 Good evening and welcome to the May night select board meeting in advance of town meeting at seven o'clock. It is 6.03. So we'll start as usual with opening remarks announcement and gender review. Is there anything on the agenda that needs to be mentioned in the press or any announcements that needs to be made? If not, I think we'll head right into our agenda. And so first up is under our action discussion items, our public argument. We have both the utility art project and a draft policy on some of the projects that we're going to discuss. If you want to share with us about that. Thank you. I'm going to ask Andy Crawley who is heading up the utility box project to reduce that and herself. I'm Andy Crawley, member of public art commission. In January the public art commission received a local cultural council grant for a project titled enlivening public spaces. This project is designed to further the presence of public art in downtown Amherst and the Amherst Center and Cultural District by inviting local artists to create unique and colorful paintings on three designated utility boxes on North Pleasant Street. This will be achieved through a public call for artists and subsequent jury process. The jury will include two public art commission members, one or two abutters to the utility boxes and one or two local artists. Following a series of press releases about the project, the painting of the utility boxes will take place in mid-September and the public will be invited to watch the artists paint their creations. Prior to painting the boxes, the three winning artists will be responsible for cleaning and preparing the utility boxes following DQW guidelines. A precedence for the painting of utility boxes exists in Amherst, the scene in the emerald Dickinson utility box located at the corner of Main Street and Dickinson near Hope and Feather's framing. Additionally, painted utility boxes enhance the downtown landscape and can be effective in decreasing the incidence of defeating. The three town-owned utility boxes that we have chosen are located in front of Subway, one near St. Bridget's Church, and one in front of Berger's Bagels. Currently, one of the boxes is tagged with a sword graffiti and one has been used to display flyers and announcements that must be frequently removed. So imagine instead three colorful designs on these boxes. This project is designed to encourage community engagement, to contribute to the vitality and attractiveness of our streetscape and to further enhance the Amherst Center Cultural District. Similar projects have also been successfully completed in Northampton, Greenfield's Downtown Crossroads Cultural District and Springfield Central Cultural District. And if in the future the appearance of the artist's creation deteriorates due to weather or other damage, the town of Amherst has the right to paint over the design without notification to the artist. The public art commission has met with and received support of this project from the DPW and the designer review board. We're happy to answer any questions if you have any. Did you want to add anything to it, Chief? Okay. Mr. Wall? I just had one. Since I haven't been able to attend to your recent meetings, one question. I gather from the description these will be permanent and not rotating designs. In other words, you wouldn't have a set of designs and then a new contest and new designs. Not for those three, unless there was extensive damage, we could run another call for artists and have them redone. Or alternatively, in the future, expand to other boxes in town. I was just wondering because you've got obviously a wide range of possible topics, and I was thinking for example that 2019 is the centennial of the Jones Library and they're playing various things about the culture of the book, the history of writing in Amherst, window displays and so forth. There's also going to be a major international conference of scholars of the book history and art of the book community, UMass, in stem of 2019. So I'm sure that we'd like to see things of that sort if that's at all possible. Thank you. My question, and forgive me if you mentioned it and I just didn't get it, is there a renumeration to the artist who's chosen or are the materials paid for? How does the money part work if there isn't any? So the grant that we've received will allow us to have a stipend of $350 for the winning artist, and they will receive that once they've submitted invoice to the commission. The rent is given after the fact, so then we would submit the invoice to get the money and reimburse the artist. I could just follow up on that one piece, but they would pay for all the materials. We're hoping to get some items donated or through our gift certificate and then other items. And just on that thing for the money, do they get to sign their name? I mean, is there sort of a marketing benefit to that artist or is it just the $350? They are going to be announced in publication through that or online. There is precedent for the artist to put their name on the box itself, and then in pictures that they take of that, they can of course go back to their website. Thank you. I have a question. This box is in the public way and will it require separate action from the Select Board if they are in the public way to authorize this use? They are in the public blazer. So will you have a separate meeting? We'll need a motion or make one tonight. So I'm going to follow up on that question because the only criteria is who actually wants these boxes. Are they only utility company or are they only about the town? And if they're only a utility