 Thank you, Athena. Seeing the presence of a quorum, I'm going to call this meeting of governance organization legislation to order. It is, according to my watch, exactly 10.30. This meeting is being recorded and pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 orders suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law. This meeting of GLL is being conducted by a remote participation. Just going to take a moment and make sure everybody can hear and be heard. So Lynn. Yes. And Mandy. Yes. And Andy. Yes. And Pat DeAngelis today will not be joining us. So it's a committee of four. I have a number of things in the packet. The agenda. We're pretty much going to follow it, I think in the order that it's here. Item four, of course, well, not of course, item four will not be discussed today because we have not gotten anything from the attorney on that. And before we begin, I reached out to Paul vis-a-vis KP law and he had had a conversation with them, but I have not yet gotten back anything from either Paul or KP law on any of the issues that we had raised relevant to the wage theft bylaw. And so I have nothing to communicate to you. What I told Paul is that if KP law has anything they wish to communicate to the committee and therefore to the council, I can communicate that orally at the next council meeting. Ideally I put it in the report, but bottom line is I've heard nothing. We have two, we have a proclamation and a resolution in front of us. And then I thought we would turn to Lynn's draft number three of the town manager evaluation process. And so there's the three main items and then we want, we have some minutes to look at. And then that's our business for today. So I'd like to start with the human rights day proclamation. My understanding is Mandy is the sponsor? Is that correct? Or is there another sponsor? I believe Mandy Joe is the only sponsor. As far as I know, it's just me. That's what I thought. So Mandy Joe is the sponsor. And we have a co-sponsor, but it doesn't mean it. So we have a document in front of us. Mandy's gone through it, put it into the proper form that we use with the right whereas is in punctuation. I'm going to go through it. I think section by section. I have a number of thoughts on this. I don't know about anybody else. I still find it very wordy and like it's not, I'm not faulting Mandy Joe. She's working with an existing document. I got it all on one page. That was the first step. But so I think we should go through section by section. If you don't mind first whereas I have no problem with it. Anybody, any concerns with the first whereas? Mandy, I just wonder, do you happen to have a word document of it? I do. I can show it. Why don't we do the word document? Thank you. Okay. And then that way we can get the changes. Exactly. You also had your hand up. Oh, my hand was up because I want to talk about the zoning bylaw that George said we might not talk about. So when we get to that item, I just want to ask the couple. So we'll, we'll keep it as item four, but we'll go to you. Okay. Sure. So now we have the word version up, which means we can do changes. Right. Right. The only thing is, could you enlarge it whoever is controlling the document? Hold on. My change at least in the first whereas is a very small one. It may not be necessary commemorating the day in 1948. When it's what I would suggest. But I think it's also fine the way it is. It's fine. Okay. I think, so I'm just going to go along unless people have concerns. Second whereas I'd like to take out at least I'm wondering why it's here. Just seems kind of, you know, I like beginning with the United Nations. I think that makes sense. Anybody feel strongly about this. We can leave it. There's nothing wrong with the way it's written. I just, I kind of liked the second, the third whereas seems to have more. Now, causing everyone stand up for someone's rights on human rights day. Doesn't matter to me. It was just a revision of something. I understand. Not understand. We're working with the documents been around for a while. The last time I think we did it. We were somewhat rushed. This time we have a little bit more time. We can leave it. I guess I am historically it's been there. I don't know. Just seems kind of. The only reason I like it is because it's more positive. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Let's, for the moment, let's leave it next. Whereas I think we need a thought. The United Nations States. And I would like to drop the second clause. The United Nations states that this would back for basic human rights is widespread in all parts of the world. So I think it's a good idea to have the first clause. The second clause. We have to meet locally. The town council sort of expect. I just think that's. And I'll know. So it's United Nations United Nations and then residents of Amherst. I think the next statement captures what thought there is in the clause, the second clause. I agree with that. Okay. So whereas residents of Amherst have expressed their belief in a way that the city of Amherst is safe. And there's a difference in72. So in that aspect, we're affecting the human rights we all share by consistently acting to demonstrate the values we hold as a community. I really don't like this. It just, it doesn't say anything as far as I can tell. I mean, somebody tell me what it's saying. So, so the, it's the lead into the next, like three. Are committed to this so it's leading into the. The town meeting adopted the town meeting adopted the town meeting adopted the council did that. I mean, if we don't. Okay. That's essential it's sort of like, and here we've demonstrated we've acted to demonstrate the values and then we list what all those actions are. Maybe if we took the clause that I wanted to take out above and inserted that in the next whereas so whereas the town council has heard expressions of similar concern from residents. And the residents of Amherst have expressed their belief in a commitment to protecting human rights. I just have a problem with it, you know, you know, protecting human rights we all share by consistently acting to demonstrate the values whatever those are, we hold as a community just seems very, you know, sort of. So I like the idea of a connection Mandy so I'm just wondering, maybe we take that line I we struck above and begin the whereas with that. So we have the United Nations, United Nations, United Nations, and then whereas we could say residents of Amherst have the town council's heard expressions of similar concerns from residents of Amherst are from residents and residents Amherst express their belief in a commitment to protecting human rights. I think it's weird to put those two together in one whereas because one's a positive thing and one's a negative thing. Okay, right. The town council goes in the end we sign it and we have something. I mean I think if we just get rid of that last clause we're fine. Okay, so just. Okay. Good whereas the residents of Amherst have. It would be the residents of Amherst or residents of Amherst. Any thoughts to be consistent it would be the. The residents of Amherst have expressed their belief and commitment to protecting all human rights. I think the human rights is perhaps. I mean, Take a run put human rights with no capitals because it's not a title of anything. That's right. Right. Right. And then you want to get rid of the we all share. Well, you know, that's it. That's a question. I don't know. I think we wanted to put in the word all after protecting. I don't know why we don't say still and consistently acted to demonstrate the value these values or something like that. I don't know what to get rid of. We just tell me, help me and you understand what that's saying. I guess it's the idea. Not only do we. Because I think what Mandy said earlier it's a lead in to the, what follows below. And it's, it's just trying to simplify it. Right. What about that. I like that. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So this is where, you know, the next four. Are all town meeting, town council select board actions and the question becomes how long do we keep them all in. Yeah. In, in proclamations versus. Start figuring out a way to consolidate. I want to just warn you that any, that every time we take any people. History out. We have one counselor who goes bananas. Right. The one that I would take out by the way is the reference to the Arizona boycott. That was a. Temporary. Issue. Overall law that I think Arizona no longer enforces. And there was an effort to boycott. Arizona and not do not attend conventions or meetings or traveled to Arizona. And that was that's gone. I mean, it's no longer. I also had a question about this resolution to create a human rights culture. Yeah, I don't know. What is that different than all the human rights, day resolutions and all or the human rights bylaw. I have to do research to find out or ask. Find it. So when I search. I would delete it. The whole thing out. I would take it out. Including the resettlement. Just take this whole paragraph out. Yep. Yep. That's fine with me. And we don't have a date when they adopted the sanctuary community bylaw. But we could go back and look for it. I mean, we re-adopted it last year. In 2019. Or 2020 or whenever we recodified everything. Within the last decade. Then let's just leave it the way it is. Yeah, I'm not sure we need a date. Yeah. So I had, I was, I agree with Andy and deleting. Whereas town meeting is also past resolutions. I think that could come out. I had no problem with the next two warehouses. I don't know what other people's thoughts are. Town councils issue proclamations for