 We may be joined by other people, but first of all, we'd like to welcome you and we're calling the meeting to order officially at 431 This is actually a training session and we want it to be of an opportunity for all of us that are here counselors and other people who have come to make sure that you get all of your questions answered about open meeting law about public records and conflict of interest law and frankly, if there's anything else so As soon as we kind of get settled, we're gonna have everybody introduce themselves counselors and all and Then I'm going to also invite the counselors to sit with the rest of the audience Because Lauren is going to be standing up here pacing back and forth like she does and That way you can join in watching either way You're also welcome to stay here if you want to take notes. Okay. Watch your back and watch her back, right? So Let's start by asking our friends in the audience to introduce themselves and what brings you here Great great We'll get to Lauren a moment. We have two three people now here from our town Athena hi For Paul vacuum in town manager Sean Hannon IT It's okay Sean Let me show you the button It's this really nice to be kind of able to be a little more relaxed than normal Brianna introduce yourself. Hello Brianna center at IT Okay, and then using the microphones as we go around starting with Darcy Don't forget to press I'm Darcy Dumont district five counselor Andy Steinberg counselor at large Mandy Joe Haneke counselor at large Pat the Angel is district two counselor Sarah Swartz district one counselor Lynn Griezmer district two counselor and towns of town council president Kathy Shane district one Shalini by Elm Elm district five Okay, and we have a couple more people who have joined us and so we're gonna put you on the spot and Ask you to introduce yourself and tell us your affiliation with town boards and so forth gentlemen in the back Great Okay, so our guest this evening and our expert is Lauren Goldberg with KB Law She serves as our town attorney and she has been pummeled with Questions clarifying the charter since the day we all started and Comes to us tonight as a serious resource on this whole thing So we're gonna project on both screens. What we're gonna start is asking you What questions do you want to make sure we answer? On the issue of open meeting Raise your hand. Yes, sir. Ah I'm sorry Amherst me is recording this. So we'd like to have you live on TV Either that or you can take the mic from Brianna Okay, I'm Steve George Board of Health my question about the open meeting is to what extent are we limited in email? Exchanges outside of the meeting itself Obviously, we can't discuss serious policy and what we're gonna do But how about distributing information that is useful to the other members of the committee and that kind of thing Thank you These are what we're trying to do at this point is collect questions about the open meeting law, sir Brianna will help you What is deliberation what is deliberation more clarification on that? Okay additional questions Andy Steinberg just want to make sure that Somehow we touch on the question of participation in social media and the risks and how to avoid the risks of Open meeting law violations with social media participation Either if it's a council or social media page or participation in somebody else's page So with that should we add what is the definition of social media for this purpose? Okay Kathy This is on already Just building on the question about distributing information if we've got a draft of minutes and we share them offline and people are saying There's a typo. There's a missing word. Can we copy the other people or can we just do it to the drafter? You know to so other people understand we've already read it closely. So it's that kind of corrections in minutes Additional questions that we want to make sure we get shall any so we formed a new town council and I Was wondering what are ways for the town council members to get to know each other? while You know Respecting the open meeting law Okay, other questions about open meeting Okay, I'm sure that other questions are gonna rise and We're gonna do the same thing as we go into public grass records Conflict of interest the ethics law if you will but right now we're gonna do a brief Lawrence gonna do a brief presentation and There will be additional questions. I'm sure that will rise with that. So Lauren the floor is yours Thank you for yes. Thank you to you. I'm sure one Well good afternoon or early evening, whichever it is. I feel a little bit like I'm on jeopardy not gonna Because you know, what is whatever anyway, I'm gonna try and talk about Oh, I'm gonna try and talk about what these issues are On a case-by-case and weave into it the other things about the open meeting law that really inform these answers So the first is what are limits on email correspondence? Oh, well, I should actually back up one step I started my legal career in 1996 at the Secretary of State's public records division And then I moved over to the Secretary of State's elections division after that even there I was dealing with public records open meeting issues and Since 2009 been a KP law where I deal with this kind of stuff every day So I am going to try and talk about best practices that might be different than what your actual practice is It doesn't mean that what you do is actually illegal if it's not a best practice, but it's certainly easier to Defend a challenge when best practices are used now. The other thing is that when we are Looking at why these things matter. Why does it make a difference? Why does the open meeting law matter? Why does the public records law matter and why does the conflict of interest law matter? The reason they matter is because Obviously transparency in government. That's number one, right? but number two is the work that you all do is very important work and We want that work to be able to be defended if it's challenged and if it's challenged We don't want to focus on things like was there an email that violated the open meeting law Instead we want to focus on What are what was the legal or what was the decision you made and was it justified? Was it supportable? So You know, we don't want to be asking Oh, did that person have a friendship with this person and that's why this and that no We don't want to do that and we also don't want to be saying well There was a piece of paper that laid that out, but we don't know where that is anymore So those are the types of things that people raise when they're looking to challenge boards and committees work And an individual's work. And so if we're trying to make the work what you're actually doing the focus We try to have best practices with respect to these items. Okay? Everybody makes mistakes But you can definitely with the with the open meeting law. It's easy to learn from them And to cure them as long as they're not intentional Most of the time they are not so the first thing we're going to talk about is emails So why do emails implicate the open meeting law? And the answer to that is because anytime a quorum of members of a particular board or committee are Addressing a matter within their jurisdiction whether it's by email whether it's in person altogether whether it's Serially so one person calls another calls another Or an email gets forwarded anytime you get to a quorum and it's dealing with a matter within that body's jurisdiction It constitutes a meeting for purposes of the open meeting. Okay now the question And I'm going to jump around a tiny bit. What is deliberation? Well, that matters because you can't violate the open meeting law if you're not deliberating. Okay, so Is there a limit on email correspondence relative to Matters that are within the board's jurisdiction Absolutely, or a board's jurisdiction anything substantive About which you have feelings ideas beliefs or concerns should happen at the table or the long row of seats and not By email or in a coffee shop or on the telephone. Okay so anything substantive where that's within the board's jurisdiction that shared between a quorum of members constitutes a deliberation Now there are some exceptions To what a meeting is. Okay, so that constitutes a deliberation at a meeting now Maybe you didn't post that meeting right and we'll talk about posting separately. Okay, you have a meeting that hasn't been posted How do we fix that? Well, we come to a meeting that's properly posted and we discuss it at that time Okay But what if we're doing other things? What if we're you know, the the Paul wants to send the council a Scheduling email. Let's meet on these days about this and these days about that It's not a violation to email amongst a quorum. Okay, what it is not okay to do is talk about your feelings ideas beliefs and concerns and the example that I like to use of this is Let's say Paul sends out an email Hypothetically that says Let's meet next Thursday on whatever does that work for people and one person writes back. Oh Thursday is no good Tuesdays Not this Wednesday is fine that this all of that is fine But then someone says in this email chain. It's