 Seeing the presence of a quorum, I'm going to call the government organization and legislation committee of the town council to order at, I don't see the time, but 932, I think, and to make sure everyone can hear and be heard. I'm going to call role in Greece. Present. Present. And I'm present. Michelle Miller is. Oh, she's here. Oh, I'm here. Oh, there she is in the baseball cap. All right. All right, so pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 extended by chapter 22 and 107 of the acts of 2022 and extended by chapter two of the acts of 2023. This meeting will be conducted via remote means members of the public who wish to access the meeting may also do so via zoom or by telephone. No in person attendance of members of the public will be permitted. But every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. Thank you all for being here and I want to dive right into the town manager goals. So I have some of Kathy's edits. And Mandy, you had some edits that I figured you could speak for yourself for and Alicia had a couple of concerns. So we're Mandy, do you want to start since you're right here and then we can. I didn't think I had edits. Thank you down for something staffing study study financial that was Anna. Okay, but I got I have that for her too. So okay, so that was a. Okay, so. Like I do. Okay, Alicia just has a couple so let's look at those. And let me see the first one. Do you have a doc that you're working from already or do you want me to bring up the draft? Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, would you bring up the town manager goals? The last iteration. Thank you. I'm sorry. No, that's okay. Is it okay to work from the clean version so people can see the changes made after the last version presented. I think so. I think that's a good idea. That's easier than a markup on a markup. Okay. Okay. In terms, Alicia had a concern about public safety. Community health and safety. They had two concerns in that area. The first one had to do with. Let's go to number five, which was she was concerned we had eliminated the senior center. We didn't. Pardon me. We didn't eliminate it. We just put it elsewhere. I think it's under capital investments. Number seven. Right. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. So that was moved simply so that. Okay. And the other thing. Can I comment on that one? Oh, please do. We, we moved it, but in looking at what we moved, we talk about improvements to the senior center, right? And I think that Alicia was going for was the original one was programming. And as we talked about last time, what, how does that relate? Is there some way we can. Should we put in something up in number two about community health and safety where youth programming is something about. I don't even know how to word it, but something that instead of just, I think for youth program was develop youth programming for youth, programming for youth empowerment. And we had developed programming for seniors, but that wasn't really the issue. But is there something we should put in here about programming for seniors. There is the actual issue the seniors are having now. The issues are that there aren't staff so they can do the programming. So like there's a whole gym, you know, all this exercise equipment, they can't use it because there's no staff. Right. And so that's not number five though, that's not the building thing. So, so is there. Again, it goes to what have we voted on and what haven't we right. In terms of programming or staffing or all, but. Is that something the council should have a conversation on and if so, does it belong here or as a separate conversation. I think it belongs here as a number six. And I was going to make that suggestion to address senior center staffing so equipment and so facilities can be for equipment can be fully utilized or something like that. I think that's a good idea. Is that how do other people feel. Jennifer. Yeah, I agree. I mean, it, we did agree as a council that we wanted to expand and strengthen programming. So this is getting a little specific, but I'm comfortable with that. Yeah. And again, it's not programming. They have programming. They, you know, maybe. Go ahead. Maybe it's something where we shouldn't be so specific what the programming is. Since we didn't discuss that as a council. Yeah, if we're sticking to that rule. Yeah, but quite literally it is not about developing or programming it is staffing. The senior center staffing isn't more of a financial guideline then. Yeah. I don't know what do you guys think. Um, can I, while we're at it, there's a, there's two colons together on this. Right before four. Yeah, semi colons. Um, semi colons. Thank you. Um, Pat, what were you suggesting? Well, I think I said something about address staffing. So, to implement senior center programming or something. I'm fine with that. That does belong in a financial memo. Right. I mean, that's the question with it. Would that go here in manager policy goals or would it more? Properly go in the financial guidelines if it's staffing. Yeah, we just need to remember that for. Monday, because I don't think we, I know we didn't put that in the financial goals yesterday. Okay. Yeah, I just, I wanted to agree that I think anything that, um, talks about what. Um, Paul's job is like with staff and stuff should probably be in more in the financial guideline than, um, Yeah. Yeah. And, uh, on a sense where they are on a wanted to have a staffing study done. And I'm not sure I want to spend the money to do that, but that we should probably then also add. To the financial guidelines and the council can decide. Does that make sense, folks? I would put it as something that as a little bubble and say that, you know, this needs to be voted on. Yeah. Okay. Jennifer. Yeah, I was good. I was going to agree, um, because we said we weren't going to introduce. Something for the first time in the town major goals that the council hadn't agreed on. Right. And that includes, you know, the staffing issue. Okay. And then, um, Alicia was concerned in public safety was the, uh, we have. Where is it? Um, It says, uh, undertake a review of public safety protocols consistent with the council's November 14th, December 10th. So that's what we're going to apply for. I agree with the council's recommendation. It's the next one. It's the new one. It's the new one. 2020, two votes. It's number four. She wants it to be written out. I don't see the need for that, but I'd love opinions for other people. About whether we want to add what that vote was. Oh, Athena. Can you pull up the November 14. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm getting nauseous. Why? Oh, I'm sorry. It's like being on a roller coaster. Yeah. I was just trying to see. Yeah, so there are some of all. Yeah. Hold on to your lunch. I'm going back up. So this is the bigger one. So this is a review of public safety protocols. Yeah, organize review of public safety protocols for responding to and handling public safety calls involving all residents including minors in order to recommend changes to those protocols if appropriate. So that's part of the seven that we adopted on the 14. Right. Others that we adopted. The other one underneath it about Cress protocols for Cress. No, I meant is there are there any other motions? I don't know. Jennifer. Yeah, I thought, well, as I recall, Alicia specifically. Oh, you know, establishing an anti-racist culture, I think that's and I do recall that we passed a motion, you know, specifically with on that. So I think that's what we're looking for. That's separate, I think. Sorry. Yeah, here it is. It says recommend the town manager to work with the APD to review an update if appropriate, selected policies of the APD. This will review shall be including but not limited to use of force, consent searches, low level and pretextual stops. And that was Alicia's motion. So there are a lot of things in here, which is I think why we selected saying consistent with the vote, because public safety protocols and policies are addressed in several places. So it's Go ahead, Jennifer. No. Were they more than one vote? I mean, do we have to reference votes? Like we voted on each motion? No, we did vote on each motion. It was one vote. It was one vote for the motion above and then afterwards she offered a couple other motions. My recollection is... Here, there it is, I think. There's the anti-racist one. Right. And it was voted on. Right. So the one about APD up above, maybe we could put in parentheses in the thing. No, we can't. No. So Alicia asked for two things. She asked for that one that's already in there that references the November 22nd votes to be spelled out. 14 votes to be spelled out. But if we spell it out, it's actually narrower than in some sense what or it gets more complicated because as Pat said, there's multiple votes there. And then she asked for the anti-racist one to be put in. And Kathy pointed out that there is an anti-racist goal somewhere in the management goals. I don't know with number three of the management goals, which builds sort of on this particular motion, but is broader than this particular motion. And so I think we're conflating those two requests right now. Yeah. Well, under personnel management, it says foster proactive anti-racist culture throughout all town departments. That's management goals too. So I think this Jennifer has her handle. I'm sorry. I don't have the whole row. Let me get it back. Go ahead, Jen. Yeah. So as I recall the November 14th meeting, the reason we had this specific, we voted on this motion to recommend the town manager, since the APD is because we were discussing whether it was, I mean, the discussion was to specifically have this, develop this culture in the police department, not just in every department. As I recall that, and I think that may, so that that's the context in which this motion was passed. I'm not, I'm just relaying what happened. I'm not saying, so I'm not, I can't put words