company, have we reached out to them to get an okay from them? From the DPW, there are a town-owned group. There's a Mr. Steinberg question. So if it comes back at the actual approval of the painting, like so many things, does that mean we see a picture of what will go on there? I mean, I don't want to be like the art review group, but would we actually be approving a specific image or would we just be approving these? I don't know how. I mean, there is one already that Dickinson did. We don't know how it got there. The dark of night. I think it's beautiful, but I think that you would say yes, you can do it and delegate to the public art commission to make this decision. Give them the authority to make that decision. Give them the authority. Whatever the motion. So a couple of follow-up questions along those same lines. One is that it's simply that we could have had that motion on our motion sheet tonight, and we don't, because I was wondering why we were looking at this at all in terms of our agenda, given that we don't have a motion to do the public wag. And so I feel like we are adequately prepared personally to make up such a motion so that it doesn't have to come back, because we are not the arbiters of what art will be done online. But so that issue aside, so thank you for trying to address that. Another is actually two of the questions. One is associated with the specific businesses that they were near were mentioned. If I could do a little bit more about any of the reactions those businesses have had to this. And then also my third question was relating back to the information in the application summary of what was just stated in terms of stipend of 350 plus materials. So the intention I believe was that, and was indicated on the timeline that was said, is that the materials would be donated, but if they weren't adequately donated, that somehow those would still be paid for out of the grant in addition to the 350, just to clarify those issues. As opposed to you get what you get from the donations, perhaps there would be additional things that would be needed. Okay, the butters were waiting until the president, I presented to the select board to move forward and alerting them that we were going to move forward with this project. And to your question about the stipend, should, as you said, we now receive adequate donations, then the artist would be responsible for purchasing extra materials. And those receipts come to us for as part of their invoice. So they would be awarded net $350 to cover that. So if I could follow up then, thank you. That's very clear. And so since I understand the process that you undertook in terms of not talking to the butters, we said it was a crazy idea even though we've already gotten the grant, so it would be too bad if we decided it was a crazy idea. There are chicken egg questions here, but beyond that, given that we don't have that reaction, then maybe that would be a reason not to make up the motion to make in terms of the future in terms of public. I appreciate that concern, but the butters don't ever say in this. I mean, if there are DPW boxes, the town does what it does, and the form of the butters as to require, to receive some input. I mean, I'm not sure what the butters are going to say about that. I mean, I did think about this in regards to, for example, St. Bridges Church, which is one of the locations. And if there was a choice of art for that box that seemed in any way disturbing to leadership at the church, I would hope that that would be considered in a way, but I think it's a difficult question because it has to do with the actual choice of the art, much as the choice to paint artwork on the box. We are also extending to the butters the opportunity to be part of the jury as well. I mean, last I checked, it's still a public place ruled by secular law, and I would assume that the people we appoint to the commission use good judgment, so it's nice to be concerned about these things, but I think we can also get concerned about things that are not really likely eventual. This is going to be really brief because we're going to drag this out, but the butters issue, so one is in front of St. Bridges, and the other one. So the subway restaurant is down that corner. St. Bridges, it's right where the light is at the intersection, and in front of the burgers. So when you say the butters, you said there are two slots for butters on the committee. There's three locations, and one might guess some of those locations. There's, you know, the next door store or whatever, so you'll talk to all of them, but there's only two slots on the selection committee for the butters. Well, I was crafting a motion, and I will read what I wrote, and then if Mr. Fackelman suggests that we hold offering the motion until he has a chance to consult others, that I'm not going to make it actually as a motion, but it would be along the lines of motion to authorize the painting of public art on three utility boxes on North Pleasant Street when each near to subway restaurant, St. Bridges Church and Gruger's Bagels, with the approval of design by the Public Art Commission. Are you waiting for a meeting? Yeah, I'll make that as a motion, and I will give that to you. Is there further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? So that's unanimous. I will give it to you. All right. So the other topic you guys were here about is policy regarding public art installations by private developers. Okay. I'm Eric Brody. I'm chair of the Public Art Commission, and this is an idea that we have been developing for some time, even before Percent for Art was