 And now we are recording. All right. Well, welcome everyone. I'm calling to order the June 8 meeting of the governance organization and legislation committee pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 this meeting will be conducted via remote means. As the public are able to access the meeting in real time via zoom or by telephone. And we'll just take a moment now make sure that everybody can be heard and can hear us. And I will start with you Mandy. Present. Ernie. Sarah. Present. Pat. Present. Jennifer. Present. Excellent. All right. So we are going to jump into our interviews with our guests and again welcome to Bernie and Sarah. And before we do that though I just would like to review the agenda very quickly. We will move through this process of interviews, and then we'll deliberate and make our recommendation and for Bernie and Sarah you're welcome to stay in the audience during that period if you'd like to. And then we will move on to the resolution and support of the fair share amendment I believe that we'll have Kathy and Anna joining us who are the sponsors for that. And we will not be reviewing the bylaw concerning deceptive advertising today so depending on how much time we have. We'll either begin our discussion of the equity lens review process or begin to look at the bylaws probably do that first at least for, for some period of time but we'll have to see how much time we have. So, what we're going to do here Bernie and Sarah is. Committee members are going to take turns and asking you the questions. You'll each answer after each question and I'll. I'll rotate between the two of you who goes first for each. So I can go ahead and start, but before I do let me ask if you have any questions Bernie or Sarah about the process. I have one, or if I, if I don't think I can stay to hear you talk about us will you be emailing us after just to. I believe that the recommendation will become an action of the committee so Mandy, would you jump in and just say how you would normally handle that. So I, I messed up and waited too long last time but in general, the chair of the committee emails. The day of the recommendations to let all the candidates know what the recommendation is and when they'll be heard I think as Michelle said the intent is to have the council vote on any recommendation on Monday. Michelle or an eco should be contacting you sometime today or tomorrow. I forgot to do it and I promised with the planning board until the Monday of the meeting so we're not always as prompt as we hope. And of course the recording will be available for anybody who would like to watch it after if you can't bear to watch it in real time. So let's go ahead, these interview questions were adopted by this committee on May 25, 2022. And I'm going to start with you Bernie on this one and I'm going to read the question. Based on the selection guidance what do you feel you bring to the finance committee that can make it successful. Please include any experience you have with finance in general or the town's finance committee. Well, I'm, you know, as everyone knows I'm currently on the committee and then on this version of the finance committee and was named by the moderator to the preceding version of financing me. I mean I've worked to craft or manage budgets in five communities, one county either as an administrator or select board member or finance committee member or commissioner. I've been responsible for multimillion dollar budgets for community services as a public employees to the plate. And I've had substantial experience in how public budgeting works. I continually try to update myself, keep myself on top of things using the revenue revenues, divisional services updates newsletter position papers webinars. I maintain two professional memberships. I'm not used to using public policy with the emphasis and economics, not that that necessarily comes into play. We're familiar with the dismal sciences. So that's what I think I bring to the committee. Thank you Bernie and I should have mentioned that you do have up to three minutes and I'm running a timer here which if you go to that three minute mark you'll hear ring. Okay, so I tend to go on for too long so I'm deliberately trying to keep it. No problem. All right, Sarah. Thank you, can all hear me. Well, as a relative newcomer to town administration and politics. I will bring curiosity and questions without the weight of tradition or decades of past controversies. As a resident member who is not a former elected official or municipal employee is particularly well positioned to bring forward and speak to the community's concerns. And while I haven't worked in municipal finance I have developed and managed budgets as volunteer treasure to nonprofit organizations. I have overseen the bookkeepers been responsible for tax payments and filings prepared for independent audits and work with investment committees. So I have a keen appreciation for fiscal conservatism budget tradeoffs hard choices cash flow proper procedures and how the decisions of today can increase or decrease options for the future. I believe that my spirit my experience will readily scale up to working on a $90 million budget as the concerns are shared across organizations of very different size. I believe I have demonstrated my interest in the town's finances through my work on the Community Preservation Act committee. I have worked with the finance committee and town council meetings cup of Joe meetings, my comments on budget issues to the committee and council, and through my writing for the blog that I co host. In the blog I have made a particular effort to educate readers about how the town spends money, how it decides how to spend money, and how the public can be involved. I am selected for service on the finance committee the blog provides one existing mechanism for communicating with the public about the committee's work. Excellent. So, Pat I'm going to move to you if you would ask question number two please. And Sarah I'm going to start with you. What is your understanding of the role of the finance committee. The committee's job is to take a hard look at the financial implications of proposed actions by town council. The finance committee delves into the details of a proposed expense or revenue change in the context of the town's financial realities obligations and plans for the future. Today the committee also evaluates proposals for consistency with town councils adopted goals for itself, and its goals for the town manager. But I understand the committee to make recommendations based on money, not on other policy considerations. Those are for the full council to weigh. The finance committee also has the responsibility of developing and recommending the budget guidelines that the town manager uses to prepare the annual budget. I believe this is an underappreciated activity as it provides policy direction, long before most members of the public are thinking about the next budget. It would be a particular goal of mine to better publicize this activity and solicit public input. Thank you, Bernie. Hi, Pat. Well, charter basically outlines what the finance committee does to provide a thorough review and recommendation to the full council of the budget as received in a 30 day window, which is kind of a tight time frame but it's doable. So that's one real basic thing that the finance committee does the other more broader and interesting things the finance committee is authorized by the charter to as a whole to investigate any and all books accounts management of any town agency. And that would be it through a request of the time manager superintendent library director. And to interview time and plates as to how things are going and I think that's where my experience comes in. Because you can, you have a baseline operate from so you know when things are going according to what the state rules and regs require our creature in the state, even though we have a chart. We begin to ask questions about why things happen the way they happen, why can we do it faster better cheaper can we do it in a way. One of my, my favorite traces is that we've always done it this way is an excuse, not an explanation. And the finance committee does shape the budget guidelines for the for the council. It's an important, an important function. And the guidelines, as Sarah mentioned or sorry disconnected from the budget process because that was recently a member, and the budgets debated in May and June. So, making that distinction and letting people know is an important, an important role to be to be played. Thank you Bernie. Hi, I'm going to move to you to ask question number three please. Okay, and I will start with you Bernie. So, what is your own. What is your understanding of your role as a non voting member. To to provide a objective independent voice. It's an interesting position because the non voting members, the resident members were not part of town government per se we don't work for the town. And we're, while we collaborate with the council finance committee, we're really not elected officials either so that gives us a degree of independence. I think is refreshing, you know, I think you can make the best of it. Knowing, you know what works best what are best practices what are beds bed practices. So being able to take the question to challenge into endorse when there's a good idea. I'm very much interested in town operators efficiently as an organization, meet a variety of needs and even those that aren't aren't even those needs and I'm seen as immediately relevant to me, but you know so it's independent role that I think is an interesting addition to the charter. Thank you. Sarah. Non voting members bring the concerns and questions of the community, hopefully with a very broad perspective. The resident members can ask the basic questions for the naive questions can question assumptions and traditional ways of planning and managing the public's monies. Non voting members can also take the information back to the public as residents, not as elected officials or town employees, which I think allows a certain freedom of communication. Thank you Sarah. Okay, and Bernie that thank you. I'm going to move to you Jennifer to ask question number four. Okay, thank you. And this question so Sarah, you'll answer this one first. Thank you. The question is, tell us about an experience you have had collaborating with the group, particularly where opinions were in conflict or the decision was controversial. Jones library first submitted a request for $1 million to the Community Preservation Act Committee, two and a half years ago. All my service on that committee CPAC, no other request triggered as much disagreement among committee members as that one. And of course, public comments were also strong on both sides. And despite extensive discussion and debate, there was no meeting of the minds in that case. We disagreed. We had to vote and did, but everyone was very civil and discuss the pros and cons in detail. And then