 turn to take minutes. May God have mercy on your soul. I've been told that we are working towards a... I think we are. Yep. Is that true? Let the record show that. It's not just for Steve. Councillor Ryan. Our policy and then 10 minutes on... 15 minutes on the GOL approximately. And then the TMAC proposal, discussion, continued discussion of recommendations related to our own charge kind of combined into one, since it might kind of relate. I had that for 35 minutes. We can discuss, we combine with that. And then some recommendations, discussion and recommendations on fee policy and lunch cart regulation. Yes, and the recycle. Recycle. That's the first step. So, is there a desire to... It is a very full agenda, some of which we need to get through because it will be on next week's, two weeks away's council agenda. But do we want to move what is technically item 6 and 7 up to the beginning, which is the TMAC proposal and the discussion? Or do we want to do a couple of the quick stuff first to get it done and then move? Is your question? Yeah. Why are 6 and 7, 7 coupled? I'm not sure whether one might lead discussion of recommendations related to the GOL committee charge has been our overall... Given the... Well, the only problem with... On the other hand... I would anticipate that one. Let's see if we can expedite some of the stuff in front. No, I would do it the other way. But I mean, I feel like you two are here. And I don't, I personally don't like public comment at the end, although... I tied it to those two. But you have it second in terms of our discussion. And it might be good to hear from Janet and Meg. This is the beginning of a conversation. I didn't know how to write that. Let's get to our business. Some changes recommended in those two there. So which of the documents are with you? The one that is... It's hard to see. The one that was uploaded yesterday. Yesterday at 10.12. Got it. You should have a PB at the very end. I saw that one yesterday. There might be a little comment. I was going to say, I guess I was going to say is it with wild sea attractions? The changes themselves are... There's a couple, and I can go through the substantive part. Most of them were just... But the comments are where it matters. So the first highlight is Town Manager. And I want... He has changed it from a... Instead of... Everywhere he put instead of the next regular council meeting, he changed it included right now It was there. I guess it's... I guess it's... So my understanding is that DPW currently handles all common reservations and banners. But those two seem to be linked less... I don't understand why banners would be... It's not stated explicitly in our current recommendation. I guess he would say it's implied. But I think it's only implied based on history. The only panel we're talking about is one of them. The one across the road. So I guess technically it's a common... I mean, it's all the public way. It's all the public way. Well, then we have no right to rightfully... The comments belong to the people. No, it's technically a public way. I could envision new benches and where they might go if it's going to be... Because we're never... I don't think anyone ought to be... Is that a difference in the maintenance and repairs? Yeah, the bandstand, the bike... So there is a designer to them automatically and then pay the house for their recommendation. I assume it does not... We think this needs to go to the designer of the board. If it didn't already go to them we could just say... Do we feel like it needs to actually be spelled... I mean, this document is just... When are we giving the town manager responsibility? And Paul's basically wants to... He wants to be very clear on what he can do without... We're telling him, you know, maintenance stuff. Don't worry about it. What are we telling him about design questions? If that's something comes to him with a design question... By typical means... He would probably normally just send a design and review or make sure that they get a contact with something. Now we're saying he also has to come to us first and we have to send a design review. I also don't think... We're just saying that we're the final... Right. We're the final approval. We could bring it to designer review first. Let me give you a simple example. Someone would really like to see a bench installed in Cambridge Park. People go out there and sit down for lunch and there's no... I mean you can sit on like a little wooden sort of whatever but there's no benches. So let's say finally that finally happens and they're going to put a bench there. They're not maintaining a bench. They're not repairing a bench. They're going to put a bench somewhere. Do we really want that to come to us? Yes. Until we have a few cases of like why are we spending all our time on a bench? And to our workload. Alright. So the bench at Cambridge Park. Okay. I mean let's say that we don't and so both design review, they put the bench somewhere and then everybody complies. So then they come to the council and they complies. That's alright. That's also part of the process. But I think you know, I'd like to leave the system as it is and if there's a problem then we'll deal with it. But how to word this may be just too difficult to... Yeah, I think what this would be is if someone wanted a bench Paul would point and say they want a bench there. If it hasn't got through the design review you could say, okay can you send this to the review. And then once it does it comes and we say alright fine, looks good. But it might be nice. One of the main differences is do we know about this before or after the fact? Right? And so a bench that people