passed, members of the commission, namely myself and Renee Taberge, were talking to the archipelago developers about art at their project, except they've been developing in town. And while they were receptive, nothing concrete came to those discussions. I think largely because we didn't have any leverage then because the town wasn't doing anything about public art in its own buildings. But since the passage of the bylaw for Percent for Art by 71% in town, it became clear that now the town will be putting public art in its major construction projects and renovation capital improvement projects. And we're in a better position, I think, now to approach developers because, you know, we're basically putting our own money where our mouth is on the subject. So the idea is different communities dealt with private developers in different ways. Some communities mandate through a Percent for our program that private developers participate in that program as well. We felt that would not be appropriate for Amherst to do at this point. It would be onerous. There's not enough commercial development that we would want to put that at risk. But we did feel that we should encourage private developers to consider and include where at all possible some kind of public art in their own projects. Now we've got two that Archipelago has already erected and they're planning a third on Spring Street and we're hoping that we can talk to them with a little more authority about including art in some of them. Now I've learned from Chris Bestra that when they made their proposals to these projects, they did include public art as part of the projects, which haven't yet appeared, including on the one on the corner next to Bertucci's. At Triangle Street there was in their brochure a lovely sculpture of a statue that they had just photocopied from an Oregon artist and put there for promotional purposes and they said they intended to do something like that. Now that might have been on the public way, so the policy itself here deals with art that could be on totally private property but also art that is on the public way because they should be treated differently or would be treated differently. This town would have more of an investment than anything on the public way. So we decided to take the approach of trying to encourage developers, particularly if the town is offering any kind of incentives for them or they're getting incentives from the town, I should say, to put up their buildings in return. We think it only fair and reasonable to ask them for something in return, specifically public art. It's clear now that the town is interested in this, it's supportive of it. So we talked about how should this be formalized and we took it to the planning board first and not knowing whether it should be a policy from the select board, this is sort of new territory for all of us. But through the discussions of the planning board and later with the design review board, it seemed like a policy from the select board seemed to be the most appropriate way to deal with the question which is why we're here this evening, hoping that you agree. But if there are other ways that this should be handled, we are of course open to anything that works for the town. The planning board was interested in it. They had very minor changes to this document. Design review board had a couple of tweaks they wanted to make. All those have been incorporated into the proposed policy that you had before you. So we're here to talk about if this makes sense for Amherst and if this is the way to handle it, we are anxious to get your views on it and we're happy to answer any questions that you may have. I'm sure somebody's got some. I mean I just have a question that we just pointed out that we do need to consider whether it's consistent with Charter section 10.7B for us to take any action on it before the new council is seated. That's a determination that we will need to make. So I think that any further conversation we have probably needs to be with that thrown out there is something that we will have to consider before we get anything other than to set our thoughts. Thank you for saying that because one of us was going to say that first. Come ahead. And the other part was that I'm wondering about is if this doesn't pass and action needs to be taken and we are proceeding on building a building prior to any such policy existing whether it's select board or town council because if we put it off based on Charter transition provisions and council isn't able to take it up right away but we do eventually get in the process of building a building I guess I'm looking for the town manager's opinion on what happens given the bylaw that of course hasn't actually done through the special legislation yet but assuming it eventually does how these things will be dealt with if this doesn't exist. Will you just consider this advisory or what will you do? I think this applies to private developers so it's different than the bylaw that has my town meeting and so I think this would be advisory to private developers and I think that in terms of since the bylaw hasn't been active on or the special legislation hasn't been active on by the legislature yet but there are no projects and waiting to happen or putting the grant to get started and there's no planning to start any at this moment and won't be until the town council takes office I think there's time isn't an issue this is something for private developers and I think public art commission and others can advocate when they go through the permitting process to say we'd like you to incorporate public art into a really