 If you want. Come on. All right, George, we're recording so you can go ahead. All right. Thank you very much. Seeing the presence of a quorum. It is 1031 a.m. I'm going to call this meeting of the governance organization legislation committee to order it is September 29. Pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 this meeting will be conducted by remote means members of the public who wish to participate in this meeting may do so via zoom. Or by telephone see instructions for I will give the instructions actually if that becomes necessary. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. I'm just going to quickly check and make sure that everyone can still be heard and seen. So Pat. Great. And Mandy. And Darcy. Yes. Great. Thank you. Emily is here. Our note taker. Thank you, Emily. And. So I'm going to put the agenda up on the screen. We're going to talk about it for a moment. As usual, there are, let's see here. There's the agenda. Let's take a look at it. Okay. The first item of order this morning is going to decide how we want to continue to meet for the rest of the term. We'll get to that in just a second. Then we're going to look at the Fincom vacancy situation and discuss that. And maybe actually take an action. We'll see what the committee thinks. Item number four is stricken. That actually came from the meeting that we didn't hold because we didn't have a quorum, but we did have a quorum. We did have a quorum. We did have a quorum. We did have a quorum. We did have a quorum. But the ADU zoning amendment. Item number six is no longer moot, at least at the moment. And, but we do have a zoning amendment that is. Presentable to us. And so under the 48 out rule, since I just got that amendment on what was it tried after Monday night's meeting. We will hopefully turn to that. And I think item seven is already been dealt with because it was dealt with at the council meeting. So we're going to look at that. We're going to look at the agenda. We're going to look at the agenda. And then we're going to look at the agenda. And then we're going to look at the agenda. And then there's an item. That we were going to discuss in advance of the council meeting. It's no longer relevant. And we'll talk about eight when we get to it. And we do have some minutes to look at. And that's sort of what we're looking at this morning. Any questions about the agenda. So a couple items are being stricken and we do have one item unanticipated. That we'll be dealing with a little bit later. Okay. So item six is stricken. It's no longer at the moment. It's not ready for prime time. And so we can't redo it. And but five is, and we do have another zoning amendment. That I was given on Monday. Actually, I think it was Tuesday morning. When it finally got to me. And we can look at that. So that will be under items unanticipated. Okay. I'm not going to put up. The vacancy notice. Just out of, just so you can see that it did get sent out. George. I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. First, before we get to that. Let us discuss and decide how we want to continue meeting. And how long we want this to last. So the floor is open. I, I would, I'm very happy to continue for this group to meet remotely, but I also would come and meet in person. We're a small enough group that I would feel comfortable doing that. I do have lost track of what that will mean in terms of it support and stuff. So. It would be a little bit more complicated than what we're doing right now. Emily, for instance, would have to be physically present, I believe. And I think it would be a little bit more complicated than what we're doing right now. And at least one IT person would have to be there, I believe. Though I perhaps I could be trained. I think Lynn is talking about some kind of training. But so it's certainly not out of the question. And this is a time where I feel like Emily should have a voice. If she wishes to speak. I think that'd be. Raise your hand. Or yell. She could just speak. I know. Yeah. Any thoughts. Yeah, I, I just. I'm perfectly fine with. And would like to meet remotely. No, just adopt what the full council adopted. And would you also the length, in other words, through, through our term, in other words, that we won't keep coming back to this. Your thought would be, it would be remote zoom remote until the end of our term. Yeah. Yeah. Well, yeah. I mean, if something. Changed. Bring it up again. But. Yeah, it just seems like it's easy. I say I have to agree with you both. It's at this point. I don't like it personally. But I've said this, you've heard me speak about it. It's silly to go back, but it's, it's about my personal preference. And I understand that for some, it's just not. They just, I understand. So I think what we should probably do. What I would suggest is that we. Reluctantly continue meeting on zoom until December. I think our last meeting is December 15th. So through December 15th. We will continue to meet remotely. And then I don't know how the next GOL committee will figure this out. I don't know how the next council will figure it out, but. Or should we. I'm wondering if, well, on the 15th, should we revisit it? Just make the possibility of revisiting it just in the sense that we could set a policy for the next GOL committee. Whoever they may be. And then they can change it once they meet. If we're still meeting remotely in on the 15th, which is what we're suggesting. When we meet on the 15th, could we. Make the next meeting a remote meeting. And then. Then they would have to decide what they want to do. Or it doesn't even matter. Maybe it doesn't matter. I'm against that completely. We don't even know what the makeup of the next GOL committee will be what the meeting time will be. We can't set that meeting. We can't set that meeting completely. So we can only bind ourselves. Okay. So, okay, it's going to be their problem. And the council will have to figure it out. Okay. All right. So I'm hearing at least three voices saying that, that we're going to continue on zoom through December 15th to the end of our term. And so I'm going to make a motion that. To that effect that GOL. We'll continue to continue to meet remotely. Through the end of its term, which is effectively December 15th. 2021. Second. Second. Thank you, Darcy. I think it's been discussed enough. So I'm going to go right to a vote and I'll start with. Pat. Aye. And Mandy. Aye. And Darcy. Yes. Okay. And the chair is a yes. So the vote is four zero. Okay. Okay. So we're going to continue. To continue. Using the remote format. All right. I want to talk briefly about the Fincom situation. I want to share the screen. I want to put up the, the bulletin which was posted. Let's see here. There it is. Open that up. So I assume you can see it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I brought your attention to a is the fact that it was posted. It was posted on September 14th. So we have. Just surpassed the 14 day. Requirement. It's now September 29th. So it is, if we wish. Within our power to declare the pool sufficient and. To proceed to the next step. We may decide not to do that, but that is within our power. So I wanted to tell you, and I can also, so unless you want to read this in any detail, I'm going to take it down now, but I want you to show you the date. It was posted on that date. And then I was going to put up if I can make this work. So that can go away. Put the. There. And I want to see if I can get this to. All right. Let's see if this will work. When I want to share is not a file, but I want to share. This, yeah, that looks like it'll work. You see this. I move it. Sorry. I just show you can all see this, I assume, so you can see the thin combo. It's in here. I just showed you. This is the pool at the moment we have eight candidates. Wow. This, well, yes. This candidate came fairly recently. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Actually, I think they might have come a day before the notice was put up. But I have had no applicants in the 14 day period. But we do have a pool of eight candidates. I've reached out to those that. Would be appropriate to reach out to that as people who. Had been in a previous pool and are still within the three year. Limit. And a couple said, no, thank you. And a couple said, yes, I would very much. So for instance, Mr. Kim, who has been in the pool in the past, said he would like to be considered. So we have, I think a, a, a sizable pool of eight individuals. I cannot guarantee that they will all submit SOIs. And come forward for interviews, but that's obviously their decision. So what I'm going to suggest is that we consider. Approving the. What's the phrase I want here, basically our selection guidance. And we consider voting the pool sufficient. So that we can begin to move forward. Toward SOIs and towards eventually towards an interview. That's my suggestion. Eight individuals seems a substantial number. It is a mixed diverse pool in terms of background and ethnicity. So that's my thought. What do people think about this? I think that's a good idea. Yeah. That makes sense. But do we, do we. Is there a way for us to see. Yes, this is a downside of zoom, I guess. Yeah. Is, is there a way for us to see who, who was on the list that you called. Well, I reached out, I reached, I didn't call anybody. I reached out by email. I don't really have the time to call people individually. I do. So once they notice is posted. I sent an email to all the members of the, the pool that are already there who've been already been in the pool and are still in the pool. And I tell them, you know, that this is, that there's a notice posted. So I do them the courtesy of telling them that the notice has been posted. And I asked them if they wish to be considered, if they wish just to be in the pool. If they do not respond, they still stay in the pool. If they do respond and say, no, I take them out. And I had two people do that. And if they respond and say, yes, obviously they stay in the pool. So that's what I do. I think, you know, like, I'm not sure how to say it to them but I do have a sense of a sense of, I do have a sense of what this is about. So I just submitted dias. That person had just submitted their application. Like either the day after or the day, I think it was the day before we actually went to post the official notice. So I didn't see any reason in reaching out to him. Or her I don't even remember now. They clearly are interested. They just, they just submitted a C a. So that's what I do. Yeah. of it in Oka, as you recall. And the staff, at that point, the town staff were still helping us. And we were able to look at the full list of who and the staff were the ones that contacted the people. Yeah, that would be sweet. Yeah, but that's not the way it is. So we had a spreadsheet and it said, you know, like what the response was from each person, which I found helpful, you know, like they moved away or they said they weren't interested or whatever. I thought that was it was a good thing for the committee to be able to see. Just saying. I understand. I hear you. I hear you. If we had a staff, if I had someone I could say, please reach out to these people. But I do do it, but I do not do it by phone. I do it by email. And I can track down the emails. But in some cases, the email was not answered. But I can certainly do that. And I can put that in a packet or whatever and I can put it on our website and I can show it to you next time. But that's, Mandy, your hand is up, please. Yes. So two nights ago, the council passed a new policy. And so I'm curious how you're integrating that into this, because the new policy is reaching back only two years. And if a new cap isn't submitted, they're out of the pool. And so you don't have to keep contacting them. I believe all of these many. Yes, I believe all of these are within the two year limit. Well, no, but, but I guess what I'm saying is the new policy was you contact all individuals who submitted a CAF within two years prior to the publication of the bulletin board notice and tell them that if they're still interested, they must resubmit a CAF. Only those individuals who submit a CAF after the bulletin board notices published shall be considered part of the applicant going forward. And so I guess I'm wondering how we integrate that since we're mid process. I'm not saying it needs done. The guy that submitted it right before probably doesn't need to submit a new one a week later. You know, if they missed it by a day, but how do we integrate that versus the old process since we started this mid process? That's a good question. My initial thought was that since the new process had not been institutionalized or made official while I was doing this, that I'm going to be governed by the old process throughout. But that could be challenged. The other possible thought I had was that I can easily reach out to all if we agree the pool if we declare the pool sufficient. And we do agree on the selection guidance. I can reach out to all the eight individuals and say, you know, you're going to need to do two things for me, you're going to have to resubmit a CAF, and you're going to have to submit an SOI. I could do that. I guess it's a question of, you know, I started this process, and we started this process before there was a change in policy. And so I consider myself governed by the old policy. But that may just be a quibble. A lawyer, Mandy, for instance, might say, you know, now that there's a new policy, it governs you no matter what was the case, you know, prior to what, you know, before the policy was created. So I think I just need advice from the three of you. Do you want me to, I do expect us to have interviews, obviously. I do expect us to create interview questions in advance. I do expect us to interview everybody as a group. So in a sense, why wouldn't I just also then go back to these people and say, by the way, I know it's a pain, but you've got to resubmit a CAF. I don't have a problem with that. Yeah, go ahead. Could you, when you, when you contact them, just attach their previous CAF so that it's, you know, so that at least we're being friendly and agreeable and saying, saying, you know, because they probably would just copy and paste their previous CAF. I think it'd be easier actually just to fill out the CAF. Actually, it's