imperative. We meet as soon as possible. This is very important Now we have an open meeting law problem Feelings ideas beliefs and concerns shared amongst a quorum about a matter within the board's jurisdiction What does the AG say about email? don't Okay That's what the AG says if you the only thing you should could do by email is scheduled. Okay And even then you have to be really smart now an individual member of a board can email the chair and say You know madam chairperson. Could you please include the following item on the agenda? That is not a violation you're requesting and I didn't be included on the agenda But if it goes on to say and it's copied to everyone else because I feel I think I believe that it up now We're heading down a problem path under the open meeting law If the individual counselor or an individual board member emails the chair and doesn't copy anyone else They're not prohibited from sharing their feelings ideas beliefs and concerns except if it's a three-member board But it starts creating risk Okay, well-meaning board member sends it to another well-meaning board member who sends it to a third Now that's a violation if it's a five-member board because three members now no feelings ideas beliefs and concerns so as Soon as you get to a quorum You've created a violation if you share your feelings ideas beliefs and concerns the more email There is the more risk there is that feelings ideas and beliefs and concerns will reach a quorum I Think I I might have said this the last time I was here, but I'm just gonna say it again When I first came to the firm in 2000 I went with one of the founding partners to do a training and as I'm sitting there listening to her she starts saying and It's absolutely illegal to talk about anything on the agenda outside of a meeting It's not allowed under the open meeting law, and I was thinking to myself. She's wrong. That's not true You know, why would she say that and so when we left I said why did you say that and she said because if you tell them They can talk outside of the meeting. They're all gonna violate the law They don't mean to but it was funny at the time until it is very tempting We are used to especially elected officials and appointed officials who saw out about appointment Because they have strong feelings about things to them be in a situation where they have to Regulate sharing those feelings. So feelings ideas beliefs and concerns your perspective You can only share at a table or amongst less than a quorum at a table at a properly posted meeting or amongst less than a quorum And if it's less than a quorum, there's a risk and the risk is even if you read it You don't press forward You just talk to somebody else. Let's say as a five-member board, you know, you send me an email. I agree with you I think it's smart. I see you on the street and I say hey the two of us we think blah blah blah now That's a quorum. Okay. Now, that's an open meeting law violation Even though you didn't know and even though I told you I wasn't meaning to violate the law Let's say but the fact of sharing that information constitutes a violation When you are emailing information for a meeting and that was a I don't know. Do you want to ask a question? Are you sure? So if you're emailing information related to a meeting Paul or your staff person can email whatever they would like that they've created They can share the staff can share their feelings ideas beliefs and concerns. They can prepare a recommended decision memo They can prepare and at a you know a recommended policy memo They can explain all the reasons why they think it's a good idea a bad idea, etc Okay, if you're a board member you cannot do that. You can't share your own feelings ideas beliefs and concerns With a quorum of the board if you share your position That's deemed to be a deliberation under the open meeting So if I was asked for a legal opinion and I either send that directly to the council or I send it to Paul And Paul sends it to the council. That's fine But if one of you know the counselors have a legal opinion of their own or an opinion of their own Them then sharing it in response. She's completely wrong. I disagree That is sharing the ideas feelings beliefs and concerns amongst a quorum can't do it Okay, now again, I said this is a best practices Because the risk creeps in as soon as you move along now If you found something on the web that you think is critical to the committee's understanding about something and you want to send it to them You can because you didn't write it But you can't say because this is just how I see it Because I really agree with this writer because they really stated it just the way I would you could just say This relates to our meeting on Monday Okay, now sometimes people will put a disclosure at the end of an email when they do that that says This is not for discussion now. It's for discussion at Tuesday's meeting Staff people will sometimes say Please do not reply to all if you have concerns, let me know So you want to be conscious of that if you're sending an email that you're taking steps to avoid implicating the conflict of interest Public records law a conflict of interest one of them so An email about a schedule is okay. It's actually exempt in the statute an Email of something you didn't prepare is okay. It's not your feelings ideas of beliefs and concerns But an email amongst a quorum about individual members ideas beliefs and concerns is a violation All right, so the AG as I said the AG's recommendation is just don't email except for except for scheduling and Sure, that makes a lot of sense from a you know strict view of the law of the law But it may not be an accurate view of the world How do we make sure that if there's emails amongst members we hold on to them that they actually exist and we use the town email addresses for that Everyone has one Volunteers everybody uses that and that way your emails are saved on the system on the the town's backup And if you wind up, okay, yep Just clarify that all the counselors do and all staff do Volunteer representatives on say the board of health or something they do not Thank you for that clarification. So one thing that you can do to Create ensure that you're creating a record that can be searched and easily find and these laws do kind of Interrelate so this is under the public records law is to copy a town Address so whether it's a town staff person or an address that's specifically created to kind of be a Repository for the for the emails that you said, okay now I Just also want to just reiterate what staff can do so that there's no questions about that staff can share their feelings Share their opinions share their beliefs share facts give updates. They can do whatever they would like Okay, the problem becomes if someone reacts to it and sends it back to everybody. So let's say Paul sends out an update x y and z and someone writes back reply to all I have serious concerns about this Now that's an open meeting law issue if that person just wrote back directly to Paul That's not an open meeting law issue because only one person Paul knows about it. Okay That makes sense What is deliberation I think you guys can tell me what is it? Sharing feelings ideas beliefs and concerns about a matter within the board's jurisdiction So a lot of times I'll be asked. Well, we don't actually have jurisdiction over x y or z. That means we can talk about it, right? Really the answer is still no and the bigger the jurisdiction the less likely it's outside of your jurisdiction. So let's just take A really important project in town now the council may not be involved in permitting that But it's a really important project and the council is gonna have to appropriate the money and blah blah blah So you can see these things interrelate in some ways and even though it might not be there If it's appealed that it'll be the board. So these are the types of things where if it relates to town business You should assume that it's within your jurisdiction What might not be within the jurisdiction? You know somebody's kid is gonna Be in a play and the parents trying to drum up a lot of Attendance for their show. Okay, that if there's emails about that That's not gonna violate the open meeting law because it's not town business All right Okay, so Participation and social media and avoiding risks. This is the new frontier. So It is only within the last Nine years that that email was actually recognized by the law as being subject to the open meeting law Okay So we've had email around for a very long time and almost all of the district attorneys offices who are then enforcing the law were responsible for And believe that email would fall within the opening law But there was one that didn't I forget which one it was and so there was this debate, you know everywhere Oh, you can still argue that email isn't subject to the law. Well, the law caught up with it And the DA's except for that one hold out Also bound up there even before the law changed. So social media Creates this new risk of violation of the open meeting law Let's talk about well, let's talk about three different types of social