 Can start recording and then I'll just wait a little bit to see who to make sure people pop in. Thank you. And if you could please announce recording once when you call to order, please. Thank you for the reminder. Hi, everyone. It looks like our participant number has stabilized so Seeing a presence of a quorum, I am going to call this special meeting of the Community Resources Committee of the Town Council to order at 1001 a.m. This meeting is being recorded and pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapters 22 and 107 of the acts of 2022 this meeting will be conducted by a remote means members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via zoom or telephone. Any person attendance of members of the public will be permitted but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time. At this time, I'm going to take roll call attendance of the committee members and also make sure that our three interviewees and can hear us and be heard. And so I'm just going to go through names starting with Shalini. Present. Pat present. And we welcome Jordan Hellser. Present. And Vincent O'Connor. Present. And David Slaveter. Present. Thank you all. With that, we're going to jump right into our interview of the three applicants that we have to the zoning board of appeals associate membership. The way this is going to work is that we have had we've sent questions to you there's a list of predetermined questions they have all been sent to the applicants. We will ask them each committee member will take a turn in asking those questions and then the response order will change each time so that you're not always going. Following the same person with three people, you'll follow the same person about half the time, but you know we will rotate that and so that the order is slightly different each time. So according to the town council rules that govern this, the policy that governs this and the waivers that the town council has voted and allowed the CRC to do, we will have opportunities for follow up questions to each individual interviewee and I will take those, I will offer that opportunity up to committee members after the fourth question and after the last question so at two different times, and those questions may be different for each individual interviewee. So, I just wanted to let you all know that. So that will happen after the fourth question and then at the end, if there are any potential follow up questions. Any, and you will have each have up to three minutes to respond to the questions and I will be running the timer. Once I get my timer up. And so I will after that three minutes are up. Kindly ask you to, you know, wrap up your answer, your response to that. Are there any questions before we get started, not seeing anyone with any questions. I will jump right into it. And I'm the one with the first question, which is the order of response will be Jordan. Who is the closer than Vincent O'Connor and then David Slavittor? Is it Slavittor or Slavittor, David? Oh, you're muted. So I can't hear. It's Slavittor, but I also answer to David happily. Okay, so Slavittor, I will pronounce that correctly the rest of the time or David. So the question is, and this is for all three candidates, what do you feel you bring to the ZBA that can make it successful? Please include any experience you have appearing before the planning board or ZBA or watching their meetings. And we're going to start with Jordan. So the basic things that I think I could bring to the ZBA are. I've lived in Amherst since I was two and while I don't have experience appearing before the town or meetings, I've seen this town for a wide variety of perspectives from the child of somebody who owns a place in town to a renter and a student. So I think, and I've also interacted, I believe with a fairly large swath of the Amherst community. So I think that I bring basically just the more spread out knowledge of various places and just, I've lived in this town my whole life. I muted myself. Thank you, Jordan. Next is Vincent O'Connor. So Vincent. I came here as a UMass student in 1974. I stayed. I participated in began participating in town meeting actually in the 1976 elections, which helped defeat the Northeast bypass and have have lived here for a long time. Recently, I've helped four students avoid a girl from two separate households, single parents, go through the middle school high school and to some extent college. And I'm now driving a four and a half year old to the Crocker arm preschool. I have, you have my application so you, you see that I've, I participated in a fair number of town committees. I've appeared before the zoning board as an applicant, appealing the decision of the billing commissioner three times. I've appeared on a number of occasions as a member of the audience as a neighbor and a butter in support, primarily of applications and regarding the planning board. My application says that I've attended about 10 to 12 years worth of planning board meetings, and not as a member, but as a town meeting petitioner and a, since the an interested citizen in the activities of the planning board. I've been mostly in the middle to 70s all the way through the 80s and 90s, and then as a petitioner course regularly since then. I'm here with the operation of the zoning board of appeals of the planning board of the processes that are involved, and also the kind of posture that I think would be most helpful, both to the public and to petitioners and and to staff. Members could bring, and I think I could bring that kind of understanding and collegiality to the process. Thank you. And David. I've been in 40 years of experience operating a small manufacturing and importing business, which involves constantly solving problems and challenges, and being informed about every aspect of operations. I've also been involved in property development and renovations, which has included zoning issues and presentations before zoning boards. I have attended ZBA meetings and I am familiar with the way the hearings are conducted and how decisions are made. Thank you, David. Next is Shalini. Do you have a question in front of you. So we will be starting with Vincent, and then David and then Jordan. And the question is, tell us about an experience you've had collaborating with a group, particularly where opinions conflicted, or the decision was controversial. Did everyone get that. Okay. I have actually chosen a town meeting article process that that I got involved in late in the process I was invited in by a group of Nigerian immigrants and local citizens, Nigerian exiles and immigrants, and local citizens who proposed to the town meeting that we should stop purchasing oil from Nigeria. And so I was called in at the last minute there was the committee that presented the article which asked for a bylaw was sort of divided. Both the planning, both the finance committee and the select board were absolutely unalterably opposed to a bylaw they wanted just to feel good resolution. They were led by gentlemen who who called upon his ethnic group to support him. And I, and the committee felt like they couldn't figure out whether a bylaw was going to be successful or not. The day of the meeting. I was able