such a simple document. But yes, the new CAF, yeah, it's like, right. Yeah, so I think it's probably easiest just to say I'm happy to do it, but I think it's easiest just to say, look, I would like us to grant grandmother this and just assume that because we started the process before, I will go with what the committee decides, but it just seems to me to be a waste of energy this time. Yeah, I agree with that. So it sounds like you're willing to sort of do a hybrid here since this initial outreach was done prior to the policy being adopted. You're okay with me just we're just accepting the CAFs as they are. And I'm just going to tell them the next step for you is to submit an SOI and it's due within and I'll create a deadline of maybe a week or so that in theory we could. Anyway, so that as long as all the other steps, follow the new process. Yeah, yeah, that's was my plan. Mandy. Yeah. What are you saying? I just I just wanted to confirm what was going on because the process which I'm okay with that if George is and that's fine. Now here's a thought just I would just not to complicate things but just to be honest with the policy. The reason we adopted submitting a CAF and this I think was Darcy's idea and I thought it was a good one is that alerts everyone on the council to what the pool is. And so one option would be for me to just send an email to the council with the eight CAFs attached and just say FYI this is the FinCom pool going forward. They will be alerted to this because we will require everybody to submit a CAF and it'll but it will be up to the individual council to pay attention. I again a future chair could do this every time they are once we declare the pool sufficient they could gather all the CAFs and just send them out to counselors FYI. So that's another option. The purpose is I understood it and I was the reason I voted for it I thought it was Darcy's point was that obviously when you're dealing with two years even now it's three years but it's now two years okay when you're doing the two years you know you're just not going to remember and you probably don't even keep them anywhere special and so you really don't know who's in the pool and so having them submit a new CAF alerts people to go oh oh oh or not so yeah. I would say for this appointment only that if you're willing to do that that might be helpful to the council because we're in this sort of hybrid mixed time and the new policy would have had them receiving these close to when the appointments are being made that was the whole point they come in close to when the appointment is being made and the recommendation is being made and so as a courtesy saying because this policy was adopted halfway through our determination of the sufficiency of the pool I'm just sending them to you. I think would be fine I have to gather stuff I I don't want to have to add another email to remember to send to the council with gathering of stuff so but I think this time that's a good solution to this I can change over to a new policy okay all right okay um all right we've got one opening right yeah one opening and we have eight candidates I'll make a motion to declare the pool sufficient is there a second second go ahead so all right Darcy seconds the motion has been made and seconded not seeing any hands raised I'm going to go immediately to vote this time I'm going to start with Darcy yes and Mandy hi and Pat hi and the chair is an eye so the vote is four to zero with one absent declare the fincom pool sufficient the chair will send out an email to all town counselors with these eight CAFs attached with a brief note explaining that going forward these will be sent to you you'll get them as part of the process but here FYI I'm sending them all to you now let me ask a question because I'm just my brain is on 50 000 things here um at what point can we not accept it we've decided haven't we by policy that we can entertain new candidates up to the time what do we decide when when is the point at which no new candidate can be entertained in this process at the time the applicant names and SOIs are added are posted yes right so up to that point we could still so this the the field is still open yes I guess that's what I'm trying to say to myself and perhaps to the public and just to make sure that it's true the field is still open um if anyone wishes to apply for this they can do so um they just need to try and get get a CAF in as soon as possible okay all right could you remind us as who's leaving uh it is um Jane Jane Schaeffler Jane Schaeffler has has has resigned and are any of these people women uh we have three members we had three members now we have two uh two of them are men and one is a woman one was a woman so I mean of the applicants uh I believe let me think uh I think at least one is I think yes either Galani or Panani is a woman um I again I get what I suggest Darcy is that you I'll be sending this to everybody just open it up and take a look and um I'm sorry I just I haven't I should have a number in terms of the the diversity of the field it was more ethnically diverse than sexually diverse that's for sure in terms of uh it's mostly men so if there are some women out there who would like to apply one of the candidates who we did have previously um who is a woman um that this point in time could not did not feel that she was able to uh make the commitment so we did have a woman in the original pool but she stepped out just wondered yeah that's a good question and I think going forward a future GOL chair um when we're doing the sufficiently in the pool it should actually provide you with some some data as to gender and age and so forth here I'm just sort of weighing it I'm afraid all right um I would like us to look at so I'm going to stop sharing the screen for a moment and I see if I can find it I'd like us to look at the selection guidance and the question is where is it um yeah I know I thought I had everything set up let's go back here um all right this I think this is it okay all right I'm going to share this with you for a second and see if we can agree that this is adequate and I have a question about it okay so here is the selection guidance that we have used in the past and Mandy his memory is far better than mine and Pat may also be able to help us here as well because my memory is going we had in the um the second paragraph which is only one sentence we had at one point a sentence about consulting the chair um if there were any special needs blah blah blah and my memory is that we took that out is that the memory it's because I have two documents that are fin-com guidance and the one that I believe is the correct one is the one we're looking at the other one has a second sentence which says that the chair or their designate should reach out to the chair of finance and inquire as to whether they need any special skills or whatever and my memory is vaguely that we felt that should be removed but perhaps it was the other way around well is anyone remember I do not in our what's in our new policy uh it's I think selection guidance is uh isn't that what we're looking at uh well that's a good point Darcy um go ahead Mandy