy are all on the same page. Yeah. So it made it a little bit easier just because I already wrote down the phrase that you wanted to add. But so I have to recommend that the council replace the prior revisions. And then after that, I don't know if you want me to like add the actual revisions that you made or. I think we do, but I replaced the prior revisions to 6.3D. Yes. After. Yeah, so after the word or before. Before. Oh yeah. The phrase to doubt the presence. To doubt the presence of a quorum and then the following. With the following language, right. Okay. Yeah. So then I, and then, yeah. So then the following and then I'll add that phrase that you just. Exactly. In quotes, just add that phrase. That'd be perfect. All right. I got it. Thank you. So we have a motion before us. Is there a second? Second. DeAngeles. Thank you, DeAngeles. So we have a motion and it's been seconded. Any further discussion? My feeling is this does address. I hope it will address the concerns that were expressed at the meeting. But still also address our desire to make it possible for meetings to be a little bit shorter. And we'll see as Pat has pointed out and Sarah's mentioned as well. We'll see how this plays out in the real world. But I think we do have good. Okay. So I'm prepared to go to a vote. And this time I'm going to start with Sarah. Aye. And Pat. Aye. And Mandy. Aye. The chair is an aye. So again, the vote is four, zero with one absent. All right. The other item is E. And I'm going to use my privilege as a chair and suggest that we simply go back to three minutes. I think that I understand the argument we presented initially and I have sympathy for it. But I think we should just leave it the way it is. Just not make the change is what I'm going to argue. I think there are a number of people that just feel that this is, I'm not sure it's really right, but I think they feel that somehow this is going to limit debate. And since we do now have other ways of reining in debate, I think the difference between two minutes and three minutes is not that great. I think it often people don't use their full three minutes. And they just stop. I think the clock is very helpful. I hopefully that will play a role. I think the clock backfired. You think it did, okay. So how so, how so? Because I felt like people felt like they had to fill their three minutes. Okay, well that would be an argument for putting it down to two minutes then. Well, I support it going down to two minutes. It doesn't stop debate because you can raise your hand again. It's not that you have two minutes for I don't believe that it is a limit for the two minutes for the whole discussion. Okay, good. Mandy. I also support the two minutes. I might need to be a separate motion on Monday night to see, but I do want to point out that I found it interesting that when we were talking about the election order, all of those are two minutes. The nominees for president and vice president will get two minutes, all the counselors, if they want to speak after will get two minutes. And no one when we were discussing that had any issue with two minutes. And then we get to this one that would sort of mirror that. And there was a lot of question. And so I obviously support the two minutes. I think both of those sections should be the same, frankly. And so I don't know how that works. I'm not sure if we pass whatever it is 2.1 or whatever it is where the election procedure is first and then this one doesn't pass. I'm not sure I'd go back and ask them to change that two minutes to three minutes there. But I did find it interesting that no one had a problem with two minutes in that section, but there was a lot of concern about two minutes here. Okay, good. I'm hearing two arguments here. Pat's point is that you can speak multiple times. So two minutes is, and she feels the clock also is actually maybe not necessarily backfiring in a sense. It just gives people a sense. Well, I got another minute. So I'll keep talking. So, and then Mandy's point that we already have a two minute limit on the election. Good. Proposed two minute limit. Right, exactly. Proposed nothing voted. Sarah, any thoughts on this? Yeah, actually I muted myself even before you called on me. I was just going to say that I also support the two minutes. And I think the clock also, I agree. I agree with both Mandy Jo and Pat. So I support the two minutes. Well, I talk about misreading a room.  Very good. Okay, so I think what I'm hearing is a consensus to keep it as it is and that we will allow the counselors to decide obviously, so we're not going to change E. The only change we've made is to six, three D. And so I think we are done with this unless someone has anything else they'd like to say. Lynn, please. I would just ask that when we prepare the documents which Mandy and I thank you for that for the council meeting on Monday that we show the original, what it was when we came to the council the last time and what we're now proposing, particularly around D. Six, three D, yeah. Okay, I will work with Athena and I'll probably call on Mandy for help, but yes, we will make sure that we show both the original language and then the new language. Very good. Okay, I was going to propose jumping in whatever time Lynn has left and they should not have any. I was going to propose jumping to five, come back to four later. I think four does not involve Lynn directly and it's a matter for GOL. Can we talk for a minute about the timeline for setting time management goals in town? So I was going to put that up on the screen. Are people okay with jumping? Do you mind? I haven't seen objections. Lynn, do you have a few minutes still? It's either that or I come back for another meeting. I'm also prepared to talk on the bylaw since I saw assignments. Okay, all right. Do you have a preference personally? Because we'll do whatever you prefer, you don't. Okay, but I'm going to go to the timeline if I can remember how I did this. So hang on for a second. Public way I have lined up, but I've jumped. That's a shame. So, all right, where'd it go? Where's draft timeline? There it is. Okay, open this. Make sure your screen, can people see that? Probably not, let's see if I can make it bigger. 