to provide to the committee, an understanding of what is like was likely to happen because I called members of this gentleman's select board members, ethnic group, religious group, and just check with them and say, ask them, how do you feel about this article. And I was able to convince them based on the responses that I received which was universal support that there was not going to be a problem with the article. And the article was presented on behalf of the committee by the daughter of the imprisoned president elective Nigeria, whose mother had been assassinated on her way to the Canadian embassy. She waited for Radcliffe, written at least one or two books, and was the person designated by her parents as responsible for all of the children in the family, because her father had multiple wives, and she was the daughter of the first wife. So she made the presentation eight minutes to the town meeting and 30 seconds into the presentation. So it was going to happen. The end result was that, and in my part in this was to try to bring factual information to the committee, rather than argue ideology about the select board and finance committee, or we should go for the biggest thing or whatever. What I had to do was provide the committee with factual information that helped them decide which course to take the, the outcome, as I had predicted both at the meeting where I was a deciding vote to go forward with a bylaw. And at town meeting was that the vote was 150 something. I think 15 or 16 the only people who voted against the article were the members of the select board finance committee and their spouses who are town meeting members. The other result. The other result was we saved tens of thousands of dollars by doing what the bylaw required, because it turned out that doing what we did was actually saved this month. Thank you Vincent. Just a clarification question Mandy Joe how should we manage the time. So I, I've got a timer on my phone. And so I will turn off the volume. And it's, yeah, if people want to see it, would it be helpful to, yeah, would it be helpful to y'all if you show the timers you have a sense or I think it'd be easier for me to see. And if she raised her hand, that's, that would try to raise my hand at 30 seconds and 15 seconds. We want to make this. Okay, great. Just want everyone to feel comfortable with just having a conversation. Okay. All right. And next up is David. My experience is based on being in leadership positions on various boards and organizations. I was the president of a condo association for 18 years. We dealt with conflicting views, usually involving finances. And I had to find a way to resolve necessary decisions. I was also the president of a synagogue in suburban Philadelphia for three years. That is an organization where there is rarely a lack of conflicting opinions or controversy. I've also been on the board of a local nonprofit for nine years in which I served as finance chair for four years. So I have a lot of experience dealing with boards and groups and resolving problems. Thank you. I have some time. Did you want to elaborate on any one of the experiences? Well, I can. I'm trying to be succinct. What would you, is there something, is there something you'd like to know? All right, thank you. Okay. Okay, we can have that. I didn't mean it as a follow up. I was just like. All right. So should I thank you, David. One more. Gordon, right. Yes. So my experience is much smaller scale. The main sprints that I've thought of in terms of collaborating with a group is working on the operating crew at a museum during a major event. And that involves a fair amount of trying to organize people figure out who should be on which task and making sure that everything got done safely and in a organized manner. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Jennifer. Okay. I actually have the same order of respondents. So it will be Vincent and David and Jordan. And my question is, do you, how do you understand the, do you understand the role of the ZBA and how does it differ from the planning board? And Vincent, you're first again. Well, I think historically, the, I mean, very interesting historically, the zoning board rules prohibited members of the zoning board who were town meeting members from participating in the debate or voting on article planning board articles on the grounds that they would have to interpret the bylaw and should not be in part of the process. In other words, to go from to both participate in the, in the legislative process that creates the bylaw and then turn around and participate in a quasi judicial function as members of the zoning board who interprets the zoning bylaw. That, that prohibition I think was lifted a while ago but I thought it was, it was an interesting way to think about the process of why those functions and why the Constitution of the Commonwealth under article 30 of part one takes great care to talk about how this function should be separate. The, the planning board now has had a lot of zoning prior zoning board activities transferred to it under site plan review. And but they, but they also initiate the process of creating new bylaws or amending the bylaws and in fact interpreting them for the purpose of site plan review and other activities. So, so to the extent that the plan board is sort of intimately involved in the legislative process that creates the zoning bylaw whereas, and less probably their month, their semi annual or annual meetings where the zoning board members both alternates and regular members meet and say okay, are there things about this bylaw which we should tell the planning board about, and maybe invite them to adjust them that we've found to be difficult. But other than that. It's really we perform a quasi judicial function. The planning board initiates the, you know, the process and participates in the process of the legislation that creates the bylaw, and they also interpret the bylaw under certain circumstances. Thank you. I'm sorry I was muted. And we'll ask David to respond next. My understanding is that they have very different roles, and that, since we're discussing the ZBA, the ZBA doesn't get involved in planning and proposing plans and projects. The ZBA is charged with being informed about and enforcing existing rules and considering proposed exceptions. And can decide at that point whether it wants to grant those exceptions, but it's, it's role in my understanding is that it is there to enforce existing rules, unless there is a compelling reason to grant an exception. Thank you. Thank you. And Jordan. My interpretation was one was the role the planning board is to create the rules and then the zoning board of appeals I mean, appeals, it's in the name is to figure out where those rules and how they should be applied when conflicts are brought before the town. Thank you. I believe we're moving on to Pat. Yes, and conflating our zoning bylaws with the Constitution I will ask my question. What in what interpreting a provision when interpreting I'm sorry a provision of the zoning bylaw should the ZBA consider the original intent of that provision. It's common sense meaning or something else and we're going to start with David. To me, a zoning