 All right, Mandy, we're recording yours. Good to go. Thank you. We're going to see if anyone joins us for exhilarating conversation today. So I'll wait 10 or 10 seconds. I thought the agenda was kind of small, which was amazing. Is there any possibility we'll end earlier? We might! That doesn't come out of my mouth as chair very often. Okay, so we're going to get started and then I'll talk about the agenda. Seeing a presence of a quorum, I'm calling this regular meeting of the Community Resources Committee of the Town Council to order on September 7, 2023 at 4.33 p.m. pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, extended by Chapters 22 and 107 of the Acts of 2022, and extended by Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023, this meeting will be conducted via remote meets. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via Zoom or telephone. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time. We are also audio and video recording this. So with that, I'm going to take a roll call to make sure that everyone can hear and be heard and that will also serve as our attendance roll call. So, Pat. Present. I surprised her because I should have started with Shalini under the alphabetical. Shalini. Present. Thank you. Mandy is present. Jennifer, talk. Present. And Pam Rooney is not here right now. I don't think she will be here. So, yeah, I don't think she will be. But we'll watch just in case she decides to come. With that, our agenda, Pat, was commenting that it might be slightly sparse and it may be. The one thing that we were going to have on the agenda originally was a hearing on the opt-in specialized code. And so one of the reasons it is sparse is because that was pulled from the agenda before we needed to post the hearing because Anna and Jesse had indicated that they will not be ready with answers to the questions and ready to present. They needed a bit more time. So we will be doing that in two weeks instead. I had Athena post the hearing today for the hearing in two weeks. So that sort of cut our agenda down and nearing the end of the term. We are nearing completion of our referral items. So we're going to take some time for two of the items. One item on the referral. The other one is the specialized code. And then continue discussion on the AMHT meeting follow-up. I watched the last CRC meeting. So I am at least up to date on what you all discussed last time. I thank Pam for running that meeting in my absence. But we're going to spend the bulk of the time on nuisance house slash nuisance property. We'll take public comment probably before. We'll see when we take it. But it will probably be sometime in the middle of the meeting, not after all of our discussion and action items. Then we'll do the minutes and everything. And maybe we'll end early today. So last meeting, you all made it through a second or third review of nuisance property. I've got basically the document as it ended. At the last meeting, we can pull that one up. But after watching the video, I modified that document to try and clean it up based on everything you talked about. And so we could pull that one up too if we wanted to see what it all looks like modified for what you talked about last time. We can pull that up after we go through the rest or before based on those conversations. And then there's a few things I want to go back to because I wasn't at that conversation and I want to bring some stuff up. But then I want to talk about with nuisance, if we make it through everything, what our next steps are for that? Because we had talked early on about robust public outreach and all. So I sort of want to talk about where we are with nuisance and where we're going. And then we'll move on to the AMHC meeting follow-up. Questions or thoughts at this point before we move to nuisance? Pat, you're muted, Pat. Sorry. I was going through this and we had already talked about the snow and ice. I believe it's section 2B and then also C6 where we refer to. I'd have to find it. Yeah, like in section C, it says snow and ice general bylaw 3, 4. That kept bothering me and this is minor, so I don't want to waste our time. But it isn't, somebody, we kept it snow and ice first because we thought people would find it easily. But just the title doesn't refer to anything else and I think we've expanded that bylaw. So I think it should say removal of snow, ice, and other obstructions from sidewalks, which is what the bylaw says. And we need that at least once because then you could have snow and ice and other obstructions or something. But I would not know that I might need to clean up my sidewalk because people can't get by or something like that. And I said it's minor, but it really kept bugging me. Yes, so I have put up the document you guys created last meeting. It might be worth where you got all the way down to this last part here is where it was indicated to start, which is the second half of the corrective action plan process for nuisance properties instead of problem properties and then one thing on state law not preempted. And so I wonder if it would be better to see, because you're referring to, sorry about all the scrolling, but you're referring to this section. Yeah, that's right. We don't have to do it now. It had a lot of changes and moving around because of different things. And so it might be better to look at the version I created in response to all of those comments that corrected those names and things like that. And so I pulled this one up. This is the one that was in the packet. No one's seen the other one because I did it yesterday and figured we'll have time to review stuff, but it was basically an attempt to clean this up based on that conversation. So let's start with that. It would have been good when you finished that to have sent it to us because I would have had time to look at it. And I needed to be bigger now. No, I will make it bigger. I finished it late last night and knowing we had a short agenda-ish, I figured we'll go through it. This will not be the last time we're seeing it. I don't, even though I moved it to action items, I don't intend to vote today because I think we need to send it to make sure like Rob has seen it and stuff. But yeah, so I made that decision because I thought let's get everything in from everything and then we'll send out the decision to everyone, but we'll take the time to review it. So let me put that one up. Jennifer, you had your hand up. I wasn't worried. I just wanted to agree with what Pat said about identifying the bylaw. So yeah, and we can still come back to it later. I think it's this one. I have lots of stuff going. So this is, and I'm going to put it this way. I'll make it bigger. To all the red lines refer to marked up version changes from the prior version. So there's, it looks a mess. Well, right now I can't see anything. I'm going to make it bigger, but if we do all mark up, you're going to see a whole lot of stuff. And so I'm going to show you the non-marked up, the simple markup. So if there's a red line and you want to see what was deleted or added, let me know. But that we're going to start down where you guys didn't get to last time. Then we'll come back and start from the beginning again and catch everything. And I'll show you what that section specifically looks like. Thank you. So you'll see it looks a little bit different than the last one, but you got through looking at notification and it said corrective actions or something. And so I've retitled it corrective action plan because that was our correction process. And we've referred to corrective action plans. And so this is the cleaned up. It nearly mirrors what we didn't get to last time, which is the nuisance property. What do you do with identification? And then what is that correction process? So last time you talked about once it's a problem property, you notify people, meet, you put a plan in place, that plan gets implemented. And then what we're talking about now is what happens when either that plan is not implemented or whether there's another nuisance violation after the plan is implemented. And so that the property becomes a nuisance property instead of a problem property. And so the two parts again of this are there's the notification process. So once it's designated as a nuisance property, I did retitle what the notice is. So oh wait, I want to retitle it. It's not retitled in this. It's one of my requests in my comments on this. And right now, based on what you talked about last week, last meeting, it would be that notice is that the property is a nuisance property now. If it's a rental property, the rental permit might be suspended, revoked, denied. The owners are liable. And each day or portion of a violation constitutes a separate offense. That's that sort of mirrors what the last notice included. And so are there comments on the notification? So this is what the notification includes section. And I will raise my hand, but I'm happy to hear from others first. So I have a couple requests. I gotta find the right section here. I would like to retitle the notice from notice of a public nuisance and violation to notice of a violation and designation as a nuisance property. So it would look notice of violation would look like this just the title of what the notice is because you're really notifying of a violation and that it's a nuisance property. So I thought it was just a clearer title. And then I would put an and or between owners in person. Well, actually, no, I would not. Now that I think no, it should be both. It should be both. There should not be an or there. So that's correct. And then I wanted to talk about sections C and D. And I wanted to add a section. Last meeting, you changed section C to notice that the owners are jointly and several liable for all subsequent violations of