major building in the 10th center of town we think you should incorporate this as part of your and if they say they're willing to do it get it written into their permit that they guarantee the building So to my point and Mr. Bachmann just expressed that I think someone's showing it in a rendering and you're assuming it's part of a project and it's not literally that piece of art it should be written into that as a condition of the permit permit rating authority The artwork I am having a problem with is where it says if it's part of that discussion the town offers concessions for example in the way of requested modifications or waivers in order to obtain artwork that otherwise would not be included so I have trouble trading waivers for art we have a specific bylaw that does change some density calculations when there's an inclusion of affordable housing it's caught fire in a zoning bylaw but the reason we have requirements is because they're good requirements if we could just waive them when we got something we wanted why would we have that requirement in the first place so it makes it sound like the modifications or the waivers or something that wasn't important to the building and we'll trade that for art because art is clearly important to us I've seen things where it's trade zoning requirements for energy conservation I mean there's a whole list of different causes that have been suggested in other communities or here as an offset to some of the zoning requirements but I wouldn't want to reword it where a conversation with a private developer in a discretionary permit where they're saying these are some of the public benefits including this piece of public art could mean something but to trade a part of the zoning requirement for the art which maybe isn't what you meant that's why I'm not I may know where that came from because I shared the working group that did the natural and cultural resources section of the master plan and so if you look at NC2G it says provide incentive to building orders to increase space for locally produced public art and performances and it talks about public acknowledgement NC bonuses opening our extensions this is of course to start consultants going nuts in a wish list fantasy world of everything in the kitchen sink so it is written in there and I think those were meant to stimulate thought but I think Ms. Kruber points out it might be difficult to achieve in practice but we have the principle of encouraging public art by private developers and providing incentive as mentioned there they had every revolving fund probably makes more sense if we could accumulate money that could be distributed as an occupying incentive to the developers and just a footnote I agree with the point about the rendering of a building with piece of art nothing to guarantee if I recall from the hearings of the planning board the spring street project was going to include some kind of art either art on the grounds and sculpture or gallery space down below there's some great talk of taking art from Amherst College and displaying it in this downstairs area so that's one possibility there and then as far as the one is pleasant of course the developers are there's a mural there that was created by the town and funded by private donations and the developers are paying the artist fairly nicely to reproduce that mural and they talked also about doing something in the way of public art or way finding to direct people from the street back to the cemetery because it's hidden behind the gas stations and the shops and so forth so those are at least two things that they have in mind but I agree obviously in agreement or some kind of incentive is better than just so I'm finding some difficulty just in following this document in general and somebody can help me out in a couple of areas one is where it says it is the policy of the town of Amherst under private developer projects head it's a policy of the town of Amherst to encourage private developers to include significant art I don't think that is written anywhere unless it's in our 100% for art this is the policy that says that but I'm uncomfortable inserting that in there as kind of a third point as opposed to an actual I'm not I don't know why it's listed there I'm just finding the whole thing very difficult to follow and obviously planning board design and view board didn't have the same problem but I'm having on the reverse it says project art on public property I'm not understanding how we get something that can't be so we ask private developers to put art on their property and then they decide I'm not going to put it on public property but there's in public way then there's a whole other set of issues that aren't that I'm having trouble understanding where our decision making like about three simple electrical utility boxes is versus some giant sculpture that's getting put on the public way associated with private development and where there's this long list of things that are happening by points here but I'm having a hard time understanding where the equivalent of the select board comes into that conversation with public way and so I'm just not really grasping as to how we're getting from point A to point B so one of my colleagues knowing how my brain works better than Public Art Commission does explains this to me from the standpoint of the public way I mean I can read the words that are in front of me asking how we get from one point to another Can I just make one comment on that? That's in there because the Archipelago team informed us that that proposed sculpture that was in the brochure would have been on the