in anyone's mouth, but I'm wondering if maybe that's why the request was made to be specific, because we had this discussion at the November 14th meeting, and then we voted this motion. Hang on, Michelle. And then I'm sorry, I thought you were finished, Jen. I'm done. I am. Michelle. I think that's right. I think that Alicia fought hard to prioritize the APD in terms of getting the training. However, I think we did this town manager goal review after that occurred, and I think changed the language to sort of encompass at the recommendation, I believe, of Mandy Jo, and there was, I remember discussion on that. And those goals were approved with that language in there. So is that language, I'm talking last year's goals. So what is the current language as it stands right now in relation to anti-racist culture? And I do think Mandy is correct that we're conflating the two requests on Alicia. But didn't we agree to broaden that language on the anti-racist culture, because I think having spoken to Pamela Young and the folks who were doing that work, it wasn't sort of a linear journey that they were going on. It was more. And so I think the idea was, yes, we want to prioritize APD, but that's happening already in some sense. And now it's not a linear, you know, right? Yeah. Yeah. And go ahead. That was it. That was it. I just wanted to see what if we could look at what the current. Go ahead. Just to see if that's available to look at. That would be great. Lynn. Yeah. I also want to point out that this vote was a year ago. And we've done an evaluation right after it, where obviously he had not accomplished that. But then we did another evaluation. And so as much as I'm pleased that we continue to have the anti-racist in all departments down with personnel, I'm not clear that this and and might I might add that the other 14 December, November 14 votes are still in process under the list of seven. Yeah. So I'm trying to resolve the fact that this is a year later. There's been a fair amount of anti-racist training. It continues in all departments. And how do we want to reflect this? And it's also regularly documented and in town manager reports and things. So I think that whatever we decide that line that it be documented in regular updates be provided to the council. I think that can be eliminated. Mandy and then Jen. Yeah. To answer Michelle's question, I don't have the exact language, but I'm working on pulling it up. The current goals for 2023 for the manager have sort of develop an anti-racist culture. And then I think it has a clause that says something like beginning with the APD. And we talked a lot last December about whether we should have that clause in there. It's now been a year. We've kept the main clause. And the the GOL proposed to delete that sort of beginning with clause. It's been a year. And so the question, I think, becomes at what point have you begun and do you just continue with everything? Right? Last year, we indicated through the goals, which department to begin with, although, you know, the language there was, you know, a little bit, the, let me see if I can pull up the language for that one. The language that we're operating under right now that we settled on last December was in number two, I think, foster a proactive anti-racist culture throughout all town departments and work with the APD to identify steps that are documented and inform models for town departments. That was last year's. And the proposal for this year is, I think, just the first clause of that, foster a proactive anti-racist culture throughout all town departments. So in the end, none of it really matched this November 2022 language adopted last year for a goal. Number two, the goal in under racial equity is support the work of the town in repairing damage of, oh no, number three. No, this was in two personnel, number five. Okay, hang on, let me see. Number five. Number two, personnel under management goals, the big two. Yeah, I see, a foster proactive racist culture throughout all town departments. And so why isn't that enough? Just a quick point of order, sorry to be so formal, but it would really help me, Athena, if we could look at the goals right now, because I don't see them in the packet. Yeah, that would be great. Thank you. So Kathy was concerned, I'm kind of, that there are five repeats of this goal throughout the document, but I don't know if that concerns me in the same way, Jennifer. Yeah, I'm concerned that we're actually, Alicia had a request and recommendation, and I feel like we're kind of going against the spirit of that to say, well, we started it in a, I mean, we haven't accomplished it. So it sounds like we're weakening it. She wanted to keep in specifically, if I'm understanding her correctly, the APD, and now we're taking it out because we're saying that should have already begun. I'm feeling like the APD crests all of the, you know, the fire department, all of their departments, and they're covered in the statement about in all departments. And I think there was belittled, I understand why there was an emphasis on policing. And there still is, and we're talking about a resident oversight board, we're talking about several other positive things that really need to happen. And I'm feeling like if we're providing an anti-racist culture, we're working to foster, to create throughout all town departments, I don't see why we have to pull out the APD. So whether, I'm not, I'm just, what I'm trying to get back to is the discussion on that November 14th, because we really discussed this, and that's why we then had the motion to vote. And so I'm just, I, so what, what is, I, hang on, yeah. So are we, are you suggesting that we not even reference November 14th? No, I think that we can reference it. It's a complex, as we saw as we went through it, and it addresses many specifics. I guess I have another question. What is exactly Alicia's, was her question? I don't know if I wrote it down how she said it, she was, she didn't like that she wanted the specificity of the November 14th vote. Beyond referring to it, which we do? Right, and here we have two references to it. Propose the town council plan for the creation of a resident oversight, blah, blah, blah, undertake a review of public safety protocols consistent with the vote. So I don't see why we need to add more language. I'm going to jump to Michelle, Jen, and I'll come back to you if you have something. No, no, please do. I think if we were to review the tape from this time last year in GOL, we actually had the same discussion that we're having now. And we came and so Jennifer, I totally understand what you're saying and you're right. That's exactly what Alicia was hoping to have happen. But we had a discussion in GOL last year after the November 14th vote, and this is where the language that we have now comes from. I'm wondering if, Athena, if you could, could you scroll to where we talk about the anti-racism training? Because I think, again, there were like, there are two requests, right, from Alicia, it sounds like. Well, I was wondering if in here, the resident oversight board, what if we just use the language vote to, is that? So it's kind of already there, right? If you propose to the town council plan for creation of the resident oversight board. November 22 vote. So that one isn't the issue, I don't think, because it says, but thank you, Athena. Public safety protocols. And this one, protocols were like in two different votes. So I wonder if we just say the 22nd votes, November 2022 votes, plural, because we just saw there were multiple votes that talked about it. Okay, I'm going to jump back to Michelle and then Lynn. And then Michelle, you wanted to go down to this section. Yeah, I just wanted to see what it looks like the anti-racism training, is that under personnel? Well, there's this. Provide training regarding racial equity rights and other options to town council employees and members of the public. And then there was also something in personnel, another mention of this. Yeah, number five, foster or proactive anti-racist culture throughout all town departments. Yeah, and I remember Mandy, I remember it resonating with me the use of the word foster. Mandy, that was your suggested language. And we talked about why that made sense in this case. So I'm just trying to reconcile that with what Jennifer is saying about whether we've begun the training and what do we know about that training? Pat, you said that it's been reported in the town manager reports. So I guess I feel a little unsure because I don't know what has occurred. Yeah, over the course of the year, the departments have had trainings and I believe many of them were staff facilitated people and also DEI facilitated. There have been outreach to residents. The one outreach that hasn't happened is to the council. And I'm hoping to bring that back with the next council because... Because... Can I go to Lynn, Michelle? Is that all right? Yes. So could you please go back up to the goal that we were discussing? Which one? Yeah, we got... This one. No, the one where we refer to the November 14th vote. What about the possibility of... Propose... I would like to look again at those votes and say, propose to the town council a plan or plans for completion or for addressing the votes of November 14th or something like that. And that means there's more than one vote. And we can put in parentheses, EG, resident oversight board, public safety protocols, and maybe some language that would be more consistent with what she's looking for. But that vote had seven parts to it. I don't believe any of them are completed. And then there was the additional vote, two votes that Alicia made the proposals for. Jen? And then Mandy? I just didn't say I agree with Lynn. And I think it's... We'll then be committing to some follow-through because we have these votes. There were a lot of votes that night. So what we're keeping the thread going of have they been implemented and at what point? So I think it's