a public nuisance of the public nuisance by law. Well, no, hold on. Oh, no, that one's an easy one. It's not public nuisance by law anymore. It's nuisance property by law. I had a question about the one year or current least period part of this notice. It appears throughout all of the bylaw about when how you're accruing things to get up to or or counts or points, however you want to call it to get up to being designated a problem property or a nuisance property. And right now they all say within one year or current lease period. And I would prefer to delete the current lease period. I would like to hear what people's thoughts are. But when I think about it, a lease period isn't necessarily a year. A lease period can be six months. A lease period could be two years or three years. And so to me, including that actually is less clear about what you're counting from for the three or the two or the extra one than if you just say within a one year period from the date of the notice or from a specific thing. So I'd like to hear thoughts on why the current lease period was in there. Jennifer? I don't know why it was in there, but I like the year because the current lease period can be two weeks. And so a year is actually, I think, I think that's better. And I agree with that. Shalini? Yeah, I think Shalini's just thinking. Yeah, I'm still processing. I was just worried. Current lease period would mean, you know, in some sense it makes sense if we're saying nuisance property from the if it really is a tenant issue. If tenants just moved in and someone calls them for having a gathering in the backyard of 20 people for a birthday party, and the prior tenants that had five, the current tenants are going to end up causing that designation or the prior tenants has had three. And so this one, even though it's their first, it goes back to nuisance property. So you could argue that might not be fair to the tenants at the same time. You know, and so counting it as only the current lease period potentially of that. But if you've got a tenant, I don't know, I feel like it's too vague, current lease period or too changeable depending on who, who a tenant is. If you own a property, it's always one year. If you're a tenant, it might be two weeks, it might be six months, it might be two years, it might be that it doesn't seem equitable. That seemed to support it. Jennifer seemed okay. But Jennifer, and Shalini was Yeah, again, I like the one year. I mean, I'm just I know this is very what's the word empirical, I'm just going on one. But like I'm thinking of one house in my district that was would have been a nuisance, you know, if we have this, and there was a the last weekend of the school year, there was many disturbances. So there are now new tenants, but the property manager is really determined not to have that again, even though it's new. And so I think by keeping it a year, it just is a good thing. But again, I don't think it needs to be more than a year if you have a three year tenant. And this, yeah. And I, I don't know whether we need this phrase here, the now jointly and severally versus are now are liable for all subsequent violations at the property. Are they they basically mean the same thing, right? Oh, or because because jointly, or you can just so they might not mean the same thing. Jointly and severally would mean, I think would mean one ticket is written and it's pay it's do it's written sort of to the tenant or the owner. But there's not a ticket to the owner and a ticket to the tenant one ticket. Whereas if we don't include it in there, I don't know whether that would still be the case. But maybe there would also be the case where you can have two actual tickets, one for the owner and one for the tenant, say if they're different. So it might expand the ability to write different tickets for different people. But I don't know the actual answer. I would just be curious whether if we delete it once the attorney reviews it, whether they add it back in or not, like Yeah, because they would see the deletion. They might if we keep the marked version, we would probably clean it up for them. But they even without it, they might say, you know, it has to be joined in several thoughts on that deletion. It is simpler just to say libel for all subsequent violations. But not being a law person. I'm not sure. Never. I was gonna say the same thing, not being a law person. I don't appreciate the new one. No, so tell I mean what what it's saying that together or separately, they're responsible. Sort of. I mean, my understanding is it's if there's a $300 violation written, all five people say if there are five people, five people have to pay a total of $300, not each of the five people pay $300 separately. And so that $300 can come from one of the five, or it can be from five of the five split up. So, so think of a rent. If we think of leases, and three people are on a lease, every single one of them is responsible for making sure they'll rent each month is paid in full, even if they have their own sort of separate agreement as to how they pay it. Well, if one person doesn't pay it, the other two still are responsible to make sure the full thing is paid. And the and the person and the owner can go after just one of those three for any back rent, they don't have to go after all three is my understanding of what join in several means. They could go after all three, or they could say, you know, these two, I don't have a shot of getting the payment from so I'm only going to sue one, one of the three tenants for the money. I was thinking I'm, I'm still struggling a little bit with it, but I was thinking, what if I weren't even there? I'm a tenant. I'm not there. My other two roommates throw this party. And, you know, why should I be liable for something? I wasn't there. I was out of town. I didn't plan the party. I didn't participate. So the way you stated it, it seemed like you could give me a ticket too, because I'm on the lease. And that feels a little unbalanced or unfair. Jennifer. But aren't we talking about the owners here? Here we're talking about the owners. When we get up first into the who's liable section, we'll be talking about all of them together in a sense. But here we're talking and this language was not used up above when it said for a property, you know, on the person's liable section, for problem property, here's the five people liable. It didn't say jointly and severally. And right now it is the land and the person in charge. I read that. So. But wouldn't it, let's say there's a, the police are called, you know, because there's a party or, you know, it's gotten out of hand. Wouldn't, in Pat's example, if one of the people on the lease is not present, wouldn't they not be part of the police report? And then they wouldn't be held liable? It depends on how our person's liable section is written, probably. Okay. Yeah, that's what I would agree with Pat. If you're not there. Yeah. If that's doable. We should make a note of that when we circle back, which hopefully we'll do today. But this language was not used up there. So one thing would be deleted for consistency purposes too. Everyone okay with the deletion? I think so, yeah. My next question was on section D and this appears above too. Normally this part is under enforcement. Not right, you know, if we think of what this is listed under, nuisance property notification. So this is, this is not, this is sort of notifying someone that, oh, each day it exists, it constitutes a separate offense. I don't know whether we need to notify someone of that, but the one thing I saw missing was up here where we talk about the penalties, that sentence was missing. And so either way, whether we want to notify an owner that that is the case, I think we absolutely need to add it into the enforcement section to make sure it is the case. Does that make sense? What I'm saying? Yeah, I think so. Yes, agree. And so the question becomes, is that something we want as part of the notice itself or not? Like when the town sends in a letter to the owners, what do we want in that letter? That's what ABC and DR. Well then definitely they need to know that each day something is, you know, could constitute a separate offense. So not telling them that would be really unfair. Okay. And one would think provides an incentive to correct the problem quicker. Right, yeah. Okay. And then I thought something was missing. I don't have, I just, my bigger thing was put it up above to make sure it's actually part of the enforcement. And what was missing in my mind of this notice was actually what they have to do when they receive the notice. So down here in number four is, you know, says once they get the notice, they have to contact and schedule that. But the notice, we never tell them that in the notice. And that seemed like a omission to me. Like you get this letter that says, okay, you've got a nuisance property, your permit may be expended and you're suspended if you're a rental property, you're liable for all subsequent violations. And that goes on day after day until you fix it, say, but it never, but then that's all they have. And so I would, I suggest adding another letter that says this, that the require that they have a requirement to contact the town, schedule a meeting and submit a corrective action plan. That's good. Yeah, the letter includes here's what you got to do sort of thing. Right. Anything else with section three here, we will move on to section four. So this one was also one I had a bunch of changes to some are easy, some are not. I would retitle it, correction. Are you talking about G? I'm talking about four, this four here. I would retitle it nuisance property, corrective action plan. So what is one thing I noticed in reading this was we don't actually talk about really what the plan is