Okay, we're recording. Thank you. We had a little sound difficulty, so we're slightly delayed. Good evening. It is December 12, 2022, and this is a special meeting of the town council called so that we can catch up on our agenda items. On November 7, 2022, an act was signed into law which extends the suspension of certain provisions of the open meeting law. This allows us to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of the council physically present. However, I'd like to point out we have a quorum of the council in the room tonight. The meeting is accessible to you in the audience in real time via Zoom, by phone, in person in the town room, and on Amherst media. Given that we have a quorum of the council present, I'm calling the December 12, 2022 town council meeting to order at 635. I'll call upon each council by name. At that time, please unmute and say present, and then remember to mute again. I'm going to start with Shalini Balmill who Balmill who will be joining us later. Pat D'Angelo's present. Anna Devlin got here present then Greece was present Mandy Joe Hanneke present. Anika Lopes, present. Michelle Miller. Present. Dorothy Pam. Here. Pam Rooney. Present. Kathy Shane. Here. Andy Steinberg. Present. Jennifer Taub. Present. Alicia Walker. Present. Thank you. And if you'll just keep a lookout for Shalini and let me know when she arrives. Okay. She may be coming to the actual town. There's no chat room for this meeting. If you have technical issues, please let Athena and me know. To make a comment or ask a question, please use the raise hand button if you're on zoom. And all of us on the counselor are on zoom. If technical difficulties arise, there is a result to use a utilizing remote participation. We'll decide on how to address that at the time. And again, please let Athena and I know if you have difficulties. I want to mention on the announcements, just a couple of highlights. Though on December 19 2022, we will do a state of the town address as part of our regular meeting at the beginning of the meeting that will be at 530. I saw also invite any of you who would like to join us at five o'clock where we will be swearing in new first responders. There are additional upcoming committee meetings and I'll note one change. And that is the finance committee Andy I'm going to correct is now meeting on the 15th at three o'clock is that correct. Okay. Thank you. Other than that, we have meetings virtually of every committee this week, either on the 15th or the 14th. We also encourage you to look at the town calendar on our website. There's no hearings tonight. Even though it's a special town council meeting. We are entertaining public comment. And this is the only public comment period. So I'd like for anybody who is in the town room, and we have one person visiting with us tonight. And he has signed up to make public comment. So if you were in the audience and you would like to make public comment, please raise your hand now. So if you're in the audience and you would like to make public comment, please raise your hand now. Seeing no hands in the audience. I'm going to turn to the. I'm sorry. On zoom. I'm sorry, seeing no hands on zoom. I'm going to turn to the town clerk who will introduce our first and only comment. Sandy must you can come to the microphone please say your name and your address before you begin making your comment. Thank you. You must breath 38 more perfect speech. And as an individual and secondarily as covener of a group concerned with climate action centered on great grace of the church, your neighbors. Councilors manager. This concerns the council's guidance on priorities to the town manager for 2023 24. And I see that the draft of a resolution is at the end of this agenda. And I'm pleased to see that the modifications of that guidance for 2023 retains action on climate change as the first listed priority. The expression of this guidance is considerably less specific than that given for 2022 you've just got to see the redaction was on the first graph. This is unwise. The urgency of the need for action on climate change demands that action to be completed in short order. Some actions should express that urgency and that assessment and the assessment of the performance of town officials is contingent upon real specific progress. Some actions that may be specified have been extensively schematized defined studied and reported on in the climate action, the adoption and resilience plan. 2021 the annual port the energy and climate action committee, the recent memos August on refuse collection and community aggregation. There is no want of data. One can act. What is needed is the bite to make it happen. Now one recognizes that our pressing demands on the limited resources available to the town to meet those demands. But the underlying reality is that all plans will be vain unless the progress to address climate change is rapid, effective to the point of being disruptive and doubtless I regret at the expense of other treasure objectives. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. Seeing that we have no other public comment. I am going to state there is no consent agenda tonight. And while the resolution and proclamation is the next item on our agenda. I have a little bit of a reference to the fact that shall be about what is planning to join us but is told me she would be late because she has to cut another meeting short. I'm going to go on to the action items and the action items in this case. Proposed amendments to zoning bylaws article by law article three use regulations article five accessory uses article 11 administration and enforcement. And article 12 definitions. This is a first reading so there'll be no vote tonight. And we're joining us for a brief presentation is planning director Chris restroom and planner Nate Malloy. I just want to let you know your camera is offline. Oh, I don't mean it mean for it to be off at all. Sorry. Thank you. Here I am. Sorry.  I just wanted to say that Nate Malloy is prepared to give a brief presentation and then we'll both be here to answer questions. Thank you. Okay. I'm Nate Malloy a planner with the town. And should I go with this Athena sharing the screen or should I share my own screen what's easier. We have the person I'll let you go ahead. Okay. Thank you, Athena. Sure just to go ahead Nate. So this is updating food and drink establishment and the zoning bylaw and you know it's a specific category in the use chart that then had some ripple effects that also we have changes to three other sections in the zoning bylaw so it really is just food and drink. We're reclassifying that section 3.352. We talked about previously. And then when the pandemic hit, we realized that article 14 temporary zoning taught us some lessons that we could administer this and make changes so we could see what's actually happening on the ground and we could incorporate conditions into the zoning bylaw to make it easier for staff, applicants and permitting boards. So with this, you know, just quickly, this is something to help businesses stay in Amherst expand and also attract businesses to Amherst and so currently a lot of food and drink establishments are permitted by special permit. That's a discretionary permit. I see that they may not even come to town because in other communities special permits are often denied and Amherst we work with applicants so even if we tell them that that you know we'll try to get you to the finish line with conditions. It will be approved they often don't want to go through that process so part of this purpose was to have those impactful uses remain special permit uses but have other food and drink establishments by site plan review. Still a public hearing through the planning board. I mean, in the past two years about 20 or more food and drink establishments had some type of permit that's through administrative approval with the building commissioner. There was a decision written plans it's on file with the town clerk and in the town hall but it didn't go to a public hearing through the planning board or zoning board. The break opened under article 14 the spoke expanded to cover that whole building it almost doubled in space and Garcia is also opened and so these things happen to article 14, incorporating 20 years worth of conditions at the ZBA had learned from so food and drink had lost been updated in the 80s and then in the 2000s and now now so about every 20 years. We've learned that things like food and drink gets updated. And we've learned that, you know, each 20 years the conditions to put in the bylaw to make it smoother, and, you know, be more enforceable. Where we're talking about this occurring are the Village Center so five zoning districts the, the downtown BG general business and limited business. The Village Center, the commercial and neighborhood business and so it's those areas highlighted in red and hatching on this map so really it's a limited area where the zoning change will take effect. And this is kind of the, the major change to that use chart right now there's three existing permits or or classifications that are permitted class one class two and class three. And that's what we're proposing for. So a restaurant cafe bar with food or other similar establishment would be site plan review, or administrative approval, a bar with no food. That's a special permit, a nightclub would be a special permit and an establishment with more than 200 patrons. That's both inside and outside would be my special permit. And a bar with no food could be a restaurant that after hours closes their kitchen and then just serves mainly alcohol. And so that type of establishment would be by site plan review for the restaurant operation. And then be required to get a special permit when it would be converted to a bar so there could be two permits on that establishment, if that's how they wanted to operate. So just quickly, you know how existing restaurants or establishments would fit in with this categorization. You know johnny's tavern has about 175 capacity occupant capacity and that would be by site plan review pita pockets is on the smaller side with 21 capacity and that site plan review a bar with no food is moan and dove. So prepackaged food like peanuts or pretzels doesn't, you know, make it a restaurant it's still a bar and you know moan and dove has about 80, 80, an occupant capacity of 80. We have a few nightclubs in town one is hazels blue lagoon, and then a larger establishment is like the hanger and ABC so that's almost 400 capacity and so those are the classifications and how existing restaurants would fit in. And so although we're changing just that article three use classification that also impacted article five accessory uses, because that also regulated outdoor dining and music at these establishments article 11 for administrative approval, when there's minor changes and then article 12. So, I'm not sure if counselors would like me to show those articles just to get a sense for that. I'll go through it quickly. We're proposing a whole new use chart that 3.352 I can zoom in but here's what it would look like the four uses are listed here by site plan review and special permit. What is important is that there's 11 new conditions standards and conditions in the bylaw and these are a summary of really what's been learned over the last 20 years, and through article 14. And so, you know, as applicable, any establishment would be subject to review and approval by the board of licensing commissioner. And so, if an establishment would like to serve alcohol they still have to apply to the board of licensing commissioners even if they're a site plan review, and that board holds a separate public hearing and can also place conditions on an establishment. There's other state and local codes that would regulate that. We're putting in here. Number three that they have to comply with any accessory use regulations. So that's article five. They have to operate and be maintained by a set of plans and number four and so this is something that we started with an article 14 requiring even for administrative approval. And it's more extensive than what is currently required so a site plan, a floor plan, a layout plan, patron management plan, a general management plan, parking plan and traffic impact statement so you know this looks to me this is like a, a city and it's telling the applicant and staff what to look for in an application so we're asking an applicant to provide all of this information. Number five lists all the information we'd like to see in a management plan. So hours of operation, specific strategies of alcohol is served, such as queuing and patron leave patrons leaving the establishment. Signs, lighting, noise deliveries, employee parking so all this information would have to be completed by an applicant. And then that can be turned into a condition that then becomes enforceable by the town. So we're proposing to modify condition 10 this is the only existing piece remaining that in the be in district there should be no more than a total of 50 seats indoor and outdoors for an establishment. And that service of alcohol will cease at 9pm. There are more conditions placed in article five for the be in district. And a new one, which is something that has been the practice of the zoning board and the board of licensing commissioners is number 11 and that is there should be no alcohol service after 1am. And so there are some establishments that have existing special permits that may allow them to serve after 1am but any recent or you know proposed uses of this were to pass 1am would be the end of alcohol service that typically then the board allows for an hour to close. So, you know, alcohol stops at one service stops at one the place has to be cleaned up and closed by 2am in article five sorry I was article five regulates accessory uses so it's 5.041 and 5.042. So in this section, we allow outdoor seasonal dining and the change in this one here is the strike through in red is currently it's only allowed if it's accessory to a restaurant cafe lunch room cafeteria. Number two a bakery deli or other similar establishment selling food and three a retail store or convenience store selling prepared food. So we're proposing to say that in these districts the BGBL and those five district districts I mentioned that food and outdoor dining can be accessory to any principal use authorized in the use chart, subject to the same review as it so it's a site plan review use it's a site plan review hearing if it's a special permit use it's a special permit hearing to have outdoor dining. So there's some discussion by the planning board and CRC about well that means you know, a gas station could sell food and in our bylaw we say it has to be customarily accessory in the county and in the region, and it really has to be accessory to the principal you know there is now food being sold back gas stations, you know, but it couldn't be something where it's a separate business it really has to be related to the primary use and that's an applicant has to prove that to the town. We're also proposing here that in the BN district and the outdoor dining shall be located no closer than 100 feet to any residential dwelling in a residential district. And there was part of the condition that was removed in the use chart and we're putting it here, we're reframing it a little bit. Just so that you know right now in the BN district we say that a food and drink establishment couldn't be located 100 feet, building to building, which really eliminates any use in the BN district for food and drink. So we're removing that condition and we're saying really that the outdoor piece needs to be 100 feet away. And then the subsequent bullets of 5.041. We're in this first one here right now we're saying that the accessory dining sorry keeps jumping on me is has to