525%, is that better? I'm going to have to scroll a little bit, but it makes it a little bit bigger. Is that legible to people or no? I'm not getting any response. So. It's fine. Okay, thank you. I just need to know if it's okay. I'll keep playing with it if it's not. We are technically for Sarah's sake and we are now sort of keepers of a process, broadly speaking, is my understanding. And we worked hard on this before the new year and then lots of other things happened. We had a conversation with Paul that was, I thought fruitful, but didn't really resolve things quite. And there may be, there is no resolution here, but the purpose of this, as I understand it, was to assist the president and ultimately the council, but particularly the president and Paul, in having a clear sense of what the timeline is for setting the town manager goals and perhaps more importantly though, or equally importantly setting a timeline for his evaluation. And there are many, many moving parts and points of tension that we've talked about, but from our perspective as a committee, already you see it's February and according to this preliminary draft, all data collection instruments drafted and reviewed, I suppose to be happening and March, right? So I felt that it would be useful and important for us with the president being present. And since this is now something we are responsible for in some broad way, and since we haven't yet actually firmed it up that we talk about it for at least a few minutes. Do you want, for instance, the chair to, working with the president to gather these data collection instruments and do you want to review them? Or do you want us to simply, do you want us to have any role in that? Or do you want us simply to make eye for the president to make sure that this is being done? But we're supposed to be keeping an eye on this process. It's my understanding. Now, the president is certainly doing it, but she has 1,001 things to do. So that's the first thing. Second thing is what about the town manager self-evaluation date? Are we going to keep it the way it is and just live with it? That's fine by me. He's weighed in with some concerns. Does this timeline address that concern? Is there nothing we can do about it? So there's also an issue of dates for his submission of his self-evaluation. So two questions there. And I'm, again, I can't see hands. So... Lynn has her hand up. Yeah, Lynn, please go ahead. Okay, so I want to reverse my comments by saying, I think I believe that the town manager has made a good suggestion regarding goals and that we seriously consider setting goals for a two-year period with the option of doing exactly what we recently did, which was to amend them. That we spend so much time on those goals. And this last year we spent a lot of time on those goals. And they're good goals. I really prefer to see us. I mean, maybe we want to have a vote to reaffirm them every June, July, August or something, but that we not spend as much time redoing them. So that's just a comment on the goals. On the goal setting process. I think a vote to reaffirm is always nice, but I think that what we did recently was we updated and added to one goal and basically they're now the town manager's goals. With regard to the evaluation, I believe what we heard from Paul was that he feels that writing a self-evaluation when it's only 10 months into the year, that that, please correct me this is not what you feel we heard, that that's difficult to do. That is what he said, yes. The problem then is that it throws it all back into the summer, which is what we were trying to avoid. One of the reasons we were trying to avoid it was because we were trying to get the instruments out while people were still paying attention, if you will, in the months of April and May. And so since the goals are what people evaluate the town manager on and we do not provide the town manager's self-evaluation to the public per se as part of their providing feedback, we could still start collecting, maybe not in February or in April, but we could still start collecting public MIDI and staff feedback as early as May or no later than the very, very beginning of June and maybe move the councilor evaluation to July or something. I haven't come up with any wonderful solution for how to move this around, but those are just thoughts. Thank you. I'm sorry, Mandy. I still struggle with this too. I like the idea of two-year goals. I think it should probably be July to July. So we would have to reaffirm them this July for one year and they be, it gives the new council every term six months to figure out where they are now with goals. I've struggled with the goals coming, one of these was if you want the goals to start July one, you need to discuss them in May and June, but then no matter which way you do it, you have 10 months to complete a year's worth of goals from the manager's point of view, given how long it takes us to do the evaluation because if we say the manager, if we want the goals coming after we've seen the self-evaluation from the manager, we have to get that self-evaluation before we can adopt the goals. And that's either getting the self-evaluation in July and adopting the goals in August or getting the self-evaluation in May and adopting the goals in June. Either way, you're stuck with like 10 and a half months of a 12 month thing for the self-evaluation for the manager. I'm not particularly a fan, now that I've had time to away from this of a summer evaluation in a weird sense. I'm not particularly a fan anymore of a May evaluation, even though I was pushing that. We've tied it in some sense to his contract, but he had a point with how do I self-evaluate when the budget isn't even passed yet? How do I self-evaluate 10 months in? But in summer, we're trying to hold less meetings. And so I wonder if we, this sounds really bad. We have to under the charter do an evaluation every year. We can't not do one for one year. We can't do the evaluation on every