please I'll try to find it selection guidance I can put it up because I'm I'm getting ready to do this with zba appointments um the selection guidance says um the council need the committee needs to by majority vote adopt selection guidance um there is an a section a section a that says criteria for a healthy multiple member body and so I think we should copy that section those there's three items there the council considers the following factors to be important for a multiple member body to be healthy it lists three sentences or multiple sentences under three subheadings um I think we should add that to the selection guidance that is the strong base of seasoned members newer members and members who reflect the diversity of the town's residents and then there's a section b to the selection guidance item in the policy prior to the adoption of selection guidance the chair of the recommending committee shall solicit from the chair of the body that has vacancies any preferred knowledge and or expertise to meet the current needs of that body to be included in the draft selection guidance presented to the recommending committee and so I think we you know what's on the screen at least those four bullet points um is what the chair of the finance committee has in the past presented as the preferred knowledge and all we could re-solicit that from Andy or go with what he's generally always came back with which is these four bullet points right and of what's on the screen that whole last paragraph isn't isn't included in the selection guidance section of our new council policy so I would delete that and if um yeah if people want something about that in yeah we should copy the reappointment section of the new policy identically yeah because this is not what the new policy says all right so yeah go ahead I guess I would just say um there is no necessity for our continuing to have this because it we have our new unified policy and that kind of overrides this um the new unified policy simply asks um what you know just basically says what Mandy Joe just said which is that we we simply solicit Andy to ask him what's missing you know what what is missing on your non-voting residents skills and expertise that you might need um and so I guess Darcy first of all we've we've done this a number of times prior to your presence on this committee and the chair has responded and what you have in front of you is exactly what the chair and this committee has agreed to so I don't see any point in that I don't see any point in going back I mean the committee may overrule me and that's fine but I don't see any point in going back to to the chair at this point and asking him do you want to add anything to this um it's already been used in the last year and a half at least twice um and so I think it's but if the committee wants me to do that I will I think that what I am hearing is that this does need to be revised to as you just said Darcy to bring it into agreement with the new existing policy we just adopted so we do need to make some changes to this but I don't see and it sounds like we do need to add that sentence back in um about consulting the chair but um we as a committee I would suggest have the discretion to either do that or not based on the fact that we've already done it now two or three times um and unless the committee as a group feels like we need for some reason to go back and ask again we're just going to go with this as it is um but so it sounds like we need to do some word smithing here or we want to hold this off for um we meet again in a week at least that's what the schedule says that's something we'll decide later this this morning um but we could hold this off and I could word smith it and bring it back or we could word smith it right now what do people think about that well um if I guess one of the things that uh I don't know if I have my hand raised there yeah go ahead we're not we're not one of the yeah I know so I try to do it right and it's still wrong um it seems to me that ultimately we need a revised uh we need to update this and I and I think waiting to next week is fine I'm uncomfortable I'm hearing what we're saying oh this is what Andy told us last time and so we're going with that this time but ultimately we don't know ever who's the chair of a committee is going to be so I don't want to permanently enshrine this um and I think that we're I think it will be removed when we when you do the revised version is that you know I'm sorry what would be removed experience or what the criteria qualifications might include because we're saying these are Andy's qualifications and we're sure of that so we don't need to check with them again right now but ultimately when we rewrite when the policy is updated to match what we passed in the council this needs to come out that's all well actually Pat I have a question about that are concerned because this isn't we consulted Andy and perhaps some of the language came from him but in the end we adopted it as our selection guidance it's not Andy's selection guidance it's our selection guide yeah so I think there's a couple things yeah um um selection guidance includes part a of the new policy so part a has to be in there whatever part a says now those three fact the following three factors to be important for a multiple member body to be healthy so those three things need to be in this document and they're not selection guidance then says input from the body's chair prior to the adoption of selection guidance the chair shall solicit from the chair of the body that has vacancies so it's a shall any preferred knowledge and or expertise to meet the current needs and so I think these these bullet points in that first one is sort of a prior solicit solicitation and so can start there George should probably go back and say this was your prior identified vape whatever do you have any you know you know what preferred knowledge under expertise whatever B says right but I think we're also forgetting one other thing which is in the selection guidance portion it allows the recommending committee which is GL may create a standard reference list of the skills and characteristics of a successful member of that body and the knowledge and or expertise related to the work of that body while acknowledging that each multiple member body will have its own unique selection guidance selection guidance overall should be based upon the following considerations and so whatever we adopt this next time could be adopted as the standard reference list of skills especially if Andy keeps coming back and every chair we can repole but we're allowed to adopt a standard and some of these for this committee could be considered standard reference list of skills and characteristics I I just want to take back what I said before which is that just basically endorsing what Mandy Joe just said I it just slipped my mind that that I was actually the one who was suggesting that we not you know continually reinvent the wheel by recreating selection guidance so we should have standard yes we should have standard selection guidance which is what in fact I view this as but the committee is certainly free to change it at