the black history month. In other words, it's the history. Town council actions. So. And I like the next one. Before we move on this, the one that has all the proclamations. Probably resolutions. But. How is the wording I did for our. Support of. The U is it's not the UU. It's, it's the first church. In the sanctuary. That's fine. Okay. I just wanted to point that out. I didn't know a good way to word it. That wasn't too specific, but was specific enough. Right. I think that it's good. I like it. Okay. I love the fact that in the last whereas we say always embraced. You know, Barely two years old. Yeah. I was. I felt that that last one could come out. It's a bit too much patting ourselves on the back. I like the list of things we've done. Like the list of things. Time meeting is done. I like the United Nations. Statements. But this last one. Seems a bit too much. Seems like puffery. So something defended, please. No, I'm, I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. So something defended, please. No, I'm, I'm fine. It's just to, you know, It seems a lot more historic than we are. Exactly. It seems to be, you know, and even if we had been around for 30 years. We're basically saying what good guys we are. And I, I like actions as opposed to. I'd like to take it out. I'd like to take it out. We've really shortened it. Yeah. Hopefully it won't offend anyone. I think it's a, it's an important document. It's important. And I believe we're going to, at least at the moment, the thought is this will be held in person. I don't see why we can't. So, so. Okay. So, so that's why I've left it this way. You know, if we don't, if we decide not to pass this until December 7th, instead of November 16th, we can modify that if that plan changes. But, but they would like to hold it in person. So that's their plan right now. Yeah. I mean, it's, I think it'd be easily done. It's not hard. It depends on whether Baker changes his gathering requirements yet again. Yeah. How many people are we allowed to have with any given event? I think right now we're down to 50. Which this would fall within easily. But if he. Goes over. So the other thing about this paragraph is that I find using the word masked. To be. Kill your. But I understand why it's there. And so I was trying to think about alternatives to that. And, you know, making something like a communal reading of the universe of the universal declaration. Which will be held. In the appropriate fashion. To protect participants. Or from public health risks of COVID-19 or something like that, but not use the terms socially distanced and masked. So I think we'll see us next year for getting to take that out. Why not just with a communal socially distanced reading and just assume common sense will rule and our document is not. You know, a legally binding statement of what you can or cannot do with the governor's order that controls it. And so all we're saying is we're at the moment we're going to celebrate this day with a communal socially distanced reading. And I think that's, and just leave it at that. My only problem and the reason I like the. Part that Andy put on and put it at the end is that this is in downtown where we require masks and. Got a lot of the governor's thing is much more now. Finally embracing masks. Okay. Okay. Public safety. Public safety guidelines. Following the appropriate public safety guidelines, something like that. Without getting into details. Following the appropriate public safety guidelines or following the appropriate health. Guidelines. Yes. I can move with that. Good. That's going to be the seventh day. This is. We'll actually do this on the. Ninth. So that becomes the question. Do we want to hold it till December? Just in case they decide they can't do it in person. That's a good idea. Very good. Okay. So this goes on the December 7th agenda. Right. Which still is in time for December 10. Okay. So we're going to move on to the next item. So we're going to do a zoom reading to fix this last paragraph. Without having to repass it. Even though it's ready. Make a motion that we recommend this. We should just note that. Something about also recommending that this be. A motion that does not need to come back to this committee. Right. Back then. So, so if we're done with it, I move to declare the. Human rights day proclamation of 2020 clear, consistent and actionable. And further. If changes to the plan ceremony. Occur. The proclamation does not need to return to GOL. So we have a motion to be modified. Okay. Andy seconds. So we have a motion. We have a second. I'm going to move to roll call vote. Lynn. Yes. Mandy. Yes. Andy. Yes. The chair is a yes. So the vote is four in favor. None against and one absent. Okay. So we have a motion to declare this proclamation clear, consistent. And actionable. I will send that off to you and Athena, George. Okay. Thank you. The question about this, but it's not with my, my tiny brain. Well, maybe they'll come to me. Second is a proclamation. In support of small business Saturday. Okay. Okay. Okay. It's a word document. I had a few small things. Most of it. I thought it was fine. But again, I think we should go through it section by section. Yeah. So first, whereas I have no problem with. Start with a just overall observation. I had raised a question last year about why we use. A lot of the things that we do. We use it in our. In our. Resolutions that it seemed peculiar to do that. And the thing that the answer was because it's a registered trademark. So I actually did a little research. And you know who owns that registered trademark. The American Express company. Huh. It really strikes me as weird. Well, I think. Where is this. All over the document, except actually there are two places where it was not. The term small business Saturday has this registered trademark things. Notations on it. Yes, right, right. And I think that there's no another term that's. Used so I looked up small business Saturday and. It was in fact created Boston by Manino and he was mayor. But. It is a registered trademark of the American Express company. We've used it's in the past. And I guess that's why we put that little are there. So it's missing in two sections. The register trademark or we could just refer to. We could change the wording so we don't use the term small business Saturday. Supporting small businesses the Saturday after Thanksgiving or something. Or Thanksgiving weekend. Or we could just leave out the trademark. I don't think we're in fear of a lawsuit from American Express, but what, yeah, I don't. I mean, if we have to. Mark every single phrase has been trademarked in our documents. I don't know. Does it, why, why do we have it trademarked? So it's trademarked. Fine. We're not trying to sell anything. We're just. Supporting something. Trademarked is because the one we got from the state had the trademark. The state model. Okay. All right. If we, if we trade market once, do we really have to go through and trade market everywhere? Technically, yeah. Well, I can add it. I can, I have it right here. So when we get there, I'll just move that. Okay. Copy it over. Yeah. I think rewarding it. I mean, that's an option that Mandy suggests, but kind of the point here is to, you know, focus on this. I mean, obviously it's for local businesses year round, but it's motivated by this particular event, which is called small business Saturday. So. Use it. I guess we'll just use it and keep the trademark. Yeah. I mean, it's easy to pull down and. Okay. All right. And it's, it's how it is known around the country. Yeah. And we'll catch each one as we go through it. I can, I've seen three so far. The one you copied is a different font size and in bold Lynn. Because it's copy from the big one instead from the title instead of from within. Yeah. So it might be better to use the one that's in. So in the first pair, the first whereas are we going back up to that? I'm ready to do that. If everyone else is. I think the comma after town of Amherst is extraneous. Yes, it is. It shouldn't be there. So what did you want it to say? Delete the comma. Yeah, just drop the comment town of Amherst celebrates our local. Just the comma. Yeah. Got it. I shouldn't be there. And then I don't see why the next whereas seems to say the same thing pretty much. So I don't know why it's there. I think there can be combined. Or just, yeah, what is it in the second one that, that, you know, it just says that local businesses create jobs, boost our local economy. And I just. I don't see why the second whereas is here. I think you can add the creation of jobs to the first one. And then you could delete the second one. Because I think that's an important part of. All of this is the creation of those jobs. The country. Our local economy and community, including the creation of jobs. Like that. I mean, you could. It doesn't work that way, Lynn, because of the. Phrasing. Celebrate our local. Maybe we just reword the second whereas that's just a little bit stronger. Delete the first one and make the second one the first one. And just say the town of Amherst celebrates and supports our local businesses. Our local small businesses that create. For another one. Staying. Don't erase that first one yet. Whereas town of Amherst celebrates our local businesses that. Contribute. To our local economy. And create jobs. I just kind of like it the way it is the first one. It's just we support them. To eliminate the second. Yeah. Do you want to eliminate and community? Oh, no. So create jobs, comma, and preserve our communities. Cause then we've worded the wording from the second one. I think we have to get rid of the. One with that. Preserve our. Right. So the first. The first whereas. The and after small businesses needs to be deleted. And then it's and preserves. Our community, not or. I get rid of this. Well, I'll strike it for the month, but strike through it for the moment, but let's just go back through that first one. I think it's, hold on, let me just show you. It's gone now. No, it's not. She's just showing the final document instead of the tract. That's okay. Sorry. So where's the town of Amherst celebrates our local small businesses. That contribute. I think it's create and preserve instead of creates and preserves. I agree. That's what I was about to say too. No, no, no, no celebrate. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Celebrates is right. No, no, no, no. The verb tense is wrong in creates it's create instead of creates and it's preserve instead of preserves. But I think celebrate now has to go back to celebrates. Yep. Okay. Yeah. Sounds awkward. Yeah. The town of Amherst celebrates our local small businesses, which contribute to our local economy. Create jobs. Just that helps a little maybe I don't know it's not much, but it supports and celebrates could help too. I'm putting the word support in there. Okay, supports and celebrates. Our local small businesses. And I like which contribute to our local economy. Create jobs. And then what? Help our community prosper and preserve our community and just there. Yeah. This by the way is the state. I mean, is what the state puts out, right? We're basically, it started with them and then it went to the chamber and the bid. And then it can, they sent it back to me. And did they make any changes? And maybe they, they may. Yeah. What you see is what. Yeah. Okay. Good. All right. So we don't want to offend the chamber and the bid here. So. No, but that's, I think we're okay. Yeah. Yeah. And. Preserve our community. Okay. All right. Okay. Second one out. Yeah. Okay. Then, and, you know, I, we specifically asked them to put. In data about. Our community and they did. Well, they didn't really put data in about our community. Which was the bummer. Well, the first one is. The first one is, yeah. Yeah. I don't think they had the ability to do much more. So the first, that, that whereas that has the nearly 90%. I think we should split. That paragraph. And right after the, the, the 10 employees and. Create a new whereas so that the new whereas starts with according, which is all. Then. Cause all of that's not local. Okay. Okay. And when you read that sentence. I think. The they represent should be representing 99. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think it's just. Representing. And I also think you can get rid of the R before responsible in the next clause. I don't know if you need to. I don't, you can get rid of the. Oh, yeah. Let's see what you've got here. I mean, the question is, do we want all those stats because the next like for whereas. That's right. So am I taking our out or not. Representing 99.9% of all firms with paid employees, the United States and. Yeah. Responsible for 65. I think the art comes out. So. See, they got this straight off the one that we got from the state. Right. And then this, the next whereas. Kind of worse, you know, sort of repeat some of that. Maybe, maybe not. I split the next one up into two separate ones too. The first clause, about 47.1% of the employees. And then a new whereas that talked about the COVID stuff. So right here. Yeah. It's still just a lot of statistics. Yeah. It's. Doesn't make for really. Yeah, but that's. It's what they gave me. No, no. And, you know, the first point is simply that small businesses are really, you know, the economic engine of. Of the economy. The employee. We can take this. And combine it with this. Oh, I think we totally could. Yeah. 99% of all, representing 99% of all firms with paid employees. How would we do it? And responsible for. And employing. 47.1%. So it could be represented 99.9% of all forms with. Paid employees in the United States, employing 47.1% of the employees in the private. In the private sector, comma and responsible for 65.1% of that new jobs. No, that would incorporate it now. Doesn't solve the statistics problem, but at least puts it all together in the right place. And I think it would be employing. Instead of employee. And then it just puts it all in the same place at least. Yes. Yep. And then we've got the COVID paragraph. Then two after the COVID paragraph. We're all in past tense. I kind of want them in present tense. Yeah. 96% of consumers who shopped on small business Saturday agree. Could it be who shop? And then of consumers who shop. Agree. And this seems more logical if it's present tense. There's three of them. I came across. And then 96%. And then one in the. It would be that one. There's one three lines down. Right. Yeah. I'm not sure. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. If we took out and made him present tense. It just seemed to make a little more sense to me. There was the additional. Yeah. One more in that whereas down in the bottom line. Yeah. No. Where as is up right next to the second shop. That you got rid of needs a. Registered trademark. Got it. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know what percentage of consumers who shop. You need to then go. Report. That reported. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry, which one, this one. Report. Yeah. Don't you think if you're going to go. Yeah. Tense you need to go to present. The prior whereas had the other half. So I missed that. Yeah. Yeah. So funny. Cause up here it was the correct tense. Right. Yeah. Okay. So my next one's in the now therefore clause. Yeah. There's some problems here. I think it's just verb tense. We're a does and an urges, not a do and an urge. You know the Amherstown council do here by proclaiming. We want to catch that, I think. Yeah. And I didn't like the word. I'm sorry. You didn't like the word what. Wide to support Amherst wide small businesses. It's just Amherst small businesses. I agree. Yeah. The here by proclaim is really verbiage. Yeah. Yeah. Just say proclaims town council proclaims November 28. Yeah. The small business Saturday. Yeah. You're by. That's better. Yeah. Strike it. And put. Yeah. Yeah. Good. It might actually get it to one page. Oh, we're going to. Oh yeah. So the next be besides the, the sizing of the text, the be it further resolved needs to just be. In normal text, not all caps. No, the, the be it further resolved. And that one's just one, I think it was 12 instead of 11. Or you're saying this whole thing is wrong. I think. Yeah, I think it's just the wrong sizing. Yeah. I think it just needs to go to 11 instead of 12. Okay. Let me, let me go back and show you the view. Okay. Take out another line. If you show no markup, you'll be able to see it completely. Okay. Instead of simple markup. Now this is not on, I guess Athena does this. This is not on our. Regular Amherstown. Stationary format. Right. So. I guess she'll fix that. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because usually when I send it, it's on the Amherst. It's got the Amherst logo, et cetera. I can do that. Okay. I think the voted is all in the wrong size too. Yeah. So does it go here or does it go to the left? So the way. The human rights day one was the voted this blank day of December on the Amherstown. And then on behalf of the town council underneath that, and then your signature and the stuff under the signature line was on the right. I'll take care of it. Yeah. There was, there was an on behalf of the town council after the voted. Section. But, and that was on a new line. Yeah. Underneath it. Yeah. That should get it all in one line. Even with letterhead. Okay. I'll take care of the formatting. Yeah. And it should be able to go on one page. Okay. Anything else. I have nothing further. Anyone have anything further? Can I make the motion? Please. I moved to declare the proclamation. In support of small. What's the title of this thing? In support of small business Saturday. Yes. Your comments. Thank you. Thank you. It's been consistent and actionable as amended. So a second. Second. Andy seconds again. Thank you. So we have a motion. It's been seconded. It's I'm going to go to a roll call vote again. I'm going to start this time with Mandy. Yes. Andy. Yes, Lynn. Yes. In the chair. Yes. So again, four zero. With one extension. I'm sorry. Is it abstention or absent? I said absent. If I said abstention, that was a misstatement. I'm sorry. It's absent. One absent. Thank you. Anything else on this? No. Move on to item four. Mandy has something she wanted to share with us. So go ahead. Yeah, so George said that we weren't ready to review it because. We haven't gotten anything back from Joe Bard yet. We do have the language. This is set for our first reading this coming Monday at the town council and the second reading. The Monday after on the 16th. So I'm concerned if we don't, if we don't review it. But if we don't review it in GOL now or next Wednesday. It won't have gone through GOL and we have to then pass a whole bunch of. Motions, a couple of motions to get it out of GOL and. Suspending council rules. So I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted to bring that forward. We haven't always sent all zoning by law, all by law amendments to council to begin with. We know this one was reviewed by Jill Bard prior to its first adoption. So I just wanted to put that out there that. We don't have to do it, but then the council will have to suspend a whole bunch of rules. So I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted to bring that forward. I