media. The first is the town social media So town sponsored town pages Run by a staff person that person can post whatever they think they need to in accordance with the applicable policy Okay, they're responsible for managing that social media site Board members have to be careful if they post on that site For a couple reasons one is the open meeting law We don't want to get to a quorum of members saying something or talking about something that they should actually be talking about at a posted meeting But the other thing is is that sometimes it sends out the wrong impression about what the answer is and one of the towns that I represent a DBW superintendent posted something and then once luckman jumped on and said no let me clarify and then another selectman jumped on It said you both have it wrong and then a third one did and then a fourth one did and by the time It was done they thought that one road was going to be closed But it wasn't and it caused this huge thing because they all needed to get to I mean not a play But a thing at the high school so you know that can cause problems because individual members of a board Only have the authority that the board gives to them So that first selectman in my example that jumped on had no authority To counter or to contradict the DPW superintendent. What should he have done? He should have called this the DPW superintendent said hey have a question about that or call the town manager and said Hey, you give that DPW superintendent a call right now because I think what he put there was wrong You didn't have the right to represent the board and the other board members when they jumped in They also were kind of making a bad situation worse. Okay, so that's another risk now the towns Social media in most cases If the board and committee members stay off of it will not create open meeting law issues Okay, could create a public records issue. Are we keeping records of those of those posts? Now we go to individual social media. So An individual could have two types of social media They can have their personal social media and then they could have an official social media a lot of people when they're running for office We'll have a campaign social media page When I talk about this I'm reminded of one selectman who is very very Emphatic when in her campaign about what she was going to do to help build affordable housing and Her entire campaign page was a was dedicated to affordable housing how how to do it how to achieve it What the naysayers said that were wrong and all the reasons why she was going to approve all sorts of Things and she was elected And then she was elected She's like, what am I gonna do at this page because now it looks like I've prejudged every single 40 b and every single other Affordable housing opportunity that I'm gonna just you know be in favor of that. She's like, you know, I understand I have to make a decision based on what's front in front of me So what she did is she used her her campaign page after that only for informational purposes So she only posted things that other people sent to her that would be relevant to affordable housing generally No more about stuff happening in the town and now just kind of like a general resource on affordable housing And then she had her kind of active Selectment page and on her active selectman page. She really used that to give People insight into what the board was doing So on her page, she would say the board's meeting at whatever here's the agenda Or she'd say if you're interested in affordable housing come to our meeting on Wednesday Well, we'll be talking about blah so rather than go back and forth with people about her opinions She used it as a resource for people and people did post on her page they posted things on her page that raised questions that challenged her and At the beginning she was replying to all of those with her explanation explanation explanation But what was happening is that that was raising issues when she got into public hearings and anybody who does land you stuff or who's dealing with adjudicating People's rights is really important to look like you haven't prejudged something and also to look like you're gonna make a decision based on What's in front of you? So? She wound up having a very good talk With the manager and a few other people about how it really would just be better to say To the people that were posting on her page. Thank you for your input Because that recognized and respected the fact that they had taken time to Provide their feelings ideas beliefs and concerns, but she wasn't engaging in a back-and-forth about those at that time Okay, so there's also a city councilor and I'll see if I can remember her name and send it to Paul Who has a page very much like that one thing that she decided she would do is she would post her reasoning for decisions After she made them so she did the thank you for your input thing beforehand but after the board vote and she had a Public discussion of her, you know feelings ideas beliefs and concerns then she would post about what her rationale was She also did something a call in she She's a working mom and she would basically have time I think between 9 and 11 at night once a week where people could call into her Into her, you know like a web service and have a conversation about things that were going on in town And so and she would do that it was it would be You know public so anybody could see whoever she answered that other people could listen and they could call in with questions But again, she wouldn't get into a back-and-forth about things that were ongoing But someone might say oh my road really needs to be plowed and she would say you know Here's what we're doing with roads and she tried to explain all the things that were going on in town with roads Now that's good uses of social media It's easy to see that we're not talking about violating the open meeting or public records or conflict of interest law because Essentially, it's being used as a vehicle to provide information to the public There are riskier ways to operate however and essentially what the AG has said is that Facebook I'm very familiar with on Instagram. I'm not very familiar with Snapchat, so I'm not gonna talk about snapchat But on Facebook people are your friends right you meet them or you friend each other and then they are in your circle And so if you and all your board members are in some of the same circles, how do you deal with that? Well, one thing you cannot do is call them out directly So you can't say right at so-and-so and have you know have them be called out in your comments If they're on your if they're members of your board You also wouldn't tag yourself as being with them if you're posting a comment about something that's going on present Okay, so you don't direct any comments to other people on your board now from a purely Lawy conservative perspective in my view if you see a couple people have weighed in from your board on a particular matter Don't jump on the bandwagon. Okay, because now it's gonna create the opportunity for a violation of the open meeting law And or it's gonna raise questions or raise concerns from members of the public about what you're doing Right, even if it's not a technical violation because it's less than a quorum. It still could raise questions For this my Feeling and a lot of people have said to me, you know, that's really idealistic Lauren because yeah sure You know you can say you shouldn't jump in on that But if everyone's talking about whether dogs should be on a leash and I don't say anything They're gonna say well, what do we elect you for if you have nothing to say about this? so one of the things that we talked about is weighing in by saying I Appreciate everyone's comments and concerns about this the board is talking about this on Wednesday. Please come to the meeting So now you've shown your responsive You're not ignoring it or you couldn't even say because of the open meeting law I'm not gonna post my own opinions here today But I'd be happy to discuss it with you offline or if you'd like to come to the meeting on Wednesday That way you look responsive you look participatory, but you're not putting yourself or the board at risk Okay It's almost it's it's a just one second It's almost a reaction type thing because we are programmed to react So it's really to give yourself a few seconds to say do I actually have to post here? Like could I say something else could I just say this is a very interesting discussion or I'm glad so many people are Participating in this or something that doesn't put you or your committee or your count of the council at risk. Okay? Yes, ma'am You do you do so it depends who it is and what the circumstances are you're right because one of the things that we often see actually is Obviously inadvertent violations of the law where a constituent emails a full council or a full committee With a question or a complaint or a concern and then somebody on the board or committee thinks they're being helpful And they reply to all right including their request or because they don't want to make it look like they don't want to reply And