any time and they're free to say oh no no uh we're not going to have any of this I think that but anyway I view this as kind of our our template um and I understand what I'm hearing is that I need to go back to Andy and see if he has anything he wants to the way in on and report back to you if he does and then we as a committee need to look at this and vote on it but I I don't want us recreating the wheel every time every time are we going to have a discussion about well should we actually look for people have experience serving in public finance I mean right I mean these are pretty much core requirements or criteria otherwise yeah so George can I recommend that you add the the section a from the new policy into this title this standard selection guidance for non-voting members delete that last paragraph about reappointments and all because that's a different section of the new policy completely I mean I'll make some changes now so you want to stand we're getting standard but standard there add the selection a you know this you can't do that now but there's from the from the adopted policy there's a criteria for a healthy multiple member body add that section so is it letter to say add a add a and the numbers one two and three below it essentially from adopted right exactly a one three from adopted policy right and then keep the next the the set with the bullet points um mix of experience and skills delete the final paragraph and then send that on to Andy because the policy now says you have to you know solicit preferred knowledge or experience and say hey Andy yeah does this work you know like do you have any right is going to be needed or whatever um and then you can come back and next week we can we can potentially adopt it as our standard selection guidance and then every year that's just what gets sent to the chair of the finance to say is this inclusive or not before we come back and discuss the finance chairs so the slowest things down a little bit that's not by no means the end of the world I'm not in a super rush but so we would delay by at least a week the adoption of selection guidance and we have declared the pool sufficient so we can now start proceeding which is good but this does need some work it needs to be brought back to you next week or the next time we meet we'll discuss that in a few minutes but okay are people okay with this then I'm I'm going to call it standard selection guidance I'm going to add a one through three I'm going to delete the last paragraph and I'm going to reach out to Andy yeah okay all right fair enough I'm going to stop sharing and I'm going to put that out of here and I did not print actually bear with me you're going to hear a horrible noise for a second cover your ears the next item on our agenda is to be deleted we dealt with 5.2 the next item is the we have gotten a letter from KP law that I believe is in your packet related to accessory dwelling units and I want to put up the let's find it here and bear with me for a second yep so here it is do you need to see the letter do you want I can I can show you the letter first so I can show you the amendment maybe we should look at the letter first just so you see it so you know I'm not making it up which what letter well so here it is you can't find it now I've got it it's here so here's the letter you know long and detailed it was dated September 17th and he has reviewed the proposed amendment to the current section 5.011 of the town zoning bylaw the adu and a copy is attached in my opinion it is in good legal form and he tells us that the voting quantum is two thirds or nine of 13 um and that's so that's that so given that letter I'd like to just make a motion which is to declare the proposed 5.011 accessory dwelling unit bylaw clear consistent and actionable second the antelous all right we have a motion that's been seconded now I'm going to put the bylaw up on the screen and Mandy hopefully will ensure to me whoops what did I just do I did something bad there okay hang on for a second I should give you a screenshot of my screen you'd be horrified I'm on my desktop it's a nightmare and if you have the experience by the way of having your screen suddenly maybe this is just my computer so open it up and all of a sudden all your files are everywhere else they just been scattered all over the place it's like somebody walked into your desk into your desk and just took all your files and threw them everywhere that hasn't happened to me yet all right I apparently just someone doesn't like me out there in the universe all right because that was anyway all right that's enough of that so um I'm going to put this up on the screen as soon as I get to the streets to share screen all right and I'll just mention I worded it the way I did because this is a repeal and replace so everything you're going to see is the revision there isn't anything specific it's the whole bylaw okay I'm going to zoom in so I have a question about our process and that is yep for for this for these bylaws that we're looking at um we're just looking at clear consistent and actionable not substance that is correct so if you you may in theory or I may be absolutely 100% opposed to this bylaw and would never vote for it in a million years but here on gel that's not relevant it's just and we have now determined actionability the lawyer has stated that this is actionable the only other task for us is clear and consistent is there any wording any section where you just doesn't seem to be clear to you doesn't make sense or perhaps contradict something elsewhere in the bylaw now given that this has been looked at by the planning department it's been looked like by the planning board it's been looked at by crc and it's been looked at by our attorney our job I think is pretty much been done but nonetheless is the last chance for in this case for thoughtful individuals to look at this one last time and see if they notice anything amiss from the point of view of clarity or consistency and we have at least two members who have been looking at this for some time so um any concerns problems thoughts as to clarity of consistency of this bylaw that you have in front of you I we could go through it section by section that's an option my assumption is you've all had a chance to look at it but I realize we're all very busy and um anyway so do people want to go through this section by section do people want to um simply if they have concerns if they raise them or do you want to move immediately to a vote I think we can vote I personally have looked at this and I have no problems but um if people haven't had a chance or whatever but so I would agree with pat yeah I think that I probably agree I you know I brought up an issue back when it was in front of the council about um about the like possible challenge ability of the fact that like I would need a special permit to have a thousand square foot adu in my yard but shallony wouldn't yeah um so that might be something you might raise at council as a concern about the substance it sounds like of the bylaw and it's yeah I don't know whether yeah so I'm not going to push that because um you know I am worried that if my