other year basis. Do we move those to November and December and completely extract them from the fiscal year cycle completely? And try and contract to that same time. It's just a question. I don't even know what I feel about it, but I do support going to two year goals with updates by the council every six months or something. I have a point of, Mandi, I may have misheard what you were saying, but I thought you said that the charter doesn't allow us to have a two year cycle on the evaluation. The charter requires an annual evaluation of the manager. Okay, so we would do what to, so we'd have a sort of a just updated once a year and then every two years do the actual full evaluation. Well, I guess what I'm proposing is council goals that start the June, the July after a council takes and are set for the council's term of two years, an evaluation that starts in October or November of the year a council takes and is done every October or November. It would have to be, I don't know whether we can do a mini one and then a full one. I think that's what you were proposing. It seems kind of odd to require the council to evaluate a manager after five months of working with the manager. Yeah, I mean, maybe moving that to the end of the year makes more sense. It does to me. I mean, I didn't, until you said that thing about the charter saying we have to do one every year, no matter what, although we can abbreviate one of them. The two year cycle really needs not to start the first year of a new council. So this year's evaluation would be done by the current council, is that correct? Or am I totally goofing this up? Which means then the new council, whoever they are, is working fresh in their experience. They can see the goals, they can see all of that, but they're working with the town manager before. Am I lost in here somewhere? I'm muted, Lynn. George, I'm sorry to take so long. Pat, that's what I'm hearing. Mike, next, and I like, I'm thinking about this. I'm real, I'm thinking about it particularly in regard to what else are we doing during that time. But I also like it because it does get it out of the summer, but then my next question is then when do we decide compensation and when is that compensation? I mean, I would say we've already changed the terms of the contract once in terms of dates that going forward, you will align the dates of the contract to whatever evaluation cycle we want. So in the interest of the fact that I have to leave in two minutes. No, okay. And let me take what I've just heard.  Does that work for you all? Well, we're trying to assist you, Lynn. So not create work for you, but obviously it does create work for you, but I feel obligated as sort of this committee's keeper of the process. So I feel obligated to bring it to our attention. You wanna take this and you're thinking about changing the evaluation date to later in, so in November, something like that, November, December and play with that in terms of the schedule, fine. I still have an issue, but maybe it's for another time or maybe after you leave, we can talk about it as a committee about goals that run from July to July. So I'm still trying to think through what it means to become a member of a council and you've given a set of goals that you didn't determine, at least for the first few months. And maybe that's not a bad thing. Maybe that actually makes sense because you've just gotten position on the council. And, but the thought was originally I thought that goals would be basically follow the electoral cycle. So that when a new council came in, they would fashion or conceivably could fashion. They could also just keep the goals that already are there, but they could fashion a new set of goals. What I'm hearing now is a sense that no goals should be sort of July to July. And so when a new council comes in, they will be inheriting a set of goals that have been fashioned by a previous council. They can amend them and come July, they can create their own new goals if they want. And so maybe that's not such a terrible thing. Could they run April to April? Goals? The goals instead of fiscal year. If we're gonna decouple everything from years, I think the court, that would the council takes office January, the first one in January, I'll give them three months to come up with goals and get themselves set. My only concern is that I think you can be consistent with fiscal years because that's how you set your budget. And I personally, I mean, we lived with goals set by the previous select board and it didn't kill us. Right. Right, right, okay. We let them go, but thank you, Lynn. And I'll put this on the agenda again for next meeting. And if you can attend, that would be great. I don't wanna stop debate here. If people have some further thoughts, especially someone like Sarah who's new to this, they thought that this is now, are in a sense our responsibility though the bulk of the work seems to still fall on the president to try and think this through. Because if the five of us can come to some consensus about this, that would be helpful to the council. And you can see there, as we just seen, there are a lot of moving parts, electoral, the schedule, fiscal schedule, it's a complicated multi-dimensional puzzle. But so maybe for our next meeting, if all of you could take a little bit of time and think about what you would like to see, this document will be obviously available to you. We've had it for quite a while. And we still have not been able to create something we all can agree upon. And then bring the goal is to bring to the council and say, okay, this is the schedule. GOL is going to oversee it. And so we're trying to get to that point. Any final thoughts, town, right? All right, I'm planning to put this back on the agenda for next time. We'll talk about that at the end of the meeting and see if you're in agreement. But I think it's something we have to keep our eyes on very much so. Next item is TSO has reviewed the public waste policy. And again, I'm going to try and so far seems to work pretty well. That's probably going to jinx me, but I'm going to open another