wanted us to be able to amend it instead of. Passing a brand new bylaw. Issues that are likely. To rise at the council meeting that. Will. Cause problems here. Are you aware of any. So the only. Questions that have come on. I don't know. I don't know. Any board meetings. We've not had the hearing yet. That's tonight. Related to. Scope not being large enough. And there's been one amendment to add. A use category to the temporary uses based on that concern. Which. Didn't end up in this packet, but I have the language for, and I could show on the thing. I don't know. I don't know. Committee so far about legality or. Concern about the. The amendments. Not meeting. Legal standards. So the. What's proposed. Is essentially exactly what we already did. There's no real changes to it. Let me pull that up. Let me pull up the most recent one. The reason is, is that we had already determined then. That it was clear consistent and actionable. In the form that it is being presented to the council. And we only. Therefore. Have an issue of. Whether it's clear consistent and actionable. If there are. To the extent that there are changes. Right. So. The changes. It's. Changing the effective period. Adding office park and PRP to the list of existing uses. Adding medical uses to that list of. What the effective uses apply. And then the biggest change is this adding of. More. More allowed uses for temporary uses instead of permanent uses. For new and existing uses. And it didn't all have to be temporary. It could be permanent. That was the new uses. I think, I think Rob has talked about. I don't know which, which restaurant. On this. If the other issue was that this out actually allows, for instance, the tent outside the library. Yeah. So the temporary uses my computer just went kind of crazy here. The temporary uses you could already have temporary uses for retail establishments and all. They're adding more and they're not allowing for these classes down here, the class one and two farm stand and all for those to be permanent changes. They can only be temporary. Whereas the ones up here. For retail food and drink and all could be permanent changes. I think Rob talked about one that will be, it might be Bster 63. I don't know that added. Something I could be wrong on that one. So that, that's the biggest change is this whole section. But none of this seems to affect clarity consistency or actionability. Right. I mean, this is nothing we really contribute here. As far as I can see. Objections would be people objecting to the substance. Yeah. Unless we're advised by a town council that there's an issue. With anything that's proposed. Motion that says. That we declare this clear consistent and actionable. Subject to review by town council. I think we could do that. I didn't want to point out this, this one. Yeah. So. I think. A tele-sized section. Was not in the draft. The council saw last week or two weeks ago or whenever our last meeting was that is the, the section that has been added in response to concerns by. Planning board members and CRC members that. Things at a church for like food banks or others may not. That they want to move outside. So they wanted to do that. So they wanted to do that. So they wanted to do that. So they wanted to do that. So they wanted to do that. And so they wanted. It clear that. Church or other place of worship. Was also falling into that potential tent for serving of. Food bank or things. Like that. So that. They also might want to do it to actually have worship outside. Yeah. So, so that light, like I said, so that, that one was in addition. Because of those concerns. It was the, the, the most, the, the, the best way to do that. So, that's the, the. The best advice to us. Mandy's point is that just given the way we do things. GOL needs to act. And if we don't act, it just makes it more difficult, not impossible, just more awkward or cumbersome for the council. If we act today. We at least remove that. It's tiny or not maybe not so tiny obstacle from the meeting. It gives it a few, fewer minutes. Devoted to stuff that's just. I just wrote this as clear, consistent, actionable, declared clear, consistent, actionable, dependent or so. How did you phrase it? Dependent upon review by town council. Or pending review is the way. Town attorney review or something. Attorney review. And once the town attorney reviews it. Since we've declared a clear, consistent, actionable, it goes to the council. There's no need for it to come back to us. Right. Unless I'm really serious major, something that comes up. And then frankly, I don't see it. Yeah. I mean, it's really a matter of substance here, not. So I think any suggestion is a reasonable one. And I'm willing to entertain a motion. I do people have, I mean, I don't see anything that we can contribute to this in terms of clarity, consistent action ability. There's, I don't see anything that, that we could raise. That would be an issue from our perspective. It's already been reviewed once. And any objections or concerns, it seems to be would be matters of substance. Somebody objects to say places of worship or somebody, you know, whatever, but it wouldn't be a matter of clarity, consistency or action ability. Okay. Mindy Joe, could you just scroll down to the very end? Oh, even to the waivers and. So nothing else has changed. No. Right. This is all current. So it's just stuff in red. I think we should go ahead and make the motion that. Okay. So I move that we declare this. The motion is consistent and actionable. Subject to town attorney review. I can. Okay. We have a motion. It's been seconded. Any further discussion on this. I just wanted to note one thing and that is we're adding medical uses, but we, we know of at least one medical. Practitioner practice that has had tents behind their backs for the last through the whole summer. But we're just ignore that because we're trying to amend the by-law and not worry about what happened under the last. Which one are you referring to? Amherst Medical Center Valley Medical Group. Had also had a tent up to. But we're just trying to bring the by-law into complete. So we have a motion that's been seconded. Any further discussion. I'm going to move then to a vote. I'm going to start this time with Andy. Yes. Lynn. Yes. Mandy. Yes. Yes. So again, four zero with one absent. To declare this zoning by-law. To be clear, consistent, actual pending or subsequent to attorney. Town attorney review. All right. Next item is item five. And that is a continued discussion of the evaluation process. And timeline. Lynn has put a draft. Draft number three. Of the document that we're working on. And so if we could get that up. On the screen. Let us turn to that. Is it up there? It is now. Yes. Right. So. Found this very interesting. You all suggested that I make this into the fiscal year, which I did. Which makes the whole top area look quite empty. The only thing that does change is that one asterisk that we did about the manager's goals. So let me just chat. Tell you what else I did. Okay. So I flipped it so that we start with July. And then I, none of the asterisks has changed. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. I did not. The asterisks has changed. I did. I don't know why this came out as red here. But I did put in some breakdowns of weeks. Because that was also desired. And then I took any other final notes. And I put them down here at the bottom. And I put them down here at the bottom. And I put them down here at the bottom. And I put them down here at the bottom. Do they belong in the GOL report? Or is this a separate memo? Or, you know, how do you want to handle this? So that's really. And some of these are really like longer term questions like this one. Or even this one. This one we've now said, okay, let's try July one. And I thought it would be useful to just make sure that. In GOL's report or wherever we're going to put this. That we state, here's what the town manager's. Contract says. So I was just trying to queue up things that. Would then go into, I think a GOL report. Okay. Okay. I think that's a good point. Is, are we looking for a vote from the council on this? I don't think so. Is this just over? I mean, we were told to deal with something. So I think this is a report back that we've come up with a timeline. I mean, we certainly, if there was objections, people had concerns. We would obviously take them into consideration. We're not trying to impose something. Just by fiat. But I don't know whether a vote would be called for, but certainly some kind of town council input. We'd like to get consensus, right? You'd like to have an agreement that this. And that was acceptable. And also that, that GOL is going to be. Carrying this. Carrying this burden for the time being. Raising that question, George. And I keep saying, Hey, until someone else raises it, leave it the way it is. This. And so. Okay. If it comes, so then the question is, do you want, does GOL want this? When we finish, I mean, we still need to look at the changes I made. When GOL finishes this, do we want it to just be part of a GOL report? And therefore during the GOL report. Counselors can ask questions. Or is GOL requesting that this be a separate agenda item. So I guess I'm trying to figure out how this would be used and who's in charge of using it. Cause we've said that individual committee processes aren't subject to. Council action. And much of this, if GOL is the one doing. And finalizing the documents. Much of this is. A GOL timeline for getting that done. And then it's going to be a separate agenda item. In time for the council to vote the goals at the appropriate meeting. And