bylaw is a law. It should be enforced as having been passed after appropriate consideration and a democratic process. It's a compelling reason to make an exception. And those reasons need to be clear and appropriate and presented properly and fit within the laws that have already been passed so it's really a law enforcement operation as far as I'm concerned. Thank you David. Vince. So, my view of I'm not an original list. And God. And with respect to gun control neither was Justice Scalia. Who ignored the first half of the second amendment. My view of our, our role in this is there are two aspects to it. We have to understand that the bylaw was written in parts over time. For example, most of the bylaw was written before there was achieved a societal recognition that global warming is a is a real threat to the entire world. Even if the bylaw lacks specific reference to that, we have to interpret its provisions in the light of that, that understanding. So, yes, the Constitution did not mention abortion, but the fourth amendment is is still an important way to look at that right. And the same thing is true of the bylaw. When the bylaw says that building has to provide all the necessary services and functions under site plan review. My view of that is that that doesn't mean that the building has to do it only on day one but after day one, the bylaw, the bylaw has done its job. My view is that you have to ask how long disability intended to be in use and therefore looking that many years ahead. What functions will the bylaw have to read should the bylaw ensure are provided in that building so that the building functions properly for the entire proposed life of the building. And in that way, you have to sometime we cannot put in words in any law. All of the possibilities that might be the law or the bylaw in this case might need to be applied to. So we have to look at the words and try to understand what those words means in the context of the time at which we are looking at a particular proposal and deciding whether it fits within the boundaries of the bylaw or not, or how it should fit within the boundaries of the bylaw. And Jordan. Um, so I believe that you obviously do need to consider the original intent of the provision because that is the law and there is a reason it was written. So the intent of the zoning board of appeals is to decide whether there should be an exemption. It's important to look at the original provision and decide does it make sense in this particular instance is there a good and compelling reason to make an exception. Thank you Jordan. Okay. Um, are there any committee members that would like to ask any follow up questions of, and I'm just going to pick a random person right now David Slavitt and I'll go through each one. Shalini. I kind of passed that follow up question earlier than later so now is probably the right time and I was wondering David it sounds like you have a lot of experience that you shared with respect to the second question tell us about an experience you've had collaborating with a group, particularly when the decision was conflicted or the decision was controversial. And I was wondering if you could tell us about a specific experience and I think what would be helpful to the committee is just to get a sense of the process or skills that you brought or in terms of a specific experience. Well, I'm trying to think of which role that I played would be most appropriate. In the context of the condominium association where I was president there were there were over the course of 18 years. There were decisions that needed needed to be made about it was a condominium hotel so about amenities about modernizing about contingency funds and proper funding of contingency funds, and there are differences of opinion. And because people invest for different reasons some people want to keep expenses as absolutely low as possible. Other people wanted to prepare better for emergency situations and the role of a presiding officer is often less about what they think and more about how to bring varying opinions together. So my, my role was to validate what people were proposing what they felt was important and to find compromises. Nobody ever gets everything they want, but compromise is the only acceptable way to find a solution. So, those are the kinds of things. Do we do we get rid of all of the existing televisions and buy flat screens, or do we wait two years to do that because we want to fund something else instead. So those were the kinds of decisions where I as the presiding officer needed to find a consensus and I've done that in that in the synagogue in at the Yiddish Book Center where I was on the board and finance chair. So that's essentially the role that I played. Thank you that was very helpful. Thank you. Anyone else that would like to ask a follow up question of David. I raised my hand so people could see that I want to. And this one goes to David you've referred a lot to compelling reasons to make exceptions to the bylaw. And so I was wondering if you could give us an idea of what you might find a compelling reason to make an exception if you have an example in mind. I actually have an example in mind I, I, if I was on the ZBA, I would listen to a request, and I would have to decide at that time with the evidence that's presented. This was compelling. If it's a compelling reason is not simply a preference or something that somebody would like to see it. It means it needs to. It needs to be very relevant and central to the request for a change. So I don't have any examples in mind if something. It's almost like the, the Supreme Court's definition of pornography I can't describe it but I know what when I say it. So, if there's if a compelling reason comes along I believe I would recognize it, but I can, I can imagine that every request that somebody says is important to them also passes the, the test of whether it's compelling or not. Thank you. Any other follow up questions for David. See none we're going to move on to Jordan, are there any follow up questions for Jordan. It was actually the same one that I had for David. And Jordan, if you could elaborate a little bit you talked about, and this is the question about collaborating, especially in a situation where there were conflict or conflicting opinions, and I was curious and you mentioned about the role you played in. It could be that one or any other situation, just in terms of like, how did you show up to that situation or what skills or what process did you bring, or, you know your thinking process, when there is a situation involving conflicting opinions. So, there are always going to be conflicting opinions on pretty much any decision that that comes up. Trying to listen to everybody and trying to make sure that everybody is heard is very important. There's almost never going to be a way to make everybody happy, but making sure that everybody at least understands that their views have been listened to, and heard at least is important and unfortunately it does not apply to that particular group collaboration. Thank you. So, my question is similar to the one I just asked David you also used the term compelling reasons in your response about interpreting