we moved on. And in case anyone listening to this is confused. This particular request from the library was first approved, and then withdrawn, and the library submitted a new proposal in the following grant round, and that one was approved by town council. Thank you. And Bernie. Yeah, I've been part of a number of municipal governments I also work human services for almost three decades. So there's always a, any number of experiences where we've been a part of a group. And there's been conflict and controversial decisions. And the one I want to speak about the one I'm very proud of is my role in the development of South County emergency medical services system which serves your field. And working with the two very talented other town administrators, we were able to take what were marginal professional and volunteer ambulance companies, work through all the disputes between three boards of select one, three different age, several different agencies to, to shape a pyramidic level ambulance service that serves those three communities now and in fact one after left as administrator was given an award for its for its innovation. That was a situation where we had to collaborate. We had to come up with good data. We've got some good professional guidance, identify key allies among citizens and then get votes from three different town meetings to agree to a plan that would start off with a great deal of controversy and ended with a great deal of unity between those, those three communities and that South County EMS has been very successful. That's something I'm very proud of having me. Thank you. Thank you Bernie and Sarah and Mandy, would you please ask question number five. Thank you. And Bernie gets to answer this one first if you haven't figured out our plan yet. And please describe the considerations and objectives you'll use for considering financial matters and the budget when making recommendations to the Council. A favorite quote, I miss it I miss appropriated miss identified this the first time I used it in the council that it's, you know, David Axelrod help put Obama in office. He's consulting with municipalities and mayors and like said you can be as visionary as you want, but make sure the trash gets picked up in the potholes get filled. So that's the first criteria, you know, are we meeting the basics of service for the community. And that's a pretty broad range that's that's that's, you know, running the transfer station, filling the potholes but also health safety, personal safety, public safety, health safety services, and then education, which plays a dominant role so I lose basic needs really that that's the first first criteria. The when you look at other services that you want to ask who's benefiting from them, and what are the expected outcomes and who's being left out. It's too easy to overlook certain populations. And as I said before, the, you know, to use the, we've always done it this way. Kind of explanation, it's an excuse, not an explanation. I try to keep in mind that effectiveness is an outcome, and not in the amount of money spent. So it's important to look back and see how things have been going and get some good measures of how things have been going, and always keep in mind that there's always more demand than money to be had. And so if you're going to, if you're going to fund make certain funding decisions, be explicit about where you're compromising and what don't keep, don't keep things hidden. Thank you, and Sarah. Thanks. I will want to make sure I understand the goal of the proposal, whatever it is, does the proposal achieve that goal. Is there a better way to get there. What are the downsides and for how far in the future. I would assess the proposal in light of council's priorities. Perhaps a proposal is affordable but a low priority. I would hope that the finance committee could say in its report. We can do this, but it will prevent council from taking other actions. It may be more important. Or perhaps a proposal is reasonable from a financial perspective what but would demand more staff time than expected concerns like that should also be raised. And in addition, and as Bernie said, who would be helped by this proposed action, would anyone be hurt. Who's, who's not at the table. Does this proposal improve access to services. When it comes time to develop the budget guidelines I would try very hard to solicit hopes and desires from the public, the needs and the wants. I would see it as my role to put these issues on the table so that they are formally addressed. And in all this work I would hear, I would adhere to two bedrock principles, ensuring the highest and best use of every dollar and positioning the town for a strong future. Every decision has an opportunity cost. What do we give up if we choose to take a particular action. Thank you Sarah and Bernie. I will ask question number six. What is your approach to incorporating public input into your decision making and that one starts with you Sarah. Thank you. I hope that I would have an open mind and be willing to be swayed by arguments made by the public. I would hope that written comments could be recognized in meetings. And even though there is often no dialogue during committee meetings, I believe the committee should somehow respond to comments. Often members of the public feel their comments go into a black hole and are not considered. I would be responsive to the public for the finance committee to say, we received a number of comments advocating for X, and here briefly is what we think. I would do my best to make sure that resident concerns are not overlooked, even if they cannot be satisfied. And my judgments would have to involve many factors besides public sentiment. If a popular proposal is fiscally unwise, then I would not be in favor of it. If people have strong feelings on issues not directly relevant to the committee's responsibility, then I would put them aside or refer them to the appropriate forum. If something is a priority for town council, whose members have been elected, I would defer to them and not the commenters. Thank you Sarah Bernie. The challenge that I have is getting input from. And it's something that's endemic, I think, but every community, not just Amherst or not just me, is getting input from a wide variety of citizens and not the usual suspects who show up with prepared statements that are read endlessly. You know, what I try to do is engage in casual conversation to genuinely listen to people's concerns. Try to offer information where I can, not adverse to sitting down and doing some research and sending people information I've done that. And to listen to concerns complaints either in conversation on social media, chance encounters, people who who make appearances at other meetings other than the finance committee and offer comments that may relate to to financial concerns. I'm always looking for different perspectives, and I'm always looking for good ideas to steal. I'm always looking for problems about as many as a good idea. I'll take in, in, in music. But again, the concern for me always is getting, getting a wide range of getting a wide range of equipment. Great. Thank you Bernie and Sarah. And so Pat, you'll ask, could you please ask question number seven. What else would like us to know about you that makes you a strong candidate for the finance committee. Just that I'm not afraid to do the considerable work to ask questions or to voice my opinion. I very much want the town to successfully meet the needs of its residents over the years to come. Thank you Bernie. Someone who's inclined to panic at the at a black swan events. I've learned that there are a few few things that one encounters in the world that are completely new. There's usually answers that can be found there's usually information that can be had, and that you have to kind of sift through and sort that out. So when disaster strikes and I've been through a variety of disasters. The first thing to do is to stop and think and listen and ask, you know, what is the data tell us. So that's one thing that I try to do on a personal level, I tend to have a sort of a self deprecating sense of humor. Not afraid to make fun of myself. But I'm also inclined to take a poke at pretense which can get me into trouble at times, not afraid to speak my mind. I try to keep the filter up but you know sometimes just feel compelled to do the other. This would be my if I go back on the finance committee this would be my last time around. You know I've been the next two years are going to be very challenging. I've had some role of play in shaping this budget in over the last two years. I really like to be able to see it through, and then take my leave. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Oh, sorry. Sarah you answered that one too right. It did. We went into a different order. Okay, great. All right. Okay, so Anika, if you could ask our final question, please. Okay. So currently the finance committee meets twice a month during the year but when budget season begins in April and May meetings become much more frequent. Can you confirm that you have the time to commit to this meeting schedule, please answer yes and yes or no. And I hope I have this right Sarah please. Yes. And Bernie. Yeah, certainly. Thank you. All right. So just, I know, Mandy, cut me off if I'm wrong here. Okay, I just want to ask if there's anything that either of you forgot to say, and would like to add to your comments for any one of the questions and I'll start with you Bernie. If there's anything you forgot to say. Characteristically, I will not say anything more. Thank you. Okay, Sarah. No, nothing more. Thank you. Great. Well thank you very much. Really appreciate you both being here. Appreciate you both applying for this very important position. And we will ask Athena to move you back into the audience and then you can choose from there if you'd like to stay or go. Thank you. We'll be in touch. I'm just gonna. All right. So, at this point, we are going to move on to our discussion and deliberations and ultimately we'll end up making a recommendation to the town council. And I wondered if we could just take 30 seconds to review the guidelines that the finance committee has so they're in your packet. And we can just do this quietly for 30 seconds just to look at the selection guidance and remind ourselves of that maybe some of you have already done that this morning. I'm just gonna mute myself and do that again for 37. Be back. If anyone needs more time, please raise your hand otherwise we can move on. All right. Well, I'll just start by saying that we have two excellent candidates clearly and just very very happy especially in light of what Mandy spoke about at our council meeting and. Finding folks to apply for these positions so I'm feeling very grateful for that and it makes the decision that much harder. And so I would like to open it up for discussion and I would encourage us to begin by discussing. Before sort of directing necessarily to a particular decision at this point, but I did see Jennifer's hand come up first. Yeah, I just, I did want to ask, because one of the criteria was excuse me if a candidate is reapplying that you know if they've that there is some preference if they haven't served for six or more consecutive years so is that so how long has Bernie been on the finance committee. That's my question. That's a great question and yes I did see that in the town council policy on reappointments and if anybody is looking for that that's in the finance committee selection guidance, which is in our packet. I believe that Bernie has been on for at least three years but Pat actually you were, do you know you were on the committee last year right here. He was not on the committee, the first year of the council so it's been two years and a few months. Great. Yes, he is would be a reappointment in this case and so the guidance that we've been that that has been adopted would apply to him in this case. Thank you. Mandy. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. I'd like to say a few words about each candidate. Bernie, as Jennifer just mentioned is currently on the finance committee and is seeking a second to your term. You know, in terms of his, he's absolutely qualified meets all of the selection criteria that we've said and set forth and adopted. You know, I, I liked his answer to how he would consider a budget with the questions of are we meeting the basic needs of the community. Before we're looking to add in more programs. And, you know, effectiveness of outcome. You know, it's budgeting stuff. And he's got the experience to deal with the toughness and all, and then Sarah I was really impressed with all of her answers. I really liked that she brought out the budget guidelines as a very important time for needing public input, because I think we've seen is this year and not just important time for public input but for the council to really consider what those guidelines mean, as we've seen this year as a budget came out and a school committees adopted budget and trying to relate that to a budget that happens five months later. And how do you do that. You know, and so I think both of them would serve on the finance committee, extremely well would bring their own perspectives that not our counselors that are currently on the finance committee don't necessarily have so no matter what decision and I'm going to not indicate which way I'm leaning right now but I think no matter what recommendation we make the town council and the finance committee will be well served. Any comments from Pat or Nika at this time and Nika. I would have to just cosine is literally to very strong and and qualified candidates I think that you know I like both of their answers to most all questions I mean they were all really great answers. I think that, you know with running three decades of experience and you know setting up. It was a South County emergency services. You know there's a lot of nerves in that. I appreciated Sarah's fresh perspective. But also very in depth and thoughtful. Very motivated to engage community. I appreciated that she brought up thinking about who was not only who was at the table but who was not at the table. And I thought that that was very important and that she's also just really on with our overall goals in terms of really getting more community members involved to serve on these committees but this is this is a tough to say to say the very least for myself that I'm still spinning within in my head as I speak. Jennifer I saw that your hand. Yeah, please. Yeah I agree with you know everything that's that's been said I don't get this is. We can't make a wrong decision but it I don't know I really am struggling with how we make the decision because they are too very, you know, excellently qualified candidates. I will say it's not going to surprise anyone. I didn't love when the word usual suspects slipped out and talking about public comment, because I feel that I've experienced and you can speak twice and then the third time your usual suspect and I do tend to use that characterization when they don't agree with someone I don't know that they when people speak in support of their positions they think of them that way but I will let that go. So, um, yeah I, I don't know how we proceed from here I mean I don't know if deference is given because to. It does say, um, you know in the guidelines that if someone has served that the preference if I'm reading it correctly, they would normally be reappointed in less it exceeds six years. I mean I'm not looking I'm not advocating for one over the other I'm just saying if we're I'm at a loss at how to make the decision with to such well qualified candidates. So I don't know if we start to look there. I can just read that quickly so that if anyone's watching this I'll just read what that says. Generally, if a member of a multiple member body appointed by the town council is seeking reappointment they are given preference and appointment for up to six years of consecutive service to take advantage of the experience and expertise gained, and to take advantage of the voluntary time commitment of members. If a member has served six consecutive years, well we don't have to even go on to that because that's not the case here but that's what Jennifer is pointing out here. I believe I saw your hand first. Okay, so I was just wondering if we can that's still I mean I understand the words that were read, but I'm still not as as clear as we went in. I guess we went in well. I think based on our answers to great candidates and if we've walked in knowing that I mean I'd like to know is this standard does this mean okay, that would mean that we would read point burning. Are we misleading with the with the interviews as if there's open because then wouldn't that mean we would have wasted Sarah Marshall's very valuable time. So if we could just have a little more clarity like I understand the words I'm just not sure does that mean that this is an automatic or my automatic or expected reappointment that we could have maybe been clear about ahead of time. One thing that I'll say is because I, I do struggle a bit with understanding this as well. Any applicant is made aware of this of these fine if this financial selection guidance. It's not to say that I'm not sure how I feel about whether this is equitable or not but both candidates in this case or any candidate that would have applied, I believe would be aware of this financial selection guidance. I do understand I actually sent it over so I mean, just like now, you know, of reading it through like I guess, a different lens I have missed that bit to question it earlier. Yeah, Mandy. I'll talk about a few things because this was a paragraph that was debated a lot in GL before went to the council it was debated in council reappointments have been debated in nearly every committee and at every appointment process where a committee has been sought since the council started. This paragraph there's there's two other sentences. There's three other sentences that that should be read, which are the recommending committee will treat every opening whether a seat is held by a current member who seeks reappointment or not as a vacant position. A resident seeking reappointment will have their current service and experience on the body considered as part of the process for making a recommendation to the council. A committee or board members under no obligation to seek for accept reappointment, nor is the recommending committee obligated to recommend reappointment to a resident seeking it. So it really is not an automatic. It's really not intended to be any type of automatic it is tended to be a preference is the word but preference. So the council is not requiring current service and, you know, that on a committee. So the council in the past has reappointed people who sought reappointment and recommended and recommending committees have recommended people who have sought reappointment to certain committees, and they have not in. They have sought reappointment and instead recommended others who have sought appointment at the same time as someone seeking reappointment so it's, it's a preference. It's not automatic. It's tough, especially when you have multiple qualified people. And to me the, the, the key sentence is the have their current service and experience on the body considered as part of the process for making a recommendation. Because that's, that's one thing I look at when I say, when I think was a resident who's seeking reappointment contributing to the body, what were their contributions valuable. Did they show up, did they do the work. Did they collaborate in a meaningful manner, or did they cause dissension did they cause, you know, struggle with cooperation on a committee. You know those are some of the things I look to when thinking about should they be preference for reappointment is, you know, do they in some sense do they work well with others not just was their vote or vote I liked. You know, do they have respect for other committee members, the council, the staff, the, you know, what, what did we see with their service and is that something we would like to continue. You know, and when I think about all of that with, you know, so now I'm going to get into where I think I'm leading, which is when I think about all of that, as it respects with respect to Bernie. He's been a fantastic member of the finance committee, the contributions he's been able to bring are something on a finance committee that doesn't have a lot of municipal experience other than Andy at this point, although Kathy is much more, you know, Kathy's now four years in right you know it's not just Andy at this point Kathy's got now a lot more experience so does Lynn. Well, you're, you're very new, right. Alicia is very new. You know, and so I think his, his service the last two years, the fact that he's not seeking a third term right now that it's not years five and six that it's years three and four are also going into my thinking about whether, you know, we should, I should go over Sarah. You know, and, and when I think about all of that, I end up looking at this reappointment section of the policy and going and leaning to my preference being to recommend Bernie. That says nothing about the fact that I believe Sarah would be a fantastic member of the finance committee that I would love to see her apply again. I don't know if this committee doesn't recommend her, but Bernie's experienced the last two years through coven through the creation of the crest through the funding of the crest through the funding of the I to see that through for another two years I think that continuity, maybe very valuable to not just the committee but the council. And so that's where I'm leaning right now but that also gives people sort of some background on how that paragraph came to be. That's really helpful Mandy. I'll just add some some something to this in terms of both of the, both of the candidates. I have had