in that point, then it shouldn't be a separate council item. It should be. A. Just in part of the GOL report, but if we're going to say, this is a council policy on when the evaluation is done. I personally favor that it's a GOL. Timeline, frankly. Right. I think it should be a GOL timeline too. It might be. Important to have some way of denoting by color or whatever. Whenever the council is taking action on something. Because, you know, we are doing something in support of council, but the council does the evaluation. And the council establishes goals. In the end, but we are. Trying to. Be a committee of the council to help the council do that work. Let me, let me choose a color for that. But then also I wanted to just point out. I wanted to just point out. Right here, I asked whether should this be completed before staff and public evaluations. This is the self-evaluation. And the reason I asked that is because. It actually provides a lot of information. That either refreshes or informs people. On the staff and in the public, if they want to read it. It's a real change. If we do that. We could just change the column D. Instead of its first week for data collection complete to second week data collection complete. Well, notice up here, we distribute back in the third week. Maybe we want. This completed. And at the same time. Get posted. And then this. Distribution has to happen at the same time. I mean, we're already cutting two months off of his evaluation. Yeah, that's my concern is that's two months. Right. 10 months of valuation after 10 months already. Remind me, Lynn, when, when was this done in the past? I mean, it was at the end of May. When was this. When was this done? I mean, it was at the end of May. And the owner's self evaluation was always provided to us about two or three weeks, maybe before we had to do ours. And it was basically considered another piece of data. Right. That came to the council, but it was never a piece of data to be considered by the public. I'm not. I'm not going to go into the public and the staff, but since I was putting these different things, and I wanted to raise that for this committee. I don't think that document is really for the council. In terms of its. Yeah. Valuation of the manager and we hire and fire him. The public is perfectly free and invited to offer their own thoughts. But they don't hire and fire him and they don't evaluate him. In the way that we do. So I'm not. I think we just answered it. So about the time that we, we would get. It's so interesting. I want to point to it with my finger. Yes. The time we would get. All of the data we would also get his self evaluation. And that's when we would distribute the town councilors. Evaluation form. And then we would have a discussion. And then we would have a discussion. And then we would have a discussion. Everything is now available right here during the first week of May. And then. Town councilors have two weeks to fill it out. And then. Two weeks later, we have the discussion. And two weeks after that, we finalize it. And then on the first of first week of July, we vote as compensation. Yeah. So I think I agree. I like the timeline. I agree with George that all of his data is council for council's benefit, not for the public's per se. Yeah, I agree. Well, now I want to go through and I want to, I already did do one color code. This one does no longer needs to be color coded, by the way. So can I make a couple of comments. That helped me sort of. Figure it all out. You did it through italicizing and non italicizing. I did it. By adding. You know, for example, the July one just said vote. What's it say it says vote contract. So I added the words current fiscal year contract or current FY. And so I added current FY throughout everything, essentially that was italicized. And then in the two blue boxes. I, I described it as next FY. And that seemed to help me figure out which one we're talking about. And I make this point because column. E row 14. Actually is talking about two different fiscal years. The first week is the, the evaluation for the current fiscal year is drafted the third week, the council completes the manager evaluation for the current fiscal year and the salary comparison, but then the next set determined compensation renew contract is for next fiscal year. And then you left July in and I, I noted it as vote contract for now current fiscal year and was just, you know, it just helped me. Better with words instead of just visually know which year we're talking about in each one of these. I'm quickly going through and adding current. We don't need them there. I basically added it in every box where there was writing. Either current FY or next FY. So not present current. Yeah. Because then you could use, I originally started with CFY and P FY and NFY, but then I decided to write out CP and N for current past and next. I guess it could be future, but it's next. Here for instruments. So, so I did the way I worded it as all data collection and then I added it to my staff public for current FY evaluation. So that was the phrase I added for current fiscal year evaluation. I'm wondering if we went through this month by month. And made the corrections as we went through. We could kill two birds with one stone, or maybe we don't need to do that, but we already in July, the very first month, there was a change made to vote contract, right? I'm just having trouble following this. I'm not, but I need to because eventually there'll be, you know, you'll redo it and it'll be fine. But there's also the question of just the timing and it sounds like people are pretty satisfied with the timeline as it is. But I'm not entirely, but. Well, then maybe we should start to top and work our way. I have to say that I keep coming back to this that. I mean, I don't know, I don't know. I mean, May is such a horrible month for the five members of the council who are on the finance committee. Yeah. So I mean, we could go back to, as Lynn noted, we're trying to match this up with the current, with the fiscal year, but if we don't want to do that, then maybe we should match it up with the first, the end of the first quarter. So I mean, I don't know, I don't know if we can do that. I mean, we won't always do that, but maybe we shift everything three months. And instead of voting in July, we vote October one, the current contract, and we move everything three months later. And then you're doing all the evaluation. And I mean, then you're, you're doing. April becomes July. May, the next fiscal go goals are discussed in August. And then you're going to have to wait until October. Late September. Biggest problem I see. Is the waiting. Is, is waiting to the summer to collect data from outside. I mean, we could pop it a half a year. And then you're just settling the first, a new council with it immediately. That's really, oh my God. Yeah. I don't see that either. I, but I thought. Initially, I think our goal was to try to get data collection to happen. Earlier before people start breaking for summer. Whereas in the past it's mostly been in mid to late June. Into the first week of July. And unfortunately then what that does is create the problem. Andy has now pointed out, which by the way, I'm very sympathetic to haven't been now on finance committee for two years. I mean, one. What if we move it just a month? Which would be weird. You'd be doing August one to July 31. It doesn't allow us to have a break in July, which is always also been a goal of the council. To try and cut down the number of July meetings. But if you pop it just a month later, the council, I'm not worried about when. I guess we should be worried about when the manager has to do his self-evaluation in the middle. Well, his budget's already in though. He's not putting his self-evaluation during the last weeks of finalizing the budget. Although he's doing it at the end of his budget when he has to submit his budget in April 31 or May one. That's probably not good either. If we pop everything a month. He's not putting his self-evaluation during the last weeks of finalizing the budget and finance committee members are not having to fill out their evaluation form. In the last two weeks of their evaluation of the budget. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. The review always happens in January anyway. It's just then. The goals and all don't actually follow any logical. Year. Yeah. And that's. I also want to just point out that I think we're trying to get to the point that. Doing the evaluation is not as arduous. It's not as arduous. It's not as arduous. It's not as arduous. It's not as arduous. You know. Yeah. We need to do something to make it more humane. For everyone. But without. It just means it's not as arduous. Yeah. Yeah. I'm just nervous about disconnecting the fiscal year. I really like following the fiscal year. Talking about fiscal year. You know, coming fiscal year. Months before it just. I don't. I don't know what to do about the problem for the finance committee, but if we start mucking this about. Seems to throw everything out of whack. Lessing the burden, which is substantial on the finance committee. What's the argument for not following the fiscal year? Is that basically it? That's the main argument. I think so. So if we get this less. Arduous. I think we might be able to pop everything two weeks. In another year. Which would. Get it off of. Would put the town council evaluations into June. Cause I'm looking at June is just evaluations and then a random vote in July on the contract at the first meeting in July. If you can combine that first, that vote with the second. Then you can cut two weeks off of something. Let me, let me just say, I tried doing that this year. And. One counselor. Particularly appropriately pointed out. That the press release goes out. Right after the executive committee meeting. Announcing our intention. So that if there's any objection. If there's any objection, I think we should have a week or two to object to say, why are you giving him that horribly? You know, big raise. So. Why can't we do the executive session the first time we see the evaluation memo. Good question. I mean, the evaluation memo is not finalized, but. I don't see why we can't. Cause then we could turn. The first week of evaluation man. Memo could actually be third week evaluation memo. And. Determine compensation renew contract. And then first week in July gets that. Town council completes town manager evaluation. And then everything's pop. Is moved two weeks later. As long as we can do it in two meetings. Essentially you're just moving the determined compensation. Renew contract for next FY up to the. Well, in this one, first week of June. But then you could move everything two weeks later. And you're moving the vote up to the third week in June, or you're just moving everything down two weeks. And this is giving some relief to the finance committee. What you're trying to do here, Mandy. I think what would happen then if you're looking at. The first week of May. Wrote 12 and 13, the town manager's column. That wrote 12 third week manager, complete self evaluation would actually become first week in May. And then. In row 13 in column C. That parenthetical of do by first week in May would actually be due by third week in May. And then in column E of. column D wrote 12 and 13 would move two weeks later. So it would be all happening in May instead of anything in April for column D. And in column E, the distribution to the counselors would be the third week. And the first week in June would be when all counselor evaluations are due. The third week in June would be meeting where we see the first draft of the memo and where the executive session happens. And then the first week in July is when we would complete and vote the memo and where we would vote not in executive session the contract. I knew things around too fast. Let me go back up here and start with we have all the data collection instruments ready in April. Okay, then in May we do this, here's the problem with moving. The discussion of next year's goals also has to move because the time that people are thinking about the goals is at the same time they're doing the review. So if this is ready in April, do we still distribute in May? So we would distribute, what are we asking we would distribute? So I'm proposing we move everything listed in April and May two weeks later. If it says first week of April, we now move it to the third week of April. If it says third week in that month, we move it to the first week of the next month. June's column E needs a little bit more tweaking. We could instead of passing, I mean, our June meeting is halfway through June, we could pass the fiscal year goals at the first July meeting and just move those goals two weeks later too so that the aim is all the votes happen at the first July meeting which in theory is the first Monday in July and we might need to see it all in writing to see whether it works. I think I need to bring this back to you again with the trying to move everything a half a month. And again the reason is to, as I understand it, is to ease the burden on the finance committee in May. And the manager in April, right now we've got the manager completing his self-evaluation while he's also finalizing the budget. So those are two very good reasons to take what I thought looked like a pretty good timeline and move it two weeks forward. And then the question, then looking at that again, next time we meet. All right. Let me do, let me take care of that, but in the meantime, are there other notes that we want or don't want? Again, we're ahead of time to take this to town council. Well, yeah, we have time to play with this and get it right. I think the goal is, ideally, it's to create a process that will outlive us all. That probably is naive, but that's what we're trying to do. So it's worth the effort and the time. We have agreed that whatever finally is produced would be presented in a JOL report. And for town council to digest and comment on, but we're not looking for a vote, we're not making it an agenda item. Right. I'm labeling that for my own reasons. So let me go down here and just make note of that. JOL report, separate memo, not separate memo. A lot of period. I think that's good. I want to add, I want to italicize for the current fiscal year. And do we want to just call it next fiscal year or Mandy Jo, what was the word you used? I used next fiscal year. All right. So these two are ones that I need to pay attention to. Okay. And then we had talked about color coding, maybe not the box, but the words, the actual text for council action. Let me see what I can do with that. Can I just go back and ask, I want to make sure we agree that when he provides progress on current goals, that's not an action. There's no action required here. We do have the December thing where the council's reviewing. Yeah. But is there an action? I think so. He here would be if we decide to amend a goal. That's, that's the one thing I've been thinking about. And actually thought about it partly in relation to current councils, but also we had the discussion at our last meeting about new councils. And I liked the oral presentation as being part of the state of the town address. Yeah. Doesn't work every other year when a new council's coming in. Action would be if goals change. Okay. About that one. And what you're suggesting is that these become then agenda items on a regular basis in some fashion or other, right? You're basically putting something in the agenda, right? When you say town council reviews, progress, town council, right? That is an agenda item. Right. So I'm just, I just want to follow on this. Is that a town council? I don't, we never voted the, the instruments in the past, did we? No. I think took them to the council, but I never, we didn't vote them. No, no. So should I color this or not? It's not an action, right? No. And also, you know, maybe we don't need to take them to the council. I mean, what we did this year was let the council see what they might look like, and then you as president just had them sent out. Right. Let me put it out here. I think it's the, the council evaluation document that the council would want to see. Yeah. And this, the February ones, the staff and public ones, this year they might undergo a lot of revision, but we're hoping that after that it's really just making them current. It's the hope, yeah. So maybe this year it is a separate agenda item because there's a lot changing, but after that it might just be here's the, here's the form and hey, it now says FY 22 instead of FY 21. So there's no vote here, but there's council sign for the time being. I'm just going to put a little green and then we review the progress. There's, I can't see us voting at this point. We're not going to vote new goals. I'm sorry, when in April? Yeah, but it's take it to the town council. I guess is what the light green is starting to mean. So I guess the question with the April one is we've got that set happening two weeks before he does his self evaluation. Is that even necessary? And reviewing the progress on the current fiscal year goals and then two weeks later we're discussing the next fiscal year goals. Yeah, I was thinking that you could take that out and just, yeah, I'm wondering if whether it's necessary. I think getting rid of some things would be a great idea. I mean, in discussing the coming year's goals, we certainly will be discussing, you know, how the past year's goals went, but I think it's a separate item. I don't see it as an agenda item. We reviewed them once in December and then then in May we start thinking about the goals for the coming year and in doing that, we certainly would be talking about where it could come up, you know, well, how do things go this year? Do we need to keep them? Can we get rid of some? Yeah, that's part of that whole discussion. I don't think it needs to be a separate item. Okay, I got rid of it. Now, I think you've given me what I need to do the revisions. Okay, okay. Yeah. Now, the questions that you had placed in the document, we've already dealt with defining the year. Let's go down to those and just see, do we want to even leave them there? How should we define a year that decided to define it as July 1, the June 30th? Yeah. Take that out. We've decided to do it that way, correct? Yeah. So, yes. It might be worth mentioning in the memo or document that there is a disconnect between the contract and the right, I don't know if it's worth mentioning or not, but it's also subject to change. It could change. I was going to say that at some point the contract could be modified by making it a shorter or longer contract one year and then get the contract into where you want it to be. You know, the contract date now was really determined just because of when we did the hiring process and when we could negotiate the start date with the person we hired. We had an acting, we had a temporary time manager going until we could, so we could do a thoughtful hiring process and then when we got to the end we negotiated a contract and negotiated a starting date and that became the contract date. By the way, we did change the contract dates this last time we moved them so at least they were not in the