provisions of the bylaw and so I'm curious if you have examples of what a compelling reason would be or what what sort of you know David provided a description as to what, you know, in general compelling might mean to him what would it mean to you. Safety is obviously a compelling reason if a decision would make circumstances more safe for everybody that would be a very compelling reason. The decisions that safety is the biggest one that I can think of to come up with the assumptions. Yeah, sorry. Thank you. Any other follow up questions for Jordan. Are there any follow up questions for Vincent at this time. And I take the opportunity to Well, one of our last questions is an opportunity to say anything else you'd want. So, I think what this shows is that you gave fuller answers. No questions left, but we're going to move on to Pam and our next question there will be another set for follow up questions after we finish this next set. Right. So this is looks like it's the fifth question. And the order of response would be Jordan, David, and then Vincent. So the question is, whose interests do you think are most important in special permit or site plan review applications, the town staff, the landowner and applicant, the parties in interest the butters, or other residents. So let's start with Jordan. I think my answer goes basically to parties in interest, it goes to the people besides the landowner applicant to the decision would affect the landowner obviously has an interest which is why they're bringing it before the board but they consider the wider aspects of who else with this decision decision effect, how would it affect them. I think all parties with a legitimate vested interest in a proposal should have their views objectively considered. It may be the most affected by a proposal, but no party has a right that automatically overrides all other interested parties. It would be the quality of the evidence that would carry the most weight, a weak argument is not made stronger because of the identity of the person putting it forward. So I think it is vitally important that everybody who is interested has an opportunity to weigh in, and it is the responsibility of the zoning board to determine what is relevant and what arguments carry more weight but not based on their identity as a specific party. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, so there are there are two aspects to this I think one is relates to the text to the bylaw, which I said in my application is really the result of participation by literally the thousands of people on committees on the town staff. There is two proposals and people who might be affected by zoning bylaw changes. The town meeting members and so forth who all voted to put the words in the bylaw that we have to interpret. We owe a lot of respect and to their efforts and to the words they they essentially when we're talking about compromise. This bylaw is the ultimate example of compromise because nothing got in this bylaw on the say so of one person. The second the second thing has to do with the actual parties to a particular situation. And in that regard, since this is really a civil proceeding and that factual information is important. I would say that, and I would encourage all the parties to present factual information, well documented, if the plant if the zoning board carries a park, a traffic study and a butter brings in a paid for traffic study by professional traffic engineer that says that there's going to be this that the other problem. And I think the zoning board has to pay attention to the, the traffic study prepared by the butter, rather than by any statement of anyone else it's not backed up by a good analysis and facts. I think that putting everybody on the, on the level playing field in terms of of factual in providing factual information to the zoning board is really the essential thing of trying to be fair to everybody. Thank you. We are back to Shawnee. Yes. Okay, so question number six and the order is David Jordan and then Vincent. And the question is what's your opinion of waivers exceptions dimensional special permits in the zoning bylaw. When should they be used, and when should they not be used. I think they are useful tools to resolve situations that may have special circumstances. They exist to be used judiciously when the case is made that warrants a waiver or an exception. It is important that they are used with restraint, because the existing rules are there for a reason and have been put in place after an appropriate process. So they should not be used care care, casually, but a zoning board should not be afraid to use them when the proper case is presented. Thank you, David Jordan. They should be used carefully, and they should be used when there is a compelling reason to use them. There, sometimes are there are often not reasons. And David put it very well, the rules were written for a reason. And there should be very careful consideration about when to make an exemption from those rules. Thank you, Jordan. Vincent. Yeah, so, so I have actually in terms of the existence of such things. I really have no opinion about, and I should not have an opinion about whether they should be in the bylaw. And again, refer to the Article 30 of this Constitution, which, which basically says that the judicial branch shall, shall not exercise the legislative or executive powers, or either of them to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men. Because we're not really sitting as zoning board members with views about what parts of the bylaw should be there or not be there or should be different. Or according to our particular views, we are there. To consider each application in the light of the bylaw as it exists before us, based on the facts that are presented to us. And whether I think there should be this or that in the bylaw is is a it was irrelevant. I'm there. If I take the oath to interpret the bylaw fairly and honestly and so forth. If I interpret the bylaw as it exists in light of all of the information and evidence and facts that are presented and to make as honest and decent a judgment as I can about whether a request should be granted or not. Should I Okay. So the, the order of responses for my quest this question would be Vince and then Jordan and then David, and it's the question is what is your approach to incorporating public comment into decision making. And again we'll start with bits. My approach to incorporating public comment is the same approach that I would have to incorporating the material provided by the applicant. The applicant may have, I've heard opinions at zoning board and planning board hearings that I know about this that the other thing completely unsupported by factual evidence, both from a butters and from applicants. My view is that if an applicant says that this is how this will be done. Then my, my view would be that we put this in the order the, if, if the applicant application is approved that we put that in the conditions. And we insist to the applicant that if, if we grant this permit. They're going to have to operate as they have pledged to do, and we're going to make sure that it's in, it's in the conditions that we violate the conditions