required to have in it and what that process is. It got deleted from one draft to another. And unfortunately, I think Pam was the one that in rewriting this this way, deleted that. So I'm I we can't ask what her thoughts were on some of that deletions in renaming it, but we really do never say here's what a corrective action plan includes. And for this one, we have to remember that the nuisance property already has a corrective action plan in place because they were a problem property. And so what are we doing with that corrective action plan? So maybe the title is fine, a correction process or a manager here needs changed to person in charge. It's just a yeah, a miss thing there. And then this was and it says take all corrective actions to address issues at the property. And then and then there was this phrase which may prevent from being renewed. So here we don't define what corrective actions are. And that so I sort of wanted to rewrite it to talk about a revised corrective action plan or to implement and to revise the corrective action plan that already exists. I don't know what the correct thing is. Yeah, this would have really been good to look at. No, I know, I will say I'm not sure I have the right language. I can put up my language if you would like to see what I did with it. But I basically said, you have to you know, this contact to schedule a meeting within three days. Oh, the and I thought should be a two. Because this says contact and schedule a meeting within three days. I don't know whether the town can themselves follow a three day meeting if the meeting has to take place within three days. I thought it was just to schedule it. Yeah, so I would change this to two to schedule the meeting. You got to contact them with days to schedule just this minor word thing there. And that would have to be business days because the town's not open. Yeah. Right. And the three days under our charter becomes three business days. So we don't have to set that forward. But then okay, so they've got this meeting. And I started thinking what happens at the meeting, right? You've scheduled a meeting. And what are you doing at the meeting? Right. This one basically says the town's going to direct implementation of acceptable corrective action and identify a timeframe. But that's it. Are we and so I thought, is the corrective action plan that's already been approved being modified? Or what what's going on? I've tried to think about what's going on in the meeting. It's a person shall contact the town to schedule a meeting and to discuss the property. And that where it says take all corrective action, it may need to say something about creating a corrective action plan. Who's not that's not corrective action or to address the issue, you know, blah, blah, blah, where is Oh, right, because they have one. They have one. So so I come up with like modify the corrective action plan. Yeah, that's good. And I like the issues at the property, which may prevent. That's good. That was there already, I think. So so then I talked about in a revised plan should be discussed at the meeting and then and I'll put language up. But what happens with that revised plan? Who accepts it or not? So in prior drafts, we had had that the town has to approve the plan. Or if it doesn't, it submits changes to the plan for revisions that then they have another meeting. And so I was following some of that, but with submitting a subsequent thing. But once the plan is approved, the prior draft said that the plan was binding. And this one doesn't really say it. So I would have added that back in. And then the other thing I thought about here was, okay, well, we had a corrective action plan, they still had a nuisance. We're back to a nuisance property. So what if they don't do anything with the corrective action plan? Or how do we show that they're implementing it? So I suggested requiring after the revised plan was adopted, requiring additional meetings with the town to ensure its implementation. Dolly. Can you remind me if we agreed? I'm sorry, if you already agreed on this, whether it's the like for problems that tenants are causing, like the noise and the garbage or cars and all of that. And is it the responsible authority of the tenants or like here I'm just reading it's all the manager or the owner. But did we actually decide that and whose responsibility it's going to be? And I know that John before leaving had said there was a problem in holding the tenants responsible because they don't have the address or they don't know. So but I'm not sure. I just can't remember what the conclusion was because right now we're just moving forward assuming that it is the responsibility of the owner slash manager. So I just put up what my suggested sort of process was to answer Shalini's question. I think that's where we're struggling because of what John says, right? At what time does some nuisances are owner responsible others are not, right? If we look at the list and at what point do the and these conversations have been focused around assuming that there is an owner that is not living there, right? But nuisance properties can occur in owner anyone can have a nuisance property. You don't have to have a different person creating the nuisance than is the owner. They don't all just have like rentals are not the only places we have nuisance properties. But assuming there is a difference between an owner and the person creating the nuisance. What we've heard from John is the inspections department can't cite anyone but the owner. The police can cite whoever's there because the police have the authority I guess to ask for ID or something. I don't know why there's that difference, right? And so at what point the question becomes at what point is something that has been happening repeatedly by someone who is not the owner at the property at what point does it become the owner's responsibility? And that's where I think these different problem property nuisance property designations come in and trying to say you know after a certain amount of violations it becomes the owner's responsibility and the owner has to find a way to figure out how to talk to the non-owner individuals who are creating the nuisance and figure out ways. What these corrective action plans might be is regular conversations if they're tenants regular conversations with the tenants and the owner and the town, right? Like we don't know what the plan might be that the town and owners come up with but I think that's where the owner might be getting the ticket from day one if it's inspectional services from violation one. We don't know. Jennifer? Yeah, I think at the point it becomes a nuisance it should be the owner should have a big responsibility. I mean initially it's if the police are called out because there's a party or it's going to be you know they're going to be dealing with the person who's on the premises who if it's non-owner occupied the owner you know likelihood won't be there but by the time it gets to this point the property owner you know we would hope would have intervened. So I think at you know that at the point at which a property is you know again it's a pretty it doesn't happen overnight that you become a nuisance property that the owner should be very much or the property manager should be very much involved. I mean if you were renting out a house you would get involved at what but the point it got you know to this point if you're a responsible owner or property manager well. So yeah yeah so I agree with you Jennifer I just think in the implementation there are some practical problems that such as that we're saying that if there are three such problems right is that what it is and then it becomes or whatever okay but anyway the implementation problem is like there are a lot of problems in so let's say the the owner wants to does try to intervene and reprimands the tenants he don't do that or whatever right and but they still don't do it and then the tenants like okay I'm not going to renew your whatever but it's still going to be you know they're still within spot within a cycle so they have to finish the rent the agreement and even yeah so during that time period we is it fair to put the responsibility on the owner especially I'm thinking like the smaller landlords who have a few properties and is this to come with some for them Jennifer so let's say this is a situation where it's not necessary noise if it's you know litter on the front lawn or you know right like that then the echoes yeah it would be the owners you know they might entail the owner coming every week and seeing what's going on you know so I think the owner needs you know you hope that the tenant would if they're cited for having litter on the lawn would correct it but I think if it's chronic then it you know if I was the owner I would make regular checks to the house to make sure it wasn't happening I would just say well it's up to the my tenant doesn't do it but so what can I do about it yes they can do something about it is that easier for a small landlord to do it's certainly easy for an owner occupied and a lot of this stuff doesn't happen an owner occupied but is it easier for a smaller landlord to it seems to me like it would be like if I have three apartments across the street or down the street it's pretty easy for me to know what's going on even with you know where it's a little problematic is if you live in another state yeah that's a whole other smuggy right but we want to deal yeah I mean didn't we hear though that I think it's the bigger companies that actually have management companies for them it's easier because they send their management crew to go and do the cleanup I thought it's the other way around that it's the smaller landlords who can't afford these management companies or and are going to have