good not to just vote and then hope it happened. Mandy? I'm gonna disagree. There were a lot of parts to that. But many times the council has told the manager to do stuff. We can point to not just this November 2022 vote. We can point to the street lighting that just happened. I think we can point to some stuff with the safety zones. I don't know whether that was a direct menu. There's the directing the manager to deal with the bylaws that are outstanding. None of those are in this document because... I would assume because we have said we've already told him and they don't rise to the level of policy goals. When we talk about what this document is compared to things we do the course of the rest of the year. And I always felt that pulling out... There was that vote. That vote still stands. We have not rescinded that vote. All seven or eight plus the other ones that are below that. There were multiple votes that night. All stand. But by pulling out a couple we're saying those are the ones that rise to goal level. Whereas if we do what Lynn just suggested we've just basically said after a year they all rise to a goal level. But these other things we've done with the manager three years ago don't rise to a goal level. And that I think needs... If we're going to do that we need to have a conversation as to when we do separate motions to direct the manager which ones go in the goals and which ones don't versus just part of everyday management. And it does feel like the two very important issues are addressed. The resident oversight board and the protocols. And so I just don't see a need... We added change the second vote to votes which I think is very important because as we looked at it we realized how complex... I think we can try to make ourselves feel better and list everything or we can trust that we've pulled out the most important ones and that we're demanding that over the course of this year these be worked on, Michelle? Without... I was trying to go back to the meeting and trying to find a transcript to hear what Alicia said. I'm feeling just my concern is it's hard when I can't remember what she said. And I didn't write it down word for word. Yeah, so if I would... Could we move on? I would still want to... I'm still going to look for that and maybe we can move on to the other things and then if there's a need come back to it and figure out if we've missed something that she said that we haven't copied or... All right. Pat, if I may... I wonder if there's a distinction between the tasks that the council asks the town manager to carry out like what was in the November 14 vote and the other ones that Manny referred to and if that should be referred to rather than in each of the policy goals in the relationship with the town council like just a broader reference to carry out the... Continue to carry out the tasks assigned by the town council or directives from the town council and report or something like that in here. I think that's a good idea. I really do. Well, how do other people react to that? Thumbs up from Mandy, Jennifer, Lynn, Michelle, I can see you researching. No, I'm sorry. I guess I didn't understand what it was, but it sounds like... Yeah, that was going to say the same thing. Okay, would you repeat it, Athena, and show us where... Athena, I'm sorry. If you could just say that one more time. You know, that's okay. So what I was hearing was that there's a distinction between these like overarching policy goals and the very specific directives the town council votes for the town manager to, you know, the November 14 votes. I don't remember if the council actually voted, but the council requested the town manager come back with an updated transportation commission proposal and the street lights and so on. So I wonder if that goes into the relationship with the town council like you know, carry out the directives assigned by the council and with, you know, timely reports back on progress or something like that in this part rather than, like Mandy said, trying to pick out which of those, because there could be more throughout the year, just like we saw this year. So making a reference in here as a broader goal to do the things the council says to do rather than all the specific things the council's asked them to do. Does that help Jennifer and Michelle? Can we go back, I guess, to community health and safety just to see what it now says? It was just a suggestion you can take out. Yeah. No, I think it's an important suggestion and I wanted to stay there. So go ahead. But no, I want to see. Can I ask a question? So when we like that November 14th or we have like five or seven motions, does that actually, that gets written down for the town manager? I mean, it must be a pretty long list, but does he actually, we make the motions and then, yeah, what? I mean, this is a good question of what happens. Well, if you're worried about what happens, then we have to list every specific task we have ever assigned the town manager in every one of these areas. No, no, I'm just saying is it listed somewhere, not in this document? The town manager keeps track of everything that the council directs and then we sort of have it on a running list of things that he needs to report back on. So that, you know, for example, street lights and transportation commission is now something that I ask him about every time we set attendance. So Michelle, are you specifically referencing Jennifer's comment or can we go back to what we were doing? Well, sort of both, if I could just, yeah, I remember thinking last year similarly, like, well, maybe we should have an appendix to this document that lists every single, you know, and then thinking, okay, the November 14th was a response to something that occurred in the community, which was a little bit unique in the sense of things. And I think the part that we, at least for me, I will say, I have trust that, you know, and I know sometimes that's a triggering thing to say, but I have trust that the DEI department has taken sort of not only that motion, but the fullness of what all of that means, and has really taken it on to do all of this. So I don't think it helps us necessarily to try to put in every specific thing in that vote. And I think what Athena is saying just adds like a good reminder just to sort of embody all of those things, as she said, that they do on this sort of running tabulation internally that they're using. That's my thought. Thank you, Michelle. I agree with that. Can we roll down down now back to whatever we were doing for relationship with the town council? And so, Athena, you talked about carrying out the directives. And you said it well. And I don't know that my language was as elegant as you want to put in here. So yeah. Resolve assistance, providing policy leadership, developing and revising and establishing and implementing appropriate support for committees, respond to communications, resolve issues, provide communications to the council to ensure the council receives relevant information and advocate for them. So possibly after five, six maybe should be that carry out the I had lost you guys. Oh, there you are. We're here. Yeah, no. To carry out the directives of council, say it again, Athena. I think you said it well. I think it was carry out council directives and report back on their progress and on a regular basis. Yeah. Because while he does report on many things, so yeah. How does that feel to folks, Michelle? You're muted, Michelle. What's that? You're muted. Oh, I read with my lips. Sorry, I thought you were talking to us. Anybody have a problem with this? I guess I wonder, Athena, you probably would know the answer to this best. Do you think Paul would understand what is being, what is meant by council directives? Yeah, for sure. Okay. Yeah, I think that's, I think the distinction here is, you know, the council has overall policy goals, but then the council also votes specific things that the council wants the town manager to do like the November 14 thing and all these other things that come up that the council asked to do through the year. So there could be more in 2024 that aren't included in these goals. And I think that kind of helps distinguish. That's great. These goals. And then we want you to also do the specific things that we ask you to do through the year. Yeah. In a timely manner. No, don't add that. Are we okay with this? Are we okay about leaving the November 14th vote and then the November 14 votes in the community health and safety? I think we'll say what you think, honey. I was going to raise my hand. No, I think we should. Because I think it may send the message if we take it out that we've changed. I'm not sure. I don't think we should take out the November 14. No, I'm saying we should leave it in because I think to take out a reference to it may send a message that it's no longer priority. Yeah. And I was not suggesting we remove it. I was just saying I agree with you for that reason. Yeah. Okay. So we're in agreement there, Jen. Okay. Yes. All right. Since we're in relationship with the town council, I've got a couple of things from Kathy. The first one is to maintain develop and it says and increase positive relationships and communication with town council. I think she wants to say to maintain and develop positive relationships. She's looking to take and increase out. So it would be and maintain and develop if that's okay with people. And then in number four, no, number five, I'm sorry. It says provide regular communications. She would like to take out the word regular and replace it with timely any objection to that. Okay. I have an objection to that. I'm sorry. I have not an objection, but I have a thought on that. I think timely is, I mean, what does timely mean? I mean, I liked regular because regular gives some sense of consistency where that it would happen on some basis, but timely, my idea might be different than yours, Pat. Exactly. So I agree with that. Leaving it as is provide regular