your permit is, is suspended. And so. And I, again, I think that all the parties who appear before the zoning board on matter should be held to the same standard. Whether it's the staff or the town staff or the applicant or the butters, or a bank that's providing, you know, funding, all have to provide meet the same standard. Just the facts show that the facts support your, your, your point of view. But just opinions without facts are not in my opinion persuasive. And I would just encourage every person who appears before the zoning board to to to present facts. And I think that there's only word will function much better our decisions will be much more widely accepted. If we focus on holding everybody to the same standard. Thank you. And Jordan. I think there should be a certain level of caution with regards to how public input is received. It's frankly reminds me of something of reviews people will only give review if they have a very strong opinion one way or the other people who have less of a viewer, unlike we do submit public comment would be. The other important thing I believe about public commentary is if there is a large group of people coming out either in favor or against something. The reason as to why should be carefully considered. Thank you. And David. Public opinion is. Wait, am I muted? Oh, no, okay. Public input is another source to be fully considered. As a town committee, the ZBA is the representative of the citizens of Amherst, and it is appropriate and necessary that public opinion is considered as another interested party. Public input is relevant and objective. It should be included in the consideration and become part of what the committee takes into consideration and making its decision. I think public opinion is appropriate. As just another entity in the discussion. Thank you. Moving on to Pam. Yes, the order of responses will be David Jordan and then Vince. So question eight, what else? Oh, this is this is the question. What else would you like us to know? Would you like us to know about you that makes you a strong candidate for the ZBA. Anything you wanted to add that flushes out earlier points that you made. Not so much. I'm, I'm experienced in many areas, including business construction. Public service. Other areas, I have a very background, I'm accustomed to assessing varied information to make and implement decisions. So, working on a board is not a new venue for me. It's not a new experience. I've been in numerous difficult situations where passions run high and hot. I've been told I'm an idiot at the same meeting where I was told I was brilliant. And they were probably both wrong. I'm, I'm just accustomed to being in this kind of situation. So I feel that the ZBA is an appropriate fit for me. Thank you. Thank you. I did want to reiterate, despite the reason this from the experience from my application. The fact that I'm part of the volunteer fire department in Pelham, which I don't. I have. As much experience in that as I would like, I think it has given me a much better understanding of how fire safety is incorporated in decisions and I think that could potentially be useful on the ZBA. Thank you. So I I think that it would be helpful for the committee to know that and some of them have asked the scene. Me do this that I've walked down the aisle many times back to my seat at town meeting, not having been successful in the presentation and managed to listen and understand why and so forth and be able to go from there to successfully accomplish things on the second or third try. And I think that's my approach to people as well, that it is important to listen to try to understand and come to some consensus from from everyone's different perspective as as you see just with the three of us and there are five members on the on the ZBA regular boards. I think that I've also been involved a lot in enter in interpreting and providing information and evidence regarding the section of the bylaw 10.38 which the zoning board uses. It has to go through in a really honest and fair way to evaluate each application, whether it's a really small thing or a very large project. You have to go through all almost 20 questions. And so I'm familiar with that process. And I will be as somebody who has spent the last 20 years of my life basically working with kids at an age where I don't think anyone expected that that I didn't expect and no one else expected that I would do that shows that I am a flexible open person who can bring to a situation of the ability to both listen and to act. Thanks very much. Thank you. One last question and then we'll see if there's any follow up questions from the committee members. This one's I don't think you'll need three minutes to respond to it. So this is basically a confirmation question. And which is to please confirm that you have the time to commit to the hearings, the site visits and the Thursday evening 6pm meetings so we'll start with Jordan. Since I initially submitted my application, I started new job at the bottom of the seniority pile so I'm actually not sure. Thank you. Vincent. Yes. I can do all those and I've had a very busy schedule the last few years I've spent a lot of time driving people don't have cars can't get drivers licenses to work at nursing homes throughout the pandemic. I don't think I spent a single day home and memorizing their phone numbers mornings having 10 to 15 trips to get people to and from work to and from school and I'm in my schedule is now not less less than it was and taught for the people how to drive who now have drivers licenses and so I've really going to have and starting next July 1 even more room in my schedule. So I don't think I will have any problem accommodating the demands of the zoning board. Thank you and David. I do have the time. Thank you. At this time I'm going to ask the committee members if they have any follow up questions for Jordan. I'm not seeing any hands for that one. Are there any follow up questions for Vincent. Yes Vincent you mentioned factual information is being really important in several questions. I'm speaking actually specifically to the fifth one where we talked about whose interests do you think are most important in the special permit or site plan review applications and you had mentioned the importance of factual information and could you explain what factual information means to you and especially when they're when they're yeah okay let's just let's keep it at that like what is what is examples. I can give you a couple of instances one it was a neighbor who family needed to construct on land that they own adjacent to their existing home. A home that was on one level and and the zoning board struggled with it and I think I it turned out that there was a factual matter regarding the original configuration of the land and the existing configuration of the land that allowed the zoning board to to grant a variance for the use of the the particular lot. And so it's that kind of facts mean I'm a lot of times, you know, to compromise. It's easier to compromise when when there's more factual information than there than it is when we're simply dealing with people's opinions. I've also seen situations where applicants before the