middle of a month. And you can do it again. What would be the ideal, in the best of all possible worlds, what would be the ideal dates for a contract? Doesn't matter. If it does, what would be? It's so subject to when you hire. I know. It seems like it's difficult to control. You know, if somebody, if God forbid, we found ourselves in a situation of having to do a replacement of a town manager starting January 1st, we'd have to do it. Okay. I'm not sure the contract date matters as much as right now, you know, the lag between what compensation we grant and when it starts is two months. That's not awful. It matters more to get it in sync when that lag would be really bad. At the same time, you almost wonder whether the contract dates should lag in enough that the evaluation happens before you have to notify of non-renewal and right now it's not happening before that. Exactly right. You know, and so it almost makes sense even though the compensation seems weird if it would be granted six months ahead of time, it seems if you're going to align something that maybe you align to your notification date for renewal or non-renewal instead of the actual contract dates. It's all aligned. A-L-I-G-N to renewal dates. This does not align with the present contract. Right. Okay. Multiple years? Yeah, these other two relate to the issue of the goals document. And I think we need to think about what it is we're trying to do with this, if anything. And you know, every council is going to treat it differently. Yeah. Can we create a template or do we just, yeah. We're not putting this into bylaw. So there's nothing about it that can be, that cannot be changed. And you know, we could even, for that matter, decide that in this next year's set of goals, we're going to have multi-year goals and a new council could come in in January and say screw that. We're not doing it. So these are theoretical at best. Right. And so I guess the question for us as a committee, is there anything we can contribute to this? And that's something we're going to talk about, I'm sure. But in terms of helping future councils, ourselves for one year at least, and then future councils. And maybe the answer is there isn't much we can do, but We could just at least mention in the report that we discussed that. Or that it was at least brought up. We never really discussed it. Well, I mean, you know, I think breaking it into policy and management goals makes sense to me. I thought that was an excellent, so that's something we could recommend that you continue to, I mean, or we can discuss and decide whether we think it's a good idea, but having policy goals, having management goals. Do we want multiple year goals? I think there's an issue with that. We're only, we're going to serve for two years. How can we commit future councils to, I don't know, I mean, goals, many of these goals are multi-year goals, but does it matter if we say two years, three years, five years, ten years? It's a question I'm wondering what people are thinking. If it isn't, should we have multiple year goals? But should we recognize that some goals are going to take more than one year? Yeah, and that's where I stand is we can't commit the council to a future council to a sustainability goal, say, but when we set a sustainability goal, maybe we have to figure out a better wording for, hey, this is a goal of ours. We recognize full completion of this goal will take 30 years, you know, or 20 years given our climate action goals, but here's what we believe substantial progress over the course of one, two, five years would look like. So we might have a specific goal for a specific year or two years within the larger goal of sustainability. Yeah. The way I view it, and I think ECAC is a good example, the future councils can amend goals. And if a future council feels that it was either too quick or not quick enough to achieve a goal or that the goal was not strong enough or too strong, that's a right of future council to make that amendment. Right. Andy, all of you, I could see that by trying to say that a goal is multi-year, then the question will be is, well, then what do we want accomplished this year? Exactly, right. And where you were coming from George. And that could start getting in us back toward, I'm sorry to say, the old evaluation where we were down to end, you know, on the third Thursday, we should do this. I'm being facetious, but it was to make a point. Let's leave it as a discussion. Yeah. I mean, I guess it's why I like the way we did the goals this year of the goal is to, you know, I'd have to pull them up to, it was like big broad goals, sustainability, blah, blah, blah, to be accomplished or, you know, some ways of accomplishing it. And then we listed, you know, two or three, sometimes four or five in each of these broad goals of things we thought would help show meeting of the broad goal, even though you can meet it many other ways too, you know, if unsustainability, he, you know, the town manager, I think one of them was like educates the town workforce on something, you know, if he doesn't do that, but can prove that we've met our 25% reduction in carbon emissions or whatever that, you know, that our climate action goal had for 2025 and he comes in at the end in the middle of 2021 and says, hey, we did that. You know, I'm not so concerned that he didn't do the other thing because he met his sustainability goal, you know, like on the broader measure. So that's why I like this sort of not specifics, but giving examples of things that could be used to demonstrate meeting the goal. Right. So maybe it's not should we, but how, how should we recognize that some goals will span more than one year and just leave it at that. One thing that I liked was that we tried to, at least for policy goals, connect them to specific console actions. So in presenting these six goals, we tried to connect each one to something the council actually voted on something the council actually as a body agreed to ideally. At the same time, we're trying to give the town manager some sense of what specifically it should be doing as Mandy suggested within these. So it's this dance between the larger goals, which are multi-year, I think all the goals that we identified this year are multi-year goals. But within that, trying to identify specific things that would be benchmark source things were, you know, it could be very specific saying we'd like to see this done or this done or this done, getting us to agree to that all 13 of us may be a challenge, but we did agree to these six broad goals and I thought we did reach a consensus there. So it's, it's, I think we need to talk obviously more about it, but I'd like us to be able to, first it's the five of us, but maybe eventually to the council, make some sort of suggestion or some kind of comment on what we think is the best way to present goals should always be tied to some specific council action. I think that's a good idea generally. Within the multi-year, we should be able to identify some specific things to be done this coming year. It shouldn't just be, you know, sustainability. So we'll come back to it obviously, but I take it as part of our remit is to produce something along this line. Most important thing right now is the timeline. Great. I think we've had enough of this. Do you want to try to get to the minutes? I'm sorry? Do you want to try to get to the minutes? Yes. You all, we have item six is the bottle of sufficient consideration. All I did is I entered in what Mandy had sent me. So if you do get a chance to look at it, you will see Mandy's contributions in red. My contributions are in red. Hopefully it shows up as red in your document. And I believe it's in the form that you can just go in and make your own. Or I think what we agreed is that you sent it to me and I will put it in. So yeah. When do you want to look at? I'm sorry? Which minutes do you want to look at? Where you get to the minutes and while you're still on the goals document you guys are talking about. I just wanted to do two things because I looked at the ones who were assigned to me and started trying to piece them out. And I think that in the end of my next step is I need to talk to Dave Zomak about both of those bylaws. So I won't call into them. When you use the term the committee, I assume that that was the bylaw review committee that's the reference to. Yeah. I think in the case that you're thinking of this, yeah. The committee understands that the conservation commission will be seeking that that sentence was referring back to the bylaw review committee. Not to prior GOL action. Okay. Okay. Can we, I'm going from memory here, but what Lynn has on the screen at the moment is this document. I don't want to spend a lot of time on it, but Andy, what you have just given me, I could enter into it that you're going to reach out to Zomak and initiate a discussion with him on the two items that you have. I think Mandy has pretty much identified the things that she, and so I thought I'd just people look at it and be aware of what people are going to do as next steps. And I haven't done anything. That's all right. It's just so people know the documents there. And Andy, it sounds like what you're saying is that your next step is to reach out to Zomak on the two that you've been given. I believe you were given too. Right. It just happens that he is, unless it's changed, he's been staffed to the Ag Commission and he's been staffed to the Conservation Commission. And those are the key bodies that we're going to work on in sort of what was identified by the Bylaw Review Committee were steps that said what staff and those two committees