then have 19 other replies, you know all saying different things so they reply And that creates a violation of the open meeting law because now you're sharing your ideas feelings beliefs and concerns with a quorum Even though it didn't violate the open meeting law for the person to send the email It violates the open meeting law to send it back So as part of my normal presentation, I say I'm gonna say it now Treat that reply to all button like it doesn't exist. It's bad Okay, it creates risk. It leaves you exposed in ways. You can't necessarily realize right at the moment If you feel like you need to respond to somebody or something About about an email that's copied to all the council you send it to a staff person if you can Or if it really needs to be another member, especially with a bigger bigger group then just to one person but not not to reply to all Okay, if you have a three-member board You can't talk about anything outside of a meeting for real Because that's then a violation a quorum automatically. Okay. Oh Sorry, yes With respect to the staff Facebook page so could they be topics that we can like and for example, we had the she leads Amherst Hashtag and so I share the photo album and then other town councillors like that. So It's not a perfect scenario Because a lot of these things aren't black and white even when we'd like them to be black and white Sharing a photo and then other people liking it is probably fine If it's a matter within the jurisdiction of the council, and I don't know I it's like hard for me to think of an example, but In another one of the towns that we represent they had a llama problem Okay, and so if a select man had posted a llama and the all the other select man liked it I think you could start you could at least make the argument that really they were talking about that issue So you need to be thoughtful about what you're doing on social media. That's really what it comes down to What should you definitely not do in my view? You should definitely not get in a deliberation I'm using the word differently here with constituents about matters that are or will be pending because That then is is now. Let's just I don't mean like generally affordable housing, you know topic or Open space. I mean specifically if you know something is going to be before your board You shouldn't be on social media writing down your exact opinions feelings ideas and beliefs So I'm a good right to you and share theirs. That's fine But you don't want to say I completely agree. I intend to vote. No blah blah blah even though we're kind of used to that You know we're used to it, but that's a record and it's there and if there's a problem Someone's gonna take it out and submit it at a voter registration hearing or submit it at a whatever hearing. Yes, I shared my How I was going to vote on something So is that am I facing a risk for that because I shared with a constituent what I was gonna do? These are not black and white Issues the way that I I'm talking about them like they're black and white But there's a lot of shades of gray for this kind of thing You can talk about about whatever I mean you have the ability to talk about anything that you want You can share how you're gonna vote you can do any of that But when you come to the table to make decisions I think it's important, especially if you've been vocal outside the room to say I'm here You know, many of you know I've always been a fan of whatever it is But of course I will only make my decision tonight after I've heard all the evidence and have had the opportunity to ask questions to The appropriate people You know again now that's more of a perception thing that it is an open meeting law thing at all, okay, and and Because that's just what are people thinking about how your your the choices you're making and Especially if it's an adjudication like a liquor license or something although you have you have a commission, right? But let's just say hypothetically when you're adjudicating rights It's imperative that you're relying on what's in front of you in evidence So if it's anything like that just make that quick disclosure just say you know you people have heard me talk about this They know I'm generally a fan of this or they know that I'm inclined to say yes But of course I wouldn't make a decision without listening to everything here tonight and asking the right questions. Okay? Yes, sir. I am part of the town's housing trust as part of the bylaw creating the trust which follows the state law I believe we have had a member of the town select board on the trust And we will have a member of the town council on the trust Looking back the town council members who've been part of the trust have contributed valuable ideas information advice in meetings Sorry, is there any problem with that in the future? so just to recap what the question was you have a municipal affordable housing trust and it's actually required by law that there be a select member of the council on the trust and As a result, I think the law is anticipating that that person is going to participate in a significant way and help to Come up with ideas and make decisions. There's nothing that prohibits anybody from Coming up with ideas and helping to make decisions even if let's say that The affordable housing trust and the council are going to you know the council is going to appropriate some money over there that's still okay that that Counselor was doing their job by participating as a member of their trust and they're on the trust because they're a council So they're they're actually they have a they do have a fiduciary duty to the trust But it stems from their position as a counselor. That's fine. Same thing with the CPA. I think this comes up all the time or the CPA committee you know, we see People very concerned and worried. Oh Well, that member of the historic commission is on the CPC or the CPAC and when this matter comes before The historic commission they have a conflict or when the historic commission Request for funds to rehabilitate something comes before this the CPAC. There's a conflict. No, there's not the idea is that those people are participating as members of the CPAC because of their experience Because they're on the committee. They're supposed to be bringing that background and that perspective with them. So it's okay Yes so This is a topic that's come up When that person is there If the council has not discussed the issue or voted on an issue Who are they speaking on behalf of? That is a wonderful question and this is a lawyer answer There is it is a fine line because they are not they are Designated to serve on the committee by the members of their committee and let's say historic or so they're designated But they're not a rep they're not representing that entity meaning Let's just say the select man in a town think X But the individual select men thinks why and the individual select men when they go to the Community Preservation Act Committee meeting Votes in accordance with how they feel which is never it was why? That's their prerogative and that's their perspective if and when it comes to the board of select men to put it onto the warrant Then it's up to the board to make a decision Do we want to put this on or not and maybe the board says no because we as a group vote, you know, five to one To reject that that application or that concept. We're not willing to put it on without the right number of signatures Okay, so it's but there are variants It doesn't it does sometimes matter if the council for example Takes a vote and authorizes you to represent it at a CPAC meeting Then you are representing the council at the meeting If you just go to the meeting But you haven't been Designated then there's a difference you can speak about what the committee has done or the council has done or believes or thinks But it's different than you putting your hand up and saying I'm here on behalf of Does that make sense? Okay, I have to push you further because we do I feel like I'm a jeopardy. We do have people We do have counselors that by virtue of a vote of the council Represent us on certain bodies. Okay, so Based on what you're saying when they go to that body Representing us if we have elected them then they are speaking on our behalf. It depends I knew it depends. Yeah, it depends. I went to that same school In some circumstances it may be that you're actually designating someone to represent the position of the council At a particular thing or with respect to a particular thing at it in another circumstance. You're just selecting someone to Essentially be a part of that other group because they're a counselor So they're not going with any formal direction. They're not being told the council's point of view They're not being told to represent the council's point of view. They're told being told to be present Kind of as a liaison for the council so that that individual knows what's going on and then there can be a back and a forth Yes, ma'am Yeah, you really have because in Amherst We don't just randomly assign counselors or formerly select board members to go be something we assigned Specifically people to go to