document. I'm going to look at the red line version of the public waste policy. I think that would be most useful to you all, not the clean one. And so I'm going to open that. And then I'm going to try and find where there we are, where we went. Okay, I'll share the screen with you. And I believe that's it. Okay. All right. So this is, I'm sorry, that's not what we want. Are you seeing? Yes, you're seeing this, I hope. Council policy regarding the control and regulation of the public waste. Good, thank you. And then there's a purple line in the first, you know. Yeah, these are the changes. Let me see. And the main changes are here in section three. I think this is where we really want to focus our attention. And I don't think it should take, well, I'm not going to say that. Yeah, don't, that's a change. I know, absolutely. I don't think there's anything in the first section that concerns us in terms of clear, consistent, or actionable. Remember that's what we're looking at here. So unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to scroll down and we can go back up if we're done. But the changes that were made were to this section three, reservations of public ways, road or sidewalk closures, comma, signage, comma, and seating. And we'll come back to that header in a moment. And under that is temporary closures, short-term closures, long-term closures. And then placement of road and temporary signs, separate item D, all placements of signs that relate to the control of the public way, crosswalk, speed limit, yield, stop, et cetera, and placements of movable signs not covered by the general or zoning bylaw. This is the item period. This, the town council delegates review and action authority to the town manager with a monthly report. And then E was other requests is now other requests for permanent changes to the public way. And the change here, all permanent changes to roads or sidewalks, including placement of utility structures, bus shelters, benches, permanent signs, electric vehicle, and other charging stations, comma, bike share stations. I should have a period, right? I believe. Addition or removal of crosswalks. I should also have a period, am I doing this right? So it's the only one that uses bullet points in the entire, it's complete. Yep, yep, yep. It's not following any of the other structures at all. All right, that's the first thing we need to note. The previous structures basically would list an item. As a sentence. Right, right, what can we do to fix this guys? I mean, everything else is just one long sentence. So we'd have to create one long sentence. All right, which is probably why Evan, this was Evan's work on the fly. He was a hero, but I can see why. And then now we also have a Roman numeral one here. Well, the Roman numeral one is accurate. I'm sorry, Arabic numeral, I apologize. Yeah. Those are accurate. Yeah, okay, fine. So maybe what you're suggesting is that to be consistent, which is of course important for GUL, other requests for permanent changes to the public way, colon, and the rest of this should all be a sentence. It should all be a sentence. Permanent changes to roads or sidewalks, semi-colon, I guess. Semi-colon after bike share stations. And then addition or removal of crosswalks, semi-colon, major roadway and sidewalk redesigns, but accepting maintenance, semi-colon, acceptance of public ways. I think that was the reason that Evan went to this because that seems so out of, you know, the others kind of seem to belong to a list, that this was a whole new concept. But maybe we don't, that doesn't bother us, or we'd have to make an F and a G. Is that right? That we could do that. We could just have a sentence and then have F, acceptance of public ways, G, other public way requests relating to roads, not detailed above, but that's all of it. Sarah's on TSO, maybe we could hear from her. No, she's not. She's not anymore. She was, she was. Yeah, this unfortunately she was not present for, but I was, believe it or not. I have a question. Yep, go ahead. You know, many of these, you know, if you look up at D, all placements of signs that relate to the control public way, and then there's parentheses and placements of movable signs, not, you know, a lot of these, we use a lot of parentheses to describe what they are. So could we change this to all permanent changes to roads or sidewalks? Parenthesis. Placement of utility structures, bus shelters, benches. Bus shelters, benches, permanent signs, electric vehicles. Charity stations, biker stations. Parenthesis. Right. I mean, even addition and removal of sidewalks is permanent changes. That's a description of permanent changes to roads and sidewalks. The crosswalks are. Right. You know, so everything from placement of utility structures to crosswalks could be in parentheses, comma, major roadway and sidewalk redesigns, but exempting comma, acceptance of public ways. Comma. Comma. Or other public, yeah. Public way requests relating to roads, parentheses not detailed above, period. Although the acceptance of public ways is not other requests for permanent changes to the public. Right. It doesn't. It belongs there. Right. I think that needs to be an F. Right, right. Okay. But other public ways requests, this should also be above. And so this comes out as F. And this goes back up with the rest of this. Here's to these guys. Is that what you're suggesting? And God help us if I can get an F in here. This could be ugly folks. The public may want to turn away. I'm working on doing it on my copy, George. Well, it's good practice for me, but I just warn any children watching this should perhaps be, have their eyes covered. That's probably supposed to be an and instead of an or. I can't believe it. The machine is smarter than I am. Okay. That's not saying much. I know all permanent changes or the roads or sidewalks, parenthesis, okay. I'm going to do this. I'm going to do this, Mandy. I swear placement of utility structures, bus shelters, driving stations, bike share stations, comma. All right. And that's also going to be included in that addition. Okay. If you see anything Mandy shot out, like this one I'm trying to do addition to the movement of crosswalks. Close, that was scary. Did I do that? Close parenthesis, right? Yep. I've got the changes done. If you want me to just share my screen. Oh, come on. This is fun. Are you letting me see? He's working on it. We're. He usually just walks so much. Poor Sarah. She's just thinking, how did I, why did I volunteer to be on this committee? All right. Okay. So we're making this as part, that's going to be a semicolon, right? It's going to be a comma after crosswalks. Right. Good. That's why I got it. I got it. Little M. Thank you. Thank you, man. Like that. And then a period, right? But no, no, no, because other way relating to roads as opposed to parking or commons not detailed above. Hang on here folks. So comma and then that. Luckily, Mandy has this on her computer as well.  