 So let's see one, two, three, four, five. I see a quorum. Sorry, I'm running a bit behind. I'm just trying to get all this stuff set up here. Nice new house, Jeremy. Yeah, thanks. All right, so it's a 6-0-5. I'd like to call the July 6th meeting of Central Vermont CV-5 or two order. Are there any additions or changes to the agenda? Take that as a no. Let's go on to public comment. This is Jerry calling in, and if David's not in, I think we might be having a little bit of a go-to meeting problem. Sorry for jumping in like that. You're in, okay, David, great. Yeah, so welcome, Jerry. All right, any public comments? Anything you'd like to discuss that's not on the agenda? I don't see anybody here that wants to say anything, so I'm going to move on. Executive committee negotiating the high-level design contract, David? At the Planning and Development Committee met last week, and we reviewed the high-level design two contracts, one with the WEC and three CUDs, and one with the non-WEC territory of CV-5. So in terms of discussing this, I believe we need to go into executive session so we can talk about the firm that we're recommending. Okay, if possible, are the other items, the other items that we have need to be discussed in executive session? No. Okay, so if we could then for, to respect Orca and anybody else coming in late, if we could move on and maybe do the RFP for the ISP operator instead? That sounds good. All right. Yeah, right. I believe that if we get into a discussion on the polls and the area of definitions, then that may require some executive session as well. Okay, well, so yeah, let's- Information everybody. So they may not have any questions now, but if they do, we should go into executive session. Okay, fair enough. So we'll cross that bridge when we get there, but let's do a RFP-ISP operator. All right. So the Planning and Development Committee met last week and reviewed, I think about the seventh to eighth version of the, well, the RFP team, at least seven versions of the RFP. We had help with RISI, Alex Kelly, and Valley Net in terms of reviewing it. We met on Thursday, I believe last week or something last week and voted to move the item and to the executive committee. And I think the motion may be in the chat room and I'll read it. Whereas C5 or C6 proposals from a firm or jointly from a group of firms to be the operator, construction manager, internet service provider and business manager, the fiber to the premises network. And whereas the Planning and Development Committee has reviewed and approved a proposed RFP that substantially meets the requirements for the issuance of an FTTP developer and operator RFP. And it's hereby moved that the CV Governing Board approve the issuance of a request for proposals for CV Fiber Community Network FTTP developer and operator and authorize the executive committee to take such action as necessary to refine, issue and publicize the RFP as needed. Second. Okay, moved by David, seconded by Siobhan. Any further discussion? This has jumped through a handful of hoops already and I think probably everybody's seen some permutation of this already. So I would not be surprised if we didn't have a lot of discussion. Okay, looks like we might be ready to go. Okay, anyone opposed to this motion? Okay, I'm going to read that as a unanimous approval. Thanks for that, easy peasy. So just a point of order, should I, Ken, would you like me to put you down as abstaining because you didn't actually hear the motion? It was unanimous. Yeah, yeah. It's unanimous, right? It doesn't make a difference if it's unanimous. I am sure I would have agreed. I'm sure I would have agreed. I just wanted to double check. No, we're good. So RFB for the Pull Inventory Services for areas B and C. I think one of the ways that we could get around not having to talk about the areas in particular is that it's essentially we're talking about the rest of the unserved and underserved areas that aren't covered by the current bids that we've already negotiated and set up. So I don't think, I mean, do we need to be explicit in state? I mean, does anybody know, does anybody not know what that means? I guess my comment on this would be while this is intended at the end of the day to provide the Pull Inventory work that's necessary for the underserved when we get into construction phase one as it's been re-designated, the Pull Inventories are intended to be all of the jurisdictions save the largest green in 2021. And so, and this breaks it down to both the area, the area B and area C, because it's expected perhaps that the executive committee may act in a sequence like that to do those. So if I'm fine either way has, so whatever the mood of the group is. I guess I'm not just not convinced that this is ambiguous or unclear. And if we could with this motion, if we could skip the whereases and we could just have that as added to the minutes or whatnot, because that's more of a discussion item. Anyways, I mean, adding the reasons why we're moving it, if we can just maybe just do the motion, that would probably be smoother, faster and get us done quicker. So David, you have to read the motion again. Okay. It's hereby moved that the governing board authorize the issuance of a request for bids for Pull Inventory Services for phase two area B consisting of 470 miles plus or minus phase three, area C consisting of 250 miles plus or minus and grants authority to the executive