should do respectively on each one. So it seemed like if I'm going to take this seriously, move it to the next stage, I should just schedule a time to talk to Zomak. Fine. So I will make a note of that in this document and I'm leaving it up to people then to begin to pursue this, begin to take some steps. I don't think there's any reason for us to discuss it. I just want people to be aware of what everyone has and aware of what people are going to do next. Yeah, Andy, I have one question and it's basically to ask you to go back in your memory. And that is, do you remember whether or not the net zero energy bylaw was ever reviewed by legal counsel? So whether it was or not, it was passed during a town meeting and all town, all towns, any bylaws, towns pass as opposed to cities have to go to the AG for review. And so it passed an AG review. And I believe that it was. I just don't remember. You have to ask Paul. It's my bylaws. And, you know, we haven't felt any press because we're not to the building stage and even in the one building that might be coming up earlier rather than later either library, it's not a requirement. So I nobody in other words, nobody's tried to actually do anything that required truly implementing this bylaw. There's been no renovations any place there's been no additions any place. And the library is not subject to the bylaw. Their plans now include significant sustainability. That was just a question. Thank you. Just to ask Paul next time if he had referred it to K.P. at the time that it was going through all of that process, I can't believe that he didn't. Andy, in terms of the words, the committee, that meant the bylaw review committee. Thank you. Yeah, that's what I was just confirming. Okay. Yeah, I developed the basic shell of this and then Pat went back to all of her notes from the bylaw review. And that's where a lot of this came from. Yeah. Good. Each right as we speak, Andy is going to reach out to Zomac and get back to us when he has. There's no Russian any of this, but I just want people to be. No, we said we'd each move our pieces along and just trying to get my head around it. Good. Thank you. We have two sets of minutes September 30 October 7 they were actually in the packet last time we met. I had one very minor change and that was it. Hopefully people have had a chance by now to look at them. Any changes problems with the minutes from September 30 or October 7. I just have one word that I would propose to delete from this September 30 minutes. Okay. And under number two, this is that very first sentence. It's uncomfortable slash divisive. I don't think I ever said divisive. Okay. All right. Just move the slash and that one word. Good. You're making that change, George. Yes, I am. I'll make that change. Any other changes to September 30? I made one very small change. Right here. Yeah, just spelling. There's nothing. I'm also trying to just as an aside, I reached out to Athena. I'm finding that the GOL meeting is not getting the video is not being put up on a regular basis. And it turns out that that is actually a town it issue, not a Amherst media issue. So hopefully I haven't checked today, but hopefully we're up to date. And I will continue to push that they get up in time. They're useful for me in doing the minutes and also reviewing some of this stuff, but I couldn't do it for these meetings because they weren't up. We had no videos. We want to go ahead and adopt this. Yes. So September 30. I want to vote then have a motion to accept the minutes of September 30 as amended. All right. It's moved and seconded. And let's just go through Lynn. Yes. Mandy. Yes. Andy. Yes. Chair is a yes. And Pat is absent. So four zero. These minutes are accepted as amended. October 7. I had no changes to this. I was puzzled by under one of the votes. We declared a bylaw clear consistent action. Well, and then the next entry has a member of the committee saying that the bylaw is not clear. So I don't know what whether that's I didn't have a chance to go back and look at the tape, but I'm not going to. But anyway, any changes, corrections? If not, I will entertain a motion. I moved it at the minutes of October 10. October 7. Thank you. Second. Second. All right. They've been moved and seconded. Start with Andy. Yes. Lynn. Yes. Andy. Yes. All right. Chair is a yes. Again, four zero, one absent to accept the minutes of October 7. We do not have the minutes of October 21. They'll have to be for the next meeting. I have no items not anticipated in advance, 48 hours in advance. I do not see any public. There is no public present. So there is no public comment. Future agenda items. The next meeting is November 18. We'll continue, obviously, to discuss this process of time manager evaluation and timeline, etc. What else is on it? We might get facial recognition. If it's back from the attorney, right? Because it's in the attorneys. Yep, it's with the attorneys. Go ahead. Go ahead, Mandy. What I was going to say is the second half of facial recognition, it was split into two different bylaws, is in front of TSO. So if they finish with it, it might come to GOL. I assume George would just send it directly off to the attorney at that point. That's better practice is to send it to the attorney, where it then disappears into a black hole. The only reason that we might need to meet before the 16th council meeting. Yeah, it would be the 16th, yes. Right. Is if something came back on the bylaw 14. Well, we have just passed that. We just decided that was clear, consistent, actionable, pending. So you're just saying if there was an issue that raised by the concerns. Right. We might have to have a special meeting. Yeah, but I don't we say no. Are Amanda, Joe, do you expect to get the review in time for tonight? So I'm I'm hoping that Chris Brestrup talks about the talks tonight about Joel or something. I don't know if Joel's supposed to be there tonight, but I will send after this meeting an email touching base with Chris Brestrup on that to see if we can have a result back by tonight's meeting. Just to ask her to hang on again. Our motion gives some flexibility. So yes. So just looking into my crystal ball, I do not see a great deal at the moment on our agenda for the next meeting. Am I missing something we have the process we're working on? Maybe something back from KP law facial recognition. We should by then have something from Paul on the policy on delegation of public way responsibility to match up with this bylaw. That has to go to TSO. Well, it's supposed it has to come to us. What happened last time is it went to both. TSO seems to, you know, they say it has to go there. They're not the ones that deal with council policy. This is a council policy. What happened last time is GOL looked at it and then shipped over a new version to TSO who then just rubber stamped it. TSO is going to insist they see it, but it's a policy of what we allow Paul to rule on versus what the council rules on. Nothing about is it good or not. So I personally don't understand why TSO even sees it. Because it's clearly within GOL's charge. Where is it actually at the moment? Oh, hasn't proposed it yet. He hasn't proposed it. I mean, we could just make changes and propose them to the council if we're tired of waiting for Paul. We could pull up that policy and propose changes under our charge. We can check with him on the public way memo this afternoon. Okay. Okay. So that might be something. Okay. It sounds like you don't have anything in specific in mind, man. Do you're waiting really to hear what Paul's thoughts are? I mean, I could draft changes. I sent Paul thoughts on what needs changed. I don't know whether he wants even more changes. My main thought was that we forgot to include, when we did it, we didn't include the governor's orders and that's what most of these public way accommodations are under. So I think we need to add the governor's orders to it. Instead of just the zoning bylaw, you know, instead of just public way uses in accordance with the zoning bylaw, I think we just need to add the government in accordance with the governor's orders too. I'm wondering if it doesn't make sense that given all the other things you're doing, maybe it doesn't, to just make a proposal to amend that policy and bring it to GOL. And we can talk about it and review it and then send that to Paul for his input rather than wait on him. You may learn something tonight, which is fine, but given all that he's dealing with, he may just not have bandwidth. But we could, if we want, we could make this proposal and then just send him to see what he thinks. If he doesn't have anything drafted, I'm happy to do that. I'm suspecting he doesn't. If you find out otherwise, then fine, we'll wait and he'll send us something. But if he says, I really haven't had a chance to look at it, one proposal for next time is for you just to give us something to look at as GOL. I'm happy to do that. Okay. And then that we could send it to him. One thing to think about me, Andy, is that, you know, we all hope that COVID-19 is going to go away sometime in the governor's orders will go away sometime so that if you can come up with wording about any laws, orders of the regulations, orders of the governor or whatever that seems right, so that it fits into something that would have life beyond COVID-19 crisis. Anything else? I don't see anything else. So for future agenda. Okay. We're done. I'm George. Awesome. Well, you guys are doing work, but so we adjourn and at almost, what is it? 29, not bad. 1230. All right. All right. Everybody go well. Thanks. Thank you as always. Emily, thanks. Going back to the TV now.