We still have another. Okay. Other public ways, way requests relating to roads, not detailed above. That's a period. Yep. And then all of the little I, the little, the Roman numeral small one and the big one below acceptance of public ways just needs copied to E. All right. Now that's, that's bad. I don't think I follow you. I don't follow you there. Now I share my screen, George. I don't want to get that. I don't want. So just one more time. Tell me what it is that it needs to be done. Stop laughing, Pat. You created the F. Right. Exactly. See the I and the one? Yes. Highlight those and copy them. The whole thing. Just copy the whole thing. Those, those two paragraphs. Yep. Copy those. And put them above F. On our E. Yep. Right. So right there. Create a new paragraph. Right. And, and paste them there. Yeah. Yep. And now you can delete the little three. Yep. That's right. And you have to delete the little one because that all permanent changes should be attached to E like it is attached to D up above. I should go back. Yep. Oh, I want to come up. So put your cursor after the colon after way. Yep. And hit the delete button. And I think that'll do it. Right. It just changed the. So. Right. That's edit undo. Yeah. We can fix the. Right. I will fix this later for the sake of my colleagues and the public and anyone else and all small children. I will fix this later. But I believe my colleagues can see hopefully and maybe it would be wise at this point for have Mandy to share her screen so that they can actually see this. So I'm going to stop sharing at this point, Mandy and let you share. Is that okay? Yep. Okay. We should have probably done this earlier, but no, no, no, no, it was fun. It was fun. We want everyone to see the actual document in its correct form. So I've got simple markup, which means you're seeing it as it looks instead of the changes. Okay. That's all right. I think that's what we need to see now. Okay. All right. Now, Evan may not be happy about this, but that's all right. We'll find out. Okay, Mandy, if you can scroll or maybe that's that's sufficient because the changes are just to E, correct? And then we have an F. Yeah, right. Which we have to talk about because we should describe what acceptance of public ways is, or we should just say all. No. I'm thinking that that is, for instance, what happened at at University Drive a few months back where that project that did not require us to accept. It would be if we accepted like there's a portion of Larkspur that's not a public way. We get requests sometimes about all of the Amherst Hills roads are not public ways yet. It's both to accept those as public ways. That's what acceptance of public ways means. Good. All right. And that is not what happened to University Drive. You're right, right. That was great. Yes, exactly. All right. So we have the language of E. Actually, what we've done, we haven't changed the language at all. All we've done is reformat it. Right. So, and so I don't know that that requires any and then managed question about F. Do we need to say anything further about F in terms we need to insert any language here or can we leave it as it is? So I have a question about E. Now that we've reformatted it. OK, go ahead. Should we up here after crosswalks like we do up here? Use the comma, et cetera. So is this an in is exclude? Is it a. Right. Is is it a general description or is it the items? This is the right. This is it. Nothing more. Um, I think it is a finite list. And if we wanted to add anything, we'd have to go back and add it. I think that the town manager is looking for his clear guides as to what he can and cannot do. And if we put in, et cetera. So the early earlier one is all placements of signs that relate to control the public way. So rather than listing every conceivable sign in which there are many, that makes sense. In the second case, permanent changes to roads or sidewalks. This is a question to the committee. Is this an exhaustive list? I guess that it is because I can't think of any, everything that might be a permanent change. Right. And so do we want to insert it, et cetera, which then basically allows the town manager to, I'm sorry, this is actually a town council remains keeping the public way. So yeah, right. So I think, because this is the sake, why don't we include the et cetera? Okay. All right. Again, we have not to my understanding made any real changes to the language. We have made slight changes to the formatting and inserted and et cetera. Just to be, so just for the sake of consistency with previous usage. So unless I'm missing something, we have not made any substantive changes of any kind. We have just changed the formatting. So any other thoughts on this? Cause I'd like to go to a motion and vote. I'll give you a moment to look at it if people want to look at it. So I'm prepared to entertain a motion to declare the, what's the title of this wonderful document? I don't, I'm sorry. We're not just a declaring on this one. We were for a report and recommendation too. Really? Because it's a policy of the council, which is our turn, George. I know, I know. But TSO is taking care of that. Let TSO write about that. Any thoughts? Yeah, I take it that the whole purpose of this is