public way if they had in fact erected it so it could happen in other I don't know what projects are becoming down the line with future developers but it's conceivable that there would be something that would be on the public way that was part of the project or that could be part of the project and all this tries to do is address that contingency if there were public art that were proposed to be on the public way like that sculpture outside of that first building this provides protocol on how to deal with it how should the town deal that should have any say at all and our view is that yes, since it's on the public way the town should have more to say what that art is and how it's handled and maintained My sense is I'm sympathetic that my sense is we're not really ready to take any action on this especially we reviewed that meeting scheduling out before so I think we might need to come back to this study it further and discuss it if that I'm not sure it's going to help because I'm missing the part where someone is where a private developer is compelled to provide public art at all and so if they're compelled to do so and they can't do it on their property then the filing part but I don't understand why they would ever be compelled to do so because they're a private developer so who would compel them to do so I think that gets back to this crew's point about in that earlier paragraph on the front side where the town is offering concessions and this is the stipulation of those as part of what goes along with those things so if we allow a certain waiver a piece that they can offer to compensate for that would be a piece of art as opposed to something else and I think that's sort of how we get there but I'm not sure it's particularly as cleanly as it needs to be for that purpose to sort of tie those together I mean obviously with language broad so it can be functional and allow for discretion and interpretation but at the same time it may not be quite fit together quite as tightly as it needs to to make that functional I guess the policy doesn't compel at all it addresses what happens for example if out of the goodness of their heart they want to put a piece of sculpture on the public way how do we handle that there is no policy or protocol for that right now so we are just trying to get ahead of that curve here in case that happens and I'm reminded and I'm sure you know what happened when an artist volunteered a gift to Northampton's Pulaski Park and they didn't have a gift policy to receive it they ended up rejecting it they didn't have a protocol to deal with public art it's actually my mind a beautiful sculpture but they weren't prepared so that's something we don't have either and that's next on our list also to consider what happens if that happens here someone volunteers a significant piece of public art how do we deal with that we don't have a policy about that and we should and we'll probably be drafting that as well if this is the forum the select board or I can't speak for it like the city council would be but currently the forum for this kind of documented policy to exist in or be a function of sort of thinking back about the transition question Mr. Steinberg raised and Mr. Lecklund's answer so if this is guidance or suggestion to a private developer that's one thing but if it's policy to a governing body of how to handle that for the private property it seems that we are venturing into the transition zone in a way that would say hey city council select board on May 9th 2018 created this policy so that's the one you're going to follow until you change it but along those same lines although I was working through the idea of this just being the principles by which the public art commission works and says these are the kinds of things we'll take with us when we go to the hearings this is the kind of thing we are looking for and we will advocate back to what Mr. Rothman said we will advocate for these things because as a public art commission these are the things we develop based on our expertise based on the experiences of our colleagues however to say that it's even our policy or even their policy I think is the same transition problem because it's not just the select board that isn't supposed to be doing the things it's everybody that's not supposed to be doing the things but guidelines I feel a little more easy about these are our ideas that we've worked hard to come to a common consensus around as opposed to we've created a new policy and that's a particular idea so Mr. Rothman what if something happens someone comes out with a signal piece of art they'd like to donate to the town what's our process maybe not policy, what's our process I think that's a totally legitimate thing to lay out like today here's our problem because we have to think that through we want to do that in advance we'd like to put a piece of art on Kendrick Park or someplace else what is our process for that and why he's been laying that out who would be involved in the decision how did the decision be made it might not be able to be decision might not be able to be made depending on the scale of the things but at least everybody would be on board with what's that path look like one of the things that it was easy to come to the conclusion we did about the painting of boxes that were already there but constructing something new placing something new in the public way and then using space, possibly impeding traffic foot traffic or vehicular traffic a whole bunch of issues that would have to be considered on a case by case basis it's sort of difficult to deal with that in advance and I'm