to go and pick up the stuff themselves may not have the bandwidth to do it and I don't know like I mean it's like we're making assumptions without really knowing yeah so I raised my hand to think about we've heard a lot about condo restrictions for those that might have renters in condos or owners in condos say what if a tenant of a condo does the littering or an owner of a condo just flitters their entire thing something maybe the condo association would be what takes care of it so it never actually gets a nuisance property right because because it's just paid for there so maybe it's not an issue for those situations but I guess that's where the corrective action plan and the meeting with the owner might it owner and or property manager right and we now know meetings don't have to be in person per se because there's video conferencing and also even if the owner is out of state to figure out what the appropriate response is to try and prevent more calls and more public safety responses from coming in right I think that's the goal of the corrective action plan and then when we've got to this point where that didn't work and there were still calls to our public safety officials and responses from them and still violations that are being cited and so maybe what we have to do is trust that that plan will take into account what is doable under each if it's if it if there is a tenant under each lease it if it's an owned property if my property is the one that gets cited four times who knows what the corrective action would be right like can can the town or does the town just keep citing me and I just keep racking up $300 violations because I refuse to do stuff right but there's no eviction process that the town can do with me there's no owner to evict me because I am the owner you know and so what would the corrective action plan look like in something like that removing a junk vehicle well if I'm happy getting the citation instead of it they can't really force the removal it's on my property they can keep finding me so right at least I feel like that's the case it's a violation of the bylaw so I if I'm happy to pay the $300 a day or whatever it is eventually I'll probably prove it right because it's cheaper if I own the property but it if I choose to just pay the fine so I think we have to have a process and then maybe what we have to do is leave and trust that the people involved in the process will come up with individualized plans that work for whatever the situation is Jennifer sorry as I muted you know like one common situation is sometimes happens at the beginning of the year you know people might move into a house and there's been furniture left over from the year before so they'll like there was one house in my district that they literally had four double mattresses and box springs just on the side you could see it from the street for more than a week so someone called John Thompson and he called the owner of the property and they were gone you know in a few days so I don't you know so somewhere between the property owner or manager and the tenants they got rid of it but if if they didn't if the tenants were to say well we don't have any way to move it I do think the owner is responsible at that point even if he may have to charge the tenants for moving it or whatever but it's not the the owner is ultimately responsible I think sorry and then Pat go ahead you're gonna say something no I I don't have anything that important to say but it seems to me that the scenario that you presented Jennifer you had tenants moving into a space that hadn't been cleaned out so that seems to me to be the landlord the owner's responsibility not the tenants and you know I don't think they should be fine for stuff that had been left over from right now may happen yeah maybe the landlord thought he was doing them a favor but yeah yeah but it's yeah yeah and I do think the landlord probably paid for it yeah I don't know but one of the things that Mandy said that sort of it's like creating a minimal process that then the details of the implementation of it get set by the town official and the landlord tenants or whatever seems reasonable instead of us trying to anticipate every solution on a whole other note and I'll be real quick about this I'm getting I'm learning more and more about what some of the larger property managers do that is to charge tenants for out of security deposits that aren't so legal and at some point we're going to have to look at some of that townwide but that's a whole other issue Johnny yeah I was just wondering if it's helpful to include the tenants in some situations in this like you know if the tenant knows that they're going to be called there's some sort of fear then of them like coming to the authorities and having to talk about it so I don't know if you if any other town does that or is that doable can you repeat that Johnny I was saying that you know when they have that meeting and we're saying it's with the owner slash manager where is it should we also include slash tenant like wouldn't it make the especially the younger tenants more responsible if they're being called to have be part of those conversations or is it I mean it is making it more complicated I don't know yeah I'm not sure right right now for problem and nuisance properties we only send that notice and that requirement to meet to the owner and person in charge okay yeah no no you've got a great point though should the tenant be involved in those meetings should we be sending that notice of hey you've now had three violations you're living in a problem property to a tenant too like maybe it should be to everyone not just an owner if there is more than an owner living at the property and any you know occupants of the property something like that and then so we could just potentially add in some of these it would be I think not under correct we would add stuff into corrective action plan but under the notification owners persons in charge and any non-owner occupants if any or something or but we'd come up with the language something like that uh Jennifer I think pat your hand is residual first or is it yeah Jennifer sorry I forgot to bring it down oh okay I'm sorry I just another antidote but just I think you know and people are trying to work this out on their own I was last week a meeting of like 12 student tenants that had just moved in and that residents on the street and the property manager it was a great meeting and one one of the neighbors said because they're in previous years a couple of the houses there'd been a real issue like you don't know like the furniture just the tenants just move in if they're particular students are just here for a year they might be the first time they put their stuff out thinking it's going to get collected by the guard by the USA and it doesn't so this homeowner said I have a truck I have my whatever permit he has to go to the dump and jump large things he goes all year when you need to throw something big out call me I'll come pick it up we'll drive it together won't cost you anything you can use my you know I'm just saying people so I just thought that was great because it's not going to get to the town now yeah so there's a felony I just added point to that and we heard that in the surveys and so forth is there's a lot of confusion amongst tenants specially but also around residents with respect to these bylaws like what I heard was that tenants don't know where to throw like they don't know what the rules are clearly about so they just throw stuff outside and so and that's why I was suggesting that instead of them having to go and find the bylaw that it has it needs to be part of the appendix or something with this so that or everything is in one place I mean most people don't even know what the noise bylaw time is is it love the clock is it turn of clock so and many people don't even know that there is such a thing so having everything in one place so they can that's why we should put that as an appendix in this so I would say I worry about an appendix because bylaws change and so if you you're then essentially copying a bylaw within twice in in the book of bylaws right you know this goes into a book of a hundred plus pages of bylaws and this one would be three point two six Snow and Isis three point four five pages later you know and so what we could potentially ask is when if this is adopted when it is adopted that those referenced bylaws be added with finger links within the darling some other part of the document maybe so we're not working with the final document we can't really do that right mm-hmm but maybe we could suggest that the town clerk hyperlink amongst the documents amongst the bylaws to get to the right ones or to the zoning bylaw when the zoning bylaw changes that document changes though right that's that's part of the problem and so even hyperlink links go dead when we're changing stuff regularly but maybe there can be some sort of link that way instead of if we restate it it becomes a part of the bylaw yeah I hear what you're saying okay but it sounds like we might be able to move on the question I have is um okay um what I've got listed here this was my sort of proposed changes for this does that seem logical to everyone to incorporate into sort of the next draft of this bylaw um this what the corrective plan is discussed and then what when things get submitted and next meetings and how often after our plan is adopted they have to meet shallony how we have a member from the participants who have their hand raised when are we doing the public comment um we'll do a public comment as we get through at least the final part of what we didn't get through a nuisance property next last time I want to get through the first run through in a while of the whole bylaw and then we can do