want in a park maybe we should know before we send it. So how do we word it so that or maybe clear it from the word? So Paul asked you to say yes. We want to know about the design. So send it to us. That was road closures. So three, we're on two. There were no comments on two. There's a couple things he added or town manager for review. I think that was committee or town manager. The highlight. I added that wording so I highlighted it so you guys knew I added that wording. They ask as a general don't charge on Saturdays at all for all the businesses. So that would come under 2B, correct? For Saturdays. So I think it would become under 2A which is a short term manager. Are we comfortable with something like that being the manager? I don't know. The discussion we should have you're saying rather than just let the town manager. My question is where should it something like that Right now it's 2A. Right now it's 2A. Are we comfortable? Because I'm not so sure. And this goes back to our conversation last week about number of spots versus dates. Let's say we leave it as it is but we do have reservations about this. How would that work? We'd ask the manager about this particular decision of his and examine it there. Do we need to put it into a formal policy? Can't we just deal with it on a one off basis? It's probably this is the one particular example. Just because he makes a decision doesn't mean that's the end of the story, is that correct? It is. Because we don't find out until after he's already approved. The reports are of his approvals not of what he's thinking about. So this would not qualify for short term because it's less important to have a discussion. That's why it would qualify for short term. That's why it would qualify. To change this would seem to create all kinds of other headaches. What are you going to reduce it to four just because of this one? Well it goes back to the discussion we had last meeting about. So I would think this would be something that a counselor could bring to the attention of the counselor and want to have us discuss after the fact. In other words it's happened and now the counselor really felt after discussion this was something we should change and we'd have to go back and revisit this rather than trying to wordsmith so that the words are such that this one instance of four chemical days gets into this regulation. And maybe it's something that are not with us. Because I think it's part of an overall larger discussion. Like what time are meters? How much are meters? And then I think that within that we can move back up for Saturday before Saturday. But I think it's more of a discussion that has to do with more of this. A larger question of policy. What do we want to help the business community versus the cost of the channel? And that's a larger discussion. Well that's what this work started raising. Are you comfortable with the town manager doing the work? If we feel like these are all temporary is where he's got the question of and walks. Are you in a separate document? I see your cursor. No I'm not in that one. I'm doing it on So we're not going to see it. So we're on 3D So 3 the heading I added and sidewalk in 3A I added temporary short and long term road and sidewalks 3A2 3A1 and 3A I guess my question was because you mentioned specifically that's okay that was my question if you were referring to the block party or any block party sidewalk sales would be delegated to the town I added more cumulative on the road and sidewalk closures because I couldn't It's good to at least have it there just in case we have no idea and they're not here to I have things they also have what is nice a public way regulation document that talks about purpose authority so I wanted to just So I think I do think that there's a larger debate to the problems right now because and so now there's a demand here in my town for the taste at that boat so it's Amherst College property and Amherst College does not want that there anymore and so there's a plot who can't have alcohol in the comments and it draws people the beer tent because it's a lot of local that's why when I was in my early 20s that's what got me to the table I was in my early 20s but I've gone in I've also heard frustration from people who are trying to plan things about the fact that if you want to plan something in Kendrick Park you go to a different person than if you want to plan something in the comments and so I think there's a larger and sometimes you have to go to the building commissioner for things but sometimes you go now to the board of license commissioners and there's a lot of actors there and I think that in the future we can simplify it would be really useful for anyone who wants to plan an event in town which I think we would like to encourage so some of it has to do with there's reason for it so I guess we could give some scenarios and we can put to the town council as a whole but it's not meant to be the end of the year planning because this can always be in fact you said that anytime putting in this place is there a better way to do it and maybe they do but it doesn't mean that while I feel like I'd like to keep as much in place as possible in terms of not shifting work loads around and stuff like that because it seems to be working this is an instance where it would be nice to figure out if there's a way to facilitate because it's a constant complaint I don't know how valid it is the constant complaint that it's very hard to do anything in Amherst because you have to go to 17 different places so I think we put that in our report this is the beginning working with students on doing a stage for some extent I've heard from