also in the sense of the analogy to proposal of the business improvement district to put a bandstand on the common and that has not been an easy process either because it involves both the use of space on the common both enhancing and effecting possibly negatively the use of the common we don't know but we see the design and it's just difficult to issue it's not one that I feel comfortable with by making a policy statement on and then I'm kind of left with back to the transition provision in addition I will suggest both I think we're happy to offer lots of commentary on this as you've already experienced but I think as far as formally adopting it as policy or I think even maybe even as guidelines because it's a significantly new thing that's not to say we don't need them I think that's your point as well taken in the absence of policy then if someone offers a piece of artwork whether it be building, construction or just an artist wanting to offer a piece of art to the town we're going to be stopped because we'll have something but I think I think it's difficult for us to take formal action on this anytime in the next several months but at the same time it doesn't mean we shouldn't work through some of this to sort of prepare it for the council because I think that will be more appropriate for them to adopt policy on it but I think there are practical things around public way and that sort of experience we have we can offer a suggestion and opinion for which we have to some extent but I think we can continue to comment on but as far as adopting formally I don't think that's where I'm hearing from my colleagues and I also well but nonetheless I think there's still positive action that can be taken in regard to sort of continue to refine this and prepare it and then have it ready for when the council takes office we're sort of meddling in your business now but does it make sense for the public art commission to have a document that says we want to encourage public art on private property privately donated to public and we will work with you and hear some guidance on what we're looking for and if you do these things and we like it maybe we'll go to the permit granting authority hand in hand with you and advocate for your project. I mean you have a little bit of leverage to provide some guidance just at the level of the program. That I don't think trends on the more formal public way approvals just an idea okay well I see the issues that you're raising I mean the hope was that to have something to hand the developers when they approach the town in case you hadn't noticed Amherst is interested in public art if your intention is to include public art here's how it would be handled if it was on private property or on I know you put this on the public way so it was part of the package of whatever Amherst gives to developers so what you're saying being a resource of course we could for now. Yeah, for now do our best to do that and we do that already This is one of the transition provisions of the charter a little bit handcuffed in some ways and you know it does impede action that would likely be considered non-controversial in a lot of ways but we can't presume that I do understand that I understand that that's in the charter but it would be helpful if you think that this document needs issues and problems that need to be addressed regardless it would be helpful to know what they were so that as you said we could be prepared to make a better presentation to the new council when it does materialize we're not going to write anything that tells you that we just told you that and so that's not something we have the time or bandwidth to analyze and write a memo about so I think if you watch the tape again just think about the spirit of the things that we talked about I think that you will accomplish what you're talking about doing and of course as we've said informally you can already have these conversations with developers but it is this awkward space where we're not going to write a memo explaining all the different things we'd like you to change about this I'm just going to add Mr. Ray I'm always going to be impressed with how committed you are to public art and I don't think this is a bad thing just because we threw a bunch of criticisms at it I think it's getting a conversation going and I think you have the best intentions for public art obviously for many years and come to us with bunches of things so I just want to appreciate your commitment to this and it wasn't a bad thing to bring to us we're struggling it's the first time we've had a chance to discuss and so I want to encourage you to keep working on whatever version is appropriate for these times really care about this stuff a lot I think additionally individually there's a suggestion to this if we find out I'm not sure there's going to be a lot of that but if Mike Bob goes off three in the morning and we send you an email I think that can be a big change so if there's something a month from now that one of us thinks of or some piece that would be beneficial to you then we're likely to offer that to you see something that planning may doesn't mean about public art it's irrelevant so I would also say to my colleagues if you do think of something you can create a share with the public art fish because that will just help help refine this and keep it really forward we will be drafting as we did with this it would be important as Northampton is found to have a gift policy place too or protocol of some kind procedures so they were not embarrassed by having to turn down substantial gifts because we don't have a handle so