communications. Yeah. And I'm just trying to think of maybe what she was, like what was the heart of her recommendation? What was she trying? Yeah. And I don't like and timely. Is time sensitive? Like I'm just sensitive. We get email. I think this part in advance of council meetings or media coverage, that was something that was, I'm sorry, Mandy, you have your hand up and I wonder if you're going to finish. Hang on, Mandy. Let's see in the finish and then it'll be your turn. Um, so there was some concern in the past about some things getting into the newspaper before the council heard about them or the council finding out things in the newspaper that counselors felt they should have been informed about in, in, in advance of media coverage. So that's what this part is about. Yeah. Mandy, thanks for the same thing, which means timely and that last clause are to me the same thing. We don't need both. Yeah. And I like the last clause better because it sort of defines what timely is. Someone could say timely is right after the media coverage. And we said, no, we want to go for the media coverage. Yeah. How does that feel to everyone? Okay. Now Kathy also in this section was saying the last is economic vitality and financial health, not relationship with the council. And, but to me it's advocate for and assist the council and advocating for. So I'm not uncomfortable with it where it is, but what do people think the very last Kathy thinks number seven should be where the she thinks number seven should be in economic vitality and financial health, not relationship with council. Maybe. So she says maybe finance, maybe economic vitality. Mandy and then Jennifer, that's how it appears on my screen. I don't know who went first. I think there's two options. Maybe I mean, there's three, there's, there's leave it here. If we want to move the state legislative action part up the special act part does not belong in finance. And as I said on Monday, this is a two part sort of advocacy. It's the special acts that we've had filed. And it's also statewide legislation that will benefit us that we want to see enacted. And so the special act should absolutely remain here in my mind. We could potentially split them into the special acts stay here and the legislative action goes somewhere else. Most of what we cited the such as parts does go to finance, but not everything goes to finance, right? The state level building authority is finance, but it's also major capital projects, right? And so it we either we put it here to try and consolidate it from four different areas into one area. But then when we did the such as clause, it all makes it look like finance such that it should be up there. I wonder if we just delete the such as clause and just do and council prioritized state legislative action that eliminates a lot of things we were keeping in the goals, which is why we had this sort of description, but adding the description makes it seem like it's in the wrong area simply because right now that's where our prioritization is. But it's not always going to be there. It might be climate stuff at some point or housing stuff at some point, which isn't financial. Jennifer. I also think the point was made when Kathy raised it at the council meeting this week that it was under relationship with council because we're asking that for assistance to assist the council in advocating for, you know, special legislation or whatever it may be. That's also why it was here. Yeah, and Mandy's correct that because of what we listed it as examples that triggered that it should be in finance, but it was for the town manager to help the council and advocating for what we need. So I'm prioritized advocating for. I'm hearing, but I want to check Jennifer, that you're okay with this deletion. Yes, but I just wanted to clarify that's why I think we put it here. Yeah, anybody else? Anybody uncomfortable with this? Okay, let's move on then. I think we're down to Kathy's comments. So if we would go up to climate action, I'll just go through them. Okay, yeah. And number three, support the development of climate action focused bylaws. And then her comment is that include including the waste hauler bylaw that action posting. And then she's saying it's too specific on waste hauler specifies design we have not yet seen or so what she's saying is to remove anything after the waste hauler bylaw period there or or semicolon actually and then remove that includes universal curb size pickup and pay as you throw the structure. Those are things I definitely would like, but I think they can come out Lynn. But based on our desire to reduce specificity, I would agree with that request. Anybody have an objection? Okay. All right. Let me see that was a mission. Oh, Kathy also had a question. But I think we are these one year goals? No, they're not in terms of community health and safety. No, they're not one term goals. One year goals, but one Scrivner thing. Yeah, needs a parentheses. Oh, yeah. Thank you. I didn't even notice that. Okay. So then Kathy is moving us to housing affordability. And she has some in number one, where it says ensure the operation of a permanent seasonal shelter. We're at the very beginning of the process. So she was concerned that we shouldn't have the word ensure there. And let me see if I have to hold it up. Oh, I guess you ensure the operation of a seat. Yeah, she wanted to get rid of the word permanent, because what we're doing is operating a seasonal set shelter so that we guarantee that we're making sure that there is one in town as we also continue to develop the one that we're going, which would be permanent. So it's removing the word permanent. And I agree with that as important as this is to me. Anybody at Lynn? I agree with that. But then I also think we need to include something in this goal about trying to work on the other effort, which is, I think the biggest concern that people are starting to have regarding the VFW site is whether or not we will ever find the money. But I still think now that we've purchased the property, we should have something in here, whether it's to and then everything else cascades down. But it should be to continue to explore the development of the VFW site for a seasonal or year round shelter. Could it those two things be combined? But I'm going to go to Mandy first before I share my idea. Thank you, Lynn. If we want to put it in, I think it should be under five capital investments. That's where we're putting all the building projects and a shelter. That's a building project. So I don't object to necessarily doing it, but I would put it under five somewhere. I agree. Anybody else? Not okay with that? Yeah, because there's, it definitely is going to be a major capital investment because of the site. We are right with that. Yeah. Okay. Let me see what else she has here. She's saying combine four and five to expand rentals and stabilizing housing. Propose measures to address and increase the availability of attainable rental housing to residents and propose measures to stabilize housing for long-term residents in town. Oh boy, that would be nice. But I don't even know if it's possible, given that we're capitalist society, but combining those things is possible. Can you let me know what you want to put in major capital investments regarding? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah, who set Mandy? Did you say it? Yeah, I think we could just add the number seven, right? Explore options four and facilitate a discussion. I don't know whether it kind of works there, but, you know, we could add a permanent shelter, seasonal area around shelter and work. Yeah. I mean, it could, I'm just trying to simplify things here. Yeah. Adding another number. It doesn't quite read well, but we're not adding an eight then. Yeah, which would be good. Okay. Jennifer and then Michelle. I'm sorry. Do you, I'm really sorry. Can you repeat what Kathy was suggesting for housing affordability? Okay. Michelle, before I do that, Jen, are you going ahead to that or are you on the seasonal shelter, Michelle? I'm on the seasonal shelter. Okay. I'm sorry. I thought we had moved on. That's all right. No, no, no. And my, my connection's unstable. So it might be that I'm, I'm sorry if I got us off track, but yeah, I'm, so explore options four and facilitate a council discussion on a permanent seasonal and year round shelter. Have, has that not already occurred to some extent? I think it has. So I feel like What do we really want Paul to do when it comes to seasonal and year round shelter? And if we know what we really want, then we can figure out. I don't think this is where we want it personally. I'm, I'm wondering, and I'm going to jump in, Mandy, ensure back in housing affordability and ensure the operation of a seasonal year round shelter while while working to develop a permanent year round shelter, something like that. But I'm going to jump to Mandy before. I think maybe we do need to create an eight in major capital investments that says continue progress on the development of a permanent of a permanent seasonal or year round shelter, something like that. Does that feel good to people? I think it's good. Jennifer, that's okay with you. Good. Thank you, Mandy. One didn't work. Continue progress on the development of a permanent seasonal or year round shelter. Yeah. All right. And then we have, she would like to somehow or how or other conflate combined four and five, which address housing availability for residents and rental housing to residents and how and to stabilize housing for long-term residents. I don't even know what we mean by that. But anyway, Jennifer, I like it the way it is. You know, maybe we wanted to change the wording of stabilized housing. I mean, you know, again, I think that's a lens through which we should look at a lot of policies. You know, are they supporting or perhaps working against sustaining our long-term? Yeah. I'm going to say one thing. It's proposing measures to address and increase the availability