multiple people who have organized things that are actually probably oh yeah I'm not even how can we make the process efficient because there are three or four things that you have to do what's the order of doing so that I know I need a policy shall we vote can I put two minors everywhere in the document you capitalize public ways with the exception as I first mentioned also in the intro public ways you can capitalize twice one is a direct quote from the charter so if they don't capitalize it I would change the quote but then later it says authority to regulate B plus the charter I would change the quote I'm working it's not capitalized but then in Wichita gets portion of the authority to control and regulate I got it so I think we're ready for a vote we recommend the town council adopt this document thanks it won't show up as amended there you're supposed to say who made the motion you don't need to say who seconded it you need to say who made it you need to say who made it it's alright she's doing a great job any discussions any discussion we had ten minutes for this it's going to charge proposed provisions it's the proposed provisions of course you can people need to see it as it's tracked from the right through it it seems fine I'll move to approve I'll move to recommend it no we have different wording for that I changed building members shall be three years starting July 1, 2030 she just made some wording changes I added some wording under appointing authority about the resident portion could you read that it just said the town council shall appoint the rest I reworded it the town council shall appoint the non-voting members per charter section 5 which obviously we don't have yet but how does that relate to OKA because it's far aside well that's to be determined by the rules of procedure don't have the rules in but the charter 55B is what allows us to change the appointing authority so appointing authority is not in that fashion part of our template so is there a reason that it's there and not so we have appointing authority twice on this document so is there a reason why this paragraph is not with it seems repetitive I've put it up I added it because up at the top it just says town council president and town council but it doesn't distinguish who does what why is this paragraph not there with the appointing authority we could put it up there what do we do with the section about the initial term of voting members I can tell you don't like it I'm just I know those two things got added into the bottom part of explaining I guess Evan this goes back to a conversation we had having something in the charter to me that the initial term of non-voting members would be in this charter because it only applies once and should actually be part of otherwise we passed this and after July 1 we have the sentence of we're taking all that out but included in the motion to to me that the initial term of non-voting to whoever because this is still not been decided whoever appoints those non-voting members when they do their first appointments they'll state that as part of the first appointments so we removed that and then you want the two sentences about who appoints that identify the appoint who they're appointing I didn't know whether it doesn't really fit under purpose or charge so it kind of makes sense to have a separate section this is the one thing that's not part of our the only other things are like purpose and the next line is where things are so just for purpose and reports it would just be on the next and then I'm happy you're happy so the quorum issue was the other one I had they had put the quorum in under composition I don't know if it's necessary I think that it is only because there are eight members but one counselor and three non-voting members so I think it does eight because there are non-voting members so our motion then he knows it's the same two people any discussion she wrote it to declare the charge the fincon charge the charge as amended before and then we're going to try and move to six and seven and so this one the main reason we're bringing this up is the SME status to make it consistent with others and also that's the biggest change so um I figured I saw how she just did the finance so it was originally passive I knew that I got six oh I see I get it me either so is there a he's free taking his minutes any discussion all those in favor oh it's going to be four zero it's five zero now we can turn to okay so now given the agenda the report to to consider the content of all pieces of the proposal to incorporate into the town council's future work that consider the content all of us sort of fresh in our brains start it to hear that is was formed to literally address the issues that you're bringing here and so we haven't met yet but you know one day tomorrow yeah and so I think that what resonated with the council in a positive way was the value being placed on finding the range so I want to say that I'd like to see bring residents on to work with us and then as an aside I have a small advisory group that I would invite any of you to join me and I will contact you to talk about issues I do that just for myself as a councilor but I I'm feeling very strongly that the values in here the idea that impact isn't just one I'm interested in the idea of what are general questions that would start a discussion or start the research so that intrigues me and I'd like to talk further about and I think in a way you're asking to do our jobs for us I think the sorry it's a long time three what's good for them what's good for them so in the beginning it would seem a proper world for us to be to take sort of a draft