our joint capital planning committee and we expect them as Counselors to serve in the joint capital planning committee and communicate information back and forth The way what I just heard described Sounds a lot like what has been very ineffective Representation by groups from the now the council the library trustees of the school committee people who say oh, they just selected me to be there No, they didn't select you just to be there. They selected you to be a conduit So how can we make that clear or it's one thing for us to say it at Town Council But how can we make that clear that that's true for all these bodies that we're not just saying oh your representative of Counselors know you're representing the council's views back and forth So I appreciate the distinction and I agree there are different types of Representation and I think that's really what we're talking about right now I think the council if it this is a council issue the council and making the selection would specify We are asking you to go and represent the council's position the council voted, you know five to four to do whatever however many abstaining and This is the position you're going to go and take but there's other times like the Community Preservation Committee is one of them a Member of the Community Preservation Committee is designated by their body to go there It's it doesn't say to represent is as a member is designated So the idea is that the Community Preservation Committee is its own thing is its own entity So somebody's on the Community Preservation Committee might very well be supportive of a particular project that the council Isn't now as you suggested or you know, whatever the Historic Commission or the planning board as you suggested They're not going to be doing a very good service for their board or committee if they don't say to the to the CP the CPAC in this example look I'm really for that, but I know the four other members of my board are not You don't have to vote the way the four other members of your board would vote though But it wouldn't be responsible to just go and not tell them big. Oh, yeah, the planning board We're all for that I'm for that because that doesn't that doesn't convey what needs to be conveyed So there's a difference between being a legal representative of or being a formal representative of the position of the body And there are times like you might vote to send, you know the council president to a conference of council Counselors to represent the council and to share the council's perspective point of view, etc That's different than saying hey, we'd really like someone to go to this conference Just and I think it's because there there is there are two differences I think that you've just really highlighted one is of course the council doesn't sit on the CPAC so But for historical Commission rep who does sit on the CPAC? I think it would shock the historical Commission to believe that their historic Commission rep isn't supposed to go The way they think they would but they don't have the information ahead of time and that leads to the other problem Which is for example our joint capital planning committee We're not sending someone to go represent what we decided as a council because we didn't decide anything as a council They're sitting there together They're getting the information on behalf of the school committee of the town council, etc it's sort of a subcommittee way of looking at things and They're gonna do gall that out in there and then they're gonna Hopefully come back to the council and say this is how it's looking not just Okay, and that's yeah, that's I think that's a good example as well because in that example that person is really Collecting information. They haven't been designated to act on the council's behalf. That's a different thing they've been they've been designated to go listen and bring back a report and then eventually to go back and Represent the council's perspective at that but but that that's dependent on what what kind of part of the process we're in it depends on the different committees that you're dealing with and it also so the the requirement that a single member of Let's say the councilor the select and be on the affordable housing trust the affordable housing trust it's its own thing and So again, maybe the council isn't supportive of x y or z or maybe the board of select man isn't supportive of that But the individual who's serving on that committee is they get to vote how they want there on when they're in that Roll they're in their own thing That's very legal term But again, I think it would be irresponsible of that that select man Let's say to not say look I feel really strongly about this But I can tell you that my other board members don't feel like that And if we go forward with it like this it's not gonna pass the idea is that you're bringing your expertise to this other There's other enterprise that you're involved with and that you bring a lot of your what you know and what you learn there And you share it back and forth now again Let's go back because I think that the issue of representation that I was talking about is Important because it does bring up open meeting law things all the time. Let's hypothetically say there's a board of select men in a town with a big project, okay, and The planning board is holding a hearing on that project Two different scenarios the first scenario the board of select men votes to authorize person X to go in and Represent the position of the board of select men to the planning board when that person stands up They say I am here as the chairman of the planning board on behalf of the planning board Okay, that person is representing the plan But they've been imbued with the authority of the planning board to speak for the planning board That's different than a member of the board of select men simply coming to the meeting And getting up at the front of the room and saying, you know My name is Lauren. I am a select man, but I'm here as an individual and here's my thoughts on this And even if I say we've talked about this at the board meeting, but I think blah blah blah I am not representing the board. The board has not authorized me to represent it I can't represent the board. I could only represent myself And if I say, you know the planning board this the planning board that or the board of select men this board select men that I really can't be speaking for them at all Okay. Well, this is certainly, you know a turn a left turn I'm gonna bring it back to the open meeting law because I think it's actually really useful Transition under the new law Members of a board can go to a meeting of another properly posted board Okay, under the old law they cannot do that and I know this for sure I Had to tell One member of a board of select men that they need to leave because they reached a quorum at one of my first meetings in A town when I first started at the firm and it was very uncomfortable They like all pulled up a chair and I'm like, no, no three of you one has to leave very uncomfortable That's not the law anymore the law now allows a board a quorum of a board to attend Another board's properly posted meeting So this means let's say let's let's just take this let's say there's a big project and the council is really interested the council can Go as individuals to that other boards meeting What they can't do is delivery when they're at that other boards meet, okay So what does that mean? What if I want to say something? I could get up there as an individual if I'm on the council and I can say I'm here as you know I'm a member of the council, but I'm speaking on my own behalf What I can't do is turn to the other counselors, especially if they're saying together, which I don't recommend I'll explain after And say right. Don't you agree? Because by saying right. Don't you agree? Now I'm deliberating. I'm asking a quorum of members to tell me how they feel think believe, etc And they haven't posted So my suggestion always is in this circumstance if your board is chatty That's also a legal term post a meeting at the same time So that if in fact Someone gets up and they say, you know, I'm a member of the board, right? Don't you think this is really important because when I do that That's an open meeting law issue Now we have a quorum deliberating at this meeting, but if we've posted it is not a violation of anything Okay, and if in fact we don't deliberate fine What are some other things to think about? Don't all sit together at that meeting. No whispering whispering looks really bad The DA's did not like whispering and neither does the AG. I know I feel a little bit like a kindergarten teacher right now And I'm sorry about that But you don't want to make it look like you're violating the law So if you know if you're a five-member board and three of you are sitting here and you're all Then people are gonna think oh well, they're talking about what's going on and they shouldn't be so Don't sit together. Don't talk to each other. Don't drive together if you can avoid it now Sometimes people are like that's crazy. We have a meeting in Lakeville and we're coming from you