comment and then we can come back to the rest of the bylaw does that sound like a plan we're almost done this first run there's only state law not preempted after this um I just want to know whether I should put these changes into the working copy of the draft bylaw I would be comfortable with that let me put the draft bylaw back up and I will give me a second and I'll get it in there um the next section is the state law not preempted I don't there aren't any changes from the last draft do does anyone have any suggested oops changes um to that I'll fix the labeling later any requested changes to that section so we're going to stop the share before we go back to the next section um and move on to public comment let me get that up uh general public comment on matters within the jurisdiction we'll come back to we're sort of pausing nuisance property right now we're going to come back to it but general public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of CRC will be accepted at this time residents are welcome to express their views for up to three minutes um we generally do not engage in dialogue or comment on a matter raised during public comment of course since we'll be going back to nuisance property it may come up in our discussion on agenda items um with that let me find my zoom um if you would like to make public comment at this time please raise your hand and I will recognize you in turn all right we're not a shepherd please unmute yourself state your name where you live and make your comment hi we're not a shepherd just this drive Amherst um thank you for bringing up who is responsible in the nuisance by law you all keep writing about owner person in charge but not tenant even though tenants may be liable suspending or revoking a permit for tenant behavior that is a bit unreasonable and Jennifer also said that uh there were parties in the neighborhood and landlord doesn't want it to happen again but really owners may not have control over it let's say the tenant is starting at least that they start being a problem you have a whole lease to go through and eviction takes a long time especially now that you know the state is pausing evictions again if if you apply for um rent assistance so you might not even be able to evict a tenant who knows it can take forever um litter cars on lawns are also a resident issue landlords can remove trash and build a tenant or passive violation fees onto tenants if they are liable and and their lease specifies it um and lease leases usually say tenants are responsible for their guests um unless people are trespassing so yeah they have to prove that the people are trespassing and not just staying over and even though they're not present yet really punish the people that are responsible not the victims of the action and correction meetings should include tenants if the tenants are responsible why not also colleges should be involved if tenants are off-campus students and provide academic consequences for them that could go a long way it could help a lot um and you mentioned condos my rental is a condo uh I used to live in a condo for 15 years um and now it's rented so when there is a problem and the tenants say puts furniture outside or whatever the association the the manager of the association will build the owner um because that the contract the association contract is with the owner um which is different than a town I guess but um so if I get billed if I get called I contact the tenant and say hey remove it and if they get if I get billed I can charge them because my my lease says that if I get fined they will I will recover if it's it's their uh responsibility um but when you think like security deposit it is a very iffy proposition because Massachusetts is very very finicky about security deposit if a magistrate determines that uh it was not warranted for me to charge a tenant I would be penalized three times that amount um which is you know very protective of tenants and that goes for any kind of complaint even board of health or you know if it goes to housing courts tenants are very much protected so um yeah I hope that gets you know taken into consideration on this uh nuisance by law and if you have owners that live in the property it's owner occupied and and those are the ones that are causing the problem they are ultimately the ones responsible um so when I make the tenants responsible too thank you thank you for your comments Renata I see no other hands for public comments so we are going to close public comment and move back to um discussing nuisance house we're going to do this for another 25 or so minutes um and then and then we'll see what's going on we have made it through the first round um so I am going to put back up on the screen now the document that I I know it's too small give me a second here that I tried to create to show uh to clean up all of the changes y'all discussed last time and because you had a lot of comments of oh we need to revise this to look like I forgot to do one thing with this um and so I I tried to take all the comments that were written in the document instead of having the comments there turn that into the language that the document would look like so so that that's that's this document and and yes Pat I I did I did it yesterday so it's it's not like I've sat on it for a while um but I figured we were so close to the end that we could go through I had some things I wanted to show we could go through and then we will distribute one big one for everyone to really review closely and maybe we'll send that directly to public safety officials and and Rob and all um through Paul on hey we're looking at big changes can you read this and and look at it type thing yeah and I'm not accusing you of doing something terrible it just would have today I had enough time I could have really looked at it and it would have made so um thank you for your work don't misunderstand I I totally get it and I debated do I send it do I not it's really late um next time send it yeah next time I will send it no matter how how about that okay it's a deal to so having gone through it um we've got about 25 minutes I had some things I wanted to to come back to and sort of circle around back to because I was not part of the conversation um last meeting I don't know whether we want to do that Pat wanted to see the one section on where we list the the things that could be considered a violation that could create a nuisance property or a public nuisance um so we can start there if we want um and then come back to some of my questions um that I had shall we just start there I guess that that's section B um it becomes section B so we'll start with section B um I left comments in about the town manager I've left the comment in of hey is there a schedule that was one of the comments from last so that comment box is is is there a schedule um just just so we didn't lose track of that um so for section B let's see how much of it I can get on here and if people want to see the the full track let me know uh it's just messy at this point so it's easier to read this way um I had a question about section so there was one thing with the comment that's in here the second comment box is um the the includes but is not limited to PAM had written in the last draft um already ticketable by law enforcement and may not need to be listed in nuisance by law but should be reflected as violations associated with property tenants managers and owners so this is one of my questions I have for further discussion we don't have to do this one today um what is a public nuisance you talked about it last time and the things been modified but as we go through and think about this the conversation last time struck me as focusing on sort of there's something later on about calls for nuisances so noise calls noise this report the noise calls report the noise this but a violation is only if you write the ticket someone can report and call inspection services for anything and there might not be a violation so what are we as we get down to sections about what is should things be reported online what are we reporting online calls about properties or actual tickets written and I bring it up here um because I worry about the new definition of public nuisance um last last time shallony looked something up and there was a discussion about quiet enjoyment just enjoyment peaceful enjoyment and I think shallony you came up with something that used the word interference with some sort of enjoyment right and interference didn't make it into this it says substantial disturbance um I don't think public property should be on here um because I'm not sure oh and who do you contact if you get three public nuisance violations on public property is the town creating the public nuisance right it goes back to almost this question about who's responsible right um so I would delete public but I wonder if it should be substantial interference but that still is a lot of leeway and who decides that interference because if I hate my neighbor because we just don't like each other and they hate me any mowing of grass I might call a noise complaint in does that you know and the cops aren't going to write a ticket but does that noise complaint show up on the town thing as we get farther on you know but who I assume I assume the police wouldn't write a ticket for that right you're mowing your lawn right but but what what it goes to what constitutes a substantial disturbance and and what got deleted a couple weeks ago was that that that question that Pam had is it within a certain number of people complaining or what so I wanted to revisit the definition Jennifer so I just wanted to ask was the thing about public property if someone lived near a park and there was you know you can a disturbance that was beyond what you know you might normally