committee to determine the timing of the request for bids, the timing amounts and submission of grant applications and further authorizes the executive committee to enter into such work orders, to affect such Pull Inventories that they are in the best interest of CD fiber following any necessary granting authority. Second. Oh, I heard Jeremy a fraction of a second sooner than that. So moved by David, seconded by Jeremy. I tried to time my lag, just right. Any further discussion on this? Yeah, actually, I don't know if we wanna add in something that says, you know, pending funding availability or something along those lines, or is that understood? So we're not executing a contract. This is just asking for the bids and then we'll need additional, we'll need additional authorization to proceed from there and that's probably gonna come back to the whole board when we have the actual contract to execute and hopefully, yeah, hopefully we will have money at that point, yeah, right? Just to point out Jeremy that the language does include and the submission of grant applications. So it's exactly gonna work through that process as well. Fair enough. Any other discussion? Go ahead. Is this for 100% of the poll inventory in those territories or is there some that's been authorized previously? I'm just gonna hit the mileage on another track that I received at some point today. That's where the whereas clause talks about phase one area A, however you haven't been done. And this is for B and C. Very good, thank you. I'm good. All right, any other thoughts? Okay, terrific. Any objections to adopting this motion? Motion passes unanimously, thanks for that. Let's go back to the executive committee negotiating the high level design contract. I don't have my language in front of me but if you give me a moment, I can find that. That's not it. Might it be this, Jeremy? Well, you don't have to change it to a high level design. Yeah. Yeah, okay. So I move that pursuant to one VSA 313 A1A that we find that premature public knowledge of our discussions relating to the high level design contracts would put CB5 rather competitive disadvantage. Second. Seconded by Siobhan. Any further discussion? This is Jerry. I just would like to be a part of that, please. Yeah, I think that is a great idea. Thanks for that. And I think that as project manager, your kind of grandfathered in to these would be my feeling on that. You know, just based on what Alan has said about, you know, employees of the organization and stuff like that. That would be my thought. First, I'm not an employee. Don't let that get into the minute. Okay. But yeah, I don't know when I need this to make a specific request or not, but I don't think it's, I appreciate that, Jeremy. Thank you. But I don't think there's anything wrong with making the specific requests. Fair enough. And so we... Go ahead, Alan. Jeremy, I think you have to note in the minutes that Jerry joined the executive session. And you should also mention, you should also note that Phil also joined as Acting Treasurer, because he's, because you're, Phil, you're the alternate, right, technically? I am, yes, thank you. Okay. If I could, Jeremy, Treasurer can't be a member of the board. So we'd like to refrain from using the words Acting Treasurer. And he is performing kind of accounting functions for us. That's true. My Treasurer. That is a good point. So I guess, where do we fall on this? Do all the alternates need to be specifically let in, or can we just think that they are, you know, non-voting board members? I mean, personally, that is my preference. I mean, I think that they are members of the board. They just don't have voting powers when the primary is present. I think we just have to be kind of just deliberate about it. So we have to, we should be saying why we're, why we're bringing folks in who are not current voting members of the body. So this is, yeah, this is one of those weird, weird situations that statute sort of has alternates as board members, but they're not voting board members. So it would depend on. A lawyer's reading and I'm not really interested in doing that right now. So I think if we just justify adding the alternates, because, you know, using the logic that we've used before, or in this case, the two specific reasons, you know, that we're inviting Phil for financial help and for Jerry, because he's the project manager. I think that's, that's easy this time around. We can maybe figure out something a bit more concrete. Next time. That sound. Okay. Okay. Great. So I then moved. On the motion. I voted on the previous. I thought I'd declared it unanimous. Okay. I just wanted to make sure. And if I didn't, I just did. So how's that? All right. So I moved that we, I moved that we enter executive session to discuss the contracts for highlights. So we're going to go ahead and, you know, we're going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead. And what I'm going to do now is, I'm going to move the motion. And I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and come on. So I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and do executive session to this, to discuss the contracts for high level design as previously noted. Seconded by Jeremy. Any further discussion. Objections. Etcetera. Hearing none. Motion passes unanimously. And we are in. Executive session. I will ask John very kindly. Thank you very much, John. We'll, we'll see you soon.