the privilege of working with Bernie for this bit of time now, and as a new member of the finance committee and new to town government and I have seen that he has been a wonderful and very knowledgeable committee or non voting resident member and he's, he has a really strong understanding of the budget and I've also seen where he is open to exploring different initiatives and. And I've really appreciated the collaboration and what he has brought to the committee so I will say that I will also say that I think Sarah has shown excellent leadership in her role on on the CPA committee. That's something that we should really uplift and think through because her leadership has been absolutely tremendous on a committee that's really difficult in certain ways has to make difficult decisions there's a lot of detail involved. And I really like what Sarah said about her willingness, and it sounded like excitement to engage the community and I think that's really important in finance, it can be somewhat dry or isolating if you're not familiar with some of, you know, the concepts or even familiar with the way municipal budget works. So I really appreciated that there would be that sort of line out to the community it seemed and from a non voting resident member where that is different than what a counselor is able to do in that in their role on the committee. So it this is really a very, very difficult choice. I feel personally, my like hard strings are pulled when I think about Bernie's comment about wanting to see through the work that he has already, you know, been involved with and I think that that is something to really think about seeing through, as Mandy said, a very difficult time in our town, and also these new programs and Bernie's really been fantastic and I can understand why he would want to see see all of that through. It occurred to me that this appointment changes over in July just next month so for Bernie he goes from, you know, being on the committee to potentially being off the committee as of next month and they're still, you know, more seeing through. And that's that's where I'm at right now, and would love to hear any other additional thoughts. My hesitation is to use any, you know, like this preference for example as a way to make a decision. And so, I'm really struggling with that piece there that's a real. It's a real tough one. You know I'm struggling as you are to I'm looking to that because it's the only thing that could give me some guidance to make a choice one way or the other. This is, I mean I thought about it all last night I don't know how to vote. I don't know why I'm kind of grasping at that for some, you know, independent objective guidance to use this site. I think that has been the tendency with other boards and commissions to is if when when someone applies for their second term, if they have, you know, been a part, you know, member and good standing and participated, you know, for all the reasons. And so I think we said that the kind of preference or tendency is for reappointment to a second term and again with two such equally well qualified, otherwise equally well qualified candidates that's, you know, I keep looking there because I don't know how to make the decision. Can I ask a clarifying question on the reappointment is that you you talked about where it came from and that it had been debated. But where did it. Where does it come from, you know, originally, is that something going back, you know, way before the charter way but you know where do you have any history on that. So in some sense it's a compromise. Paul's policy is if someone seeks reappointment to to read, you know, if they want to stay on a committee and they're already sitting there to appoint them. No questions asks no interviews, not even considering who else is there. The select board was similar before the charter changed is my understanding. At least up until that six year limit for the select board I don't know whether Paul has sort of a two term limit or not but the select board sort of considered it most most appointments are three years so the select board sort of said if you're seeking for your second term, you know, and and you want it will give it to you. There were some counselors on the first council that wanted it automatic for up to six years and other counselors that didn't wanted to believe that an automatic six years sort of keeps the status quo and an automatic keeps the status quo without knowing who else may apply right once you're in. And if you automatically have that that seats, then if that happens, there's no opportunity for diversifying at all. Any particular board or committee until you've worked through all of that. And so you're, you know, you're sort of in that position and then there's also the. Some counselors believed that prior service should be considered in terms of both the political aspects of how they vote on certain committees you know this is not just this is a policy that doesn't just apply to finance committee appointments but it applies to ZBA and planning board and there is definitely on the first council a difference of opinion as to whether particularly the ZBA and planning board appointments were political or not, and should consider how people may vote. Or may not vote right because you don't necessarily know ahead of time but you know and and so in some sense this this where the council ended up from my perspective was much more of a compromise of not automatic. So when I treat them all as separate open seats in order to see who applies because if they become automatic you never even capture those applications. And you never see who might be interested in who might apply, see who applies, do the interviews and then make that decision of course for a situation like this it doesn't make our job as counselors on a recommending committee any easier, but you know so someone at it to just be automatic and never see any new applications or anything and others said you know we, we want to see the applications we don't want it automatic we want to be able to consider has has the person done the job, you know because if it's automatic you might be putting someone in there that hasn't done the job, but they sit on the board and they're automatic because that's what the policy is or they might have done the job but they might be a very, you know, you know someone who's very disruptive and has harmed, you know, and made more difficult the work of the committee not because of their views but because of just how they operate and being able to take that stance between appointments and say, is this still a person we want on the committee was important to some counselors so that's why I say it's more of a compromise between an automatic and absolutely open don't consider it at all brand new it's a, you know, we are going to consider it and we are going to preference but that doesn't mean you get it. It's not very helpful in some sense to, to us at this point but that's sort of the history pat pat knows the history just as well she sat through all of those she can add anything she wants to that. That can your cat just make the decision for us. I'll tell you later. Okay. Okay, Anika. Okay, so Mandy or Athena please stop me from not allowed to ask this and Michelle you don't mean to put you on any spot but you seeing as you are on the finance committee. Okay, so with. So we have three of us here as do counselors on committees it's like the, the newness, the curiosity can be great and it also can be a curve and, and it can delay in certain aspects so with your experience so far and recognizing that we have, we didn't set we can we cannot go wrong I think that there are so many strong points for each Bernie and Sarah. I mean, clearly we have this kind of steadfast like I've got this experience to Bernie and then. I sense the exact same through Sarah and she could even be looking through more of an inclusive wins with this. But in your experience as a new counselor, do you think that if you were leaning on maybe the needs of the finance committee considering the makeup of the group. Do you think that you did the committee would benefit as it stands or from some from experience that can flow through, or maybe fresh perspectives, a fresh perspective. That's the best to answer that I will say that I received an email this morning from a counselor who would like to consider extending the time on the non voting resident members. It was another lens to consider and that counselor said that that did have to do with continuity and even though extending would mean that non voting members are on longer than the counselors, it would help to sort of bring that continuity and be able to sort of help as new counselors come on to the committee so I do feel given where the town is at with its financial health and where we're going to be challenged in the coming years that having Bernie will really be helpful in particular really looking at what we're what we're coming up against in the in the next couple years. I also feel like I hope Sarah runs for town council. Honestly, I, I, I think Sarah, I have seen Sarah just so thoughtful, extremely smart has, you know, delved into things that, you know, maybe she didn't have like with her blog, for example, where she's talking about things that she's, you know, maybe not have a lot of experience previously with I think her curiosity and that's a word that came up a few times. So I really hope that Sarah will run for elected office I hope that Sarah if she's not chosen for this position will apply for some other position that's available, because she's really fantastic, but I do think that the continuity and where we're at right from the committee and with the town having Bernie would would be helpful so it's not a great answer but it's the best I got a second that town council. So I, one of the things that I was thinking about when I first got on to the committee was sort of the debt. What was the diversity within the committee, you know, and in all different ways, and I'm not sure the committee has. I don't want to say, I don't think that public outreach, other than sort of the hearings that the committee is required to do and the list, you know that kind of thing I don't feel like the public piece has been as strong as I would like it to be, particularly as Mandy said, when the guidelines are established and you know I had a slightly different view on Bernie's comment about meeting the basic needs of the community than you did Mandy, because I think that that's really subjective. What are the basic needs of a community right and he talked about potholes and of course I mean there's some level of that that's absolutely true. But there's also like how what lens are we seeing the basic needs of the community through and, and I'm not saying that Sarah necessarily like had something to say that was different but I just I that was my take on that. So I do think we need to it's 10 o'clock we do have some other business so I think we're going to have to move