be closed between November one and April one. And we're saying we're proposing to have that be removed and to say that outdoor dining shall be allowed so long as the accessory uses active and operational so if someone wants to stay open during the winter and maintain it and clean it. We're saying that's fine. Currently that wouldn't be the case they would have to close down in 5.0413 were eliminating proposing to eliminate the statement that there's freestanding heating and cooling devices so during the pandemic we actually had outdoor heating, and it seemed to work really well so we're proposing to strike that for live and pre recorded music. Same thing we're proposing to say that it can be accessory to any use in section three, although in the BN district there should be no entertainment outside the building so that's in the bold italics. So live and pre recorded entertainment again it has to be clearly accessory to the use. And it's something that would go through the same permitting as the use. In 5.043. We're deleting the drive drive in restaurant, because that's proposed to be eliminated as a use classification. And then article 11 is really where there are some discussion about what it means to have administrative approval. And so existing in the bylaw is an administration. In 11.21 we're changing administration and applicability. And so currently the planning board doesn't see a lot of restaurant applications. And that's because an 11.21 which we see here site plan review shall not be required when and there's 11.2110. These conditions here. These are proposed to be renumber that's why there's some bold italics. There's some red but really these conditions are already in the bylaw so if there's no exterior change to a building or site, then there's no site plan review, essentially it can be approved by the building commissioner. If there's only changes to the signs, then it doesn't go to a hearing it goes to the building commissioner. If there's a small change in the building commissioner determines it doesn't conflict with the bylaw, it's administrative route. And so that's not new. What is new is the ability now we're proposing that an administrative approval 11.212 here is what the building commissioner can now, and I don't know why it keeps jumping on me. It can make this decision and then file it with the town clerk like an article 14. And so right now there's no written decision. If there's administrative approval it's something that happens between the town and the applicant. What we learned from article 14 is, if we can have the building commissioner approve it deny it or approve it with conditions it's a lot more effective to be enforced and it can also be changed and so this is really the key part is that if the building commissioner approves an administrative approval with conditions at any time that those conditions can be reviewed in the in the permit could be changed, or it could be revoked or there could be enforcement actions and so it gives the town the ability to really monitor establishments that have administrative approval. And so there was some concern initially that administrative approval meant that an applicant would not have any conditions associated with it but it still has to meet all those proposed conditions in the bylaw. And then also has to be the submittal of all those plans that are required and then there's also a written decision that's kept on record and so you know this is really tightening up and making administrative approval, a lot stronger than it currently is now. The last changes are to article 12 and just quickly, we are proposing to change language and bar that we have a definition for a definition for bar where the food and drink establishment is devoted primarily to the service and consumption of alcohol. We're saying it may and food may be incidental as opposed to is only incidental. We're proposing to remove. There's a definition for a drive up restaurant. And so that was never really a definition that was used and now it would be just considered a restaurant and so we're proposing to delete that and then really just renumber the remaining section of definitions and article 12. And so I guess that's a quick summary of the food and drink establishment. You please convey to us the planning board voted on this and what was their vote. Right so the planning board met a few times. And when they voted they voted the all changes at once. So the changes to the use chart article five article 11 and article 12. The vote was five in favor, and one abstention, and the one abstention. Voice the support of, of all of them they wanted to have a little bit more time to look at article five and maybe change some wording but you know they because it was every, you know is a an article vote that included all articles they, you know they abstained from, from the vote so it was, you know, five in favor and one abstention. Okay. And Chris do you have anything you want to add to this at this point. No thank you I think Nate did a great job of describing what's being proposed. Yes. Thank you. Mandy Joe, this came to CRC and you spent some time on it. Yep, CRC voted that ultimately voted unanimously to recommend all the changes are initial vote had some requested changes to that article to that one condition that dealt with the BN neighborhood, and those were subsequently changed so that we could get it to GOL and then we reaffirmed our unanimous vote. Okay. Thank you. Michelle. Yes, GOL declared this clear consistent and actionable unanimously. Okay. Are there council questions Kathy. I think my questions are pretty simple. The first is when you do definitions you kind of defined everything except cafe. And cafe is then referred to later and a suggestion would be when you're defining a restaurant say restaurant walk or cafe since they're probably the same things but it made me think is, what is a cafe if it's not a restaurant since later it's not a restaurant since it's a used table. Then my, the list, Nate that you had that goes with the dimensions table and then that long list. What wasn't clear to me is how much of that is the board of license is doing that now or would be doing some of those versus the planning borders this just the first time a brand new place opens up, because it's so detailed that you just, you really want to have a plan to run the place, oversee it. It didn't seem like the kind of thing that the planning board would normally do, as opposed to license so that's kind of a question on how they interact. My third, I'm not quite sure I you gave that big map of where these places are that it can be if you are up in North Amherst and you get to Coles Road, where we have restaurants and is that a village center business do we have a weird. So it's a question of the, the other boundaries that we've got that showed up as quite odd in some places like what where does residential village, village center leave off from village center business and North Amherst was one of the places where House of Teriaki kind of makes it in even though across the street doesn't or, you know, so it's, do we need to revisit those at some point or is everything fine in terms of where a restaurant, a cafe, a pizza place. Now we have a rest breakfast place can be. So those are my three first is simple just put cafe somewhere and then the other is this detailed list. Andy, do you want to build on those questions before we ask for a response. The question is different but if you'd like me to pose it now I can please do. Yeah, my question was about the change in definition of a bar that no longer requires service of food, and there's quite a history to that because the reason that that was in there was concerned about alcohol consumption without food. Leading to a greater risk of the effect of alcohol not being tempered by actual food and concerns about driving after leaving the establishment and those associated kinds of things and I was wondering if there'd been any discussion about it and whether there'd been any consultation with people in public safety or public health regarding that particular change. Okay, so I'm going to go back to Chris and Nate and begin to respond to those questions. I'll go in the order they were asked the definitions or the list of restaurant cafe and the use chart. You know, in the currently, there really is a restaurant you're right. Some of it is just for, you know, information the way our bylaw is structured is that if there is a proposed use, and it doesn't fit within the use chart the owner has to figure out what where to put it how what is the closest use category and so by having that list in the use chart, you know someone may come in and say well I'm really not a restaurant I'm at cafe and, and so really is to help guide an applicant in the building commissioner to put that use there and so, you know, before we had listed other things we said like a lunch room or cafeteria and those were never defined terms in the bylaw either and so really, you know what's proposed restaurant with food is really, you know, those types of those are similar uses and so, you know whether or not we leave it or drop it, it's still the same meaning, and you know, the building commissioner would help have an applicant figure out where they are, you know where they would fit in the use chart. And then in terms of North Amherst, let me just pause for a moment Kathy you wanted to pursue that definition. Yeah, you know, Nate, in the basic use chart they're lumped together and then in definitions there. It's not mentioned was what I was pointing out but, but we, I don't think we have any examples in Amherst but you get a lot in some urban areas where a bookstore has a little nook that is food. It's a bookstore but it has food and then is it, is that a cafe is that a restaurant or is that a bookstore with a restaurant in it and so. So just, you're trying to clean up complications so I'm not trying to complicate it more I just want to make sure when we just find what a restaurant is it implies it's a freestanding entity that's a restaurant, as opposed to embedded in something that's, so just look at those words later to make sure you capture all possibilities. So that but that was my only point that sometimes cafes just are kind of smaller in their nooks rather than a freestanding. Thank you. So yeah, we do have a definition for restaurant in the bylaw and so really if it's an establishment with a separate kitchen that needs review by the Board of Health and other things that becomes a second use. And so that could either be an accessory use or a second principle use. So, you know if there's a bookstore that then wants to serve food, you know it comes down to is it pre packaged and it's delivered from somewhere or are they actually making it and having you know something there and it wouldn't be. So you know we would fit it in as possibly. Like I said a second principle use that would need permitting and review and you know all the certificates and licensing or something else and so it wouldn't just be oh the bookstore could now start making you know sandwiches and and having someone by them we'd have to have it fit a use classification. And so for for North Amherst, right so where the House of Teriyaki is south of the intersection that is a zoning district that allows food and drink establishments and then north of the intersection in North Amherst there's a large commercial district between Sunderland Road and Montague Road. We're not proposing to change any zoning district so currently in those districts that I mentioned the food and drink establishments are allowed and we're just changing the classifications of those we're not changing where they are allowed and so if in the future, someone thinks that you know the business Village Center zoning district in some areas needs to be rezoned and moved. That's not what we're proposing here so we're not moving zoning district boundaries. We're just changing the use classifications for food and drink establishments. And then Kathy your third question. I'm forgetting. It's, it's in the complicated dimensions table we're now at the bottom, you have a lot of conditions around restaurants that look like it would be also part of the licensure review. Right so these conditions right so no these conditions in the bylaw right here, the one through 11 would be either the planning board, if it's site planner view the zoning board as a special permit or the building commissioner. And so the board of licensing commissioners is really focused on the management of alcohol service and serve you know and what and around that so the board of licensing commissioners could put conditions on an establishment. As it's related to the service and management of alcohol but they wouldn't necessarily follow these other conditions right here so these are conditions in the zoning bylaw. That would be used by, you know, land use boards or staff and so the board of licensing commissioners may have similar concerns in terms of same management strategy. In terms of queuing or alcohol service as what we have in our management plan, but they wouldn't necessarily follow these conditions and they're in their review or public hearing, they have their own set of guidelines. And on to Andy's question. Yeah, so right now Amherst allows a bar with through a site plan review so oftentimes what happens is a restaurant will come into town. And they'll say they'll serve food, and they'll close early and that's a class one, they're allowed through site plan review. And then three months later, they decide they want to stay open till two o'clock or one o'clock, close their kitchen at 10. And for the last three hours of operation be a bar. And then that becomes a class to restaurant it's a special permit from the ZBA. What happens all the time we notice it goes through the public hearing very rarely do any public come. And because the establishment is already operational, they may have been running for six months there's been no complaints. The ZBA grants the permit and now they're a bar after hours with no food. And that's been happening for 20 years. And so there's always been bars with no kitchen, right so the definition of a bar is where the primary is service is the primary consumption of alcohol. We're not changing that definition that's always been in the bylaw and we're not proposing to change that we're saying that the service of food may be incidental and is not only incidental. The only language instead of only incidental is that it may be incidental. And so, you know, that's been 20 years where there's been bars open later and they can still serve food, they could serve pre package food, or if they want to keep their kitchen open. Even now, they would be considered a bar but they have a kitchen, or in the proposed language they would still be a restaurant. So a restaurant, if their kitchen is going to stay open and they're going to staff it and have their full kitchen and serve food until 11 or midnight. So it's either a restaurant or a bar with food. And so we're not proposing to change how, you know, a bar operates or the definition so that's something that has been happening, like I said for the last 20 years, since the changes were made and you know the early 2000s. The only follow up I'd have is just to point out that there had been, I can recall, discussions when the select board was the licensed commissioners about questions of some bars, including the one that you named as an example, that we're not selling food at any time. And whether that was acceptable and whether that was wise policy. And that's why I brought the issue up. Sure, so you know a bar with no food is a special permit proposed to be a special permit use and so if there is one proposed it's a discretionary permit through the ZBA. And that's because there could be some more impacts for that use