we'll be working on that for the new council as well I don't think we'll necessarily be opposed to seeing that and not bring you I think as well but you know you can come and get abused anytime you like but oh he said he'd go up here thank you very much next are you know if we do take positions on in the time of the article I'm not sure there are any that we need to take any action on receiving a review that I know of that we'll prepare to Mr. Simon I just want to point out that we've heard rumors that somebody may make a motion to reopen one of the enterprise fund budgets for the purpose of amending the budget and I'm going to assume as the speaker on budget items that this is equivalent to others and that since the budget was passed as we recommended it we do not take the reconsideration we don't recommend against you want to take a motion on that that's not a motion that's just a statement that's just a statement otherwise I don't want to interrupt that but similarly rumors that there will be an amendment to the possible amendment to the capital budget around so I don't know since we approve the capital budget we would not approve an amendment so I think we could do something about it especially on budget I think we're pretty clear we supported this budget and so to accept an amendment we'd be not supporting our own actions but also with some emergency lava flow we'd have to spend money I hope that I can I think there was a license well we have a license so why don't we do that so we can make a motion on the one license we have we'll approve the application at the top of the campus incorporated for a special license to serve wide and multi-diverages of the country building atrium on May 15, 2018 from 5pm to 7.30pm Kimberly Cowles to board member second so a motion is second hearing none, all those in favor please say aye aye and so topics not anticipated in the last few hours yes so any petitioner brought in a number of signatures not the requisite number for requesting a special panel meeting for one article to address campaign finance reform there aren't enough articles to require it there are questions the charter gives you guidance in terms of what you can call a special panel meeting for I just want to alert you to that in fact the town council will be rendering a written opinion to provide some guidance because this might not be the only special panel meeting request you get you will get others wouldn't surprise me and so having some using this as an example with a hard request and having the town council and the town attorney put that into context where you would provide you some guidance so a follow-up I really appreciate that because we had been warned by the petitioner that this might happen at some point but to follow up on the very first part when you said I had been given the impression from the email that they simply hadn't certified enough signatures yet are we saying that in fact they didn't even submit enough signatures but it's too much and they just didn't could you just say was there an explanation for that like we didn't get enough or we thought you'd call it anyway I mean that's what I don't understand because if we'd already called one they only would have had to get a hundred but to force one and put the item off to force one for their own thing they needed 200 assuming we were even a town anymore that is bound by that master but they didn't offer it to you that's what I was looking for it's just going to be clear two weeks ago when this my first heard the petitioner saying this could be a concern in terms of whether there's a legitimate option available for this life board thank you I'm sorry what I was expecting the petition would come in with a certified number of signatures and then I still had a legal question about that but given that it doesn't even meet that threshold it would be we can only figure out what's implied because it wasn't a cover or a statement that if we wanted to act on it we could or we could also have a motion just in we declined to act on a common special it didn't so I was just trying to get it out as soon as possible because you're seeing the same people who are signing it and they didn't want you to be caught off guard because it was active normally we wouldn't wait until we had the requisite number of certified registered voters signed which we don't and then that would be for that to you so declining might be premature we still don't know and maybe this will be in the written guide if the requisite number of signatures certified signatures were to turned in under the rules that were under now would we have to hold a special or can we say no assuming that there were the 200 signatures so it doesn't even get to your agenda until there's a requisite number of signatures if they get the requisite number of signatures that triggers something and it triggers that they have the ability under state law to ask to hold a special telling and you have to weigh that in terms of the charter which is also state law passed by the under the rule act and you in that the transition provisions gives the slug for the decision making to make this and what I think the council will tell you is that you know these are both state laws there is a this is a more the charter is a more specific law and that would trump the general state law and you would have to make that call you would decide is this something that is not ready to delay so it's kind of an FYI so we know because it just came in 48 hours and we need to know about it but more to unfold and we don't have a message we don't know if it's the real yet because we don't have the