simply to give clarity to the town manager. He came to us and said, look, I have certain places where I'm still not sure what's mine and what isn't. So would you plea? And he made some recommendations and suggestions and these have been looked at now by TSO and also now by GOL. And so it is, to my understanding, it's driven strictly by the desire for greater clarity from the town manager. I've not heard any complaints that I'm aware of from my colleagues or from any council committee or anybody else. It's really just to help him. He has made some suggestions and I think we've adopted them pretty much without exception. I don't know what do people want to say about this as far as policy, beyond the desire simply to clarify, Mandy. So yeah, I do have one question. We've got with the D and the E, right? The original policy that TSO looked at had under D, essentially delegating to the town manager, decisions on benches too. Not bus shelters, but benches, for example, seating. And that's obviously been moved out by TSO to E. So I guess one of the questions I have is, why did TSO do that? Because I sometimes wonder, I think it's exempting maintenance, but I'm not sure on how I read this because it's permanent changes to roads or sidewalks and then major roadways or sidewalk redesigns, exempting maintenance. And so if he wants to move a bench when they have to replace a bench, a foot, do we have to approve it because we're keeping the control of that? I'm less concerned about benches, frankly, than other types of permanent signs. So I'd like to hear what TSO was thinking in terms of the benches one in particular and then the exemption of maintenance, was that meant for, I mean, it was in a bullet point that was for major roadway and sidewalk redesigns. It was not in the bullet point of utility structures or crosswalks or anything like that. So was there a conversation about that, George? In terms of exempting maintenance, yeah. In terms of what part of maintenance was exempted, is it including the benches and permanent signs and charging stations and stuff like that or was it just sidewalk redesigns? I think, yeah. And if something needs to move a foot when the charging station needs changed, does it have to come back to us? And like the parking meter, if they redo the sidewalk and the meter changes a foot, do we have to approve it based on this? And do we want that requirement? We certainly don't want it. And so if this allows or this seems to require it, we'd be in our best interest to change it. I think we're trying to follow a kind of common sense process. I think the town manager also, obviously follows a town. I've sort of a common sense process. Mostly we're concerned with permanent changes as opposed to temporary, but there was concern about certain objects that people wanted to have a say about. Yeah. Many do you have a suggestion as to what would make this clearer and also be not defy common sense and not make things more complicated than they are? Basically, this is read as a way of just helping the town manager say, okay, this clearly is us or this clearly isn't us. So your thought is that the way this is worded seems to suggest it's not clear whether a minor change, what would be considered I think by most people to be a minor change would require us to get involved. So you're moving something, you're not just painting it, you're not just repairing it, it's maybe a car ran into it, so you're fixing it, but you're actually moving it to a different location, but the location is maybe a foot or two, it's not. Or you're removing it, you're taking it out. But those are permanent changes. So maybe we're just gonna have to leave it as it is and there are gonna be certain gray areas that maybe a limit to what a policy can do, unless there's some major confusion here. I'm not sure I wanna get into it. So what about this? We had up here in town commons, but exempting maintenance and repairs and we're adding conducted in the normal course of business. What if we take that and move that down to these permanent requests, get rid of it here and add it, not detailed above comma, but exempting. It would look like this. All right, insert that. So now we'd read all permit changes to roads or sidewalks, placement utility, major roadways and sidewalk redesigns or public way requests relating to roads. Supposed to parking of commons, not detailed above. But exempting maintenance and repairs conducted in the normal course of business. Maintenance and replacement. I mean, repairs deals with the replacement, I guess. I guess, I mean, this phrase is meant to cover what would be considered common sense type situations that clearly would not require our involvement. And so it just repeats it, I mean, in a sense, or it clarifies exempting maintenance. I don't see why it can't be put in here. It may be overkill, but it doesn't create confusion. I'm trying to change the wording as little as possible, but that's, I mean, this is again, so we are inserting one phrase again for the purpose of clarity to make it clear that these sorts of situations do not involve just ordinary maintenance and repairs. Yeah. That's fair. And it's a little bit clearer than exempting maintenance. So I think that's fine. And it's borrowing from above where we have a similar phrase that reinforces that point, which I'm sure is clear to the town manager, but nonetheless, it doesn't hurt to have it in here. All right. Now I have no idea how I'm going to present this to the council, but that's be my problem. Because we have TSO changes and then we have GOL changes on top of TSO changes. Yeah. And unfortunately, the purple isn't necessarily indicative of the... No, no, there's no way that people can... At this point, the GOL changes, even this change here, the but exempting maintenance, this is clarity. Yeah, I'm certainly going to make the case that we've made no, obviously no substantive word changes, but we did insert this one phrase for the purpose of clarity. Otherwise, it's just strictly formatting. And that's how I'll present it. And if someone from TSO, it'll probably be Evan, because