and so, like I said, currently, someone comes in and they kind of game the system because they get a site plan review and then they change it a few months later, three, six months later a year later and then they become a class to restaurant with a special permit. But now if someone comes in, they would need a special permit as a bar with no food, you know from the outset and so, you know, a nightclub or a larger establishment we're proposing to be special permit uses so it still has, you know, a special hearing a public hearing through the zoning board associated with it. Christine. I just wanted to point out that the board of license commissioners has taken over the role of the select board in the granting of liquor licenses. And so the board of license commissioners looks at whether an establishment should have some food available and that would be, you know, it might be as minimal as popcorn or pretzels or peanuts or something like that but they decide whether there should be some form of food and I think in normal conditions they do require that something be available but it's not food that's served from a full kitchen it's food that is somehow prepackaged or just a very minor amount and Rob Mora is here in the attendees and so if you wanted to hear from him about that topic, he would be available to talk to you about that but that's my understanding. Thank you. Any questions from the council. This is the first reading. There's a significant amount of material in your packet. Nate, thank you for the abbreviated presentation. We will do the second reading next week on the 19th and Pam you have a question. More of a comment. We did study this at some length in the CRC and went back and forth with the planning department as well who were very helpful in sort of laying out the sort of the full exposure. One of my, one of my original concerns was that in fact, we were, it seemed that we were losing the opportunity to notify a butters when we lost the classifications of the restaurants from based on operating hours and service of alcohol. And with a fuller vetting of this conversation with planning department. I was able to finally support this because I learned in the process that in fact, as just mentioned, board of licensing commissioners will step in and hold public hearings, notify a butters. There are two reasons one if there is a change in in hours of operation, which obviously affects neighbors and any change in service of alcohol and their approach to that which obviously again affects neighbors. I'm pretty comfortable that board of license commissioners, as well as the, the special permits for many of these uses will be a safeguard that we need. Okay. All right, thank you. Are there any other questions from counselors. Just a housekeeping issue shall any can you hear us. Yes, and the record should show that shall any join us about 648. Okay. Since we've started and we already delayed our staff from a week ago. I think we owe them the privilege of moving right on to the proposed revisions to zoning bylaw article two zoning districts article three use regulations article 16 FEMA flood map. This is a first reading, but it's not the first time that it's come to the council. This has come to the council on various stages throughout the process, this has been shepherded by Chris and her staff, and is done I believe every 10 years. And so we assume that there's a material in the packet is something that you've reviewed as counselors. And so with that, we're going to move right to the question, the planning boards recommendation or report on this with regard to their vote. Chris, please. On November 2, the planning board voted six to zero with one member absent to recommend to town council to adopt the zoning amendments to articles to three and to add article 16 FEMA floodplain overlay district and to recommend that town council adopt the amendment to the official zoning map to add the FEMA floodplain overlay district. Thank you. Okay. And Mandy Joe CRC. So CRC's vote was more extensive, but we did vote unanimously on four different things to where the same as the planning board which dealt with the zoning bylaws so we voted unanimously to recommend the council adopt all those proposed revisions Chris just mentioned to the zoning map and to the actual zoning bylaw. We also voted to recommend that the town council adopt the flood insurance rate maps, which are the firm maps. Those are the same maps that the overlay district amendments to the zoning map would be. But we have to adopt them separately as firm maps to under the FEMA protocols. We also recommended that the town council adopt the flood insurance rate study dated February 9 2023 and when you read these things including the zoning bylaw that has a date of February 9 2023 that is not a mistake. They cannot go into effect until that six month window closes from the date we got the letter. So yes, these are dated ahead of when we'll be voting. So we have four actions we have to take to related to the zoning well there's a lot of zoning but then these two extra ones about adopting the flood insurance rate maps and the actual study which is a big long document, and then CRC. Well actually it was GOL that recommended. So I won't talk about that in terms of the effective date that was GOL. Okay, Michelle, GOL. I can't remember that right now. I might need help. We did, we did vote for this to be declared clear consistent and actionable and I'm sorry I'm forgetting the date we Mandy you would do better to describe I remember the conversation but if you wouldn't mind that'd be great. So those the zoning bylaws and these studies are dated February 9 2023 GOLs recommendation was to adopt these effective that same date. Okay, and I think Nate had a good reasoning for that and we had that discussion. Am I right about that Nate you do you had. Yeah. Okay, thanks. Any questions from the council. I just want to be very sure that the lack of questions does not mean that people haven't engaged in this in fact, there's been a ton of engagement in this over the last year. Both of these measures are areas that we've looked at tonight, really come as a result of enormous work on the part of our planning staff, and the part of our committees, the planning board as well as the town council committees Mandy Joe. You did what I always forget to do that I raised my hand to do which is to thank Chris and the entire planning staff, especially for the flood mapping project they've been working on it for over a decade. It was a long time coming and thank you for all your work on that but but the planning staff and also Rob more on food and drinks to because that the temporary zoning is sunsetting in about two and a half weeks so they they worked hard to be able to get us something so that we didn't have to renew that temporary zoning yet again. And it's also a wonder the other piece the earlier one that we did is a wonderful example of where we learned from article 14. Rob and his staff kept meticulous records, and then we're able to come back and say, and because of what we've learned, we're now going to propose these bylaw changes and all of that started happening with coven. So look at this as a good outcome from coven. Kathy. I just want to echo at the amount of work and Chris I remember you standing in town how with all the flood maps around you is people were coming in, trying to find their piece of land and what happened because you were one on one, taking on questions which was terrific. I have just I have a pretty narrow question. Assuming the elementary school moves forward, it would be moving forward, starting the beginning of May, they're operating with the old flood maps right now because they were told to keep that until they're posted. And to what extent, would that mean they have to go before the Conservation Commission, more than once, if in this particular piece of land, the floodplain has moved back a little, it's not moved closer to the school, you know, so they had both lines. And I would, it's a, it's a timing, it's just a timing issue of, and they've gotten pretty clear instructions from Aaron Jack, Eric Jack to stay with current map because it's more restrictive, you know, in terms of delineation. So that's what we've been told by our consultant, who gets their information from FEMA that we should use the more restrictive maps until the new maps are adopted. And that's the rubric that I would operate under and if you wanted to have a more, you know, intensive conversation about that I suggest talking to Aaron Jack, but it sounds like you've already spoken with her so that's the guidance that we've been given which is to use the more restrictive maps until the new ones are adopted. Nate. Sure thanks yeah just one other piece there was a meeting. A while ago with you know the school team and you know the information for these maps has been available for quite some time so the, you know the consultants for the school project have the new flood maps they have the elevations. And so we discussed that so although through permitting they have to use the more restrictive maps, they have the elevation data and the flood data for the new maps and so, you know they they're aware of what those flood elevations are. And so you know they can, you know they can essentially plan accordingly right so even if they have to go through the conservation commission using more restrictive maps, they have the flood elevations that are, you know will be part of the new map. You know, they have knowledge of that so. Thank you that that was my understanding I just didn't want them to have to go twice and because it's they're operating under the more restrictive. That's that they have both sets they have a lot of information on on this planning so thank you. Are there other questions or comments from the council. Yes, I have a well thank you as well on just a quick comment. I really appreciate how within all of this work that you've done you've made room for establishments who are able to expand upon outdoor dining and moving those dates I think one of the ideas that we've seen through covert is it's allowed people to really be creative and how they organize the ability for people to be outside and dine and though we're moving on we're still moving in on to winter so I think that will be incredibly you know helpful for residents and establishment owners at the same time so thank you. Thanks. Any other questions or comments. Well, again, Chris, Nate, and Rob. Thank you for joining us. You're getting out of here by 730 I just want to note that time since we kept you here till I think 10 last time are 11. And so I'm glad we could take you first and have you join us. Thank you. Thanks. We're going to now go back to the proclamation or the resolution excuse me. We had a resolution before us last week. It was a resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum Regional High School athletic complex. And that resolution had two friendly amendments in it and those that is posted. Since then, the sponsor of this has also consulted with some other people and there is now a substitute motion or resolution in your packet. I'd like to take you to take just a moment to make sure you're looking at the right one. And Athena, you might want to put the new one while I turn to Michelle Miller to make a motion to substitute. Point of order. Yes. And someone describe exactly which document is the new one. Well, but in our packet, it's the one that was posted around 4 o'clock.  You need to unmute Dorothy. I read this and I was quite surprised because I didn't see that this added anything. It does not say any action. It. The only thing new is it says we have listened to the Amherst Board of Health. But it doesn't sound like we are saying we will follow the Amherst Board of Health's advice. And I know that there has been there's not all scientists agree but since most of them do and most health organizations do agree that PFAS is dangerous to all and particularly to young people. And this doesn't include any of the discussion as to once you get something with PFAS in it, what do you do when you have to get rid of it and dispose of it, or how do you take care of it and what the equipment is. So I am very unhappy with this. I don't see this as anything that I could support. And that is why I'm just, I'm not what what. All it says is we listen to the Board of Health, but doesn't say we're going to follow their advice. And it seems to have no teeth at all. And to be just basically here's your $900,000. So I'm very unhappy with it. Michelle, would you like to make a motion. Yeah, just a process question, Lynn, I will make the motion but I would like to be able to give a little bit of framework about this and how this came to be. We do that after you make the motion and it's perfect. Okay, so there is a motion on the floor that motion was to adopt. I'm sorry, let me just make sure I have the right. It's to that motion on the floor was to adopt the resolution concerning the safety of Amherst Pellum Regional High School Athletic Complex as presented that motion was made by me and it was seconded by Michelle. We delayed this until the next time we met. So if you are going to place this new or replacement or amended resolution on the table, you need to make that motion and it needs to be seconded. Okay, so I am making a motion to replace the previously proposed motion or resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum Regional High School Athletic Complex. December 5 with the newly proposed resolution or resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum Regional High School Athletic Complex that you have here. I that might not have been the best motion but that's the best I could do the moment. Is there a second second. Okay. Athena, I just want to make sure we're now going to be dealing with the substitute motion. Is that how we're going to refer to it in this. Okay. So, Michelle, please go ahead. Sure. Last week I presented a motion that I felt was sort of a coupling with the action that we took to add option to to the appropriation order, and this motion or this, this resolution was postponed and we, we heard the reasons for the reason that Councilor Baumann postponed it. So, Councilor Baumann, Shalini and I were able to get together and talk about her concerns. And it was clear that also Mandy was having some similar concerns so we decided that we would try to work together on a resolution that we hoped would address a couple things and so that's what I really wanted to frame. We went into our meeting to really try to get clear on what the intentions of the resolution were. And we wanted to stick to facts of record. We wanted to stick to timelines that have been established. We wanted to express our support for our students and our student athletes as well as express our understanding that the fields are in very poor condition. We also wanted to express the concerns brought up about artificial turf and PFAS and make some commitment to continuing to evaluate those concerns. What we really want to do is get into a debate in this resolution about the science or choosing a side in the resolution. We really worked hard to try to create a balanced resolution that acknowledged concerns and put on the record our support for our student athletes. However, I will say that we also discussed in our meeting last week and I think this was Andy's suggestion. If the council wants to take a position or wants to provide some guidance to the regional school committee, then that's a discussion that this council should have. Perhaps there's some other measure or a letter that is written by our council president on behalf of the council to give the regional school committee direction. But we felt that for this resolution doing that, this wasn't the right place to do that. And Shalini and Mandy, if I missed