toward a recommendation and what I'm going to ask is if there are any members of the committee that would like to try to make a motion to make a motion and given the conversation that we had, and then we'll see if that passes great if it doesn't, then we'll have to try again, and Mandy. I mean, I'll make a motion based on where I'm leaning and I have no idea whether it'll pass or not but I'll I'll move to recommend the town council appoint Bernie Kubiak to the finance committee as a non voting member. I'm determined to begin July 1 2022 and and June 30 2024. Instead of a point it should be reappoint. Is there a second second the Angeles. Great thank you Pat and is there any further discussion. Okay, what was that the end of the term length was it 2024 2024 I believe our finance committee non resident non voting members are two years so 2024. Thank you. Are there any other comments to add before we vote. Alright, so Mandy, I'm going to start with you to make it easy. How do you vote. I'm an eye. Okay, Pat. Jennifer. Hi. Anika. Hi. Okay, and I'm also an eye. So that is unanimous. And yes, Mandy. I think we've set it up. Okay. With it unanimous. I do just want to make sure if Sarah watches this or that it goes into the report. I think we've said it enough that that unanimous doesn't mean. Or doesn't reflect anything about our belief as to Sarah's qualifications or how well she would serve on the committee. So I just wanted to make sure that said. We wish we had four applicants and two spots available. Yeah, I just want to make sure. Anika, I watched how it, you know, you were working to figure out up to the last minute how you were going to vote unanimous is not important. I just want to encourage each of us to make the vote that we think is the vote we that we really support and not feel like any committee recommendation has. Has to be unanimous and I'm sure you did what you needed to do, but I just want to make sure for all of us because I think there's a bunch of who we attached to unanimous. I respect all of you, but you did not sway me that much. This was very difficult, but this was my own difficulty. Thank you. Love you. Yeah, no, that's what I assumed, but I'm talking to all of us in truth. It's just there. I mean, this is, this is really like I'm still, I'm still thinking about it, but I'm, I'm doing my best to think, you know, beyond beyond myself and I'm really not that budget person like that. I deeply respect those who are. And I know this is a, this is a tough decision and so where I, I have my own watch needs but I, I generally feel like with most of the council votes it's not necessary it's really not out my personal ones at all. And I do hope this will motivate Sarah or fire Sarah up potentially to to run for elected office. Thank you, Sarah. Or ZBA, ZBA, ZBA. Oh, ZBA. Wonderful idea. Yeah, yeah. Okay, great. And Athena, did you get everything that you needed there? Yes, thank you. Okay, great. And Mandy, I'll follow up with you about. So I heard sort of the conversation that was happening in the beginning about the next steps and sending the email but I'll just make sure I got all that right and if there are any other logistics that we need to handle on the back end of this pat I see your hand. Yeah, I'm going to need to leave the meeting I'm having warnings that I'm starting a migraine. So, but I am there in spirit. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, so we're going to move on to our review of the resolution and support of the fair share amendment. I did give Kathy and Anna, the 10, 10 o'clock so and I see that on is in the audience is not so I'm a thing if we could bring. We bring, I'm getting confused. Yeah, please bring on it. I love that would be great. And Mandy, are you in a position where you can pull it up. Okay, awesome. Welcome, I was just waiting for you to tell me to do so. Don't we speak telepathically. Hi, Anna. Hi, is Ian road wall in the audience. Yes, I'm so sorry is our. I was wondering if you could be a sponsor if you could bring it in him and that'd be great. Wonderful. I was wondering, I'm like, wow, Ian is just joining us at just thanks to us fun now. I mean it is he's correct, but you're right. Welcome back. Ian. Nice to see you. So I'm going to pass it over to you and Ian just to give us a little background on this I don't think Kathy's here but I'll keep an eye out in case she comes. Yeah, I wasn't sure I didn't think she could make it but no worries if she's able to, obviously we'd love to have her. So, Ian if it's okay with you I've got like three sentences and then I can pass it to you if you have anything to add. So, thank you. So the fair share amendment is a proposal that will be on the ballot in September. And that, yeah, September. Yeah, sorry, my brain just was like, September, November, November, November. Sorry, I've been really focused on September for the past three weeks and can't get that out of my brain. So the fair share, let me start over the fair share amendment will be on the ballot in November. There we go. And it's a proposal to amend the Massachusetts Constitution and create an additional tax of four percentage points on the portion of a person's annual income above $1 million. So this would generate approximately $2 billion. I'm sorry, let me rephrase that billion, not rephrase emphasize $2 billion a year, which would be spent on quality public education, affordable public college and universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads bridges and public transportation. I didn't get a shirt but I did get a pin and what's really cool is they show you all of the things that it's going to fund on their little pin you can see roads and bridges and schools and universities it's great great logo. So, one of the things that one of the reasons why I wanted to bring this forward as a resolution is because Amherst is really Amherst stands to benefit from this and in it, not a unique way, but in a heightened way. Given our needs in our in our roads and bridges, given the the presence of the land, the Massachusetts land grant institution. And given our needs with our schools right we've seen we've seen needed investment in our public schools. I believe the council should come out in support of. And so I was very excited that Ian who we've worked with before is now working with the fair share amendment, and was able to work with me and creating this I also want to note that our school committee passed a resolution in April or May, supporting the fair share amendment theirs was obviously much more focused on K through 12 public education ours is broader because the town council covers all of it. So, I appreciate your consideration and happy to answer any questions you have about clarity consistency or action ability. And then Ian do you have anything to add. I think you gave a great introduction. Thank you, Anna. And thanks for working with me on this. Some of you may know this has been through sort of multiple iterations, going through the state legislator legislative process. And now it, as Anna mentioned it's finally on on the ballot in November. We're really excited about about winning this and it will be an annual $2 billion. And the amount of people of individuals impacted by it across the state would only be about 20,000 to 25,000 individuals in in the population of, I think it's close to 6.9 million in the state. And a number of, along with Amherst school committee and a number of town councils, city councils and town meetings have recently passed similar resolutions, Holyoke City Council just last night passed it. And over the weekend, I think, I think Conway town meeting Pat was the most recent one to pass it also. So I am just really grateful for your time with this, and we're excited to hopefully pass it here. And Ian and Ian thank you for your advocacy in these different areas that you've been advocating so for thank you. Okay, so let's start our review and we will begin as we always do with the title. And seeing if they're the title. I know Mandy usually does a preview preview review. And that's been very helpful and I see she's made just a couple. So we will any comments or questions on the title or the way that the sponsorship is outlined here. I think we just added Ian right. I don't know the whole thing. Yeah, just didn't put it in there. It's okay. Okay, so let's start with the first whereas. I just added the Oxford comma. Love an Oxford comma thank you. There's a couple of them that got added throughout so I'll highlight them as we go. I have a question for you about Oxford commas but I'm happy with that so it's fine. Okay, any, any, just jump in, because I can't see everyone very well so let's move on to power to whereas to. Okay, whereas three. All right, it looks good whereas for one of the word that stands out to me and I'm not, I'm not saying we should remove it but to take on enormous debt the word enormous. I don't know why it's standing out to me I don't know if anyone else has a reaction to that word, but I'm fine leaving it but it just seems maybe like subjective like what's enormous. It's subjective. I mean I think if you really, if you want to dig into it, we can and we can look back at the resolution that was passed in support of student that forgiveness and see if there's language there. And if it's not something that you want to pursue then I'm comfortable leaving it. No, no, I don't I don't need to pursue it I just out at me so I mentioned it. I appreciate it. You know I you know I hate a subjective term and that's absolutely one. Okay. All right, so next insuring. So this one I added an and, and this could be one of the ones where I wasn't sure whether that was appropriate or not, but the way it read to me. No I think the end is appropriate. And I got rid of the comma because I thought the phrase was reliable transportation crucial elements and supporting families and the workforce and building economies. Yep. So is the M capitalized. I shouldn't. Oh, in here. Yeah, I don't think so. No it's not. I just always get trapped with that. Like million needs more emphasis people don't understand millions really big. I always want to capitalize it. That's funny. Well you got the 48.9 in front of it. I thought about I thought about just instead of 0.9 like really writing it out but I just got them out too. Okay. Wow, that's. Okay. I'm really this is very interesting. Right. It really is. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I enjoyed doing my research on this one. Not that I never don't enjoy doing my research but I really enjoyed my research. Yeah. All right so I think we're at the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority. I had a question about this one. Yeah, is the MBTA not considered a regional transit authority, because you said it's the largest regional transit authority and maybe it is by area if the MBTA. I just don't know. I think it is larger in terms of the region it serves geographically. But I can confirm that. I mean it's the second largest public transit system. I don't think the MBTA is considered regional I think it's considered not municipal but metropolitan maybe metropolitan thank you. I figured it was because the MBTA wasn't considered regional, but yeah, I think that's true. I'll confirm this. And did this like so that 70% is wow that's really something and wondering where did this information just like did you find this on their website or where this information come from. I believe my source for that was the Massachusetts government. The mass.gov but through through public transportation. Information. Yeah. Sorry, it's not connecting today. Yes, through just through the information on the state website about transportation. And I will pull that up to confirm. But there are 15 regional transit authorities, and then the MBTA so it's not right. That's correct maybe that it is not considered a regional. And do we normally site in these kind of resolutions I've seen where we have and where we haven't but for something like this we, we felt like it was getting needlessly complicated to site. If you'd like me to I can. No. Okay so whereas there is inadequate. Okay. Whereas we recover. I have a little bit of a. I don't like in order to in order. Crucial in order. I usually just take that out and say crucial to improve. Do you, how do you all feel about that. I would agree. I don't like it as much, but, and I don't think that in order to impacts the clarity consistency or action ability of this. Because I think that it's one thing that's needed it's not the only thing that's needed for me in order to makes it a little bit more of like it's part of a process versus it's the only step in the process but again if that's something that committee feels strongly about and then needs to see and that's fine. It's usually something that comes up like in a check it on any one of these, like it tells you it isn't coming up right now. It came up. It's underlined. Okay. I've just taken it out gotten you taken out but I'm I don't have any strong feeling that it needs needs to be removed for me when I read it. Yeah, so I mean when I read it as new state revenue is crucial to improve. I mean, it just, it feels clunkier to me but it doesn't. If that's something that y'all feel strongly about then that's that's fine. No, let's leave it you like it let's leave it. And one. Okay. All right. This opportunity. So the only sorry I'm I'm I have a clarity on my own thing. Technically it's the Amherst town council's goals or Amherst town council's values not goals. We don't have goals as a town. That's not to say we don't have lots of goals, but we don't have stated goals. Thank you. Town councils values. Yeah. Nice. All right. Where is asking everyone to pay their fair share. So I put the essence lessons to match it with allows. So I guess the question is, is it allowing the state to lessen the large and growing gap or is it. Is the common good is the name. Yeah. Which which is the way you guys intended it. It's that it allows the state to lessen the growing gap. Okay. Yeah. And then we're getting the, I think these are the hyphens. Yeah. Yeah. That's fine. Okay. Whereas a four cents per dollar. An Oxford comma. A couple of them. One there. Yeah. So I was struggling if it was like. Well, hang on. So you don't want the Oxford comma if you're listing two things that are both multiple item. Right. So, so this is education infrastructure transportation as a group. So that would be a Oxford comma. And I read it as fair reasonable long overdue. But maybe. Otherwise it would be fair and reasonable and long overdue depending on how you read it. Right. Yep. Nope. Those are good then. Thank you. Okay. So I thought you were missing the word amendment and then because it's an amendment, I capitalized it. And then the billion and then an Oxford comma and the period. Because we do periods at the warehouses. So there was a. Oh yeah. Nope. That sounds good. At least I got the date right here. One more Oxford comma down here. And then I just had one question. Which is more of not clarity consistency or action ability, but, but maybe you guys know the answer. Is the amendment written such that the additional raised if past cannot supplant already budgeted. Items for those items, meaning with the two billion. You know, a lot of times we see these and. You, you pass this and it's for transportation. And so the state then takes the transportation money out of the general fund. And so, you know, it's like, Oh, well, we don't need it in the general fund anymore. I was just curious whether this amendment is written so that can't happen. So it would really be an additional two billion or would we. Sort of my understanding is, is that it is additional revenue. I don't have the exact. Language of it in front of me, but I could get that back back to you. Not necessarily. I was just curious. I mean, if you have the exact text of the amendment in front of me, it does not specifically talk about supplanting or not, but it, I mean, it does talk about. I can read it to provide the resources for quality public education and affordable public colleges and universities for the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation, all revenues received in accordance with this paragraph shall be expended subject to appropriation only for these purposes. In addition to the taxes on income otherwise authorized under this paragraph, there should be an additional tax of 4% on that portion of annual taxable income and excess of $1 million reported on any return related to these taxes to ensure that this additional tax continues to apply only to the Commonwealth's highest income taxpayers. The 1 million income level shall be adjusted annually to reflect any increases in the cost of living by the same method used for federal income tax brackets. And it'll apply all tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023. So it doesn't specifically talk about supplanting. So I think there's some, there's some. Interpretation in there. I think so there might need to be some more work if this passes at the state house level. Okay. Yeah. So make sure it's not just like. And that's part of one of the reasons of passing these town and city and school board resolutions. It is also not just to build a broad based coalition of support, but also once it does pass to ensure that. This coalition that that exists continues to press pressure, the state legislator legislature to follow up on, on the amendment and distribute the funds to these. To these resources and equitably throughout the state. Thank you. Shall I make a motion? Yes, that would be great. I move to declare the town of Amherst resolution and support of the fair share amendment. Clear consistent and actionable as amended on June 8th, 2022. Second. And any further discussion. Okay. Anita. Yes. Andy. Oh, is that Mandy? Yeah. Sorry, it sounded like Andy and then I'm like, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I was not on this committee. Jennifer. I. Okay. Great. Congratulations. Passes you. Thank you all. Thank you. Both. Yep. And we'll get that over to Lynn and Athena and every role. Yeah. You know what I mean. Okay. Yep. All right. Thank you. All right. I'm just going to wait to be booted. Okay. We did lose Pat. So you could stick around. I can pretend to be Pat. I don't have a cat, but I can pretend to be. Yeah. Okay. So I'm not seeing any. Buddy in the attendees other than Anna. With risks. I should have asked if she was planning to make public comment. And if she stays there, I'm not going to make public comment for public comment. Before we decide what to do next. So, Anna, if you would like to make public comment, please raise your hand. You are free to make public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the GOL. For up to three minutes. And we will not engage in a dialogue or comment on a matter raised, but we will be taking notes. If you would like to make public comment. All right. So we had a couple other things on the agenda here. What I'd like to do is use the remainder of our time since Pat is not here. To review the bylaws and the opinion of GOL to be carried over to the next council to review that list. And I am going to lean on you a little bit, Mandy, because I know that we are actually tasked with doing, but could we just take a two or a one minute pause? I need to use the bathroom. Or I can actually, Nika, if, if I'm just going to hand it over to you for a quick second here, I'm going to go to the bathroom and I'll be right back. Okay. Okay. Mandy, did you want to clarify, go ahead and clarify. Michelle was. Sure. So this is the, what's in the packet, I think, is just the simple list. We should, let me see if there's. Yeah, this one's just the simple list. So the simple list, there's a better document that will help us decide which ones we want to take up. Sooner rather than later, but, but when. The charter was passed, there was a bylaw review committee that needed to be formed to basically review the bylaws and make them consistent with the new charter. So remove references to select board and town meeting, remove things that didn't apply anymore, add in references to town, town council or substitute a town council or town manager for the references to say select board or town meeting. And basically make it consistent with the new charter and they did that. We rescinded and replaced every single bylaw as well. And then they said, we didn't know what to do with these. And it was a big list, you know, that these might be more than just that administrative change here, change there. And so the council should continue looking at these. They might be outdated. Maybe you want to do something much more substantive than that committee was tasked with. And so GOL was tasked with that for the course of about two years. And as you guys have been able to see, we were able to do a lot of that as it was writing rules, as it was reviewing rules, as it was doing committees and all sorts of other things. And so we were able to get to a few of them to make recommendations of no, don't bother changing this, you know, it's been dealt with or, you know, this one needs rescinded, you know, we don't need it anymore. And you'll see some of that at the bottom of it. But basically. There were somewhere we were like, you know, what the bylaw review committee said is logical and we need to look at it further, you know, and it needs some work and it needs some help. But we don't have the time or the expertise potentially that it needs to go. To someone else. So what you're looking. Let me just share it so I can go through. Because this is the simple document. So what you're looking at is the summary of. Every single bylaw that GOL was told to look at and what we recommended be done with it. And so the ones we get to just say, ignore RIVs. GOL basically said whatever bylaw review committee said about junked vehicles, RV uses, pawnbrokers, the trust. We're done with, we don't need to touch. It's either been fixed or we did something else or we just don't recommend