expect in a park or if they were in a park after hours but I guess then you maybe the park doesn't allow people after dark and that would be the violation and noise violation right you know this is this is I think what's the difference between the writing the ticket for the noise violation versus writing a ticket for nuisance property right in a public park you'd write the ticket for the noise violation so what is it to write a ticket for nuisance property right because what makes it a nuisance property one of the things is if there's a lot of noise complaints and you've written up the noise complaints for the noise and then if it there's it gets to a certain point that it in the same property then it gets to be a nuisance so in terms if it what if it's on the common or sweets or park and it's a group of people and they keep coming back is are we are we going to complain right if they live near the park yeah but they're not complaining to a landlord no then you just make a call to the police right like a fire in a park you yeah there's yeah so it seems to me that in this well wait a minute no it's got the point because okay as this is written with the public property on here and and it goes back to what are we trying to do with this bylaw right if it's sweet it's five different groups over two weekends and each group gets a ticket written well there's been three violations on that parcel on that piece of property the town owns it so the town's sending a notice of violation and problem property designation to itself to meet with itself to figure out how to manage sweet stir park by the way this is written because public property is on here yeah I know now again getting back to the lawnmower if someone's mowing their lawn at two in the morning but then that's a different kind there's probably a violation just for noise at that point yeah wouldn't it be maybe public property does need to be there and because you're sitting here or gross in lewdness so if I'm running around exposing myself in sweets or park I can get fine to rest it whatever for lewd and obnoxious behavior it is a public nuisance violation so if if so do we have to delineate when we're talking about landlords and tenants we're no longer talking about public spaces well that's why I was wondering whether public property should even be on the list but shalani well it says public nuisance violations so it's in that category I'm sorry right yeah I know they can just do a build on what you were saying that they can't be nuisance on but I think we need to maybe qualify beyond acceptable norms or something like we have concerts all the time in the parks and commons so that's not noise when people gather there but if people are honking or you know really loud music at 12 o'clock in the night in commons then they can be fined for that however it won't be it won't we won't pursue the nuisance property but they can still be the individuals can still be they're still violating a bylaw a noise bylaw right or if if people are littering like you know sometimes like just throwing away they're doing a picnic and just littering the place they can definitely be fined so I think it definitely deserves to be there but not for purposes of property nuisance property and then you heard it we have that list right like whether if it's litter or noise or junked vehicles so I mean that's way that's this list here yeah it split pages so I think I can hope we define what is considered a disruption of enjoyment of private or public property that was not how I wanted to do that I don't know how to get rid of that so sorry um yeah so I think this is we got rid of the point system where points accrue and then you've got these problem property designations right and I think we're we're running into what's a public nuisance and what's a nuisance property and those are different things potentially and maybe that's what we're struggling with as a committee on how do we differentiate because yeah it it a public nuisance does include that but shouldn't they be getting the ticket under the gross and open newt lewdness right why why are we ticketing them under this nuisance property thing and so so maybe it's not public nuisance we're saying shall not maybe we need to use a different term for public nuisance maybe it's just maybe maybe we need different terms there maybe it's just nuisance on a I don't know it's a clarification point what is the what is the title now for this by a lot because I had it as penalties for violation of public nuisance or is it just property now we titled it nuisance property at one point we said public nuisance because this is public nuisance here right and and the other question I had is public nuisance number two here is basically a definition of what public nuisance is but we're not putting it in definitions and and that I wonder if we should be moving it up to definitions but maybe we need a new term and maybe it's not public nuisance maybe it maybe it's just like I don't know we can mark it as come back and think about Pat you're muted I just said that would probably be good because it feels like a real conundrum we've sort of veered off of where are yeah it's like we're trying to make goulash you know when everything is getting thrown in the pot or stone soup right yeah okay or if we could maybe ask Rob when we talk about a nuisance on public property if it's covered under other vial you know other places we don't maybe have to address it here which it does feel like it better for the chief because the chief would know because if it would be covered under much of what we're talking about would be covered probably under state law I wonder if there's a public nuisance state law there might be I mean it gets covered under each specific separate one right like for animals or junk vehicles and there's a bylaw for each one of them so but just general public nuisance do we need to have it all under one or can it be just can they be just fine under separate things yeah and so I guess the question that I have then is that back to how this is working and one of the things that struck me in listening to your conversation on video was a lot of the conversation talked about well calls for calls calls calls without tickets being written and at what point is a nuisance property ticket written because our enforcement scheme requires the tickets to be written three times before you get to the corrective action plan yet if you're just writing them under noise and you know obstruction of public ways and snow and ice removal you're not writing the nuisance property ticket and therefore you're not ever going to get to that corrective action plan which made me then think maybe we need that point system back about properties that have these laws set out with each time a ticket is written for these laws then the nuisance property is when so many of those tickets have been written in a year or something it got me thinking again oh my goodness I totally thought that we're going to be finding them because they're violating that trash law or that noise by a law under this but now I'm hearing you say that no they're going to be ticketed under that by a law but not the way this is written now requires them to essentially be ticketed under this and maybe that but maybe wouldn't it be like referencing whether or not an enforcement action is taken under this that specific law by law regulation so so this says this this sort of says the officer if it's a noise complaint say or if it's well let's let's let's do a vegetation complaint no a false alarm we'll do false alarm says someone lives in an apartment building that's connected to the fire automatic fire for any time a fire alarm goes off that alarm thing says after so many things they can get a ticket for that right and so this thing this this scheme says if they want to write a ticket the police could write a ticket for false alarm then it wouldn't fall under this and it wouldn't count towards those three to getting to a problem property or they could write a ticket under this one because they've determined it's more of a nuisance property or they could write a ticket under both but only if they chose to write a ticket under this one whether or not they chose the other method would it count towards those three things to get us to the corrective action plan pat it kind of seems to me that this this goes back to are we talking about public or private property um I can do I can break all kinds of rules on public property and I can get ticketed for it but I'm not a tenant of that public property but if I'm breaking rules on property on whether it's rental property or property I own or that just it really that's so different and that seems to me that would trigger we're ticketing based on um oh god property you know I guess I'm a lot of this has to do with people who rent property but I could make all kinds of insanity on my on my property right and I could be subject to what now I'm going to be declared a nuisance house but I own the property I um Jennifer what are we really trying to do because I think you know what seriously what are we really trying to do Jennifer I mean if if somebody's you know leaving garbage or whether they're owner or not I mean I would I would if it were me I would I wouldn't care I mean I I don't even know that I know but I you know I mean I I can tell you I had an incident with an owner of a house right across the street and garbage was collecting a lot of it and we offered to take it to clear it I mean for a long time and then I finally this is on for us on the council had a call John Thompson and when they went out the number of health and safety violations were you know he said it was one of the worst he'd ever seen in terms of the number of categories and they had to deal with it and it was an owner occupant