of attainable resident housing, build more buildings. That's not what I'm not saying. That's what I want to have happen. And so anyway, I'm going to go to Michelle and then back, I think back to you, Jen. Is that all right? Yep. I just, I don't see these as conflatable. I think that there's one that's talking about attainable rental housing. And then there's one that's talking about our, you know, stabilization for long-term residents. I just, I'm not, I guess I'm not understanding where Kathy, without having her here, saw those complete being able to be completed. Yeah. She feels like it's being said twice. So she's suggesting a measure to expand rentals and stabilize housing. So that's how, so she's saying you can conflate it and combine it by saying that stabilize housing for an increase of availability of rental. What if you just take out rental and then remove five? No, I think we need to have the long-term, the long-term residents because we're losing that part of our population. I think that's kind of the point. I would just push back a little on that in the sense, Jennifer, that we're under housing affordability. That's what we're talking about, right? So just if you could tell me, I agree with you that this is a goal that I want to have in here somewhere, but what is, I guess, how does that in terms of housing affordability, what do you mean when you say a stabilized housing for long-term residents? You mean, one of the things, I think all of our building has been not to serve that, you know, we've built 862 units in the last seven years and it really has not been, they have not been with the intent to sustain our long-term. Oh, I see. Okay, so like a lot of student housing versus housing where there'd be affordable options for people who were, let's just say, non-student. Right. Okay. One of the things that we propose, stabilize housing for long-term residents, the Housing Trust is looking at the possibility of creating a fund that would be support seniors who are having trouble maintaining their homes. So in that sense, but I'm really, I feel like many of the rental housing residents who are renters are long-term residents of Amherst and that gets lost in the shmuggy-googie stuff. No, no, it doesn't, but that's not who we've been building for. That, the building that has happened. I don't agree with that, but yeah, I agree that that's true and we should have more housing but that's not what the focus has, that's not what's been happening. So instead of you and I debating that, let's just just like, But I thought we already settled on this in the council. We have settled on nothing in the council, come on. But anyway, it was in our goals last year, I don't know if we changed it. Let's just leave it as it is, even though I don't like it. Okay. I'm good with that. Okay, major capital investments. She would, this is why emphasize the, why the emphasis on the fire station first, DPW is in worse shape, three implies spending money to design fire. There's something to this one for, because we have all along said the DPW has to move before we can address fire. So I think there's some validity here, whatever your name is, Griezmer and then Hanneke. Thank you. I've been waiting till we get to this. First of all, I think we need to be very consistent with what we say about fire as well as with DPW. So for, and the other thing is whenever we say fire, we should say fire slash EMS station. And so in two, I'm sorry, three, bring the council a request to set a location for the placement of the central fire slash EMS station. And if feasible, begin the schematic design phase. And then under two, under four, identify and secure a location or locations for the department of public works comma and If feasible, begin the schematic design process. Yes. And I don't care whether you reverse the order of those. I, you know, I don't have to get into what my personal bias. Yeah. Um, and then this present a financing plan, I guess we can leave that separately, but the reality is you're aren't going to do a request for either one of these separately without a financing plan. Yeah. Managing and then Jennifer, thank you, Lynn. So I could be remembering differently, but I think potentially part of the reason the schematic design was not included in the DPW is because the money's already authorized for schematic design for DPW, I believe. It may be, but that, but this says begin the schematic design. Right. But, but I think that might have been why we had that difference there. I, I'm okay with adding it in, but I think the difference might have been there because we would need to authorize the money to begin the schematic design phase for fire EMS, but the money's DPW can already begin immediately once we have a location. Great. I'm sorry, I'm having trouble with my computer. So, but I'm okay with leaving them in. Yeah. Yeah, I was just, because I agree with what you both said, and I think sometimes I do think we have to be a little cognizant in this, you know, it is a public facing document that if we take something out, because maybe it started to be done, it sends a message to the public. So I think it's good here. It lets everyone know that both are a priority and one's not more of a priority than another. So just to say that I think, I guess I know after the last GOL, we got a couple of emails the next day from, I think a couple of residents were kind of panicked because the language had changed. So just to be cognizant that, you know, we're sending a message out beyond just the town manager, which I'm sure you all know. Lynn? Yeah. So in five where it says central fire, I would go central fire slash EMS. And in the new eight, there needs to be a space between development and of. Oh yeah. Okay. Are people okay with this? I think Lynn wanted to add EMS in number five. I'm okay with it. We can't afford it and it's a multi-year goal. Were there other changes in there? I think that's it on Kathy's, on emphasis fire. Actually, she said, and I don't support, bring the council a request to set a location for the replacement of the central fire. And then she wanted to remove and if feasible begin the schematic design phase. But I don't think that we can remove that. I don't either. Yeah. So anybody support that? And that was her last comment in that section. And I believe we can go to goals, management goals now for some of her comments. So no other changes here, right? Right. And not that I can see the capital that I did. We did the climate. Yeah. We're okay. Under personal management, number five, she would like to remove it because she feels like it's repeated throughout the document. But since racism is repeated across our culture and every moment of our lives, I would like to leave it there. Foster proactive anti-racist culture throughout all talent departments, Lynn. Yeah, I'd like to leave it there because ultimately I would hope that as we get through some of the ones above, we always have this here. Yeah. The other thing is I want to remind everybody here and we'll start reminding the new council we're a department. We need to begin to address the issues ourselves. We have not done that. We tried once and once is not enough. And that was with the original council. So it should be an ongoing training for every council change. All right. Then she goes down to finance and she let me see. Number six, she would like to effectively manage and disperse ARPA funds with a lens of equity and inclusion and report to the council on the impacts and uses of these funds. She would like to remove with a lens of equity and inclusion. And then some ways I agree with that because what is that specifically addressing what? If we put solar on the high school, is that with a lens of equity and inclusion? I think in its own way it is. If we disperse funds to businesses, BIPOC businesses, lesbian, gay businesses, male owned businesses, is that done with a lens of equity and inclusion? I don't... It's like timely. What does it mean? What does that phrase mean? Because I believe that if the Amherst, the Black Business Association of Amherst and the Amherst area were to speak, there's only one idea about what that is. And it is an idea that never mind. I'm not going to say more than that. Michelle, who I rely on. Well, I guess I just, without Kathy here, this is a real struggle for me and I'm feeling it more and more in particular with this one because I don't understand what concern would lead one to want to remove that from here. I think I'm seeing it's hard to read her thing, but this may be what she was offering instead. I'm not sure. Effectively manage and disperse ARPA funds to support. It is what she's saying. High priority public and diverse needs. Okay, okay. I'll ask you guys again. I mean, that's helpful. That's really helpful. So she's saying what are the high priority public needs that affect everybody and what are some of the diverse needs of the community? I mean, I guess the only concern I have with that is it's sort of subjective, like high priority. Like that is something that we would probably all describe differently. Well, there's a lot here, including lens of equity and inclusion. Right, right. I get it. Yeah. So I feel like particularly sensitive to this right now because it's something that with the second round of ARPA that we haven't yet heard from Paul on and I'm just feeling like, I don't know, this one. That's not what matters for these because these are two-year goals, but I'm just thinking. And also do we, I mean, this goal literally is just for the next, the only that's last round, right? Right, right, right, right. So, okay, I'll stop now because others. Okay, Mandy and then Lynn. Yeah, I would ask what our diverse needs. That one to me is more subjective than high priority public needs. That one, at least I think I could name a couple. Lens of equity and inclusion. If I had to guess, the request for deletion might be because people interpret that differently and we have been receiving a lot of comments