planning board not before the zoning board repeals have claimed there's a couple of claims that I that I've found particularly incredible meaning not credible one applicant who for a large scale housing project said that there would only be the these one bedroom apartments which were the primary units were going to be priced at $1,800 to $2,000 a month. And that only one person would occupy each bedroom in in all of the apartments in the proposal. And this is a college town I've lived here for 50 years. I came here as a student. I found that without any credibility whatsoever. I found it distressing that the planning board did not insist either on a condition to that effect, or, you know, some credible proof that such a thing would would be likely. And the second, the second situation was a statement actually of the planning department staff on a project either that project or similar one to the effect that the people who would occupy a for this particular structure, which was in the center, which is in the center town would not have automobiles. When in fact of course, subsequent to the construction of that and no one believe that either, because if you can afford to pay $1,800 $2,000 for an apartment, you're probably going to have a car here and a car someplace, wherever you came from. And is that kind of in one case providing factual information, and in the second case, the permitting authority, allowing statements bald statements of fact, which were unsupported by any factual information whatsoever. To be to be the basis of a decision, I think, is important. It's important to to focus on that kind of thing. That's why I talked about those factual matters. Thank you. Are there any other follow up questions for Vincent. Are there any follow up questions for David. See none. I want to thank Vincent David and Jordan. Oh, Pat, you. Yes, I'm sorry. I have a quick question for David. Okay. Is that all right. Yes, in your response to who's interests. You said something that interests you said all parties with legitimate views. And then you refer to the quality of the evidence, but you're wondering what criteria. Do you have for a legitimate view. How do you, how do you sort those things. Well, every view is legitimate to the person who is advancing the opinion. And the members of the ZBA have to decide we, we would have to make a exercise our judgment as to whether something is legitimate. And more, more relevant than, than even legitimate but there are certain views that make no sense, even though a person may deeply believe it. And if they propose something, and we are charged with determining if that is legitimate or, or relevant in the word itself is. I'm not using the word legitimate as a way of invalidating somebody's right to propose something. If somebody advances something that makes no sense doesn't pass the smell test. It's the responsibility of the ZBA to basically say that doesn't make any sense. There are also views that are just objectionable. And you know if somebody says I don't want to. I don't want a certain project because immigrants may come to it. And that's not legitimate to me. So there are arguments that people believe that they advance sincerely that don't make any sense and the ZBA is charged with determining if something is compelling factual and make sense and that's what I mean by legitimate does it actually warrant objective consideration. Thank you David. Thank you. I've seen no other hands I want to thank Jordan Vincent and David for their time today for coming out for completing the statements of interest for completing the community activity forms for your interest in the ZBA and serving on town boards and committees you know we can't get to town without the volunteer time of its residents and I know we on the council in going through this process in order to get to even being considered for appointment ask a lot of time of our candidates just to get to this process so we really appreciate that you took all of the time to jump through all those hoops basically and come here today and answer all of our questions. So before I basically ask Athena to remove you from the panelists section and into the audience you're allowed to stay for the deliberations in the audience. Or you can leave completely you don't have to watch us deliberate about you if you don't want and but I will notify myself or Pam will figure out who afterwards will one of us will notify you later today as to what the vote of this committee is in terms of a recommendation to the council this committee does not have the authority to actually appoint you and appoint you to any board to the ZBA that is the purview of the council all we do is make recommendations. The next council meeting is January 9. And so any recommendation we make today will not be acted on by the council until January 9. I do expect it to be acted on on January 9. So but we will let you know what our recommendation is before that so that you know what's what's going on and what's going to appear on the agenda on the ninth. Before I ask Athena to move do either any of the three of you have any questions about the continuing process or anything before we move on to deliberations. I just want to thank the council for their time. Thank you. And with that, then I'm going to ask Athena to move our three candidates and applicants into the audience they're welcome to stay in the audience or they can hit the leave button themselves if they want and, and move on with their day, instead of watching us if they'd like. I'd like to say thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for the opportunity. Thank you. Oh wait until. Okay, we are all moved. If I've got my screen correct. Yes. So, at this time, we're going to take this slightly differently than we tend to take this. Normally we have more candidates than spaces and so so we might be discussing. In some sense, one over another so we discuss all of them and then we let our views known. We have three openings that we can appoint to. And so instead of taking that to set process, I thought we'd just go through each candidate themselves. And, and sort of will vote a slate is my intention, but we can go through each candidate themselves talk about their qualifications. Our thoughts and then thoughts on whether we would want them to be part of a motion to recommend the council appoint or not. And then we'll move on to the next candidate and the candidate after that and then in the end once we've got thoughts on all of them will will do one motion was my thoughts, if people would like a different process. Before we start that process. Let's decide on how we're going to do it but that's what I thought we could do since there are three openings potentially and three candidates. So, with that, I'm just going to take the candidates in alphabetical order because it's the easiest way to do it in my mind. So we're going to start with Jordan Helzer and thoughts on qualifications and then on whether to recommend appointment to an associate member position. Pam. I enjoyed hearing from Jordan of the three of the three candidates Jordan has the least amount of experience in obviously boards and committees and and town process. But I think he brings a