neighborhood started to be filled with thousand square foot dwellings they'd just fill up with students anyway so I am not going to push that um so uh okay okay what I'm hearing at the moment is that no one has any specific concerns about clarity or consistency we've had actionability dealt with by the attorney um and there doesn't to be any appetite for going through this section by section since people had a chance to look at it now for some time and some have looked at it a great deal over the last many many months um I'm prepared to move to a vote uh on the motion all right seeing no objections I'm going to move immediately to vote I'm gonna start with Pat hi Darcy yes Mandy hi and the chair is an eye so we have voted four to zero with one absent to declare the ADU bylaw amendment to section 5.011 to be clear consistent and actionable this is a rescind and replace so as Mandy has pointed out and the chair hopefully will remember when this goes to Athena and to the council they will get this entire document there will be no redlining no because this is an entirely new text okay all right the next item if you will bear with me this is um that came to me with the last 48 hours from KP law was their opinion um on parking is that correct is that that is the one no it was the apartments it's the apartments one okay I got two and the only one that could conceivably be acted on would be apartments and let me just first show you the letter from KP law before we do anything because that hang on for a second all right so I'm going to open that and I'm going to share the screen so is that is that in our packet it is not it I came literally Tuesday AM like well actually it's like 1230 so it's Tuesday and it was right after council meeting Paul sent me an email with two letters from KP law and in the interim between Tuesday morning and right now Wednesday morning I have just been too busy to add stuff so you're seeing it for the first time and if you're uncomfortable with that um that's definitely I understand that um but I it's not in the packet that is correct the letter it's not in the packet it's not on the agenda it's not in the packet it's under the 48 it's under the 48 hour rule oh I just got it we're we are I got it we see the letter and we see the letter because it is properly under the 48 hour rule if it came Tuesday morning to George it's Wednesday morning it's been less than 30 it's been definitely less than 40 okay but this is a huge issue I would like a chance to explain what's going on with apartments so that's why I'd like the letter put up and then let's put the letter here I can explain what is going on so here is the letter that I got dated September 21 um but I did not get it until Tuesday morning so I don't know how that happened but that's what happened um and uh here it is let let let me know when everyone's done reading and if I'm done purchase permission if I could put up a a document related to the apartment's bylaw I think just for clarity's sake my understanding at this point is that Joel Bard was looking at two different proposals and that's why he's here I've reviewed proposed amendment to article 12 um related to apartments and I analyzed versions from the planning department and the community I'm sorry okay we did read it honey may I share my screen George go ahead go ahead so what CRC is proposing is the only item that will be on the agenda on Monday night for a first reading related to the apartments bylaw is what you see on the screen just these two changes in the zoning districts the rvc sp to sp r and the bg sp r to sp those are the only two changes that are going to be brought to the council for a vote and well for a first reading on October 4th we on the 4th October 4th not the section 12 definition not the any other changes that have been discussed or that jill bard reviewed in the multiple proposals that multiple drafts or multiple revisions that he reviewed that is also included in the letter and so under the 48 hour rule you know I would argue that this is a lot easier of a discussion on clarity consistency and action ability and all to bring to the council on Monday than potentially what comes to do months concern may have been because there were a lot of going on and multiple proposals and which one do we look at which one do we vote this is the same in both these two changes were the same in both votes from the planning board and the CRC there is no conflict in what the planning board and CRC voted in terms of the proposed changes related to these zoning districts and that is the only thing that is going to be brought to the council on Monday related to these proposals I would just say that I object to this being on our agenda I feel like it's being rushed for no good reason and you know I don't think we should even be discussing it what we're discussing is whether this proposed zoning amendment is clear consistent and actionable that's all we're discussing I don't I don't even know what that means I haven't had a chance to look at it at all this is the first we just declared is zoning amendment clear consistent and actionable we had the attorney declare it actionable and we had the language of a much more elaborate and complex document in front of us that we all had a chance to read I agree with you Darcy and I agree I believe with Mandy that if in fact we were looking at the entire bylaw with all of its changes etc this would be not something we could do but what we have in front of us is a very specific change it's the only matter that we brought before the council on October 4th the attorney has reviewed it and declared it actionable and you have it in front of you to read and that's basically two changes that's it the substance you can debate and argue to as much as you wish on Monday night October 4th but here it's not a matter of whether you like the bylaw or not it's a question of our procedure and this was given to me as I said within the last 48 hours and so that's why I'm bringing it to you now because it is being put on the agenda we'd like to be put on the agenda for October 4th just this that's it why why do we need it on the agenda on October 4th because we've been working on zoning bylaws for over half of a year and numerous committees the planning board the planning department and the crc have been working very very hard on a set of zoning amendments it's not like this was worked on last week and somebody said hey let's just throw this up for the council to look at this has been worked on enormously there have been numerous public meetings okay so this is not a surprise to anybody um and so surprise to me well I can't help you George the public hearing was in July I did not know this was going to be on the agenda today neither did I until until I got it on Tuesday morning and decided to place it under the 48 hour rule may I make a motion please go ahead I move to declare the amendments to the zoning district RVC from SP to SPR and BG from SPR to SP in the section 3.323 apartments clear consistent and actionable is there a second second the angeles I move to postpone I don't think you have that right now that's a council that's a council right she she