that relate to one interpretation of equity and inclusion in some sense to almost the exclusion of some other interpretations, particularly I would say as it relates to money spent to improve the senior center. And so, I don't know whether it's best to just delete all of it and just say disperse ARPA funds comma and report to the council on the impacts of them as a cleaner way instead of debating which one has the right interpretation. But I feel like either high priority public needs not and get rid of diverse or keep with a lens of equity inclusion, which is what we had last year, I believe. I'd go with either of those. Or nothing. I'd get rid of diverse in, yeah. Lynn, Jennifer and then Michelle. I actually like getting rid of diverse. I would just keep with a lens of equity and inclusion. And just for high priority public needs with a lens of equity and inclusion. Yeah, and then and report to the town council, blah, blah, blah. Jennifer. Yes, I agree. I mean, why would we want to take out? I mean, again, that sends a message to take that out. And I don't think that's the message we want to convey. So I agree with Lynn. Okay, Michelle. I support Lynn's suggestion and Mandy and Lynn's suggestion. The only other angle to think about this in is like the Treasury was very clear about the use of ARPA funds and and equity include like helping disenfranchised folks was a major piece of that. So if we really didn't have a way to deal with this, we could say in accordance with the Treasury's best practices or guidelines or whatever. But that might get a little bit warly for this. So yeah, I can go with this also. Okay. Okay. I think we did relationship with the town council. So I think we've gone through all of Kathy's concerns. So and it is 1047. Where my computer? I may lose my computer is not charging and I don't know why. So if I may pop out at any point, I have no idea. So if that happens, Jennifer, I'm going to rely on you to keep going and I'll try calling in. Yeah. Pat, just make sure that all of the courts are tight. I know that's what I have done. I don't know what's going on. So I may have another court somewhere. But anyway, are people okay with the draft as it is now? My question is, do we have to revote it? Or should we revote it? I think we should revote it. That's what I was going to do. I'll make the motion. Okay. Okay. To recommend the town council adopt the town manager goals as amended at the December 13, 2023 GOL meeting. Is there a second? Second. Who is that? Halb. Me. Okay. And so we'll take a vote. Michelle? Aye. Jennifer? Yes. Mandy? Aye. Lynn? Aye. And I'm an aye. So it's unanimous. Okay. Before, okay. So I think we're done with this right now. We have a carryover moment to look at and minutes. But I want to check to see if I would like to have a period of public comment. So I'm going to add, again, I can't see the block. So I think if you could say when we called the public comment. And there is no one in attendance. So I'm ending public comment. Seems such a silly thing. Okay. So what I have on the agenda is the carryover memo and minutes. Let's do the minutes real quick. Minutes for June 21st, July 12th, and August 8th, a second. I make a motion that we accept the minutes for those dates as presented. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Let's vote on that. Lynn? Aye. Mandy? Aye. Jen? Yes. Michelle? Aye. And I'm an aye. And then we need to authorize a member of the committee to approve the minutes for September 13th, October 11th, October 25th, 1115, November 29th, December 8th, and today's minutes after once they are promoted. And I'm willing to do that. We moved to authorize Pat DeAngelis to approve the minutes of and then just fill them in. Yeah. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Vote. Michelle? Aye. We were going to make you do it, but it didn't seem fair. Mandy? Aye. Lynn? Who was? Aye. I'm sorry. Who was the second? Mandy was. Thank you. Okay. Lynn? Aye. And Jennifer? Aye. And I'm an aye. Okay. So we're done with that. So what we have right now is the carryover memo. And I must admit, I got, I have, can you pull that up, Athena? Um, give me one second. I'm trying to. Yes. Yeah. Take all the time you need. And thank you everybody for the work on the goals. I just got to notice MMA is having a whole webinar on flag raising policies. Oh, God. I don't know if you all are aware, but we had, um, we had a request, um, for the town to raise a pro-life flag, and we were able to direct the requester to the flag policy. And we haven't heard from them since so wonderful, but you for getting really, really wish that we had known that, you know, thank you for telling us that. And that's exactly what has to happen. So it seems like it's been effective. I thought we'd, so though if you take that workshop, bring a copy of ours. Okay. Um, okay. Sorry. I'm just now. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for your patience. Yeah. Thank you for you. I think we can scroll down there. I think there are some sections that we were going to look at. And yeah. Now, Athena, or is this, uh, are you going to automatically add the charges that would on the carryover menu or menu memo, or are you asking us whether we want to? Uh, I can do that for you if you'd like. Okay. Then we can scroll down. Does anybody have anything specific that they want to bring up on this? Okay. So let's just go through. Athena has quite a few comments on this. So let's roll through. Baby Michelle, did you have one specific on this? I do. Yeah, I do. Oh, I'm sorry. I don't have the pool gallery. I'm sorry. I didn't see your hand. Go ahead, Michelle. Thank you, Lynn. Um, yeah, just at the end of this, I missed a meeting. When you guys discussed this, I think, so, um, at the end of, uh, the background here, I think in the status of the Amherst Black Reparations Committee charge, it says, uh, there was a question in the committee about whether, about the charge essentially approving all aspects of the report. I didn't understand what that was referring to or what that meant. I thought it meant that here's a charge and everything in it you're going to get, as opposed to an investigation of the issues. And I think that's what was meant. I don't know who, um, raised that question. I don't remember. I, I raised it. Let me see if I can find my notes. Awesome. Yeah, I wasn't sure if the, like all aspects of the report, if that was referring to the AHRA final report, or if that was referring to what Pat just said of the charge. I thought that's what Pat said. I was referencing the charge, but Mandy, why don't you speak for yourself and then I'll come back in with my memory if you don't speak to it. Um, yeah. Yeah. So I don't have the charge in front of me, but I have my notes on the charge in front of me now. And, and what I, I was referencing with that was, um, there was the first bullet point of the charge, you know, indicated something about, um, support implementation of the recommendations in the assembly's final report. And I, my question was, if that's actually in the charge, does that sort of mean the council is affirmatively adopting all of the recommendations in the charge? And so that's one of the questions I brought up that the transition memo was referencing. Right. Yeah. No, I totally understand what you're saying there. And it almost seems like something needs, like, um, because I think right now the status is confusing from my perspective, um, when it's stated that way. But I also understand what you're saying, um, which is, you know, it will be, it will, the whole process will need to be in collaboration with the council. And as the council sees the recommendations fitting in, um, so I wonder how we get to that, um, more effectively because that what's there now isn't in my mind clear. And it's even a little bit confusing. So I'm just wondering if we might consider some other language that could get more to the heart of what you're saying, Mandy. If I can offer the, um, I think what was intended in the status was just sort of a summary of the discussion of the GLL discussion, not exactly like this. I think the word status is a little confusing. It's just like what GLL had talked about regarding it up until now. So are you saying that we don't have to answer this question or, or because it's part of the discussion it can just stand? Well, see, in other sections we have status slash discussion. And I think maybe just adding that word would make it more clear that this is, this is just the things that GLL has talked about a very brief summary of the things that GLL has talked about regarding the charge. So I think that would be great. Yeah, if we added that. And also, um, Mandy, would you want to specify that you're referring to that first bullet? Or do you feel like, would that give it more clarity in terms of what you're saying? It was, I think my concern was not just the first bullet, but also the purpose statement and all it, I had other concerns about the charge, but, but this was one I particularly wanted in the transition memo. Because I think that's sort of the first discussion we need to have about the committee and the charge is, is what is it doing? Right. How do we take this report and then decide what gets right, which sort of carried into the successor body's charge? Yeah. Okay. Does that feel comfortable to the two of you? So I would combine those two, you know, we have GLL discussed creating a separate committee or integrating, um, oh no, then it works. GLL raised a question about whether the charge. And I don't know if we need the word essentially. I mean, what do you all think whether the charge? I was going to say whether the charge as drafted results in approving all aspects of the report, something like that. Yep. As drafted. Results in the council approving all aspects of the report. Thank you. If I could just, uh, Pat, just stay with this for one second. Yeah, go ahead. And then Lynn, unless Lynn has something to add right now, go ahead, Michelle. Um, so