something, please feel free. Jennifer. Yeah, I just what if it's so the motion that is now on the table is this substitute resolution. Okay, do you want to speak to this or is there amendment you want to make or what I wanted to ask there were two paragraphs. In the original motion that were taken out that I just that seemed to give it a little more substance but didn't seem to be. I thought weren't controversial and that so looking at the first the motion from last week. It's the first now therefore be it resolved and then the final one be it further resolved. And that, I don't know if you want me to read both but it's just one is, you know, you can refer to it. Last week, it's in the original motion, which was just sponsored by Councilor Miller. The first it said now therefore be it resolved that the Amherst town council encourages the Amherst Pellum regional school committee to prioritize the remediation of the poor conditions of the high school athletic complex and in determining the option to pursue to consider among other benefits and drawbacks the emerging science related to the health and environmental safety of PFAS and artificial turf. And then there were the second be it further resolved that the Amherst town council supports federal and state legislation related to PFAS safety, including the soon to be signed into law PFAS firefighter protection act and bill s 1387 and act including toxic PFAS chemicals and consumer products to protect our health sponsored by Massachusetts State Senator Joanne Comerford. And I just ask are you making a motion that those be added in. I think I'm asking why those were taken out. Yeah, yeah, yeah, right. Michelle or never. I mean, so I just again I want to say that if we, if we as a council have an intention for this resolution, then maybe that's the discussion that we need to be having because it sounds to me like, perhaps, I'm hearing from Dorothy and maybe Jennifer that maybe we have different thoughts about what this resolution is meant to do. But specifically to answer your questions, Jennifer, sorry, the starting with the now therefore be it resolved that would that mention the other legislation. We decided to remove that because it was not in relation to artificial turf. And we included the language around legislation future legislation. So that that sort of scaffolds and gives us an opportunity to, at another time, be able to come back and potentially consider legislation related to PFAS in our community. Can you go ahead sorry Jennifer look like you're about. I understand. You know, I guess, when I look at the new resolution. We can the second to last whereas seems to be the only one not really just saying we support the field. So I understand. You know, counselor Pam's concerned about that. And where it does said the board of health and members of the public have expressed concern. I think the board of health at their meeting last week did more than just express concern. So I'm a little uncomfortable with that wording. I agree with what Dorothy's concerns were and what Jennifer is voicing, but I would sum it up as this is a pretty weak resolution at this point. So I'm not, I don't really want to spend a lot of time on it, I must say, I mean it's, it could pass and it doesn't say anything. The other one may have had sentences that people wanted to pull out. There is no doubt that PFAS is concerned. There is some, there is debate around what's currently in artificial turf that people can buy. And whether it is a concern and I'm going to so I'm just so very clear. We are not going to sit here tonight and I know I'm not. I'm just saying that the old resolution had the paragraph Jennifer just talked about that said, we were sending a message that this should still be part of a conversation in the school district if we don't want to do that. I'm not sure this resolution currently does much of anything so I'm not going to oppose it. I just usually our resolutions take a strong stand on something. So I cannot, I understand exactly what happened to it. I'm just saying that now I feel it's weak enough and doesn't say enough that I'm not sure it's worth doing. I'm going to skip to Mandy Joe. Um, I just want to echo what Michelle said, when the three of us Michelle Shalini and I got together and I thank Michelle for being willing to talk and work through and all. One of the first things we did is we asked ourselves what do we want this resolution to accomplish. And as Michelle said I think that might be where some of the concern from some of the counselors today is because we came and and agreed amongst us that we wanted to accomplish a resolution that showed support for our student athletes and support for rehabbing our fields because they're in poor condition. And we also wanted a resolution that recognized the concerns that people have surrounding PFAS in this community, particularly as it relates to artificial turf. But that did not take a stand. If people want a resolution that takes a stand on PFAS in particular or addresses only PFAS. That's a different resolution in at least my mind, because the decision at least for a number of us on artificial turf versus natural or support one way or the other was not just based on PFAS and so we were trying to avoid that particular controversy in writing this resolution by saying you know, people have concerns with that including those of us that support artificial turf have, you know, recognize the concerns around PFAS but there are other things that go into our decision and so so that meant that we recognize that the bills that were mentioned in the first, the original resolution really didn't relate to the safety of the athletic fields, because none of them actually deal with athletic fields and PFAS. So they didn't seem to have a reason to be in and resolution that dealt with our athletic fields. And the other one was the removal of that one was more from my mind as a recognition that the school committee in some sense is an equal to us. They are elected just like we are. And so we need to be really careful when we talk about their roles and our roles and some of us were just very uncomfortable with the way that wording was that language was worded because they are elected just like we are and they are elected by the people just like we are to make decisions related to stuff within their own purview and their own thing so that was one of the other reasons to remove that in favor of supporting the implementation of that working that strategic plan for the athletic fields in general. I'm going to ask that if people want changes, they make them as motions to amend and at this point on a you're the only person whose hand is up who has not spoken so I'm going to call on you and then we're going to move to amendments if we want them. Oh boy. Yeah, so I did raise the issue of the first now therefore in the last meeting because I was extremely uncomfortable with it. I feel that the one that you're referring to Jennifer. It is inappropriate in my mind to follow a vote of the council where we added in and passed an amendment, which provided and in the school committee with a choice to make instead of us making that choice. To follow that by pressuring them regarding their decision that felt completely inappropriate to me on multiple levels because I also agree with what Mandy just said that we should not be passing judgment or passing pressure on to the school committee regarding their decision I think that they take their jobs very seriously and they don't really need our our opinions and trying to push a scale. So, that was something that I had raised in the last meeting that I was extremely uncomfortable with and for me that was one of the reasons I couldn't support the last resolution. I also want to just know resolutions are non binding. They indicate our support and our opinions. And they don't need to pass unanimously but they shouldn't necessarily have teeth in the sense that they should not dictate that they are not policy they are non binding resolutions they are opinions of the council and this resolution is demonstrating that the opinion of the council is that we support our student athletes and want to see our athletic facilities represent the amount of pride that we have in them. And I appreciate that it's that remain and I think the sponsors for their work. Dorothy we're back to you. Yes, I will do a resolution. First of all, yes a vote is stronger than a resolution and we had a vote and the vote said, do not go ahead with PFAS. Secondly, we had a chance to read you somebody said we had to redo the vote because we had new information. What was that new information. It was a letter from the superintendent of schools saying, please, if you don't like this, commit to grass fields, and more fields commit to what we need. I was totally prepared to support that. Since you brought it up and avoided our vote. I wanted to support the superintendent's new information. Since then, just games upon games. So I'm saying that I would like to make a motion that we support the superintendent's plan request that we support. Dorothy, that there is a motion on the floor and there's an amendment to the motion on the floor. We're only dealing with those two at this time. Fine. I just am really getting tired of the games that are being played. So this isn't a game. We have Robert's rules of order. Yeah, well, you know what, that's calling a new vote on new information and then ignoring the new information to me that's a game. The motions on the floor. Motion's been amended and that amendment is on the floor. The amendment is a substitute resolution. Are there any further questions, comments, or requests with regard to the substitute resolution. Jennifer. I thought the reason we were having a resolution was to say we are we support our athletes and we can we want to give we are going to give this gift to free cash. Oh, here we. To the school committee. And we would, you know, like them to have the option for option two, which would be grass, it wouldn't just be tied to option three. And that the resolution was stating that we do have concerns about artificial turf, and it is the decision of the regional school committee. But kind of restating what that we had concerns and that we would like, you know, option two to remain an option that that was really the point of the resolution that we. It is up to the school committee, but since we are giving this gift, we can express that we would like them to consider, you know, option two, as well as three. So there was a reason for having a resolution. We clearly support our student athletes by the three appropriations that we've made for new field. Um, you know, I agree. It's more perhaps symbolic.  I don't know if other people share it. And I don't know how the board of health would feel by just saying that they've expressed concern because I do think they've, they've done more than that. Michelle. Yeah, I guess I would just, um, I want to restate that we as a council can decide what kinds of actions we want to take. And so this does not stop this council from having additional discussions. Um, that do potentially, if there's a majority of counselors who feel this way, some of the things that are being pointed out by Dorothy and Jennifer. So if the council feels that there should be some position taken or there should be some direction that is given to the regional school committee, I think that we can still do that. I mean, Lynn's the president of the council, but I'm just saying, I don't, I guess what I'm saying is there are multiple things that our council can do in any one arena that we're working within. And so it doesn't mean that supporting this resolution means that we can't take other steps that this council would like to take. Um, and I just wanted to ask Jennifer, Jennifer. Um, so you restated what you thought the resolution was hoping to do. And I was just wondering. Everything that you restated is covered in the resolution. So I was wondering which part you felt wasn't established in the resolution and if, you know, there's some amendment that perhaps could be considered. I also wanted to clarify Dorothy Dorothy you had said that we voted last time with the amendment on the appropriation, not to do artificial turf. I don't think that's what that vote said. So I just wanted to clarify if we had a different understanding about that perhaps we are discussing the motion. Fair enough. Fair enough. Yeah, so Jennifer just wondering what what piece do you feel is missing from this that you had hoped to have in there. I guess as I read it again, you know, because we got it late that yeah, you do have either artificial turf or natural grass, so I feel comfortable with that. I just, um, yes, I was expressing I, I thought that the two paragraphs, you know, I prefer the first resolution, but that's, you know, that the two paragraphs that came out. I think it's stronger with them back in. As I said, if that's and I guess I did honestly think that the last paragraph of the first resolution where you had mentioned legislation that we supported. I thought that was part of the conversation was acknowledging that the council's role is legislative.  Maybe that would that requires a longer conversation for legislative action that we would be within our purview. If we wanted to look at restricting, you know, certain chemicals PFAS, you know, as that would be installed in Amherst, you know that that would be within our purview to look at taking legislative action and that was, I don't know why I thought that that be it further resolved was, was how the first resolution concluded. Yeah, so I just wanted to respond to that and just say that I, I, from my perspective, adding in that the council will continue to explore this and perhaps take legislative action is stronger than including legislative action that's already there that's not related to the safety of our fields. It felt sort of out of place. But I do think it's important that we are signaling in this resolution that there may be further action that's taken as this continues to be explored. You know, one of the things that I would hope is that we, the Board of Health and the regional school committee will continue to have discussions around the safety of artificial turf and PFAS, and perhaps even bring in folks to sit on a panel like the other committees have done to explore this. But I, I just, I'm glad to, I just wanted to know which parts you felt had, you know, that you were hoping for had been removed. The way that we've worded it is a little bit different, like by saying that the $900,000 included artificial turf and natural grass is the way of saying, you know, that keep option to you on the table. That's included exactly. And so it is keeping that option on the table. So, that's it. Are there any other further comments or questions or proposed amendments. So, we are going to first move on the substitute resolution. And if that passes, then we're finished. If it fails, we go back to the original resolution. Okay. Any other further questions or comments? Then is this a vote on whether to substitute or not, or is this a vote on the resolution? I just, I'm just asking what I'm voting on. It's a vote. The motion. Athena, go ahead. Sounds like the intent of the motion was to move to adopt a substitute resolution. We're moving, we're moving directly to this. It's not like an amendment. Okay, that's great. That's all I wanted to know. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure I was right in what I was doing. So the motion basically is to adopt the resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum regional athletic complex as a substitute resolution. Or should it be to adopt the substitute resolution concerning have to replace the previous motion adopting the resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum regional high school athletic complex with the newly proposed resolution concerning the safety of the Amherst Pellum regional high school athletic athletic complex submitted on December 12, 2022. I added the date to clarify that we're doing new. The new draft. Thank you. Thank you for reading the motion that it as it will appear at that motion was the motion that was made in second. Any further discussion. I just, oh, wow, that's really loud. Um, now I just want to second what Michelle said at Monday Joe I just wanted to make sure why is my way sounding weird isn't on sounds like a good sound problems tonight just go ahead. Okay, so I just wanted to make sure that Jennifer got the part where we've added it's the second last be it for the result that MS Council supports the need to further investigate the impact of PFAS and all consumer products. I'm continuing to learn the impact on your materials and artificial turf in our community and taking legislative action. I just wanted to make sure that you did see that I know this was received very late. So I just wanted to make sure that you see that that stated, and we felt that was stronger because it's talking about the legislative action we can take. And Joe Comerford's bill just talks about general consumer products and does not include athletic fields. I didn't feel it was. That was another reason, because her bill does not include athletic fields. It's only for consumer products. So which is why we kind of remove that and kept it more pertaining to the athletic fields. Does that make sense. Thank you. Okay, the motion's been made and seconded. We're going to move to the vote. Yes. Pat DeAngeles. Aye. Anna Devlin-Goth here. Aye. Lynn Grismersen. Aye. Mandy Johanicki. Aye. Anika Lopes. Aye. Michelle Miller. Aye. Dorothy Pam. No. Pam Rooney. Aye. Kathy Shane. Abstain. Andy Steinberg. Aye. Jennifer Taub. Aye. Alicia Walker. No. The way I have it is there's 10 in favor. There's two noes and there's one abstention. So the substitute motion passes. Michelle, we're going to go on to the next item. Yes, I'm just letting you know my son just texted he's having a health issue. So I just need to turn my camera off for a second and return as soon as I can. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. So we should note that Michelle is not in the meeting starting at 757. And she'll return. Okay. So we are going to go to the next item on our agenda. And that is proposed amendment to bylaw 3.22 discharging of firearms. This is a first reading. This is coming out of GLL. And is there someone else from GLL that can speak to this? Andy Joe. I can try unless our vice chair wants to, they're willing to pass it off. So this is part of GLL's review of the bylaw review committee's outstanding bylaws from four years ago that then got forwarded to the new council XYZ. And so here we are with at least one report out to you on this discharging of firearms. So the bylaw review committee wanted the council to look at this to determine whether shotguns or air guns should be excluded. From the provisions of the bylaw and clarify if fouling pieces different from shotgun and stuff like that. So we looked at the bylaw, we asked a lot of questions, we sent some questions off to the town attorney who got back to us and answered a lot of questions and then we talked some more. And basically, we voted four to zero with one absent to recommend deleting section a one. And so a one is the section that deals with shotguns and the exemptions to shotguns that that exempt shotguns from the paragraph at the very beginning. So then shotguns would be subject to that very first paragraph that does that prevents the discharging of firearms in the town. That paragraph itself does not overrule any of the state laws, regulations and laws related to the discharge of firearms it gets really confusing. But that's the paragraph we're recommending be deleted. Okay.  So, are there any questions from the council. This is a first reading it will come back next week for the second reading and the vote. Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead Pam, I'll recognize you without your hand up on here. Can you describe what excluding something means.   You just can't do that in Amherst. It's subject to whatever rules the state allows you to do. So it doesn't overrule the state has rules like allowing just discharge of firearms more than I think 400 feet from a building and stuff like that. And so. You can't overrule that but so the a starts with not overruling that state law that says you can do that we're saying if it's not explicitly in the state law you can't do anything you can't discharge of any firearm in in Amherst, that's not covered under that rule that allows you to discharge a firearm under state law this is why it gets confusing, but then we go on to say in this bylaw, well, but you can discharge a firearm for these reasons. And that's what a one and the original a two were so so then we said the original bylaw said well but you can discharge a shot a shotgun or an air gun. And then you could discharge any firearm for the specific reasons self defense hunting, hunting's not in there but it hunting's dealt with with state law it's dealt with with state law we determined that you know just humane dispatch of injured animals you can read it all. And so, basically we're removing the shotgun provision from that exception. So, shotguns were fully accepted, and now they'd only be accepted for the same reasons, item two, anything under item two. Does that help. Okay. Are there any other questions, Andy. Yes. That's Mandy because Michelle's not here and she's presenter. I'm a little confused by the numbering that's left in the bylaw, because there's now a one with no two. And it would seem to me that therefore we should be just saying at the end of that introductory paragraph of a program should not apply to the discharge of fire ones, firearms, colon, and then have a series of either numbered or lettered paragraphs following but having a one without a two. I was wondering if that's really good legislative construction. Not entirely but we were sure that the town clerk would take care of that issue when it went to the clerk but we can make sure next week in the motion sheet that it's taken care of. Okay, thank you. And Andy, given your legal background and Mandy Joe's I'm going to say yes. All right, anything else on this one. Okay, so I recall for Kathy you have your hand. Just what any size picked up up at the top mine picked up under be it still refers to section a two, and there won't be an a two anymore so it just needs. It's purely making it work. So there's additional things in B that need to be amended to be consistent with what's under in in B that refers to a Athena. Question. No, do you, you got what you need. I do. Thank you. Okay. Are there any other questions or comments. Okay, then we're going to move on to the next item. Last week in executive session. The council met. We discussed the town managers contract and compensation. Based on that discussion. We voted and in executive session and we now need to reaffirm the council amendment. And just very briefly, the amendment itself is to section 11.1. And it allows the town manager to use the 300, I mean the $3,000 that we have been providing for him in the past for disability insurance to either use it for disability or life insurance. I drafted an amendment to the contract I sent it off to the town attorney the town attorney has looked at it. The town manager has looked at it we made one small modest change at the very end which is item two which says all of their provisions of the existing employment agreement shall remain in full force and effect. So our purpose or goal tonight is to reaffirm an amendment to the town managers contracts so the motion is as follows to approve the amendment to employment agreement between town of Amherst, Massachusetts and Paul Bachman dated December 12 2022 as shown on page The motion sheet and to authorize the town council president to sign said document on behalf of the council. Is there a second second Dublin got here. Are there any questions or comments. Okay, seeing none we'll go to a roll call vote. We begin with Pat D'Angelo's eye. On a Devon got here. I. Lynn grease murders. I'm Andy Joe Hannity. I, Anika Lopes. I, Michelle Miller. Oh, I'm sorry she is absent for this vote. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Yes. Kathy chain. Yes. Andy Steinberg. I, Jennifer top. Yes, Alicia Walker. Oh, yes. Thank you Alicia, shall any bomb in. Yes. Okay, so it's 12 in favor, none opposed. No abstentions and one absent. Okay. As we move on to our last really. Media item tonight. We're very fortunate that Mandy Joe has been basically shepherding this area of the town managers goals with GOL. And so this is our opportunity to speak to GOL who will be meeting this week about our thoughts regarding the town managers goals. And then we're going to move on to our next item. And we're going to include either how they're organized and or substance and specifically detail. So Mandy Joe, I'm going to just assume you're taking notes and the theme is taking notes and we're going to move accordingly. So comments are, there's no vote on this tonight. It will come back to the council. Hopefully next Monday night the 19th. On page two of the actually number, number four of council policy implementation, there's quite a list. And number five is housing affordability. Now prioritizing initiatives to increase home ownership opportunities for low and moderate income residents. And it feels appropriate to add the, the following phrase, including retention of single family homes or just homes for purchase. Because I think the retention of these homes is as critical as any other facet of availability. I'm seeing, I'm seeing question marks. Okay. Thank you. Pam, was there anything else? Okay. Kathy. I just have a question. I have comments on multiple pages. Should I go through all of them or do you want to go through a page at a time? And I can just give my comments when we get to that page. Mandy, Joe, how would you like to proceed by individual? I mean, it might be more efficient to go by individual goal for each of the council. Then I'm going to suggest that Athena, you put the goals up on the, the draft up on the screen. And if we're doing the goals, those two pages, I just have one minor comment on that. So I was doing the town, I focus more on the town manager. So we have the beginning is the town council policy priorities. Are there comments on that? And I'm sorry to ask people that have now raised their hand that if you don't have comments on the priorities, please lower your hand.  Michelle. Welcome back. Let the record show that you're back at a 10 and Mandy Joe is now doing the goals since she was working on it for GOL. We just had her go ahead and work with us. Okay. Great. So, Kathy, you have. Yes, I have just one on on the climate action. This is just purely wordsmithing it's when it says the 2019. And it says with a focus on enacting a wave waste hauler that wasn't in the 2019. So I was just suggesting, including a new 2023 policy goal. So just something because otherwise it makes it seem like we're pulling something out of a list that we've had since two years before it's purely wording it so I wasn't questioning the waste by law. I'm not sure if that's clear, but when I read it, it looked like of the everything that was on the list in 2019. Now we're going to focus on this one thing. And that's not, I don't think what it was meant to say. Okay, is there any other comments on climate action. This is under Town Council policy priorities. Climate action on that particular one. Pam. Your hands up that's what you have your hand up here. Andy. It's not on climate action. I have a couple of overarching policy goal or policy priority issues that we see the current list. So I don't know when you want to take that up. Let's stay on this and then let's go back to that because I think several of us have this. We're talking specifically about Council Council policy priorities climate action objective. Michelle. So I'll keep it to the climate action objective but it's broader to say that the policy priorities these lines at the end that indicate with a focus on or basically with a focus on. I'm just not sure if structurally, this is the right way to write the policy priorities. So I'm questioning I guess the structure of including a focus when there are lots of different potential focuses and like for community health and safety why is the residential rental bylaw the focus as opposed to many other focuses that fall under community health and safety so I'm wondering if it almost feels like there was one blurb that has been used throughout the Town Council policy priorities which is the Town Council will continue making progress on such and such by prioritizing appropriate legislative regulatory fiscal and other actions that really is relative to all of these priorities. So, like you like has happened with the town manager piece of this, we've listed out details which is what we've heard from a lot of people people want the details to be included so. I'm just wondering, I structurally something feels off about this to me. Andy, since we seem to have kind of eeked into an area I think you were going to comment on do you want to go ahead. All right, then I'll go on to Anna. So I think that mine builds on potentially what Michelle was saying if I'm understanding it correctly, which you know there are several potential policy measures under climate action that I'd love to see included, versus just one, one focus. For example, sorry I just switch hands. So for example, an energy benchmarking disclosure policy or bylaw, excuse me, residential energy performance disclosure bylaw. I'll send you that phrasing. And additionally, I'll stick with that for now. But I guess it leads to this bigger point of is is right now the time where we have to come up with all the examples because I want to make sure that we still retain some of that flexibility to do all of the things that are covered in the umbrella of the beginning sentence. Does that make sense. Yes, we're, we're now going to open this up about the structure and I'm, I'm going to go after a Nika but Dorothy, you need to unmute Dorothy. Yeah. I know a lot of people wanted to have the goals more specific and it just seems that by we're now saying we're going to stick with all our goals. And it's like we're almost not saying very much. Unless like, for example, when Michelle was commenting on the climate action. Unless that particular thing of November 18 2019 lists very specific the very specific goals that I'm used to hearing and the waist taller bylaw does is not mentioned in that because that's a more recent project of ours. So it's really a question. It's, it is not in the climate action goals. I'm a little confused about again similar idea whether we're keeping it broad in the policies are we going into specifics, because we received from ECAC chair list of climate action goals and so where would that show up here. I can. I'm sorry, somebody spoke over. Sorry, I was going to I can respond to that briefly if you'd like me to or Mandy probably can they're integrated throughout the document so I've been tracking it on the side and then they're each interwoven throughout with the exception of certain ones that are policy related that would be covered under that general umbrella, including the one I just specified to me. So we're going to edit it to include more of those of the policy ones here in this climate action policy. There were only three that were directly related to policy so it was the zero waste bylaw the energy benchmarking and then one about a home rule and energy stretch codes. So those could be seen as covered in this general sentence at the start. And I also picked one of those