gets a second we can vote on a motion to postpone but she needs a second all right I'm I'm I'm exercising my other that's a charter right only at the council not at a subcommittee can you can you show me where that is in the charter it's the charter section for a charter right to postpone it applies only to the council this is the council no this is not there it's a committee it is not the town council it is a subcommittee okay so I think we need kp law opinion on that well I'm not chairs ruling that it's out of order yep unless you have a motion to overrule the chair the chair's ruling stands Darcy I'm not sure ultimately how I'm going to be voting honestly on the apartment changes to zoning overall but our job here is to look at this and determine if it's clear consistent and actionable and Mandy the way Mandy proposed the motion she limited it specifically to this which we do have legal opinion on that's why I can support it as being clear consistent and actionable what I will do Monday night in terms of how I vote for this or not is is different and separate and substantive and doesn't belong in this meeting right I guess my I just am feeling completely steamrolled because this does not there's no reason to rush this and there's no reason to bring it up as and you know 48 hour rule there's no reason this has been on the agenda for the council first October 4th and October 18th for months October 18th there is a MGL law about 90 days from a hearing these are the meetings they need to be held to save your fellow counselors holding another hearing on two changes to this bylaw these two only you can debate it all you want there but we're trying to comply with state law and these are clear consistent and actionable and that is all this count this committee is set to deal with it does not deal with substance no matter how much you would want to now that you sit on the committee to deal with substance when you are not on the committee you argued vociferously that this committee should not talk about substance these are clear consistent and actionable there's no reason to postpone that at all if you believe at the council it's not an appropriate time you argue it there but yeah I'm not I'm not arguing substance I'm arguing process yeah this is this is was not under it you don't have I have not heard a second for a motion to postpone so unless you have any unless there's a second there or you have comments on clear consistent and actionability we should probably move to a vote on that so a motion was made to challenge the chair's decision and to postpone and there's no second so that motion is no longer in order the current motion is the motion to declare this clear consistent actionable it has been seconded and I'm prepared to move to a vote and I'm going to start with the chair and the chair is an eye eye Mandy eye Darcy abstain and pat eye so the vote is three in favor I'm not opposed one abstain abstain and one absent um all right okay I want to put that away Mandy you um let me see okay so we right now have no share screen is that correct correct all right and so the next item on our agenda is okay mixed use building has been withdrawn we dealt with the um apartments by law under the 48 hour rule the town manager timeline and process and timeline was dealt with at the council meeting so that is no longer relevant item it's been already dealt with I want to talk briefly about item number eight um my feeling at this stage is this is really in the chair's chair's responsibility we at the last meeting that we held made a number of decisions a number of votes as to disposition of various bylaws a number of them would involve basically referring them either to other committees or sending them back to the town manager so at this stage I'm not planning to take up any more time of this committee with this until I've had a chance to consult with paul and give him a sense of what's we're going to send to him and and and then also produce my report which would go to the council telling them that what telling them what we've accomplished so at this stage I'm not asking you to do any more homework yay well you're free to disagree um um but um I think you also have to realize that um this is my problem um we're anyway it's in my court now is what I'm saying and it's my responsibility to get the report done it's my responsibility to reach out to paul and let him know what's coming and if I learn anything from him or from someone else that would involve this committee revisiting this I will certainly put it on our agenda but at this point unless I hear otherwise from members of this committee I'm not planning to put this on the agenda again I'm going to work on the report and I'm going to reach out to paul and so that's what I'm proposing if anyone wants to go through the document and review it one more time and say wait a minute what about this what about that I'd be happy to have you reach out to me but we did a very thorough and I appreciate that very much I thought we did a very good job the last time we met where we went through just about everything um and and made dispositions for all of them um either through instruction to the chair or by vote so it's now my job to go back and sort through that so that's what I'm proposing for item number eight that you're not going to see this again unless you bring it up we have two sets of minutes august 25 and september 8 they are in the packet I've reviewed them I don't have any problem with them or any proposed changes but if anyone has anything they should bring it up otherwise I'd like to to make a motion to accept the minutes as presented for august 25 and september 8 2021 is there a second now there's a motion made and seconded anyone have concerns changes problems with either set of minutes all right i'm going to move to vote and start this time with the chair the chair is an eye on Darcy yes and nandy hi and pat hi the vote is for zero with one absent to accept the to approve the minutes of august 25 and september 8 and emily as always thank you for your work um let's see if we have any public present whoops um where is the participants we have one we have one member the public president um and so if any any member of the public wishes to speak at this point um I'm entertaining public comment and a hand is raised oh my god I've never had to do this before so did you know how George we're gonna find out hopefully Anna will be patient um uh so I could promote her to a panelist and have her you should be able to just click on her and say allow to talk thank you all right we have a person uh if you would unmute and it looks like you have you'd introduce yourself and you have three minutes all right hi everybody oh my gosh I'm so honored to be the only attendee I can't believe that that's the case this is critical stuff here uh so Anna doesn't knock here and I'm 83 railroad and I can't excuse me I can't understand her because of an echo or something I'm sorry if you could speak a little louder if you can I'm in my office and it's really echoey all right I'll do my best I'm sorry can you hear me it's a little better Anna all right sorry folks um I haven't hung stuff up in