he's the one who worked on this, but he was doing it on the fly. He will speak up if he feels that somehow we've crossed the line. I don't think we have, but... At least get out the acceptance of public waste for clarity purposes too. Right, right, right. Exactly. We didn't change the wording. We just made it a separate item. So I think this is... And Mandy, this is a document that you have now. So... Thank you. I tried. All right. It's a good try, honey. Yeah, I know, exactly. Give me another year or two. Right. I'll send it to you. Thank you. All right, so we need a motion on this and we need action on it. So I would entertain a motion to... Recommend to the Town Council that the public waste, what's this title again? So the motion is to recommend to the Town Council that they adopt. And then I just need the title up above, Mandy, whatever it is, the public way, yeah. The adoption... Yeah, the whole... It wasn't amended on February 11th by the council. That's the TSO amendment, proposed amendments, right? Yeah, right. So the motion is to recommend the proposed TSO modifications to the Town Council policy regarding the control and regulation of the public waste as amended at GOL on February 17th, 2021 and declare them clear, consistent and actionable. So again, we are recommending that the Town Council adopt the TSO, wanna say revisions. The proposed revisions. Proposed revisions by TSO of February 11th as, I'm sorry. As amended by GOL on February 17th. 17th. And... Declare them clear, consistent and actual. That's the actual, okay. So, Emily, how do you feel about that one? I'm feeling better about this one than the last one, so... Emily, that's a very bad sign. I think we could talk after this meeting. No, I have it, I have it. I promise I have it. Okay, I'm not gonna make you read it back but we'll figure it out later. So we have a motion. You've just heard the motion read twice. Is there a second? Somebody besides me. Second, sports. Sarah, thank you. Sarah, second. So we have a motion, it's been seconded. I see no hands raised. No one wants to talk more about this. I can't imagine why. So we're gonna meet with the vote and this time, the chair who has now moved permanently to San Francisco is going to vote aye. Mandy. Aye. Pat. Aye. Sarah. Aye. Thank you. So the vote is four, zero with one absent. The motion carries. I'm going to skip over the minutes unless someone really objects, partly because the wrong minutes are listed on the agenda, partly because apparently the chair wasn't the right minutes but they got lost in the, right? So I will bring those minutes back to you at the next meeting. I have no items anticipated by the chair. I'm taking a look here. Okay, my screen is a mess. We have no attendees. I can't imagine why. This is one of our... Pat has her hand up. Pat has her hand up. She's not an attendee. Since Pat did a little bit of work on her by-laws. We're getting to that. Oh, okay. I thought you were gonna... No, you're right, Pat. I skipped over it. So let me go to Pat and ask her to tell us about her by-laws. I have contacted the fire chief and the police chief on the open burning for the fire chief and junked vehicles and also recreational vehicles because there was a conflation of those two things. I'm waiting for replies. So after our next meeting, I should have those updated. I haven't worked on the phone one yet, but... But there's been progress there. Yeah, so if I get the phone one done, I'll be done done. You get a gold star. Okay, Pat, that's great. Mandy, of course, has done... Yeah, I know. She's perfect. I know. We're not even gonna talk about that. Sarah, are you willing or have you decided yet whether you can take on the AgCom matter? Is that something that you're willing to take on? So I should have gotten ahold of you earlier. George, I have a family situation that is finding that my time is somewhat constrained, but at the same time, I think it would be a good learning experience for me to do it and to try to take that on. So I was dithering and that's why I didn't get back to you. So I would like to do it. So maybe I can get in contact with you and I know that Pat had said that she would help me with a little bit of the stuff that I don't know. Great, great. Pat is an excellent source. We regent her as well with a couple of things I'm working on just to try to understand what the By-law Review Committee meant by some of those notes, but great. So I'm back, good. And Darcy has gotten back to me on her materials. And so at the moment, we're making progress and that's all I can ask for. Yeah. Mandy, please. I'll put it on some of mine because I emailed Paul as you saw George regarding the activities and amusements one, actually regarding a number of them. But the activities and amusements, Paul got back to me with a CC to George. Let me see what that email is. See if I can find it. And he got back to me with another one. And yeah, so, so Chief Livingston regarding activities and amusements, the question was the fine number one, but also because it slated at 200 right now per penalty. And just so you know, the activities and amusements is no person shall play at ball or any similar amusement in any street, no person or group of persons while playing at ball or engaging in any amusement or activity in any park or common of this town shall interfere with another event or activity already in progress or previously reserved. And the penalty is $200 per violation or non-criminal. And so the first question was, do you, is that penalty correct? Should we modify the number? And then the second one was, do we even need this one anymore? And Chief Livingston wrote back, quote, I don't ever recall making a comment about it being a good tool. That was something from bylaw review that I had written to Paul. Then he says, as I can't say if I have ever heard of anyone being written up for a town bylaw 3.15 activities and amusement violation. I remember some discussion in the language section about quote, interfering with others of activities already in progress and quote, but in the end, if the town council is looking to