because a home rule is a beast and so I want to not necessarily set that as a full goal for us right now but I, not that it's not a great idea. But I asked to include the benchmarking disclosure bylaw in addition to the waste hauler bylaw in the policy goals, the other elements of what was crafted by ECAC are covered in the different areas broken out, even though it doesn't it's not all within a climate action paragraph they're they're broken out into infrastructure and policy etc etc. Does that make sense. Okay. Oh, excuse me. I meant to lower my hand my questions and concerns have been raised already. Okay, Mandy Joe. So I think this discussion highlights the trouble a Council of 13 has with policy priorities. We have six I think it is seven, seven broad policy priorities here, but each one of us views some action within each of those as more important than other actions. And we have to get to at least seven of us agreeing on each one. And then, you know, in terms of whether it's in there or not and then be able to have seven people vote in the end for it. The more specific you get, the more likely it is people will peel off and not be able to vote for it because they don't believe any one thing should be part of that priority for the one year specific thing. The more specific you get, the harder we have to do our job because we also have to think this is one year. Everything we add in here do we think we can get done in a year. And that's one of the reasons to keep it much more general and maybe only list one or possibly two under each one we've already seen say for residential rental bylaw, we've been working on it for nine months now, and we have three more months to go. I mean, it's probably a council probably, you know, and so some of these are quicker to do on a legislative basis, others are not, but we have to think if these are our goals for our priorities for a year and our legislative priorities for one year 12 months. What can we accomplish in those 12 months. We can't list 17 climate action things because TSO is never going to be able to get through 17 climate action things, especially if none of them have been proposed right now and legislation. And so I don't know what the solution is. It's in some sense why there's one or none on some of these. Some of them, you know, are a little more expansive than others, but I think we as a council have to come up with what do we think we as a council because that's what the policy priorities are we as a council can get done in one year. What do we want to focus on in that one year amongst these eight general priorities, what actions are most important to us. Andy. So we're getting into the general structure questions and so I'm going to say three things and try and be really quick. One is that in the first paragraph. I think, partly picking up on part of what Mandy said and partly picking up on the budget guidelines which will return to it our next meeting. I would have included a sentence like this. These goals cannot be achieved in a single year and will be pursued consistent with available resources. Because I think that it, we ought to recognize up front, exactly as Mandy said that it's not doable in a year. And I think that we're doing ourselves to service if we don't recognize that there is resource limits to, if we were really going to do all of these things, which then leads into the second point that these are all council goal structural things. And I was just going to do three things. So that would be the one that I would include in the first paragraph. The second thing is that I think that we're missing an important policy priority of this council. And it is to maintain essential municipal services expected and and supported by our residents or something of that nature. Because I think that we provide a lot of services we spent a lot of time as a council talking about routine municipal services. It is a policy, I think it is a policy priority of the council, and we're doing a disservice to all of the existing town departments by not just saying it up front as one of the town council policy priorities. And the last thing I will touch on is that I'm fine with what's put down there for the climate action because everything that we're doing with the exception of anything that's been added since is really tied to the community to the climate action goals. And they've been established by the council and through the car. And the only thing that the council's added is the universal curbside pickup, which is why I would just leave it alone because I think that it really does cover what we want for the climate action objective. Michelle, I'm actually Michelle I've already, I'm going to go on to Pat since you've spoken once okay. Justing some of my thinking because of what you just said Andy. And it helped me understand why waste fallers which I happen to support but felt oddly inserted now I understand why it's there. We do have. I can't hear Pat sorry. You have to lean into the mic Pat. Yeah, there you go. Not even shorts worth listening to. But it seems to me that I'm, I'm concerned in terms of town council policy priorities. I want to be very clear that they should be what the basic policy is and Andy just led me to understand why we would add waste faller here because it's the newest thing that we're looking at. So I would like us to look use that lens as we go through. I'm my concern has to do with the priorities that we are giving to Paul. And when I look at five housing affordability in the council policy priorities. We're focusing on promoting home ownership opportunities. This goes into what I value that but I also value the creation of and ensure at the operation of a permanent shelter and housing for people who are homeless. And I want that in here. We've just purchased property to do that. So that to me is new. I wanted here and I wanted in the town manager goals because it's been those of us who have been pricking Paul to remind him of the things that we most were are concerned with. And that's, you know, he said it. I'm going to paraphrase this really badly Paul so fix it. But in I believe it was the housing trust meeting you talked about how important it was for you to have specific things stated because that's what you focused on. So I want us to be very careful about how we're doing this. And I know we have more specifics when we get into council policy implementation. But, you know, there's a balance here that we might need to look at as we go through each one of these. That was long winded and maybe not value, which I don't know off the panel. Thanks. I would support what Andy was talking about that that not all of these are accomplished in a single year but I think it's really important to put them on the table. Rather than just limiting ourselves to one year lookaheads because in fact, you know, we're referring to the November 18 2019 climate action goals. Well, that's a very long standing thing now. And it's clear that we're still referring to it. It's still giving us guidance from the first council so I really don't want to limit to one year look out. I've struggled with this new structure and I've been very clear about that and I'm still struggling with it. And if we're going to stay with the structure which it appears we are then biggest challenge we have is sitting here tonight and trying to give feedback on both our town council policy priorities and also the town manager's goals. And that's a big order. It's been a big order all along. And one of the reasons I think I've struggled with this new structure is that when we were using the old structure it in. Maybe it needed to be more clear this is policy versus this is implementation, but in divorcing the two I think we've lost something. And that's what I'm trying. That's what I'm struggling with. Having said that, on this specific climate action goal. I do not believe that we have agreed to enact a waste hauler bylaw, I believe that we've agreed to explore the possible enactment and the way this is stated it sounds as if we have adopted that as an action. And so, I, on that particular one, I think it needs to be have something that basically says explore the enactment of or something like that. So, my concern is that we keep saying, well we've make working to continue making progress on the climate action goals adopted in 2019. And then that's it's very, very broad and the reality is that the climate goals adopted in 2019 or three bullet points. 50% reduction in greenhouse gas greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 25% by 2025 carbon neutral no later than 2050 and achieve to be prepared to achieve carbon neutrality as early as 2030 by planning and advocating for state and federal action, etc. And then what ECAC did and I watched them do it and it was a lot of work is that they pulled out the key areas of focus from the carp, and they identified specific goals and they gave us the percentage of change in emissions. My worry is that we put this goal statement out every year, but we don't give ourselves the specific action items, we've given some to Paul and I think that's important. If we actually 2030 is right around the day in corner y'all, like this 2025, even closer. So some of these need to get in here specifically some of the ones that pertain to policy, I do think are important to be in here. I am excited about a waste hauler bylaw, and that cannot be the only thing that is cited in here, especially given that it's not in the specific measures that are giving us a significant change. I'm not saying it's not helping it is helping, and it cannot be the only thing cited. That's, that's my, that's my hill I'll die on today. Everybody has one. That's mine today. Jennifer. So I was just picking up on one, Anna just said, because I do agree we need to be a little more specific or we'll find ourselves at 2030 and. That's what we're saying. But could, would that more appropriately go in the town manager goals. That's what I'm struggling with. Unless it's policy. Unless it's policy and sorting through that list and we deciding which is policy and which is, you know, implementation, which is what the town manager and his staff do. But that would need to be done. So I've done that and I'm happy to share it. In just we received. We received an email from the Amherst climate justice alliance, which I thought was really excellent and it. You know, I don't know if that's something that can almost be tacked on to the goals or.  You know, appear in different places, but. And it, and it didn't ask that it all be done in a year. I talked about three years and and beyond, but I'm just, you know, I'm so can we suggest or add that these be part it seems like it's more appropriate in the town manager goals. So one, and I'll get back to you in a moment, but one of the options. You know, we cannot just tack on an item. We have to discuss it. We have to agree to adopt it or we have to agree to accept it. So, one of the ways out of this might be to go back to the carp and have the town manager. Come to us with a plan for implementing some of the higher suggested actions or something like that. And instead of us sitting here and saying, oh, we think you should do a B and F. So maybe under the climate action is the council will continue making progress on the climate action goals adopted by the council on November 18 by prioritizing by and in reference to the car prioritize legislative regulatory and other actions and using period and except we don't do periods colon and then go on and do something else that's here but for us to sit here and if we need a whole night just to talk about climate action. Okay. And I'm not saying we shouldn't but we're not going to resolve that tonight. Okay. I'm going to go to Mandy Joe, only because you're kind of controlling the deck here. So it sounds like the council in general doesn't like the new structure but struggles a little bit with the old structure in terms of the policy which is why we tried the new structure. We can go back to the old structure with sort of a clarity of that council policy implementation goal in the town manager goals, sort of becomes the old policy goals, but but really refers to implementation of council policy priorities or something, or council policy or something like that and so I could go back to that I can't do that tonight, obviously, but I, you know the carps already in that, you know I think a lot of the emails we got focused on the policy priorities of the council and never went to read the manager goals that had implementation of those pilot priorities with like carp and waste hauling and X, Y and Z. And so a lot of it's already in there as Anna said, I just don't think people maybe made it that far and maybe sort of doing some sort of hybrid again, but with clearer language around implementation of policy instead of policy goals. I think we need more effective and allow us to talk more about the specifics. I just want to add to that thought me and did you and then I'm going to make sure we go call on everybody but it also to me by having it be a single document of policy and it it heart it beckons the fact that we work with in a team with the town manager, and we, we go back and forth in dialogue about how what we want to accomplish as a council translates to management, and the impact that comes on management, and then that comes back and further informs our policy. So, I, as much as I truly admire the attempt to separate them in this case. I'm not sure we've done ourselves a service. So, Michelle, let me just start at the top and just go down the list. So Michelle, I'm removing my hand. The first is, I have really tried to start looking at all of the documents that we're working with through our lens as counselors and then also through how the public is viewing the documents that we're working on and eventually passing so I would wonder, for example with the climate action, if somebody from the public, let's say a newcomer to town. They came in they pulled this up and they looked at this and they see that something was passed in November 18 they don't see what the items I think that Anna was bulletin. They don't see what those items are. And then they see with a focus on enacting a waste hauler by law, which is something that has been newly added and they may or may not know about so I am just thinking in terms with my role as a GOL head on about how we might be able to make this structurally more clear to both our internal workings as well as to if somebody a member of the public were to pick this up and really want to try to understand what our priorities are. So that's the first and then the second is we have a record of votes that we have taken as a council and we have a record of votes that have been taken by previous councils. We, but there's no reference in this document to the record of votes. So it's unclear, for example, on November 14 in response to the July 5 incident. We have a several motions that were passed. And I've worked with the CSS JC to sort of look at those that many of those items don't appear at all in this document. And I'm using that as an example to show that what what may be falling through the cracks. If we don't have the record of votes, and we don't have that clearly identified. How can we be sure and that that all of the items that we have agreed to move forward with as a council are being represented in this document. So again with the GOL hat on. I would like to between now and Wednesday when GOL meets again, and we take this up again with the feedback we're receiving here to think about some ways that we can take the feedback regarding structure and work with Mandy on and the other members as well as to be more clear about what we have like I use this example of the votes on the July 5 incident. There is at least and I have a list of them there's at least three or four