I mean it wasn't so you know it was actually a fire hazard to the surrounding neighbors it turned out and to the person living there so yes go ahead I'm sorry the question I have is yeah so so that's a good example I can I I can dump littering on property is not exclusive to any type of occupant right it can happen anywhere with anyone and anything and so if we use that as an example of a property that is not that is just collecting waste because it's not being hauled away or it's not going to the transportation or any of this there's a violation but what what ticket should be written right is it the ticket under the littering and illegal dumping and whatever the state health code is or is it a ticket under nuisance property or is it both because I think one thing we recognize is all of that becomes a nuisance to the neighbors right and attracts that's why there's health regulations about removing waste right and so but at what point do we put it under this if at all versus just the john thompson you know health and safety inspection services department under their health and safety state regulations at what point are we saying you know you're gonna get this nuisance property ticket two and it all goes back to what are we aiming for with what is currently a nuisance house bylaw that relates to gatherings and underage drinking only shallony yeah I think the the purpose in my mind is to again ensure that we have good quality of you know neighborhoods and so forth and so bringing all of them under the nuisance property bylaw like you can cite that because you violated so and so but it's ticketed within this nuisance property bylaw it makes sense because that's the I thought that was the fundamental goal for the people who initiated this is that in certain neighborhoods especially more than others there are more chances of having more parking or more I mean that's what we heard in the surveys was there were a lot of cases where there was people were very happy but then we also heard about a lot of cases where there was excessive cars outside on the sidewalks and obstruction or garbage on the you know so I thought by making people responsible for this and and therefore I think in my mind it makes sense to centralize it that yeah because you violated the noise bylaw code you know bylaw or this health bylaw or this or this you get ticketed under the nuisance property bylaw and then once they accumulate a certain number of points then something happens and of course for the owners I guess the points just means they're paying fine no they're paying fines they'll have to pay fine still there yeah but there's no threat of what I meant was there's no threat of rental permit being removed or anything like that so the only thing you have is the ticketing the fines on the violence yeah so I mean if being charged 300 dollars each time I think it's pretty I mean we can decide what that amount is and all but the other thing I was saying is that's the question that you asked Pat I think that's the reason it's good to have the purpose in the bylaw so that the people who are reading it kind of also have a sense just at the get go or this is what the town is trying to do and this is what how we expect it to live is you know in service of the this shared vision and values or whatever so we should add a section on purpose Jennifer yeah and some of it is you know trusting our town you know building and safety in this incident incident and John Thomas actually and now we have Cress you know he knew he needed to get she needed some social services it was a case of someone who wasn't able to keep up her house and he got you know the town got the care she needed and now we have Cress it would probably happen you know so they were definitely able you know they didn't they will treat eight cars on the lawn because whatever and they know if it's maybe because there's more people living in the house that should they'll deal with that one way versus someone where it's a completely different set of circumstances you know they didn't treat this person like a nuisance because it was a recognition that that's not what was going to remedy the situation and that this was someone with needs so I don't know if that but I so I just there should be a way that we can we don't want to not deal with very frequent you know situations which may not you know where that you know need to be dealt with like you need to move your somebody needs to get the couch off the front lawn whether it's the tenant or the owner and someone who has a whole different set of circumstances and our building and safety seems to know how to do that it just I guess it comes back to how do we write this as we struggle how do we write this to capture the ongoing nuisance where it is ongoing in a way that is not easily correctable with just one visit to you know as Jennifer her example is one visit and then connection with social services and the problem in general is sort of revised but how do we write a bylaw to capture when it's five visits and it still doesn't seem to be resolved for whatever reason or it's five visits and to give my other example I'm happy paying the fine for junked vehicle because I just don't care so you know and bringing in a different bylaw for that sort of thing to create another level of upping the ante as the case were right how do we capture it we will get to continue this discussion but anyway Pat you're seeing how I rewrote this here Shalini yeah could we get staff feedback on that how they think because they have to implement it what would make sense for them but I think could we at least people who are closer to this bylaw maybe write a purpose section so we're all writing it in service of meeting that purpose does that seem okay manager to add a small like maybe even if it's one line seeing what the purpose is yeah I put a comment up add a purpose so okay and I think it's time for us to move on if I may you'll see there's a lot of changes here and all I intend to to make this easier to read except a number of these but can I go through today we eliminated the current lease period again so should I go through and do that anywhere that comes so it just becomes that one year I had also noticed there were some contradictions between some of the sections in timings and all so if I can correct that before I send out a new copy that would be helpful too and potentially speed up some of our conversations and then I'll send out a new draft that can also go to Paul for a lot of questions and then maybe want to we can all try to look up other towns on how they write nuisance property or nuisance house or even public nuisance bylaws to see if we can find some examples of how it's dealt with in other places we know state college has something but a lot of what we're trying to do I think is captured in state colleges rental registration only with their point system so we'll see what we can do with that but there's gotta be others that have done it as two separate things because nuisance properties are not just rentals so with that we're going to move on if people would like I wasn't sure this one's still on here is there I know the last conversation on the follow-up to the meeting Shalini you were you were going to work on and it was not for this meeting so it's not like you were supposed to have staff here so don't yeah we were supposed to have a hearing today right and then we didn't so you were going to work on I think Shalini you were going to work on bringing potential survey questions and all back to the committee for us to potentially create that survey um and um where are my notes on this um that's the wrong notes that's why um and let's manage your question about that did we decide on that for sure that we're doing it given the time and since we don't have Brianna to help with it and stuff so I don't want to put in all the work and then not be able to do it Pat and then I'll try and answer uh you're muted Pat I just wanted because we're right at that place we're C6 where it says snow and ice general bylaw 340 I think that needs to have the full title which or no the full title of the bylaw is not just snow and ice yeah let me pull it up it is something like yeah no let me pull it up to show you that it's there it's obstruction of public well okay yeah okay I'm sorry this is getting really confusing it's hard to read right now which is why I would like to be able to accept stuff I'll send you a track changes but a clean version would be easier to read to yeah yeah okay yeah thank you I'm sorry no it's okay so Shalini to to try and answer your question whether or not we can do the survey and start the survey now I know I know we can't finish a survey in the next three months right three and a half months whether we can start it or not I don't know but you know CRC will continue on the AMAHT will continue on and planning with the conversations they're having continues on so personally I think it's valuable if we can start working on a potential survey that might gather information about the sorts of things the follow-up question was about like focusing on what the 24 to 40 year olds and what they're looking for in housing and stuff like that I think you know that information no matter when it's done would be valuable and so I'm not sure you know I think if if we did some of the work it might not get started this term but it would give a head start to someone else whether that be planning or when we get a replacement Brianna or something right we might not be able to launch it and all but if we can have stuff kind of ready that in my personal mind I think that's a valuable thing for us to be discussing that won't go to waste of course it depends on who's elected and where priorities are and everything but I feel like the town talks enough about housing and housing