wonderful perspective on living in the town, but what are some of the elements that we as towns people deal with on a day to day basis and how, and how projects or how changes in town may be enhanced or affected by a project coming to the VBA. And I think I like the idea that someone wants to step forward and participate in the community. It's in my mind, it's a way to sort of engage somebody and and and make it a pathway for further engagement as time goes on. So I'm very, I'm very pleased. Just from that perspective to to see Jordan step up and and and be part of this in terms of more specifics on sort of approach to things I I appreciated that. I think there's there's good good consideration of process, understanding that the bylaw is the bylaw and we can't until we can interpret everything. So we are, you know, ZBA is asked for looking for good and compelling reasons were his words for for looking for an asking for an exemption for So I'm, I'm the keep them on the list. Thank you Pam Shalini. Yeah, I think everything that Pam said I just feel he brings a very different perspective in terms of age like in terms of diversity where, you know, being able to attract younger people. And in just the different perspective that he brings repeating myself. So yeah, I've definitely support him and I thought his process also even though he doesn't have the experience. He's what I appreciated was the fact that he, you know is willing to listen to the different perspectives and he kind of said that through multiple things about, you know, who is this going to affect, and how would it affect them, and then make decisions based on He did talk about his time commitment changing, but my take I don't know what the process is for that manager but my take on that is, you know, most people, or many people are busy and have work and so how can we work with them and, you know, and And there might be some give and take over there but I think we want to make our committees accessible to working people so let's find a way to make that work, if you know if you go that direction. Thank you Shalini Jennifer. Um, yeah I just want to come in terms of the schedule though I think we know the meetings are at six on Thursdays. So I would you know just confer with him, if he, you know, knows that he can't make six o'clock, then that's not going to work. So I think the scheduling there is just to confirm that you know he may not be able to make every Thursday at six, but if you can't make any Thursday at six that's not going to work. Thank you Jennifer. Pat. Yeah, just a quick response to what you said Jennifer, because all of the meetings are recorded. And if there was a commitment on applicants part to watch those meetings, even if they weren't able to attend on the evening that it's, it's happening that that lessons your concern for me, I had a similar concern, but it lessens every member of the meetings are taped to deliberate if you have to be present. Well no if he were deliberating as an associate member, he would know that in advance, and he would already make a commitment to be at the meeting. Right but he just just to confirm that his schedule such that he could make those. Right. Yeah, and what I'm saying is he has a lot to learn. One of the things that he could do would be to watch regular meetings include that he can attend for whatever reason of the of the planning board, and as you know so that he gets a real sense of what the workings are. So there are ways for him to still stay connected and involved. I think. And I took his, I actually appreciated the honesty about the time commitment. I really did for someone who sat through the interviews and I took the responses more of a not sure not for the meeting attendance but more of the time outside of the meetings to learn and to attend maybe site visits and things like that that might not happen during the meeting times. But at this at that point, you know, I think if we're looking for working people, working adults to be able to volunteer we have to take that in consideration and I almost think an associate membership is a is a, in some a good spot to start when you're not quite sure of how much time you have because you're not on every application you're not on every hearing you're here you might only get one or two in the next six months or one or something where you might more easily be able to fit it into your schedule and so I'd be much more concerned if we were looking at appointments as full members that are expected to be there. Twice a month every month and all of that at all the hearings as much as possible, then an associate member especially as we potentially ramp up our associate memberships to a more full set of associate members where, you know, we've heard that the current divide on heavily but if we have more that commitment hopefully will decrease so. I agree, but we asked the question because we want to know that no and so I actually appreciate the honesty. Yeah, any other comments on Jordan at this time or thoughts before we move on to our next applicant. Vincent is the next person in alphabetical order so thoughts on Vincent's responses application and on potential recommendations to the Council. Do you have your hand up. Yes, I thought I'd start or at least normally I sit here quiet. Vincent, you know I don't. I've seen Vincent in action at town meetings and all, you know I don't necessarily have personal relationship with him at all but I thought his answers to basically every question were thoughtful comprehensive. And showed a level of detail and knowledge that that is something that could, you know, and detail knowledge and even just perspective, I would say that that, you know, would be good on on a on a board or committee just in the approach to, you know, how he responded to the questions and how he would approach these questions and the hearings and everything and so, you know, in that sense, all I basically only have positive things to say. So, Pam. Yes, I would, I would echo that I was was impressed by the level of knowledge, understanding the sort of the composition and creation of bylaws and the fact that they are done over time. You know, the examples of, you know, global warming isn't explicitly spelled out in the Constitution, you know, all these things are are sometimes implied for essentially reason of protecting the health and safety of a town that's what that's zoning is all about. And so his understanding of the role of the zoning bylaw and then this interpretation by the by the ZBA for enactment of projects. Again, impressed with the knowledge of of the process and and also the stated intent to have a fair and open hearing of of all the facts. And I think that's, that's exactly what we asked ZBA to do is to have a fair and open exploration of all the facts, making any decisions. So I'm very happy to put him forward. And I saw Jennifer you unraised your hand it makes me think that maybe Pam covered what you were going to say but I'll give you the opportunity and what else about Vincent. We will move on to David comment spots on David's application responses and then potential recommendations to the committee to the council, not the committee the council. Yeah, I really appreciated