where we're at, I just want to make sure I understand where we're at in this process. And where we're at in this process is the committee and the council need to have continued discussion about the creation of a successor body, the structure that will take and what the charge will be. I am less tied personally to the draft charge that's there and whether it results in the council approving all aspects of the report. Because I think, you know, there's still much more discussion that needs to happen. So it almost feels, and I say this with all due respect, it feels almost defensive, like putting that as a status, because we haven't really worked through the process of having all of the discussions. So I just wanted to, like, name that. I'm not going to, you know, oppose it strongly. I just wanted to name that. I think this is an unfolding process that we're all consciously involved in. And so that we don't need to necessarily hold that fear. But I understand why it's there. I feel like it needs to be there because there is frequently a belief that a report guarantees not, you know, everything that I want, because I'm the committee me, I get. And if you start saying, no, that's not going to work this way, then we're attacked. So in a sense, it is defensive. And I think, or maybe protective, because I think we need to look at that charge. I haven't looked at it in a while. I don't have, I don't have a thing I could tell you that, you know, I really want to go back to it. I even want to go back to integrating it into one committee and into another committee, which is also going to be a volatile situation or a conversation for some people. So that's kind of where I am. Oh, go ahead, Michelle. Go ahead. I was just going to say, I appreciate the word protective over the language I used of defensive. I think that's what I was trying to get at. And I just, I want to, I guess it's more about, like, that we are empowered as a council and I trust that process that we will go through. I understand we've had those circumstances in the past, but I guess what I'm saying is, let's make our reality different in terms of, like, how we approach these things, as opposed to sort of setting ourselves up for, you know, that sort of protection. But. Well, I hear you. I hear you, but you're speaking for yourself and some residents. I'm speaking for myself and some residents. Yeah. And there are residents who aren't going to, who are going to say that no, you're not doing what you said because, and we know that's true. And so I don't know. So I hear you. I hear you. Mandy and then Jennifer. Could I ask Athena to page up just slightly so we can see this goal status discussion, but also the motion, if we can get them both on the page. Yeah. Okay. So the charge was referred. And so that's where we are. What might, we might be able to add into the discussion part. We didn't really discuss it at GOL though is some of this, something like this may require further discussion at the council. You know, something like that, that might, you know, might imply that, you know, these are some questions being raised. We haven't discussed what we're doing with those questions yet, including, is it handleable at GOL or not? Cause really only the charge was referred. And these were questions brought up when looking at the charge. And we haven't gone further than that first look at the charge once it was referred. So if people are okay, a sentence that said these questions may require further council discussion, something like that. Jennifer, did you have your hand up? I took it down. Okay. Where would you put that? And, and well, Michelle, go ahead. So, so further council discussion prior to acting on the charge. Okay. Michelle. Yeah, I think that's a really, like really proactive language. I mean, I think even, you know, I don't even think we, again, I'm okay if we want to keep it, but I don't even think we need GOL raised a question about whether the charge is draft of results in the, I mean, we did raise the question. So I guess it's fine for it to be there. But I just want to make sure that the message we're getting across is actually like, the council has yet to discuss with any real comprehensive, you know, comprehensive in any comprehensive way, the report, it was accepted by the council, but there was never really a full body discussion about what the recommendations were and how the council feels about those recommendations. So I do like the addition of that, of this, of this sentence to clarify, to clarify that point. And I would say has yet to discuss the AHRA report and recommendations. And I don't even remember all of what they are right now, but I think that's important. Lynn and then Jennifer. I believe that the sentence needs to say the recommendations require further council discussion prior to acting on the charge. And then that takes care of that. Yes. Yeah. That's good. So, yeah. So it's the recommendations. Yeah. Thank you. Without the May. Yeah. Yeah. But say that requires the recommendations no, the rec and recommendations require further council require not require Jennifer. Yeah. No, I agree. Because I think there's sometimes there's disappointment that all the recommendations aren't being followed through on when there wasn't you make a recommendation, but there's no guarantee they're all going to be adopted. So do we need the prior sentence? GOL just GOL raised a question if we're going to have that last one. I would say we do because that's why the recommendations. Okay. Okay. require further discussion before we can act because that question was raised. Yeah. Thanks, Jim. All right. Are we okay with that? Okay. Can we scroll up or down the hell or don't go on to the next? Yeah. Can I look at it? Go ahead. Go ahead. No, it's okay. This is a I feel like when we say review process for developing town manager goals and timing, evaluation, goal setting and budget. Because the three of them all of this is so interlocked. So I would say goals, a colon timing of evaluation and goal setting. Yeah. And budget. But the motion was only the evaluation process. I know, I know. You mean the evaluation process timing in terms of its relation to the budget and the budget guidelines, right? So maybe that can be clarified here. So review process of town manager evaluation, goal setting and in relationship to the budget process. And I understand, Manjia, what you're saying. Hang on, Michelle. I see your hand. Are we changing that? Well, I was just going to include it here. Timing of the evaluation in relation to the budget. Budget guidelines and manager goals, I think. Yeah. To which the evaluation is part. But Michelle's next, are you going to comment on this section? Yes, I am. Are we only referring to timing when we're referring to the evaluation or are we referring to timing in the context of the development of the town manager goals as well? The goals as well, because that was the whole, yeah. So then to me, I think like the headline here, review process for developing town manager goals. Should it be review process and timing? Like, so should the timing also encompass? Review process for developing and timing of. It would be review process and timing for. Exactly. Yeah, that's good. Or. Developing town manager goals and evaluation slash goals. Goals is now twice. Yeah, I don't think. Goal manager evaluation. Town manager goals and evaluation. Yeah. Yeah. Right. And it might clarify to actually put town manager in front of evaluation too. Just because if somebody's looking at this, they might say, what evaluate? Who's evaluation? I mean, we know. Former counselors, we're going to send a committee to your house. You're right to 360 on that. Don't send me the results, okay? Lynn. Love you all. Yeah, yeah. Lynn. I would actually say review process and timing for town manager evaluation. Town manager goal setting. Establishment of financial guidelines. And the budget colon and the budget. You wanted semi colons between? Yeah. She likes those little things. I like them for some reason. And the budget cycle or something. Mandy Joe has, I'm sure, word smithing, which is fine. For Mandy. It's not word smithing. I've got a problem with enlarging what we were actually referred to do to all of these things. Like that's not what we're asked to do. Especially as it relates to financial guidelines and the budget cycle. No, we were not referred to reviewing, we were not referred to review the process and timing of the establishment of financial guidelines and the budget cycle. That was not, I mean, look at the motion. Connecting. The manager evaluation process. And so I feel like it's trying to be expanded beyond what was referred to us completely. Okay, how about this? Wait, because I remember that we were trying to court, that we were asked to see if we could coordinate it with the budget cycle. And that's why we have this timing in relation to develop timing of the evaluation in relation to those things, not the timing of those things, right? Yeah, yes. This is the motion. So, I mean, essentially. But there's nothing suggesting that it all be tied together. Yeah. Or it'd be coordinated, you know, that there be. That if it was possible, we needed to look at that. So, I thought I'd have some fun meetings with Andy. That was, Mandy? I'm okay with it in the status and discussion. It was, my problem was with titling it that we were essentially referred to review the budget process timing completely. And so that's related and stuff. So, yeah, yeah. You're okay with this? Yeah. Okay. Lynn, you have raised your hand. I'm fine. I think this is good. Okay. Everybody okay? Can we? I'm typing along. So, make sure I'm capturing what you're all talking about and what your intent is here. I rephrased some of these things to make them like. I think you got it. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Can we keep going if there's more attached committee charge? That's something that can happen. I think we're okay coming bylaws. Do we need to put the motions in there? Yes. That's why. Okay. All right. I'll add the attachments and I'll find the motions. I think I meant to do that before the meeting today and. Okay. Keep going. It's all right that you didn't. I'm just trying. Um, may need to be moved to. Can you scroll up a little bit? I, I moved. Okay. Hold on. Well, I just wonder. I think the. Go ahead, John. Okay. No, just the, um, set parentheses closing waste hauler. I think it should go after waste hauler, not bylaw. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? Yeah. The close parentheses to go after hauler, not bylaw. I think it's right after bylaw because we've got general bylaw, 3.3 refuse collection and recyclable materials. That's its title and in parentheses is what we've been calling it. Yeah. Right. But don't, isn't it the recyclable materials bylaw? It's general bylaw, 3.3 refuse collection and recyclable materials. Yeah. Bylaw goes in the beginning when we came at the end. Okay. Yeah. And she's dead and referred to us is that. No, no, no. That was fine. I just thought the bylaw was part of the recyclable materials. Okay. Never mind. When we refer to the official name of bylaws, we go general bylaw, 3.3 and then the title of the bylaw, it's just our, that's what our consistent practice has been around that. Okay. Anything else here? Then let's keep going. Yeah, I actually, I think we forgot to mention that we also have to do the non-resident members of the finance committee. Oh, yes, yes. That's right. No, I think that's items that should be carried over because it's not vacancy yet. Yes. Right. Right. Okay. As long as it's down below. Yeah. And it's there under the transportation thing. Yeah. And Athena, on the transportation thing, is Paul not doing that until just January now? Yeah. We will have an opportunity to talk about that later today. When we set the agenda, I think he had, it's still on my list for the 18th. Okay. Thank you. And last week he said he was meeting with Tracy. Yeah, I think there's, we'll talk about it later. Yeah. Okay. I think that's it on this. Am I wrong? Where's the, oh, we don't, non-voting got it. Yeah. It's right there. Can anybody think of anything else? Do we want to put like upon the resignation of Bob Hagnar or something? Sure. Should it say non-voting resident member Bob Hagnar? We stopped saying resident because all the members are residents voting. That's true. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. A non-voting member? Are we worrying? No, it, I mean. Oh, it's up there. It's up there. Yeah, it's up there. I'm sorry. Instead of identifying who, I mean, we all know it's coming in anticipation of an upcoming resignation or something. That's good. Yeah, that's better. And we did discuss at finance yesterday that he has to resign effective the second. Right. But he hasn't submitted it yet. So right now we're just anticipating that he's getting done for this most purposes. I just wanted to confirm that he knows he has to resign. Oh, he knows. He knows that. I think that's it. Am I wrong, Athena? I think the review of the town council rules of procedure. We're going to try to do that on, no. Oh, no, I actually think under items that should be carried over, we might say something like any remaining rules of procedure. In case something doesn't finish. Yeah. I don't even know if we can finish it. So the procedure are there. We had mentioned last Friday there were a couple of spots we recommended that the next council discuss. So maybe we put those bullet points in too. Yes. So can we, you have it. Review of the town council rules. That's what we'll see. Yeah. I think we had some bullet points under that one. Oh, no. They take out too much. It took out finance. Yeah. We have it above. It says after the transportation committee, it's the review of the town council rules of procedure. So can we say review of any of the remaining recommended changes of the town council rules of procedure changes, amendments, whatever. Not acted. Not acted on. And then we're like two or three things. It was what Jennifer Lynn and I were at this meeting. weren't there like three things? Yeah, but yeah, we put them on so we don't lose track of them, what they were that we said that needs discussed next council. And so review any recommended changes to the rules. Not acted on by the council prior to the end of the year, including and then have three dots under that. Except we didn't recommend changes. No, I'm talking about what we reviewed on Friday. There were discussions that we would leave for the next council and we should list those items. Was one of them how counselors want to be addressed or was. Yes. Yes. Yeah, because there's some interesting stuff that Stan Rosenberg and a group of people are doing around stuff like that. There was that. There was videos for writers attending remotely. Videos on. And I feel like there was another one. Yeah, I can't remember what that one was. I'd have to find the document, but I think there is another one too. Can I just I'm a little bit confused. Are these under the Transportation Commission? No, no, no, there's review of the talent council. There should be a space between. Yeah. Rules of counselor. Rules of transportation. Yeah. Oh, oh, oh, I see. Okay. And also, but that was a good question. How that works. I'm going to mute. I was like, wait, I'm confused. How counselors wish to be addressed, right? Oh, thank you. Yeah. I can't remember what the third one is. Sorry. I'm just looking through the notes on the version. That'd be super important. I don't know if I agree with that memory does get. It was under under other council meetings. There was a discussion about reorganizing the section on other council meetings. Special meetings, public forums, all of those. Okay. Public discussions or whatever they were called. Oh, right. Right. I do have another question to raise and I'm not sure where it goes, but at some point during this next calendar year, it is possible. Not a given that the Charter Review Committee will be making recommendations. How those are handled will be based on the type of recommendations they are. Some of them may be recommendations that just the council can approve. Some might require special legislation. Some might require actually a vote of the public. How do we want to put any of them? I think it's premature to put that in this transition memo because the report will come back to the council. Okay. Yeah. All right. I just wanted to raise it because it's kind of looming out there. Anything else here? I think to address this comment about, may need to move this to automatic carryover. If the town manager brings that to the council on the 18th, then the council decides to refer it to GOL. I think my suggestion was that GOL authorized Pat to amend the transition memo to clarify that that had already been referred. So when you vote on this today, you could do that if you want. Maybe we could make a general thing that we authorized Pat to make any changes coming out of the meeting Monday night somehow. Are we dealing with it? Because I can make a motion. Does this document have a title? GOL, carryover memo. Okay. I guess it's, I moved to approve the GOL carryover memo as amended on December 13th, 2023. With authorization for the GOL chair to amend as necessary. Following the council meeting. Following the December 18th, 2023 council meeting. Second. I'm sorry for that. No, that was great. I appreciated it. Do we approve it or do we recommend approval of? No, you approve it. The council doesn't approve. Yeah, because this is our report. Through the council. The council would only vote not to carry things over that are automatically carryover. Anything else? Oh, you got a vote on that. Oh, okay. And Jennifer? You're taking the vote. Yes. Yes. Michelle. Hi. Mandy. Hi. And Lynn. Hi, and I'm an eye. So it's never first. I was totally caught off guard. The tea last night. At least we took too many votes today. Yeah, I should keep a list. I just kind of mush around with pictures. I think that's everything that we need to do today. Lynn. Yes, I believe it is. But before we end the meeting, I would like to thank Pat. Actually, Michelle. Then Pat and Jennifer for the various times during the last few years that you have ably, very ably chaired. GOL. It's been a pleasure to be on this committee. I've always thought it was one of the best committees that the council has. So I just want to express my appreciation to all of the people who have chaired and substituted as chairs in these last two years. And Athena for her amazing support of this committee. Yeah. Amazing. And I really want to say to Michelle that you will be missed. Yeah. I'm hoping that you're going to be the survival center board. I am joining the survival center board. I hope to. But I am also going to come to every GOL meeting in the audience. Oh, I'm going to hold you to that. I'm going to be the GOL ghost. No, it is a great committee. And I second what Lynn said. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. And thank both the chairs and Pat stepping in. And Jennifer, you did a great job. It's invaluable. And many times I do not like chairing. All of you know that. But this is the best committee in many ways to chair. And I hope with the exception of a shell that we have only one new member comes. Now there's just been a camaraderie that's developed over the five years in this committee, whatever the configuration or constitution of the committee was. And I think we're lucky because, you know, we're, we have such a specific job. And only got testy when people thought they could change substantive things. And that really didn't happen very much with this group. I am going to, unless there's another reason to, to adjourn the meeting at 11 29. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And then I'll talk to you. Maybe we'll share reporting on the rules for next year. Yeah. Maybe we can get together for coffee and figure out a plan. Great. Okay. Thanks. Bye-bye.