numbers signatures can if it does become real then you would say well what are our options here we might have to do that now in terms of our options in that memo I'm not quite sure how to phrase this because it is a slightly different situation but it is something I've been saying a lot since we started working on marijuana I suppose is how do people sue us for something like this and so if we make the determination and I'm not being I mean I know it sounds a little funny and we get sued a lot of time and that's fine but this is such an unusual situation with the transition period and so if people are on if we make a decision either wet either to accept it and then people who say oh my goodness you shouldn't have done that because you have a chart and the people who say oh yes you should have like who gets to say is that just I want town council to come back and say select board has this authority to make this decision and that's the final place that people can do it unless they come up with some super creative way of suing us that nobody's thought of before like there's not an obvious path like land court is an obvious path for certain things cool is there a name? well that's what I'm saying but there's no obvious like land court is an obvious path for certain kinds of things I mean you don't find anything like 45 certain kinds of things so there's no obvious there's no obvious court of appeal that's what I'm saying for this beyond us we take administrative action we follow our procedures you cannot take people's right away you can't remove the ability to go to the courts I don't know which court that's not what I'm asking to do I'm asking it to be clarified if there is a known court of appeals for this sort of decision or if it's just the generic ether people will find a way to go to the courts if there's a known court of appeals for this sort of thing per se like land court is for certain kinds of decisions if you're relying on a charter there is no appeal process they're outlining the charter so they would appeal someplace that's what I'm making sure we hadn't missed something there is no there will tell them thank you so can we make a couple of date announcements absolutely why don't you do yours first it states announcing when things are happening when things are happening so race amity day is coming up on Sunday June 10th which is a week after the human rights heroes awards that's at mill river race amity day is at uu we're going to be asked to read the proclamation we'll be doing that because honestly I couldn't remember the proclamation for this year but I kind of thought not but if we're following up on tell me these actions associated with that and the other one was associated with the item on our desk tonight since one is such a new issue for us in Amherst even though we've been working on it a long time to announce that the entire community is invited to the grant opening event so it has previously been known as GTI and will now be known as Rise on Meadow Street and that they should attend that on May 16th from noon to 3pm open house with ribbon cutting at 1 o'clock obviously it will not be serving customers at that point but they will be doing tours and giving discussion about what their plans are and their planning to start serving patients later on the 21st so I thought that was good that it's not just a little small thing that they're doing but they're saying the entire community can come because this will be our first one so speaking of dates so in our packet tonight a calendar that looks like this with lots of colors however there are a couple of changes that I want to alert you to not only of what I would say in the front side we start with January 2018 but on the back side um it would be in it came tonight attached to that letter at the back of that right yeah not in my packet it's a bad indication we're going to give you new ones anyway but I will point out to people that in July instead of the 2nd it's highlighted in yellow it should be the 9th in October and we had picked the 1st the 15th and the 29th as meeting dates but the 22nd the 1st is not appropriate given the holiday that's there so I researched that I asked Mr. Wall and I think those were the only two okay so those two so we'll so we'll but along with that is just look those dates over and I know this couple has reached out to us for our summer plans first we're still figuring those out but we will need to to do that so we'll probably it's known that some of these dates are really awful make sure to let me know and then we can potentially have a motion in our next meeting where we sort of set these dates and modify them as we learn more but we just want to put that counter out there for folks so that they can look it over Mr. Wall Mr. Columbus Day here that's right it's a town holiday at the Indigenous People's Day that's right I'm confused by what we have in our packet so somehow things happen I didn't get that one fine I'll get it later but we have one dated May 2017 to September 2017 that was just from reference to show us what we did last summer last summer as a reference and so are we going to have a packet delivery this Friday for Monday's packet since we don't have a bunch of stuff here for Monday's meeting and so if we are then it would be great to have that reprinted with that date correction that nice colorful one and if we aren't well then maybe something to bring an extra packet on Monday right yes so I think at this point unless there's something anyone else needs to mention we'll go into recess for the evening and we'll go into recess it's not seem to the me thank you all