affordability and attainability that that it will be useful to somebody whether that be the housing trust or the next CRC or even just the planning department and planning board my thoughts Shalini if thing to do it right it would make sense to then coordinate with the planning board if they have ideas what have they been doing in that or at all and if not and they're like oh we're not even touching this or something then that's fine and then the housing trust as well horrible housing trust like what are some observations questions concerns they have but I'm happy to start the process at least like pull out and actually we did initially manager you and I worked on like I don't know we worked on but we have a survey from the past which we didn't end up using for rental registration but that was that did have these sort of questions like you know what would bring you to this town what would not bring you to this town you know stuff like that what would you want to see what stops you what gets in the way of you moving here what would you like to see more of what would you like to see less of you know those kind of questions yeah and I think if you can hunt that one down right and and that's the basis to start talking and then yeah last last meeting you guys talked about reaching out to others right and if we need to start with a basis of something though and know what the goal is I think before we can do that outreach that's my thoughts should I send it to you the survey and you'll reach out or do you want me to what is the process if you can gather because what what I I think I think based on last week's conversation and what I gathered from that is you would hunt those questions down we would get that into a document it's not yeah it might already be in like a word document or something we can put that in a packet it frankly for a month from now we're not going to get to this it might be on the agenda for two weeks but we're not going to get to it because I suspect the hearing will be the whole meeting even though I threw some other stuff on the agenda because you never know sometimes hearings go what I expect and sometimes they're unexpectedly short um I don't expect this one will be unexpectedly short but so I put other things on just in case but we can get it into us we can as a committee talk about stuff and then talk about who we would send it to what we would be asking them and all of that but we'd have a basis for our own conversation based on our meetings with the trust and our own what would help us with zoning and housing and all of these conversations we're having right so I feel like coming to us and then we put it on our own agenda and then we figure out next step from there so send it to me and I'll get it unpack it got it yeah this I just just a general question in terms of getting and I if I missed it and you've touched on it but in terms of getting feedback from people who don't live here like what would keep you from moving here what would get what would make you want to or be able to move here would we get that information from like uh you know employees at UMass and the colleges and people that work in town do we have a way of who work at other places in town so do we have a way to get that was the goal yeah that is the goal to have this you know whoever the school they have a newsletter or something like to use the school administration to send it out to teachers and staff and then to use UMass like we've done in the past okay yeah maybe the chamber and the bin could get it to there yeah and the chamber and the bed so use all the channels that we have right now established within the community use those and then not to forget what Pat did mention that to be inclusive we will find a way to be at the mobile market or you know these other places survival center or other places where we can have the translated different versions of this and we gotta have we gotta figure out how we can do it most efficiently yeah of course so if we can sit with iPads maybe or something and just have people answer it right there or because it is a lot of work to even just to analyze it and then on top of it to feed like 50 pieces of information is a lot of work working with the survival center maybe and craigs doors and all maybe possibilities yeah and access to Amherst family outreach is another very good resource yeah the language issue is present at the survival center as well yeah yeah churches and you know we might be able to figure out a way to to get it out there and and help with electronic we could get volunteers sorry we could recruit volunteers like everyone knows Tom counselors are spending a lot of time and then people who can support us who speak different languages maybe they can help with the translation or something it can be done we have to have the intention yeah but we have to get creative yeah um the so the survey was one of the follow-up items the other one was um and so we've got a plan we've got a month or so Shalini for that one um for for production we're looking at the October meeting for that um fit into manager goals how do we put some of this into the goals goal setting we'll start at GOL and the council pretty soon for the next term um and you know we had talked about one thing we could do is find better ways to um fit or to to put manager goals out there for emphasis on affordable and attainable housing and Jennifer you were going to work on I think from the last meeting I had a note about you or Pam had said maybe that you could work on drafting some sort of potential goal regarding public private partnerships or something regarding working with this university and colleges regarding surrounding staff housing um and yeah and trying to get since so many there's so many employees particularly with UMass it would be great if they could live here with their with their families with their families yeah so some sort of goal relating to that what other goals I think for next time I think we should be thinking about that one was identified at the last meeting I'm trying to get us out of here on time so we don't have much conversation but um I would like the committee to think about each individually think about what other goals for the housing conversation that we had with the AMHT what what would we potentially as a CRC be able to come to the council with of hey CRC thinks these should be some goals included in the manager's goals for the year right as as what others besides the concentration on potentially staff housing where we work with the universities is there other goals so I would like each of us to think about that um and potentially come with drafts of thoughts on what we could potentially put in or suggest the council put in as it relates to our conversations surrounding affordable and attainable housing. Would that be separate from the housing policy goals that are already stated in the housing policy? Yes so um because the the comprehensive housing policy has been adopted and there are five goals and we're supposed to be working our way towards it the town manager goals though one you know that comprehensive housing policy is huge right and contains so much stuff and so potentially the town manager goals would be you know in the next year here's that one thing within those five goals or two things that we want you and your staff to concentrate on right like work in various levels so of course so I see it more as the council's emphasis on what to implement within that policy does that make sense yeah yes thank you and I will make a note and try to remember to remind the committee before and this will be for a month from now two meetings from now because if we do have any time after after the hearing in two weeks we'll go to nuisance um because we're that one's a little more discreet I don't know whether we have time to get it done prior to the end of this council but I think we can get substantial progress made so nuisance will be what we go to even though everything's on it um if we have time after the hearing so this would be October something what is the date October 5th oh my dad's birthday um but I actually found the survey I can send it to you right away so we can send it to me and I'll get it into a packet in my note taking so that when we create that that means okay cool okay so that is everything but minutes does anyone have any requested changes for minutes the none I'll make the motion to adopt the August 17th 2023 meeting minutes as presented second to your choice are there is there any further discussion see none we will vote uh Pat uh Felony yes Jennifer yes and Mandy is an eye that is four to zero with one absent they are adopted I will I will take that on because Pam has normally finalized them so I will finalize them um I don't have any other now I guess I've made the announcements the hearing on the specialized opt-in code is on the 21st at 435 it will be the main item we will only do any other things on the agenda um other than public comment there'll be the hearing comment and then there will be general public comment at some point um because it is a regular meeting so those two will definitely happen um everything else will only happen if the hearing completely finishes early um so um we'll see if that happens I don't expect it to but but that's the I think the hearing will take the full meeting um we'll have a more extensive presentation um and that and they have the questions that we had from our first sort of intro so that's the plan for the next meeting um so that's the announcements and the next agenda preview I don't have anything anticipate unanticipated does anyone else see none thank you all um I'm getting you out eight minutes early that's not as early as I'd hope but eight minutes we're adjourned at 6 20 thanks everybody yeah thank you thank you