maybe five that actually don't appear anywhere in this document, but that we agreed to pursue. And so I think that that's problematic and it makes me worry that there might be other other items like that that aren't being reflected in the document. Dorothy. I totally support what Michelle said but I'm going to say something different. We have to have all of the climate action goals spelled out. Before most of the people in this council were born in the 1970s. We had Earth Day, and we said we were going to do things and we promised and we didn't do them we didn't do them it's 50 years later we didn't do them. And soon we're really quite concerned about what physical world we're going to be living in. We have to do that because we have to prioritize the climate action goals. This has not been my first cause in my life, but I see it has to be now, because time is running out. We have to do it. And I mean just today at my book club we realized that our very language is going to have to change the whole concept of the iceberg where more of it is below the surface. And I'm thinking, but soon we will have no icebergs. We really can't assume anything we have to spell every one of our initiatives out on climate action, because there is going to be time to deal with it later. And there may not be enough time to do what we need to do, as it is right now. Anna. Sure. So, when I was a little alarmed by what you said and I want to make sure I'm understanding it I, I do not think that sending Paul back to the entire carp document and saying pick from this on what to do is one respectful of our committee time and energy and effort put into this. And, and to the purpose of setting goals for the town manager. So I think that we, in my opinion, we should look at the list that carp said to prioritize that's, sorry that EC has too many acronyms that ECAC said to prioritize which are pulled from the carp and go from there I don't think that we, I don't think that's us getting into the weeds and debating individual climate measures I think that's us looking to the expert opinion of one of our committees and saying this is what was brought forward and this is what we believe should be focused on we can put the window down that list as we see appropriate but I think it's abandoning our, our purview a bit to, to give so broad a goal to just say, go forth and look at the big 400 page card. I, I was misunderstood. Thank you. I don't disagree with what you're saying. Andy. I have a process suggestion. Last time, the last meeting we talked about the budget policy guidelines, and then asked that the conclusion of the conversation rather than picking apart and trying to edit the whole thing. Just asking that you send Kathy, if you had suggestions or work up on the prior document and Kathy did some great work on it and the committee's going to talk about it on Thursday and get it back to you. And so I think a similar process might be helpful here, not to spend the entire night until one in the morning again, talking about each one of these action goals and then town manager goals, but just to ask that all of us do something similar. Andy, I thank you for that suggestion.  Thank you, Lynn. And so first I just did want to appreciate all of the work that Mandy Joe did on this document because while I do think it's helpful to see the separation of policy versus implementation. I do also agree that it kind of, I feel like it also minimizes the connection and how they work together. And I also have more details that I'm not going to speak to that I would like to see in this document because I wanted to speak to the format basically in that I also would be supportive of Mandy Joe's suggestion to go back and include further specification as to certain things as such as Andy's suggestion earlier, but I think that this format is a little bit tricky for me. And then I think it's helpful to see where these things are separated and where they affect policy versus implementation. I think in terms of goals, policies and in terms of ratings and doing our evaluation, I think our prior format was a little bit easier to work with because it also allows people to go into these specifications that we're all talking about now. And so I would prefer to see a change of format, and then to go back because I don't want to offer like so so much small details to each section when I really just want the format to change. So, again, thank you Mandy Joe but I just wanted to make that comment. Kathy. I am totally supporting what I think is an emerging idea that we're only we only got to the first page of the first two pages we never got to the town manager performance goals. And we actually have to have that other document and what Alicia just said is we have to have a document that if we think of 12 months from now, we're going to go through and say, did this happen, did this not happen, what do I know about it. And so I focus most of my attention on starting on page one, I think we should just, it was an attempt at a new structure but I think we should start with, if we send comments and I think we should send comments and on the town manager section is where I was going to go instead of trying to rewrite the first two pieces, because adding a lot of detail there won't help with the manager's goals. And when I went through what we have now in the town manager structure. We have eight Roman numeral sections, but one of them has six subsections called policy implementation so there were actually 13 sections that we would be rating that. And so we have one town manager, and some incredibly wonderful staff. And in various departments, then we have schools. So we do also have to come up with something we think is, this is what we think could happen in the next year. And this is part of a multi year strategy so we might want a long term plan around something to see it, but we don't expect to see it. So my edits were on pieces that, yes, year one, and then some things I don't think the town manager has to focus on in the coming year. And I'll use one example, but I'll send my comments and we're funding the reparations fund and until we have a how we might spend it. There's not a lot at the town manager level because we've got a funding mechanism so it's listed explicitly as a performance goal, and I would move something else in because I think there are other things that we have asked the staff to work on so going through think with them, and then depends on what would the staff be doing on it getting grants, you know, so I'd like to recommend that people focus on, ignore the first two pages while thinking of our policies, and then going through this, and do we need to break this policy section section up into big bullets so that we didn't bury it, but I didn't find it difficult to think of what was missing there but that's where most of my comments were so it's the structural shift Alicia as you were saying that, like, where am I going to comment on things I want to comment 12 months from now so just try to think of the way we just went through and what is a two smaller level, or at, it's a multi year level. When we make our comments. That's my overarching and Mandy I understand what you were trying to do but I think we keep getting stuck on page one of our goals and we never get to the same goals. So I want would like to jail to start on to flip it and focus on the other section because we pull needs to know what we want to focus on starting in January and we're halfway through December so So the waste hollow bylaws being brought up a couple of times whether it belongs there and I just wanted to say that I believe it belongs in the policy just because the town council voted. to send it to TSO and finance committee to work on it so I think it's something we have already voted that the council wants us to look at and in collaboration with the staff. And the council policy implementation part does have the the waste bylaw implementation pieces so it is there in the town manager goals. However, again, it seems to be lost and I think this new version. It's everything is under come so policy implementation so I think for the public and generally we it we're not highlighting our focus like climate action community health all of these are like subsections under policy versus being very clear for the town manager goals that climate action community health and safety economic vitality I think all of those deserve to be their own major sections I think that's lost in the current format which is kind of what Kathy was saying I think. Yeah, I think that's what several of us are now saying. Pam. I can come back to you go to Jennifer. Okay. Yeah just quickly. I saw so picking up on what Chaloney was saying, and the concern Linux express that since we haven't adopted the bylaw amendment for the waste taller, but since in order to get to the point that we would come back to the council with the amendment or the bylaw in a form that the council could vote on does is going to take a certain amount of staff time and that's why the town manager asked that we included that in his goals because they really have to make time to work through it to get to the point that we can come back to the council. And I did want to you know just express support for what Andy said that just delivering basic services should actually be a goal that we recognize because it's not an easy lift just to keep the trains running on time. I'm Pam running. Thank you. The going back to the conversation about our policies versus versus town manager goals. I struggled with it because I could look at every single one of them and just say, well it really boils down to doing the legislative regulatory actions needed so we could almost use that as a, as a preface to the whole document that the town council's responsibilities are to support, you know, our targets, the town manager's goals through legislation regulatory actions and that, and that in a way feedback from town manager and staff to town council saying, if you want me to accomplish this, then you need to provide the following pieces of legislation or something like that. So our, our policy. Our role is is just really could be summarized with with that little string of items. If that makes sense. So, Mandy Joe and Michelle and I'm in this case I'm looking to the person who's been more of the architect of this document. Would you like us to give you feedback using this document, or would you like us to give you edit into the old town manager goals. I would love feedback on the performance goals that start with administration and leadership and move down to implementation because if I get that feedback, I can move it into sort of that hybrid is structure that we've had no that we've had in with some word changes. Alright, so here's the plan. Then I also respond to that please. Yes. I just, I would like to try to find a time for Mandy and I to meet tomorrow to talk about this together. If, if we can possibly do that, so that when we get to GOL on Wednesday. We have a little bit, we have a plan that we've at least two of us have discussed. I totally assume that and accept that either. Are there any other comments I see more hands, but I'm trying to move this to how are we going to proceed. Shalini. I have a clarifying question for Paul actually. So, can I ask that now, please. Okay, so in the council policy implementation for the first one climate action. You know, the number a item where it says that the goal is to the goal that's supporting appropriate committees and staff regarding adoption and implementation of waste. So we're going to call a bylaw and subsequently seeking awarding this in accordance, if said waste. Call a bylaw is adopted. So it feels like we're going circular because we need the town staff to go and look at, you know, do the whole which we are already doing the RFQ and all of that. We require you to actually dedicate some stuff already in order for us to find out how we will be able to implement the bylaw. So I just want to make big one in clarification that you're not we asking us to adopt the bylaw and then you will appoint staff to study and or is it just for the implementation. Is my question clear. I'm not sure I'm not clear on your. Okay, okay. So it says that you will appoint style like you will, you know, appoint your staff and so forth. So waste holler bylaw is adopted, but we can only adopt the waste by holler bylaw. If you appoint staff, which we're doing right now to work with Susan wait in order to gather information and give it back to the TSO committee, and then we will work kind of like it's a reiterative process. Like what I'm saying is we can't wait for you to appoint staff, only after we adopt it because we can adopt it till the staff does some initial work. So what's important to me is to hear from the council what your priorities are. You have a number of things that you have brought into the council and then have referred to committee, not just waste dollars, but we have a street lights policy that's in the same position. And I think what I'd like to see is what are your priorities as a council, because then when I build the budget, I will assign budgetary support for the things that you want to accomplish. So just simply referring having an item come here and refer to a council committee doesn't mean that suddenly is a priority of the council the way I read it until the council has said and through your goal setting process that this is a priority for us. We support counselors and their development of their ideas and their proposals, which what we're doing for both of those proposals as we speak. And we'll like with the grant that we got to support with Susan wait to support the exploration of the RFQ for waste hauling. So, in terms of dedicating staff time, we're happy to do that piece of it when it gets into more development of the proposal, because doing waste hauling takes a long time. I mean, to look at that develop a policy that's going to work well and implementation plan all that thing takes all that takes time. You know, but if that will be helpful for me is to have the council say yes, this is what we really want you to dedicate time to or explore. I think that's what we're talking about is are we explore we're in a exploratory level here. I'm not sure if I made myself clear on the answer, but I think that that's what I'm asking for. So actually what you just said also to some degree answers with Michelle you had raised that we have voted on several things and should they all automatically show up on the town council priorities and what I'm hearing you say is that just because we passed like even the Paula bylaw we passed it to the committee wouldn't necessarily become a town manager goal unless we listed it as a priority in this document. I'm going to be judged on what you put into this document right my performance next year a year from now is going to be judged on what you put into this so what you should put into this document is something that you want to have accomplished during the course of the year. It shouldn't be everything that you say it should be everything that you want to prioritize and say here's where we're how we're going to judge the town manager. So we want to see tangible progress and now saying that it couldn't be an it could be a list of 45 different things which has happened in the past. So I think the idea is to prioritize the things that you feel are most important it doesn't mean it's all inclusive. So you don't have to say everything that's going to be in it you just have to say these are the top things that we care most about because I need to be able to say off the top of my head to my staff. These are the highest priorities for the town and and then have our staff be able to internalize that we've done that with racial equity with climate climate action. Every staff member can tell you those are the two highest priorities for our community right now. And so I think as we continue to narrow down the number of things and really concentrate our message of what your highest priorities are. That's what that's how this document is powerful. So Michelle and Mindy Joe, we're going to send this document in a word version tonight to counselors. They will get feedback to you by when. So I would love to have the feedback now. At least in general right like if we go to, I mean it's technically page three of the full document but it's paid, I put numbers because I imagined them split into two documents so I renumbered it starting at one but the town manager goals starting with administration and leadership. I would love to know if people have problems with anything in that and whether they'd want to see changes and then move on to the next one and the next one people can send me specific wording. Hopefully by late tonight but noon tomorrow at the latest because Joel meets 9am Wednesday, and it's going to take me a while to redo the whole structure and incorporate what will likely be conflicting requests. If you would like us to spend the time now going through starting on page three. Yes. All right, let's put everything up that's starting on page three. And under the very first one I'm not even going to deal with the opening paragraph that can be done with wordsmithing under administration and leadership comments. Dorothy. I have to tell you I am not prepared to do this tonight. And I'm tired and I have a class tomorrow. Then Dorothy I'm going to ask that you try to get any other comments that you can. But at this point, just, I'm asking people to read that paragraph and see if there's anything in there that jumps out at you as problematic. I'm not seeing a hand so I'm going to go on to personnel management. Andy Joe. Andy, I'm sorry. Yes. I guess I would eliminate to begin with the Amherst police department and last line. And I was going to request a deletion of that whole phrase in sub item five that starts focusing first on the guidance. So that would start that that starts with focusing first on the guidance in the town councilors vote. So, so just more of what Andy said, but the rest of the phrase.  