know, I Don't know hi anus like of course we're gonna drive together. Okay. I get it, but if you can not then don't What about social gatherings and we were at social media. What about social gatherings? Again under the new law, there's an exception for people that wind up at a social gathering where there's a quorum of their board members But they're not supposed to Deliberate when they're doing that. So The example I like to give because it's a real one in it. I thought it was really funny And I observed it in a town where I don't represent anyone so it wasn't my problem, which was good I walk by the kitchen and there are like all these people Chitchatting around the table and I look over there. I'm like, oh, that's a cozy bunch and the guy who whose house I was at looks I mean he goes. Oh my god. That's a conservation commission every single one of them now I immediately went to the game of clue. It's a conservation commission in the kitchen with a knife But it looked horrible and as it turned out they were dealing with a really horrible situation In general they had an application before them. So whether they had been talking about that or not Everybody at that party thought they were you can bet that Monday morning. They had open being a lot violations filed against them Okay, so that's something you want to think about if you do find yourself at a party It's hard to schedule a kind of meet and greet like let's get to know each other because The risk of matters coming up that relate to your official business Exists so sometimes some towns will do a retreat They will try to do a select man retreat or a council retreat, but it's a lot of work for Everybody to kind of stick to the street and narrow and not to talk about stuff. That's ongoing So, you know, if there's thoughts about doing stuff and I know that you guys have in the past and there's ideas about About how to kind of build Relationships and that's important team building is exceptionally important But it's also important to remember that you have to stick to the straight and as I say with the open meeting law I always think you do better to assume that people are going to think the worst because then it's easier to know What to do if you're assuming that people are thinking you're doing something bad then, you know better what not to do Yes Could be for example median on the weekend Could we for example organize a dance Zumba party for the council and announce it as a public meeting You can have anyone you want to at any meeting you would like So, yes, if you post a meeting for a training or retreat or a Zumba party You may do so But don't invite Paul because I hear he likes to dance That was a joke. Okay. Yes If they post that Zumba party do they have to have minutes for that. Yes, they do Every meeting of a board or committee has to have minutes So if you double post if you post if the council is going to go to the planning board meeting or the planning board is going to Go to the council meeting both groups need to post. What's it mean to post? Time place date and then enough specificity so that they know what's going to happen at the meeting now If you're posting to attend someone else's meeting you can use their agenda as your agenda And you can use their minutes as your minutes if you want to, you know Although board members didn't participate in the deliberation. This is what occurred at the meeting and that's fine. Yes, ma'am Okay What needs to be included in one's own minutes. All right, so that's a believe it or not That's a question that is multiple issues Only the minute taker is required to take a minute that would meet the requirements of the open meeting Individual board and committee members who are not the designated minute taker can take their own notes in whatever form they want And as long as they don't share them with anyone else, they are not public records subject to mandatory disclosure If you are the minute taker and the notes you take are public records from the moment of their creation What needs to be in them? Time date place people present people absent Any motions made and votes taken as well as Enough additional detail to let someone who isn't at the meeting know what happened at the meeting So it used to be that it was just enough to do a very quick summary. Okay, if we use this kind of Which is not a Meeting in a traditional sense But let's say I attend a board of selectmen meeting where 20 minutes of their time is me giving a talk about the new Short-term rental law and then the rest of it is their own meeting and three people asked me questions during that discussion Really the AG would like to see My kind of general outline of what I said in the three questions and what I answered now that is a Significant burden it is significant. Okay, it used to not be that it used to be Attorney Goldberg presented on the short-term affordable housing law questions were asked and answered That was good enough under the new law. There needs to be more detail. Okay so this idea of And now it's a theme that we've been talking about that the law applies broadly at the law is intended to cast a wide net That its application is our interpretation is broad. It's all on purpose That's how the AG as the enforcing authority sees it that it's meant to have a far reach. It's meant to require Discussions amongst a quorum to happen at the table even if those conversations are uncomfortable because you don't know how everyone else there feels and Normally when we go into something especially in our private world private sector world you go when you're prepared You've done the research, you know, you've you've tested the waters with all the people that are going to be the decision-makers And you come prepared I have two water and superintendents in one town that I do an open meeting law training at every year They're both engineers not superintendents commissioners and they're both engineers and every year they asked me the same question Are you seriously telling me I am gonna come in and be as Unprepared as if I didn't even know what this project was about is that what you're telling me? I'm like, well You can read whatever's provided to you ahead of time, but I can't talk to Joe. You can't talk to Joe three member board It's frustrating because you're supposed to have your reactions your feelings your ideas in your beliefs. Yeah, the two Yes in the back and then I Pathetically you have a nine-member board and its chair you managed to talk members into participating in three-person Subcommittees to those subcommittee meetings need to be posted and have minutes Yes, I want to stay on the minutes a bit Partly because we're all taking our own minutes. We don't have minute takers Okay, I wanted to say on the minutes questions. So If the specificity has to be what were the questions asked do we have to do Lynn asked a question Kathy asked a question and then Can't so that kind of specificity who well who was the voice doing the asking and Suppose where I'll give you another example of we're talking to a set of ideas on do you like this or that and Someone makes this suggestion. So one makes that can we Summarize with the following ideas were suggested list the ideas or do we have to identify? the offer of each Knowing that we also have a camera going. We're also taping it. So It is Acceptable and allowable to use a videotape or an audio tape to help Create of acceptable minutes Basically the law says you're not required to keep a transcript. So it doesn't have to be she said this she said this She said this he said that though But it has to be enough for someone who wasn't there to know what happened at the meeting Now I can give you an example of this because the Attorney General issued a 17-page decision dealing with a search the search by the UMass Board of Trustees for a chancellor. I don't know if you remember this and the In academia yes, your reputation is very well known And so you have to be careful about the kind of information you allow to be in the public realm about applicants Or they'll they'll automatically know and this is what they told me because I I'm not in that world And so they in their minutes they didn't include anything about the qualifications They didn't include anything about prior experience They just said the candidate told us about his private prior experience or the candidate told us about her private experience our past experience and The AG basically said no you need to put that in the minutes And if you choose to you can redact it under the public records law, but it goes in the minutes So and they they wanted every question that was asked and and the response that was given now That was an interview so that's a little bit different than a regular discussion But in my experience it would be if if you're having a roundtable discussion about something and everyone has something to say And they talk multiple times I don't think you have to have it written down that every single person spoke multiple times I know you have to write that individual one, but you can say you know Person X was very supportive of this concept person y felt concerned about the position