get rid of bylaws that just plain or not necessary or not enforced, this one certainly applies and I would support that. Then Paul wrote also, since the fine is pretty high, he felt that it was a detriment to using it. So I think that's one that we as a GOL need to discuss whether we want to either change the fine or just remove or recommend the council remove from the bylaws completely. Okay, all right. That is something we could put on the agenda for next time and actually start moving some of these along. So 3.15. And then there was another update from Paul on a different one. Well, there's 3.16 here and also 3.26 on nuisance. And Paul on the conservation land one. Ah, conservation land, okay. Littering, I think this one was the littering and illegal dumping one, which the question was referred to concom and conservation department for discussion and recommendation on whether to broaden the types of lands on which littering and illegal dumping are prohibited, specifically bylaw review committee considered including town conservation land and land and agricultural use. And Dave Zomack wrote back briefly, I think there is some merit to including Amherst conservation land, places in town that we see dumping our long roadways, sometimes in the public way, or just outside them think Mill Lane or Pulpit Hill Road, conservation areas and recreation areas. As always, the challenges finding or catching the people doing the dumping, land and ag use or APR might be more complex as they are private. What we often hear from APD when we try to enforce rules on conservation land is quote, show us where it says you can't do X without getting overly complicated. It might be good to have the concom weigh in as I believe they would be very supportive. And then Paul said, do we want comments from the concom? So based on that, should I respond saying yes, we'd like comments from the concom on this? I would think that would be appropriate because with their comments, then we could move to making a proposed change.  So yes, I think the answer is yes. So three, one, six, you might have some report. Well, concom may not act that quickly, but that- They may not act that quickly, but it sounds like adding recreation lands, there's other, whatever's not on this one, adding some of it is supported. And then we just have to see if concom supports conservation land. Okay, all right, good, all right. That's a good question. Please, Sarah. So with agricultural lands, as someone who has a farm, who people often dump things here. And I think that that is actually an issue. Do we want to talk to ag com? And do we want to maybe discuss, I don't know, with conservation and with ag com about whether or not APR lands should be included in how it would be enforced. And I'm saying that also as someone who has a tow yard that was close to our river, and there was some issues with that, and we didn't really have much of a recourse in saying a lot about what people were doing. So maybe that's something we could just look into. I can certainly ask Paul to refer to both concom and ag com for comments. Okay, okay. It would make me happy. I mean, nothing may come of it, but thanks. I will do that. Okay, all right. Ag com's the one that deals more with APR land, Sarah, than concom does. Well, they're the Agricultural Commission. So it used to be all farmers now, not so much, but I still think it would be, they deal with agricultural land and a lot of it in Amherst is now APR'd. So I think that would make sense, but I would talk to Paul. Okay, okay. That makes a lot of sense if they're the ones that deal with the APRs. Okay. Now, I'm not saying that people need to do what Mandy's done here, but this isn't, because there's document can also be, you can add material to the updates document that's, but you could also just send it to me directly and I will add it. But so we will, this will be on the agenda again as it will be for all future meetings and we will do these updates and I appreciate it. And hopefully our goal is to get through this by March. Obviously March 31st, but that's the plan. All right, what else? Future agenda items just briefly, we will be looking at a decarbonization resolution on that on March 3rd and the sponsors. I am a sponsor actually, and so I believe it's Darcy Dumont. Sarah. You're not going to be able to vote then, George. That I was going to make that point, Pat. Thank you. I will abstain. That's not true. You know it. I will abstain. I think that is actually the right thing to do. Well, you're wrong about that, but anyway. That will be on our agenda and Sarah, I don't want to put you on the spot. So I'm not going to ask, you don't have to respond, but if you are interested in doing that sponsorship, just send me an email. But if we don't respond at the moment, my understanding is the two sponsors are Darcy and myself. We, I did promise that we would put the interview process for council appointments on the agenda. And that is on my notes for next meeting. So March 3rd, I plan to have a discussion on the two processes that are used and whether we need a single process. A number of counselors have raised that question. So I think it should be discussed by GOL.  We'll have a report from Mandy, hopefully on 3.15 and updates from others as to how they're doing with the bylaw reviews. We will also have at least in theory, the timeline also on the agenda. Lynn, I assume we'll be present and I will again try to put that near the front of the meeting so that she has a chance to say what she needs to say before she has to leave. Any other items that people have in their minds right now for future meetings? You can always email me, but that's at the moment what I have. So for March 3rd, I see no public presence. So there is no need for public comment. Any final comments, concerns, questions? Seeing none, I'm going to call this meeting to I'm going to adjourn this meeting and again thank my colleagues and Emily and Athena for your help. Yeah, and see you all too soon, colleagues. Take care everyone. You're welcome to come to San Francisco anytime. Yeah, be good. Bye-bye.