Yes. Period. Michelle. Yeah, this is a sticky point. And I think I'm looking right now at what we passed on November 14, which is to recommend the town manager to work with the APD to review and I'm sorry. That's the wrong one. Just give me a second here. Okay, to recommend the town manager assist the APD in building upon current efforts and identifying steps to develop a proactive anti racist culture in the Amherst police department and that it be documented and regular updates be provided to the council. So we passed that motion, essentially within the framework of a four month turnaround in which Paul would report back to us on his progress on this. So, I am not understanding why there is an issue with keeping the APD in there. If that's a motion that we passed as a council, and I just I'm trying to understand the perspective better from Andy and Mandy and why there's a concern about doing that if it's back to the same argument that we argued on the day of the vote about whether or not APD should be identified, I think we already had that argument, and we voted and the vote passed. Can I just before we get into a debate about this, say, remember, this is over a full year. And that's just the next four months.  That's over the full year. Right but this says focusing first we want the town manager to be clear that we want the APD to come first. And that's what we voted as a council. So Alicia. Thank you Lynn, I so basically I'm just supporting Michelle's previous argument but just wanted to add in that the motion itself didn't specify the four month time period.  And so I would see that this would be happening continually throughout the, the year. I also don't understand why if it's something that we passed as a motion. Why it wouldn't be put in the town managers goals, because it's something that we have already agreed upon and have already asked the town manager to do so to put it in there to see that that is something that is being followed through upon, and to see that that is being prioritized I think is important in the follow through of something that has passed. I think it makes sense to, to want to add that this will also happen throughout all town departments, I think that that is true as well and so I think that both should be included. Kathy. Yeah, I'm just trying to both listen and respond. I think by saying, by calling out just police and saying do this first, we have a DEI director and I'd like her to be looking across all departments. And it, it is the discussion we had when we were talking about this Michelle because I, it's not clear to me that we have a specific problem in a specific area but I think we should be doing this across the board. And we've given her those her in the department, those marching orders. So I would agree on removing this phrase. But it is in the work plan already. So I don't know how I would evaluate whether one specific thing had been done in a series of months. So I've always wondered how we're going to know this because we've talked about doing training sessions in multiple staff areas. So I agree with the proposed deletion of that sentence. I'm going to, I'm going to take four more comments on this and then I'm going to move on to finance Pat. Can hear you Pat. Sorry. I would like to maintain the fostering a proactive anti racist culture throughout all town departments. I feel like one of the things that I've seen in town hall at different times is rather insulting behavior in regards to some of our BIPOC residents by staff in receptionist areas and different things. So it's not something that's yes, there was this July 5th incident and there was a real examination of a lot of things. I'm not going to get into that that examination was limited. And I feel strongly and agree that working to make myself to be a proactive anti racist human being takes ongoing work. And so I feel strongly that I don't want to single out the police department. And there are individuals in the police department who need this ongoing work, just like I need it. And just like receptionists at the desk downstairs needed and people, you know, people who are interacting with our committees need it. So I, I'm very comfortable leaving that out. Oh, Anika. Yeah, so I think that, you know, this one is is packed, but there are a couple of things. I believe when it comes to fostering an anti racist culture, it's far time that we really brought in our vision, as opposed to singling out departments in regards to the police department. They have been used as an example in part, not just with the July 5th incident, but just linking to establishment of the police in general. But in part because of the July 5th incident and before they probably have all the departments have probably gone through the majority of training they most trained there under the highest scrutiny. And if we look at our town and we want to be realistic and we want to talk about, you know, historical truths and facts. We're, we're sitting in a building that has the same historical truths and reputations, but I think we can all agree that we have a diverse staff here. This is our police department is more diverse than this town council. And many other departments. So where I agree that this work is important all around. I think that we are really backing ourselves in corner when we were just saying, you know. Police department where if we actually, I believe if we look at departments and see where our complaints have come from both historically and recently. If we're talking about BIPOC community, would the police be number one? I don't think so. And that is me, you know, speaking for just myself, but I think that it is important as we're talking about broad views and giving direction. I mean, this is a lens that I think should be in every department and every committee and going on throughout our community. I think we're losing that opportunity by focusing on the department that is probably having the most training and scrutiny at this point. Okay, we are not going to settle this tonight. I think that GOL has heard your feedback. Shalini, I'm sorry, but I need to keep moving through this. GOL has heard your feedback. When they come back, people can vote to amend. And either keep it in or not. Lynn, can I make a point of order please? Yes. We, if a counselor would like to continue this discussion, how do we, what is the method that we have in order to continue this discussion now? Can I make a motion that we continue? No, I'll just honor the fact that you want to continue to have the discussion. Okay. We are not going to resolve this sitting here tonight. Shalini. Even if they don't resolve it, I just fear that we all get to at least say, at least say what we want to say about it. And, and at least that much. So thank you, Michelle. I think what I wanted to say is we could potentially be making a big mistake by focusing on the Amherst police. And I just want to read the statement to you for, for example, like by sing singling out a single department and how that can come across to the people their families their kids when we single out of specific department. For example, if we were to say this as fostering an anti-resist culture throughout all town departments, focusing first on the town clerk. You know, how would we feel about that? Or how would Athena feel about that? Like if he singled out, you know, focusing on one. I don't think shaming or bring, you know, to me that's problematic as part of our values of grace where we've all agreed we want to make space for people to learn and grow. And so that's number one, that shaming aspect. Secondly, I think it's a mistake because we don't really know which departments need most urgently need this training. Because just recently I heard an example with Anna actually and I'm not going to name the department again, but it was from a BIPOC member of a community saying how they feel they're not heard. And I will communicate that with Paul separately, but it is not the police department. And over and over again, I've heard different never about the police and which is not to say the police doesn't deserve to go through that training. But I really feel that the DEI director needs to be given that if that is indeed our intent to create a culture of anti-racism. We need to be very seriously and forcefully asking not forcefully but but really unanimously asking the DEI director to assess the departments that really need this and to roll out a plan of systematically offering these anti-racism trainings. So those are my two things. Thank you. So Alicia. Yes, thank you Lynn. So, I don't see this motion as singling out a department that's not the intention of this at all. And again, I think it's the same thing when we're looking for progression and to improve things in the community and in the environment. And I think for change isn't necessarily saying something bad about somebody or something. And so I think I struggle with this conversation every time we have it because for some reason the implication is that I'm saying something bad about the police department. However, nowhere in this statement, does it say anything about the actions of the police department or that I feel negatively about them in any type of way. So what I'm looking for is for us to step away from the idea that this is calling them out on anything because nowhere is this calling them any type of name or claiming that they are something different. But simply stating that at this current time, there are no policies put in place in any of our departments across the town that focus on anti-racism. And racism is when we have policies that look at specifically fighting against racism, not just simply not being racist, not just being kind people. It's very different. It has a very different intention and a very different implication. And so again, I see this as an improvement as something that we would celebrate that we are doing, not something that we're calling out somebody or that we're saying something bad about their name or their profession. We know that as a town that we appreciate our police officers, we know that as a town we appreciate all of our town staff, and we know that as town and as people in general that every single person can always be better. And so I think when we're looking at what improvements can be made, we can say we know that throughout all of town, all of the departments need to get anti-racism training and that this should be ongoing, not even just one year, but all years all of the time because it is active work that you need to consciously work on every single day. It's not just something you can have one or two trainings on every year and you're all set. But that why would we not focus on the department that we already passed a motion to focus on. And so we don't need to wait for these things to happen is the same argument that I made when this motion was on the floor. And so we're not arguing the fact of whether or not we want this to happen because it's already going to happen because we have already passed it as a motion. So right now we're arguing the fact as to whether or not to include it in the town manager goals and what we'll be evaluating him on for next year. And it doesn't make sense to me to say that we are passing this and we want this to happen but we're not going to look at the progress of this in terms of making sure that things are following through on what we voted. So to me it just doesn't make sense that we're still making the argument for something that we have already made the argument for that has already passed. And we're trying to argue against it again, but we're not arguing. I think the argument is the placing of in placing it in the goals which doesn't make any sense to me since it has already passed as a council initiative. We have already instructed the town manager to do so. So I think that's where my confusion lies in this entire conversation. And again, I think I stated this in the GL meeting I'm not sure if I stated it in the council meeting but my thought about how the process of this works is that we are adding things that we have already agreed to as a council as goals and things that we are moving forward perhaps motions that have passed or specific actions that we have voted upon, so that we can effectively track and measure the way that we are moving forward on the things that we have already voted on. Michelle. I just want to say that I do trust that both Pamela and Jennifer will roll out anti racist training throughout the departments and will honor the motion that has been passed. I really do believe that. However, I think that we really need to think about applying the same rules across the board, and if we, we passed emotion. I just invite you to consider another motion that maybe doesn't have this emotional charge for you that was passed, and we were asking for that to be simply included into the town manager goals. I don't think it would be a problem. I think that the more sort of, and we've done it actually throughout this document we have referenced throughout this document other votes. And so if we are going to remove this vote we need to remove all of the votes that we're referencing. And then I also just want to say a more nuanced comment. I believe that this discussion in part is in response to earlier discussions we had, and is in part response to recent meetings that have been held at the Amherst police department with members of the town council. And I feel like for the benefit of Alicia and Pam Rooney who did not attend those meetings. And I personally feel in conflict as a counselor knowing and I shared this with Lynn. I feel personally in confl