That this would suggest for the future and was you know Hoping that we would you know consider more options person whatever and if they said that four different times in four different ways You don't have to write it down four different times four different ways But enough so that someone gets a flavor of the discussion even if they weren't there Sorry Lauren. I said I wouldn't come today and here I am I Know that you have to give us the proper legal advice. I have to say realistically It's insane to imagine that volunteers are going to say Lynn wondered about this Alyssa thought it was a better idea to combine these two ideas Kathy said I have been through those meetings with those kinds of minutes and everyone argues about how they were characterized, etc Surely we can go with something that's more along the lines of bullet points, etc Until someone says we're not being clear enough. I think it's more the ideas than who said it so One thing that you missed when we started out was the concept of best practices versus What is reality and I understand it's very difficult to I mean I find it's very difficult to meet the Attorney General standards You know, I spend a good deal of time every day looking at sets of minutes that the Attorney General has found are not satisfactory So I understand I think you have to do it the way that you can that is as close to correct as possible One of the things that I have been suggesting to people especially if they are the minute takers is that they set up their minutes before the meeting Using the agenda that's been prepared. Okay, and that as they do that they can leave They can put everybody's name down and then when that person's speaking and they feel like it's important They can type that in right there If a person takes notes by hand, it's a little harder, but if they're if they're note takers by by computer It's a little bit easier Also, if you know what the big issues are ahead of time You know like I think of town meeting right someone always gets up and says it's for the children Someone always gets up and says I'm on a fixed income right those are those are two Alternative arguments, so you know someone's gonna make those arguments. You could write it down and then fill it in They're supposed to in the the kind of Best practice is to have someone who wasn't there understand what happened at the meeting So let's just say you were really supportive of a particular idea The AG would say for me to really understand what happened at the meeting We'd be better if I knew that you said it versus someone else, but I understand, you know Not everything is gonna meet that level So it's a matter of making sure that somebody who's not at the meeting can understand That's the standard you're working towards that they understand what happens at the meeting if it doesn't I mean I think a transcript is so-and-so said that so-and-so said that so-and-so and I'm not suggesting at all that a transcript is required Okay, that is not required It specifically says it in the law and I'm gonna remind you as well that there's a difference between talking about what a best practice might be And what's defensible and appropriately so if a challenge is brought so You know a lot of times making sure that you're trying to hit the mark matters as much as actually hitting it So understanding that you're trying to create a record that allows somebody who wasn't there to get the basic feel for what? Yes So with minutes one of the things I think the council has talked about in our particular committees is So we're trying really hard to make sure that we do minutes the right way But I another thing that's come up is maybe audio recording all of our meetings. It makes it easier. Is that good bad? Um Audio recordings are great and you can use them to prepare the minutes, but you do need to have actual minutes This is one of those things. It's a relic It's a relic of the law because it's hard to argue that an audio tape or a videotape of a meeting Isn't better than someone else Interpreting what happened at the meeting. I mean I think all of us can agree on that when this law was originally written That capability didn't exist and or you know, not everybody had a tape player. So they were entitled to get the records The law is moving and I think it will move it will continue to move there's open meeting law Propose amendment proposals every single solitary year not just one not just to usually 10 15 20 They don't usually get any traction But when there's enough to push it then something changes So I think we'll see a change on that in the meantime if you have the audio Recording and you're not a person that does well with typing as you go and don't bother Don't type as you go use the audio recording later to help you make the minutes and that's fine Until those draft minutes are prepared the audio tape or the minute is the minutes of the meeting And if a public records request comes in that's what's responsive to it. Okay? Yes So to clarify it would be you what we would but people were thinking is it be a way to have a Backup not in place of written minutes But as a backup and then finding out whether or not like how those would be posted because they still would be a public That that makes sense. I will say When under the old law, I used to tell people just write a summary Don't write down what this person said and with that person because what you will wind up spending your time on is I Spoke for 20 minutes. She spoke for three. She has a paragraph. I have a sentence You know, I thought what I said was so important and what she said was just a passing comment This is really tough. So to the extent you can get away from that and if you feel yourself doing that when you're looking at minutes You're not focused on the right thing Focus instead on what the substance of the conversation was and whether that's properly reflected Okay, now sometimes people have different perspectives We know that and then having that backup tape someone can just be told that's fine We also have the tape they can go listen to the tape if they want to But you do need actual minutes prepared okay, if you're using a tape to create minutes You can destroy the tape when the minutes are approved if you're using your draft notes as the meeting minutes They're public records as of the moment of their creation and you can destroy them after they've been approved by the body Unless a public records request is received in the meantime So I'm gonna give you the warning that I give to all people that take minutes Do not write anything there. You are not comfortable with other people seeing No Impressions no comments on people's outfits. No Annoyance about how much time something's taking because if someone makes a public records request for that It's public record and you can only redact something from it if there was a reason to and those are not good reasons Okay, so if you're the minute taker assume your minutes are going to be read Now what if you make someone makes a request and they're messy or they're incomplete or you know You really do believe that you were like really focused on what one person said about dogs because you love dogs But you weren't listening to what the dog hater said because you like I don't care about that opinion You know you're gonna go back later You're gonna look at it and say all right. I want to make sure I'm balanced here This was a long part of the conversation or whatever, but your initial draft doesn't do that. That's okay It is what it is. You're gonna write the big the word draft on the top of that Those minutes you're gonna put the date on them and you're gonna put on every single side If you have multiple sides, you're gonna put it on every side so that's clear with your initials So someone then later says look at these things. This is completely misrepresenting the dog conversation The answer is this is representing this was my minutes the night of you can see the date and the time I gave them to you and After that I watched the video or I went back and refined and now the minutes are the minutes that were approved by the body Okay All right, um someone did once asked me what if I do best in doing a shorthand There's nothing that says you the draft minutes have to be in in You know readable text and for example if I was to take the draft minutes and I had to write them No one in this room could read them and it wouldn't be because they were not in English It would be because I am a terrible hand writer. So That's not the issue. The issue is are they prepared? Do they exist if they do their subject to disclosure? Okay What else anything else open meeting wash Also a legal term I'm sorry if you covered this earlier Lauren in terms of the and then just say go back to the tape Minutes approval Did you have that conversation because we were having that conversation recently about the fact that the FAQ says you can do it a Variety of ways somebody was worried that that meant we should have to vote that we're gonna do it a certain way or not It's like no Let's just pick a way that works for any individual group because a lot of these groups Do have