his thoughtful responses like once he did expand on the specific experience in the conflicting and about you know really listening and willingness to compromise. I appreciated that and just his vast experience in across the board. Thank you shall any Jennifer. Yes, I agree I think David was a very strong candidate I think he's had a lot of experiences, and I think he really comes to this position with a very open mind. So I think he's an excellent candidate. And Pam. Thanks. Yeah, I think he's a terrific candidate. And in his statement of interest, it was also the fact that he has worked in development he's worked in in construction. And those are the kinds of challenges that, you know, help understand the sort of the practicalities of a project when it's being presented to the ZBA is you kind of have to. It's very helpful if you can visualize, you know, what that means to add on a building or to to grade a slope. And I think that those are those are the physical ramifications of a project and I think it's very helpful that he brings that as well as just, you know, a very rich background of working with a lot of people on boards to to come to this decision and I don't know that compromise is necessarily the word that, you know, if he, if he were asked, you know, is that is that your golden rule is to compromise I don't think that's what he meant, I think it was that he gives due consideration to all of the elements, and looks to as I as I think the counter does looks to knit where people can work together. And I think that's just very important, especially on small boards that need to need to come up with a fair and equitable solution. I would definitely definitely recommend them. Yeah, and I do think these candidates bring a geographic diversity, which ZBA chair said was needed. Once from North Amherst once from the in town and I believe Jordan is from a different part so I think that that's a good mix. So I can speak to that before I'll say I've heard a motion. Well I've heard what the motion might be is to recommend all three but before I make that motion I'll speak to the demographics. Because I did that this morning so in terms of it in terms of residents because Jennifer brought that up. All the, all the percentages will be in the report but one of them lives in District one one of them lives in District two and one of them lives in District four. The one thing I did find out the current members which we have six, if you come if you combine the five full and the one associate and five of them live in District four and one lives in District two. So we are very district for heavy. The new district for. Yes. Okay. Yes. These are on the in the new districts, we have five of our six current members live in District four and one lives in District two. The other thing that struck me in terms of age is that that this, the sets of candidates will actually depending on how you look at age distribution will bring some diversity right now 50% of the six members are 60 to 69. And there's one member 18 to 29 130 to 39 and 170 to 79. And so our candidates are in the age range of 18 to 29 70 to 79 and 80 plus and so we'll still skew have skewed towards the older end of the range but with 50% in the 60 to 69. We're adding the sum above and some below that sort of median that's in there which I thought was also interesting. And we do have, I don't know if you look at this but a mix of renters and homeowners which is also good. So that I'm not sure is on the CAF so that I can't necessarily, we don't we don't track that you don't track that but I think that's maybe yes, the current board has at least one renter. And, and I believe the candidates have a number are more renters than owners I actually think on on our other three current applicants I think our two renters one owner. So, yeah, so again, you know, in certain areas as we always say the demographics and the diversity are not necessarily present. But in other areas, the diversity, it will actually increase the diversity of of the body. And those numbers will be in the report that gets written as we've done in the past. So with that, given what I've heard I'm going to make a motion to, to recommend the counts, the town council. And Jordan Hellser, Vincent O'Connor and David Sloveter as associate members to the zoning board of appeals effective immediately for a term to end June 30 2023. Second, Shalini Shalini is going to second that. And then, if you wouldn't mind just repeating that motion so I make sure to get the language down just right that would be much appreciated thank you. I'll do that Kelly I will read it again slowly I was trying to read slowly but you you're not used to these motions so I will read it again. It's to recommend the town council. A point Jordan Hellser, Vincent O'Connor and David Sloveter as associate members to the zoning board of appeals. So we're going to be effective immediately for a term to end June 30 2023. And I, Mandy made the motion and Shalini seconded that motion. Is there any discussion on the motion. See no discussion we will start with a vote. And we're going to go in reverse order just for the fun of it so we're starting with Jennifer. Yes, and Pam. Yes. Hi, Pat. Hi, and Shalini. Yes. And so that is a unanimous vote. Pam, do you want to let the three applicants know about that vote, or would you like me to. I will be happy to do it I'm actually not leaving town for another hour so. And Jennifer, you have your hand up. Yes, I'm not trying to be divisive or to bring up any sore points, but I still, I'm very pleased that we and I support and affirm that we fill the three positions, but I do think John Varner was also a missed opportunity. I think he was as qualified as those that we affirmed I just wanted to say that for myself for the record. And perhaps he should have shown up and been available. Well, we don't have to. I don't want to discuss that. Let's not get into that too much but thank you for your comments Jennifer and Pat Athena. I was just going to ask that Pam, if when you let them know that they've been recommended that you specify that it's pending a council vote to appoint them. And the earliest possible date would be January 9, not sure right now how full that agenda is. I think we're scheduled to take a look at it this Wednesday so if you'd like I can follow up with you and let you know. If we're expecting to put those appointments on the agenda for the ninth and if not it would be January 23. Thank you Athena and I will contact Lynn and Anna about that agenda and information from CRC because I believe CRC would like it acted on. As soon as we can but I will let Lynn and Anna know about that and know about the votes and everything related to that. Melanie and then Kelly. Yeah, may I leave because I'm super late for dinner. Yes. Happy holiday. And my last question was just if you could repeat the term one more time the term was the only thing I was missing. Effective immediately. For a term to end June 30 2023. Thank you so much I've got it. You're welcome Kelly. Are there any announcements. I don't have anything unanticipated which means we are adjourned at 1129am. Thank you all for the extra meeting. Thanks. Getting the schedule. Yeah. Bye bye.