anything and the council accepted that. So, so this set here. This GOL committee doesn't really need to do anything with. There was a set down here. Number four recommended for action rescind it, rescission. The council did rescind that bylaw. So that one's done. And then there was a group over here. Number three that. GOL said, you know, we need a town committee, a board. The manager, we need help from them because they're the ones that have to tell us whether something should be done or not. You know, for example, littering and illegal dumping. That the, and this is just a, this is just the listing. There is a document that explains what we were tasked with doing or asked to look at in each of these documents. And for something like littering and illegal dumping, it was, should we add in extra areas of town into that bylaw and expand the scope of that bylaw. And GOL said, we need concoms and the agricultural commissions recommendations on that because that's where they were asking whether we should expand it to. And so that group, this entire group is what GOL recommended. And then the council did actually refer to the town manager to get those information to get those. To get those recommendations back to the town council. Departments or town and board committees to make those recommendations to look at those bylaws to make recommended changes and then to get back to the town council. So one thing that GOL should do is probably. Check in with the town manager on the status of this whole group. But until. GOL hears from. The city council that is referenced here, the town, you know, through the town manager HR director town attorney. G. Well, doesn't really have a role in this, although you'll see in here, residential rental bylaw was in there and we recommended it. Go to the BLC and the board of license commissioner in the building inspector. CRC is now dealing with a whole rewrite. Right. This was a specific action for one particular thing, which the board of license commissioners was looking at. But, you know, and so we don't have much to do with this other town manager is doing its job in getting these committees to look at them and get back to the town. Add to that, Mandy. So I did meet with Paul actually to review this list. And it was, it was when I first started. So I, because I just wanted to jump on it and give time. But I feel like there's a timeline that we're supposed to report back. Maybe you said that when I was in the back. That might be in a motion. I'd have to look at the motion, right? But the council passed in December. There might have been a timeline, but again, GOL is not tasked with making and recommending reserved revisions to these particular bylaws. So the ones that we need to deal with are this group, the one in number one, where GOL went to the council and said, you know, we still need to look at these. And we think the town council can actually review these that they don't need the expertise necessarily of a particular board or committee given what the board, the review bylaw review committee wanted us to look at that, that, you know, in terms of what solicit and I can't even tell you what some of these were for. But say, for example, I think street numbering of houses, it was like, well, do you want to also talk about naming of houses or something? And and that was, you know, GOL can have that conversation itself. It, you know, and so fees and charges, you know, there were just things in there. And so we should pull up the bigger document that explains the request of the bylaw review committee in each of these 10 bylaws, 12 bylaws. And then the next step should be picking one or two to focus on and then just sort of ticking off each one as we go instead of trying to do all 12 at once. Say, you know, after we see which ones are, we could as a committee pick off and say, you know, we want to focus on discharging of firearms and nuisance house, say, or nuisance house and soliciting first. Let's see what we can do with that. And when we're done with those and have made a recommendation to the council, we'll move on to street numbering and snow and ice. You know, and instead of trying to do all 12 at once, GOL last time tried to do pretty much everything at once by farming it out to individual GOL committee members. But then you're constantly trying to talk about 13 bylaws at once. And that became really hard. So I would recommend picking one or two. I think the full document that explains and summarizes each of these, including what's been done on them is in the SharePoint. But I know it was in a council packet. It might take me a few minutes to find it. But also I'm in a January 19 GOL packet. Thanks. I have something also here that's in the packet table of bylaws identified for future consideration with updates. Oh, that might be. Did I miss that in this packet? No, it's not. I did not add it to our packet, but it's in the SharePoint eight twenty five twenty one was the date. I could pull that up first. Am I allowed to let me pull the January 19th one up? OK. And also, Jennifer, I see your hand. Yeah, I was just wondering how how were those bylaws of all the bylaws selected? So so when the bylaw review committee made its report about here's all the bylaws with all the changes for the charter, they also had a report that said, and here's ones we think the council needs to do more work on, but it's outside of the scope of the bylaw review committee. And so so so when that that was their recommendation, the council took that recommendation and then said, OK, bylaw review committee says, look at these other ones for and they had and you'll see in here, they had specific reasons why they wanted us to look at stuff. And so then the council said, GOL, take those reasons and do something with it. And this the summary I put up was that that do something in a sense and and all. So, for example, you know. You know, the Affordable Housing Trust, GOL voted to recommend take no action personnel. We we recommended a referral to the manager because there was inconsistency in the language of protected classes. But the bylaw review committee didn't believe it was within their purview to make a recommendation on how to be consistent, that that should that was too substantive for what their charge was, which was make the charter consistent, make the bylaws consistent with the new charter. And so anything they saw about inconsistency or potentially not related to state law anymore, they said that's outside of their review and their charge, but still needs looked at. So we're going to tell the council to look at it. And that this is sort of the three year evolution of that look. And so let's find one that they they recommended, GOL. Keep that's not. Nuisance House, so, you know, we apparently this is one that GOL recommended to the council that it stay at GOL for dealing with. And you'll see the bylaw review committee. Wanted the attorney to look at Section G and wanted to determine the definitions of alcoholic beverage and owner of record. And so there's been a town attorney discussion. But they also wanted us to revise other things. And so. And so we need this document. This was as Athena said, was in the January 19th GOL packet. So I just pulled it up. So I can go look this up. Yeah, this is the one that helps would help us decide for the ones that are within GOL's purview still, that weren't referred to the town mean manager for action that were kept within GOL, which ones we should look at first. OK, thank you. I want to go look at the full document. Yeah, thanks. It's 11 pages long, so it's huge because it it does this for every single document that was that's great. OK, you know, it does it for every bylaw that is in this summary. Great. OK. And this summary basically says here's what. So you don't have to read 11 pages. Here's what we recommended in those 11 pages. Right. OK, great. Thank you. And so do we want to add that to this week's packet, Mandy, the other document that you had had up? I think Athena would probably say yes, since I just put it up. Does that make sense, Athena, to add it? I'm sorry, would you repeat that, please? Should we be adding the document that Mandy just pulled up from December two thousand twenty one to the packet this week? Yes, if we're using it at the meeting, then we should have just a packet. Perfect. So it's the one that you said, Athena, was in the January 19th GOL packet. I'll do that now. Thank you. OK. And Mandy, your recommendation for if you could just help me to understand how to sort of flow this with our work schedule. What is your recommendation for how we should tackle this? So give give me a second here and I will show you. So my recommendation, these are the two documents put together is to take the summary and these 12 and have each committee member at the next meeting come back with sort of a rank order as to how they would like to deal with them. Like, which one should we look at first and then the GOL can look at based on, you know, Newson's house is on this one. Here's the summary of what we'd be tasked with, what we have been tasked with looking at with Newson's house based on the summaries in the GOL report, use item one from the summary of bylaw disposition and try and rank those 12 based on, you know, individual preference, maybe, you know, but come to the next meeting with. What each individual wants to work on first as a committee or thinks the committee should work on first and then we can set an order and then we can start working and discussing on each one in a logical manner. Things to consider would be. How necessary is the revision to be done quickly versus can it wait two more years? You know, how extensive is it? How much time might it take? You know, each person can can look at that and do that. And then maybe next meeting, we can actually discuss which ones we want to take up and in what order. OK. And so taking up one or two or one, maybe a couple per meeting depending on what else our workload is. And do you think in terms of criteria for ranking that there are any like goals or sort of values that should be taken into consideration when we're looking at. I mean, it's been so long. I can't even tell you like what the reasons for looking at these are right now. So I think I think if you're looking at, you know, as as 12, you know, look at. Are some of these more important? Are we having problems with some, you know, like that fixing the language would really help something or fixing the language? Further is a goal, right? The other things we tend to consider. But until I, like I said, I haven't reviewed the summaries, so I can't. I don't even remember why some of these are on here. OK. All right. Well, let's dig in then on our own time to that between now and next week. And I like Mandy's suggestion to come back if you. I mean, you could what it makes sense. No, I guess we can't do that. I was going to say, could we send a rank in advance that I could look at? And then that way for next meeting, we could start or can we