this office so the echo's strong anyway uh really quickly I I know that you are are pretty much done with the um the uh sorry I had to hold up the document around selection for multi-member bodies and I just wanted to toss in the thought and I understand that I'm coming in wait I apologize uh for not being on the ball but two things that I would recommend considering for this is doing some training work around bias mitigation for folks who are uh participating in that selection process one of the things to consider is the creation of a rubric when you do create your interview questions thinking about making sure people are looking at the same measures of needing those those questions right and I understand that some of them are subjective but for ones where there are clear parameters or clear things that are shared I'd recommend using a rubric it's best practice in terms of um that interviewing process to mitigate bias uh specifically write the conformity bias where we want to have people who act like us and look like us and sound like us the other component to think about is in the bias mitigation you know there's there's trainings that can be done that are we're not talking about major requests on time and um yes this would be great if it were something everyone would do but I think specifically for folks you know and I'm happy to talk more about this it's something that I do work in professionally uh a little bit but you know if there were a quick half an hour module that folks could at least familiarize themselves with to understand where bias might come in in a selection process right because there's a lot of ways where we for example uh negate lived experience as a valid indicator of um ability so there's a lot of ways that bias can creep in and there's really small simple steps you can do to at least start the process of mitigating that and I'd love to see that effort towards anti-racism towards diversity on our boards introduced into the selection process for multi-member bodies or is that the right phrase I'm sorry if you know what I mean exactly the size thanks for listening to me I'm just really quickly because you haven't taught me how to get um the zoom thing is so helpful because I can tune in while I'm working and things like that so regardless I hope you maintain a zoom option where there are um closer views of you all I mean I I understand that zoom is possible from the town room but you can't see um and I remember Nandian out of waving we can see your arms waving we can't see your faces as you talking um as we could if we were in that space so you know again also happy to this is something I've also been doing a lot of work on and my my grown-up job but happy to brainstorm on how to how to do hybrid in a way that might work for folks to be able to attend in this way thank you thank you thank you all right um seeing the presence of no one no other hands have raised um that is public comment for today item 11 was discussion of future agenda items um we are planning to meet uh next week that is uh on our regular schedule and we do have now at least one item to deal with which is the Fincom um situation we're going to be reviewing selection guidance um and Mandy you can finish well it's just I think people know where I'm headed um other I well what else is on our agenda surveillance surveillance why does that legal opinion came through this morning and so Pat and I are hoping to meet before next week's GOL meeting to discuss the legal opinion so maybe I know you were hoping to cancel the meeting but no no no I just asking Pat and I might be really appreciative if it goes forward with that legal opinion that just came through so there's something you guys want really badly that okay well Darcy what do you think um should we um anyway that so we have two items at the moment and so it sounds like anything else that would be on the agenda for next time that anyone would like to have on the agenda or for instance we've just had a suggestion from a member of the public that perhaps could be put on the agenda for something just for discussion purposes and maybe not so much for this iteration of GOL given the time and so forth but perhaps laying the ground for a future GOL committee um since we will be doing interviews um and we will be um so the idea of rubric that sort of thing um any interest in adding that to a discussion next time right now we have two items which is fine I'm interested in adding it and and wondering also uh if it seemed appropriate to actually ask Anna back so we can ask more questions and things like that or if she can send us material that we can look at between now and then okay I think we definitely since we're going to go forward with this process um once we adopt selection guidance we might be able to change turn it into a rubric you know and so I think we could talk about that as part of the one agenda one of the two agenda items that was already on it fincom appointments right for recommendations you would fold that into it I think we can fold that into that as long as you we make note that we're folding it into that yeah at least as it relates to that um as chair of CRC that's starting this process for ZBA associate appointments I made myself a note that can be folded into that process too okay okay um okay um we have a hand we have a hand raised in the public and so Darcy is trying to speak well Darcy please yes go ahead I just wanted to say that there may be a couple of resolutions coming along not totally clear yet but um to climate related um one to support extended producer responsibility legislation on the state level that would bring cash into the town um and um well anyway no I'm horizon I hear you okay um and again all I would ask and I is that to the degree possible the sponsors so I assume you might be the council sponsor so they have a council sponsor um that they try to get it to us um you know as soon as as humanly possible as opposed to like you know the night before all right right and especially if you want to invite people so normally as you know when we have these kinds of resolutions we invite the sponsors along obviously with the council sponsor to be present so good okay so um we do have a hand still raised I'm going to consult my committee here um are you uncomfortable with me um because okay all right I'm going to unmute and uh allow um our one member of the public to speak again if she wishes our fan club I know fan club I'm going to go to Jersey um so just really quickly I am happy to send you many many materials and also happy to discuss this further I also can refer you to some folks who do this work professional like full-time professionally um whatever direction you choose to go in I'm happy to support so just let me know all right thank you thank you all right all right so um seeing that we have no further business that I'm aware of and we will be meeting uh one week from today um and we have at least now a number of items on the agenda and perhaps even a resolution um I'm prepared to call this meeting to an end and to adjourn it all right so go forth enjoy the rest of your day and uh thank you thank you everyone yeah thank you Emily