a staff person a lot of town council groups and some of the other town committees don't have a staff person and have to Rotate it so it's not even like one person is always doing the minutes and so they don't get in habits That's a good question the AG recently released that FAQ on how to approve minutes before It was assumed that the only way to approve minutes was by vote of the entire body And a lot of times people say to me well, I wasn't even on the board when that happened So I can't vote well That's actually not true. You're not attesting to the validity or the Facts in the minutes. You're just saying these are a record of that meeting So you can participate even if you're not there, especially if you need for their form To approve number two It does not require a vote of the body any longer to approve minutes a body can approve minutes in a number of Ways one is the traditional way vote of the body another is through the consent Calendar concept which is at the end of the the meeting notice you'd have three sets of minutes For example that you might be seeking approval of and unless anyone brings it up at the meeting. It is deemed to be approved Okay, that's one then the other is to give an individual the authority to approve the minutes So you don't need to vote on it at all now this works best when everyone's on the same page And so and they like the way the individual takes minutes when you're shifting minute takers and stuff that can be harder But there are some boards that it's just obvious this one person is good at the minutes And they never make changes but you have to talk about them in every meeting You don't have to do that if you don't want to you would vote under that circumstance to give the individual the right to approve the minutes Yes So just continuing in that and it's partly because you're seeing a bunch of people that we keep rotating who's taking the minutes So we're every time someone's taking the minutes are not as much of a participant So if you did a draft you marked it a draft you sent it around said anyone have any changes additions anything and People say looks okay Is that approval or do you need to have said? Say looks okay to X Y, you know, here's the person So this is one of those times when I really wish I was the writer of laws and not the interpreter the unofficial interpreter of laws in The most strict sense if you're the person that created the minutes and you're a member of the board You're not supposed to share that amongst a quorum and get feedback from a court because that Raises to the level of an open meeting law Deliberation because if the body has jurisdiction to approve then now you've created that problem If you have a staff person, it's completely different The staff person prepares the minute sends it out says please get back to me with your feedback Do not reply to all no problem at all Individuals can all write back and there's a couple decisions from the AG's office of Paul I'll send them along to you so you can distribute that suggests that you cannot Coordinate Outside of a meeting approval of met Okay. Oh, absolutely, but that's different than saying I'm gonna send the minutes around and get everyone's feedback And then everybody provides feedback. Yes, if yet if at a meeting you guys agree This person is gonna be the minute taker and this person is gonna be the minute approver fine. You're done They're not doing it together. They're not collaborating each of them have a different job Right one person is approving them one person is right Not being authorized to act together Sorry can if the council in their own rules of procedure would prefer one Method to another is that an appropriate thing for a council to do I would say so. Yes, okay? Yeah Okay Who's taking the minutes and then sends it and has sent them out is the only recipient for comments that too is a problem It can be yes Okay The the AG says you can't collaborate on the minutes So let's say you're just sending them back to one person But that one person then it puts everything together and sends it back out and says here are the minutes now That's a violation of everyone's ideas beliefs concerns opinions been incorporated and put in there I will send you those two Decisions the the best case scenario is to have a non board or committee member take the minutes and For those boards that when you can't and there's an individual member just If you have one person who's responsible for approving the minutes and that one person and just to you know Prepare them and approve them and you're done Or you could do the consent calendar way, which is you send them out and unless someone brings it up You know as part of the the meeting and they're just approved in the format they were in Yes So if you're having a particularly contentious issue under discussion And you had it at the last You had at the last meeting Somebody wrote up the minutes They come There's a big discussion at the current meeting Of the inadequacy of these terrible minutes. Do you have to record that debate in the next set of minutes? So I just want to Consent calendar might work for some of our situations. So on on the consent calendar Each of the members would have had to see a draft of the minutes So no feedback and so you so you sit down and you said you've all seen a draft of the minutes Do we have a yes? Yeah, you know, so you know, is there any objections and otherwise we're good to go So it's not a vote on each of them these restrictions tend to have a chilling effect on conversation Wow, that's that's a question. I don't know. How much time do we have are we gonna have some time here? I think the new law Changes the way that and and I say new but it's really been nine years But people are still they were doing it a lot, you know longer a different way I think it's intended to have somewhat of a chilling effect in that The ideas of what's going to be discussed is intended to be listed on that agenda Whereas before it could kind of be this free-ranging thing There was never any requirement that it be about that but we didn't talk about this Which is what if someone brings up something that's not on the agenda and can it be discussed and can it be voted on and the answer is it can be brought up as Long and discussed as long as the chairperson didn't reasonably anticipate it If the chairperson reasonably anticipated and left it off the agenda on purpose And it would violate the open meeting law to discuss it if the chairperson didn't anticipate it Then it can be discussed and it can even be voted The issue being that if it's not something that requires immediate attention Is it better and now I'm layering on this idea from the Attorney General to put it off to the next meeting Where it can appear as a properly posted Scheduled item for discussion so that other people who might be interested in this topic who didn't happen to come that night have an opportunity So again, it's not required by law the AG says if the chair didn't anticipate it doesn't have to be on the notice can still be discussed But they recommend that unless it requires immediate action it be pushed off to the next meeting I wasn't That I get but suppose It's the difference between recording a vote and Having a discussion Which is then recorded and entered into the public record. So if you know you're gonna vote Yes, or no, you can just sit there and be quiet and say nothing and not be entered into the public record and you vote Is this helpful? I don't know. I think you you could debate these issues all day. I will say that's If there's a very raucous Energetic discussion Deciding what to put in the minutes matters Especially if there's a lot of disagreements like as you just said do you have to write down this person said this awful thing This person said this awful thing this person yelled at this person this person yelled at that person No, you don't you can say a heated argument or a heated discussion followed and I will tell you that I'm not a huge You know, I don't go to court all the time I did go to court on an open meeting law issue once and the minutes were filled with Words that are not appropriate to be in minutes or to be said really that happened in an executive session And the recorder recorded literally every single thing people that they said and the judge called me in the other side up and said Who are these people that we're dealing with and I thought oh my gosh I just lost because the judge wasn't focused on what they did You know what they were whether what they did was something that was okay They were focused on this open meeting law issue and this yelling at each other issue So just be thoughtful you want to put in enough detail so that people have an idea what happened at the meeting You don't need to put in such detail that it embarrasses someone or it makes it difficult for them or anything okay, um, I'm sorry to disrupt this but This room was double scheduled and there's a hearing in here for the zoning board of appeals At six o'clock so we are going to take a recess and move down to the first floor meeting room And where we can continue this just a discussion until seven