make a decision right now, at least on one or two that could be added to next agenda? Or do you not? Do you think it's not that I mean, we could try, right? Are these in the right order 26? So these might be, I don't know what order these are in, you know, we could try to briefly go through some of these and see. Michelle, I just wanted to I just wanted to jump in quickly and let members know that the previous bylaw review committee has a really extensive report on some of these bylaws identified for future consideration in their 12, 16, 2019 packet that's still on the website. Awesome. OK, that's great. So so here's one new committee. Yeah. OK, bylaw, I can share a link with you. OK, thank you. That would be great. So let's take this one and maybe this one we can deal with next next meeting with a request for, say, the chief of police or the crest person to show up to the meeting, peaking and peering into the place of habitation. That's this first one on the summary of deal with the council. The bylaw review committee basically said, should we add drones? And so that's a discussion we could have, right? Add what? Drones to the bylaw. And I'd have to pull up the bylaw to say how it reads right now. But that's peaking and peering. That that's that's your peeping bylaw, right? And so the question is, should we be adding technology to whether it's a violation to peek into someone's bedroom, right? And the bylaw review committee said that's not under our jurisdiction. That's the council to have another discussion. We're not going to do it ourselves. So we could put that on the agenda for next week to have that discussion as to whether we should be adding drones to that bylaw. And did you say at inviting somebody to participate, inviting the chief of police to so so so you'll see here, the recommendation is, does should GOL deal with it themselves or should it be referred to another committee? And so since we're technically not supposed to, you know, these were the ones that were carried over. What our recommendation could be is to either deal with it ourselves or send it to if we think it should be, I don't even know whether it should be TSO or CRC, or maybe we could just say, you know, GOL is just going to make a recommendation to the council. If they don't like you, I'll make a recommendation can send it to another committee. Right. But I would say if we're thinking about dealing with this one on substantive level, we bring in the chief, right? We bring in maybe the Crest Director to talk about would it be helpful to add drones? You know, and other electronic cameras, you know? Right. Jennifer, I see your hands been raised for a while. Sorry about that. Oh, no, that's okay. I was just wondering, so like when I just lanced at the list in terms of what might stand out as, you know, one of the, you know, top items we would look at, does nuisance house seems relevant to our, you know, to CRC's revising the rental permitting? Yeah, so nuisance house has had some work on it, right? About the town attorney opinion, that's the summary that's right here. And so we could talk about that one too, or that one, you know, town council needs to decide whether the review is appropriate to occur in GOL or needs to be referred to a separate committee. It could potentially, given its relevance to rental that's in CRC, GOL could potentially deal with that one with a vote that says, we recommend CRC refer nuisance house by law to CRC, you know, that the town council referred to CRC. You know, those are perfectly fine. In terms of, you know, what people encounter, thinking that that would be a high priority. Right. And so that's something that, you know, if we want to take up something like that next week, or even this week, if we're in this brief review saying, you know, that's not what something GOL should do, that really belongs in CRC, given what else is there. There could be a vote to recommend the council refer nuisance house by law to CRC. So I think we should do that. I think that makes a lot of sense. And as the chair, Mandy, I hope it sounds like you're okay with that given that you suggested it. Is that okay? I mean, that's where I would send it if we weren't going to deal with it. You care for what you say. But if GOL's not going to deal with it itself, given that CRC is dealing with rental registration and nuisance house deals with that, and certainly some of these owner of record and all, we're dealing with definitions like that right now, as Jennifer can say, can attest to. We're talking about those definitions as it relates to rental permitting. So it's probably the appropriate place. Okay. Let me make a proposal and see how this goes. So I agree we should vote to refer that. Both the peaking or peering and the discharging of firearms, which to me feels very relevant right now, is something that asks for the chief of police to be involved in in terms of a conversation. So what about bringing or inviting both the CRS director and the chief of police to our next meeting to deal with both of those bylaws? Is that something, is there, do you see any problem with that, Mandi, with respect to what's being recommended there? So I'm pulling up the discharging ones and what they looked for, which is definitions. Yeah, I have a different chart that I'm looking at that you are not, but yeah, it's similar, but it says consult with the chief of police, says the committee recommends future consideration of whether shotguns and airguns should continue to be excluded from the provisions of the bylaw. And then yeah, there are non-substantive amendments. It also says to consult with KP law regarding MVL. But does that sound like a fair plan to bring those two to our agenda next week and ask both CRS and the chief of police to join us? Is anyone opposed to that? I don't oppose, but I'm not clear as to the, what that bylaw is exactly for. So, our general firearms. The firearms, yeah, go ahead. I was gonna say, I think I already closed the, I already closed my general bylaws. We can put it in the packet for next week, I think, because we don't have the language on this one. Let me see if I can pull that up quickly to find that one. Okay, so here we go. Let me share this one. So the discharging of firearms, it starts at the very bottom, so it's this one. No person shall fire or discharge a gun, palling piece or other firearm, except as other provided in state law. And then it doesn't apply to shotguns, air guns, and for these reasons. And then you can't do it within 150 feet of rail trails. And so basically they asked us to look to update it and whether it's still updating. And then peeping and peering is the next one. No person upon the property of another shall intentionally peep or peer into a place of habitation of another. And so that's where the question of should we be adding drones and things like that, because you can do that without standing upon the property of another. So those were sort of the questions for those two. Okay. Anika, does that answer your question with respect to the firearms? Yes. Okay, perfect. All right, so let's make a motion on referring the nuisance, what was it called? The nuisance house? Is that? What is it called? The nuisance house bylaw. Nuisance house bylaw. That's such an interesting name. Okay, would anybody, would somebody like to propose a motion on referring that? I can make that motion. To recommend the town council refer the bylaw 3.26 nuisance house to the community resources committee for report and recommendation on changes recommended by the bylaw review committee. Second. Jennifer, seconds. Great. Any further discussion? I just have a question. So it has to go to the council and then the council refers to me. But we could tech, we could probably get that. Onto consent. Potentially. Potentially. We're, we're anonymous. It worked. Unanimous. Not anonymous. Anika, how do you vote? Yes. Mandy. Hi. Jennifer. Hi. I'm an I as well. All right. So, so for future agenda items, our next meeting is June 22nd. And I just want to take a quick peek. Where am I here? Too much stuff pulled up. Okay. So you're going to do peaking, peering and firearms, firearms. Yeah. And so instead of us, you know, I had recommended we just come back with the things you could as chair just pick through these every so often as we finish them and say, you know, next time it's going to be town fees and charges. Okay. Let's do that just to take that step out. But if somebody feels strongly about one, just just send me an email or once you've had a chance to look at them and then we'll kind of go from there. And so I will send an invitation to invite the chief and the crest director for next meeting. I'm also going to follow up with Paul about that list because I do believe there was a timeline attached to that. And I think it might be July from what I remember seeing. So yes, Jennifer. You're muted. I'm sorry. I just wanted to ask a question before the meeting closes. It's not pertaining to this. Oh, look at this. Okay. One, thank you, Jennifer. Yeah, we'll do that. So moved to request the town manager provide the town council with information regarding the following general bylaws by June 30th, 2022 as detailed in the governance organizational legislation committee memo recommended disposition of referral bylaws identify future consideration dated December 6th, 2021. So that means, what does that mean for us, Mandy? That means I need to follow up with Paul. He's supposed to get to the council, his responses to that number two list number three, whatever the list that was three, three, the third set. And that would mean, so we have a meeting on the 13th and then do we have a meeting on the 27th? Okay, so I'll send him an email as soon as we finish and just put that on his radar. And then for next week, other than that, I really hope we can take a dive into the equity lens review. I'm really hoping we can spend a good portion of time on that if nothing else comes our way. Is there anything else that any members know about that will need to be dealt with? Okay. I don't have anything that I can see. So yes, Jennifer, and you had a question. Yeah. So I've in the last few days been getting personal emails to not just the emails to the full council about the plant medicine. And I just needed my memory refreshed. Where does that stand now? It didn't get referred back to GOL. It's on, it was by motion postponed to the June 13th meeting. So it'll be on the June 13th meeting. Thank you. All right. So if there aren't any other questions. Minutes. Oh, yes, minutes. Thank you, Mandy. Yes, let's adopt the May 25th, 2022 minutes. I'll second that motion. Wow, I like that. Okay. Hopefully you got that Athena. Okay. It is 10.59, we are right on time. I know. Yes. Yes. Okay. Mandy. Hi. Jennifer. Yes. Hi. Yes for me too. Okay. Excellent. I don't have any items that were not anticipated. And if there aren't any other announcements, I am, I feel like I want to wait until 11, but I won't, let's be admitted early, journeying at 10.59. Thanks. Bye. Bye.