proposal and transform it into something that could be brought forward they're not necessarily interested in seeing realized in that they don't necessarily so to me if they did we would say ok we have a charge template we're going to take this we're going to format it to a charge template we're going to draw help and draw up you know something that the council could vote on to create a new committee if that's not the goal do with this and so I think that what you said is a lot of this is what the CRC is it didn't go to CRC because we decided that it was unfair to send something to a committee that had never met before I still I don't know in our appropriate USGRL G-O-L within the context of our of those it's not legislation it's all similar to where our public issues were bylaw this is the type of analysis that's the other layer I see want to go forward with a charge proposal for a separate committee and then we can figure out the other set whether we want to do the other set or set George and then let's do with that proposal in terms of separate committee those are essentially the three so bylaw resolution and so and I'm trying to wrap my head on what of those three categories does it fall into right so are we dealing with the creation of a new committee it sounds like that is not from Meg's perspective there could be a resolution from the council that says we think that every decision of the council should consider these things that would be a resolution of it this doesn't seem necessarily to fit with it and so from there I'm not sure where this falls now there can be that's if we're looking at this under the second part of our charge which is dealing with measures that go before the council the first part of our charge we could create a policy that would fall within this committee and so I guess this is my question and this is a question for the proponent I know Meg you can leave I'm actually wondering if especially given the time if it makes sense to maybe throw the ball back to you all and say think about and maybe come back on our April 24th meeting to see okay so do you want to move forward with the committee charge do you want a resolution or do you think that it's best for this committee as we think that every decision should be accompanied with some document that has these things right I guess for us to move forward I need a little bit of clarity about if we're falling under part one of our charge or part two of our charge that is actually something that they should probably at some point not agree but that's another option you could form a committee you could propose committee charge you could propose some kind of resolution third option would be this is a brand new format you guys use real examples we could club together residents with certain expertise to advise us on things so it feels like there's a flexibility there that could incorporate our desire to sort of be a committee that forms and has some impact on how we think as a council and also how to include more resident input around decisions and what and where to look for I think maybe the best thing for us if you some type of measure that's actually voted on by the council I know there's three of you here there were more names on the original proposal so maybe talk more yourself and say given the conversations we've had what exactly do we do we still want a committee and if you come back and you say we still want the majority of us still want a committee then our role is to help you write a committee charge if you say we just want a resolution that says the council then we can help you with that if it's not one of those things I would say that this committee perhaps table this until CRC can have a discussion of let me know who so you just want to be done we don't have time to do it I think of the three things we have left we don't have minutes seven was on there just because of this so I'm considering it done because we've decided as a committee that that is not as much I was actually going to suggest I think that we do that in order and if we don't get the lunch part regulations that's okay FAQ that I've been drafted and then move on to this thing that I call discussion and vote on recommendation related to review of the policy for public awareness but I think the FAQ first would be I thought it was a lovely document it's potentially the more important spirit of Evan unless I were muted and had no comments that seems unlikely it's totally possible Evan it's possible I would just change the tense on the very second to last one and pass that to the president where are you at the end of the document I'm not sure tomorrow's meeting so on the present tense I think you keep it in the present tense FAQ I don't know tomorrow because I think that that's what they just asked me what time the meeting was it might be worth reaching out to her can you give us a little well for tomorrow's meeting she's saying it might be worth let's talk about that after this meeting okay I thought this was excellent I did not have any changes but that's just me other than the one that's extremely useful I think we'd like to make this available to the world at large it also is good I think to our fellow council members correct I thought the audience for this would mostly be the counselors who else is going to read this but also say people who want to bring stuff forward to some extent it was clear did not everyone understood the role of this committee which makes sense because who's going to understand other than the ones who are my list is the charge template the guidelines and put it on a 3x5 car and keep it in my wallet that would be impressive if you can get this on a 3x5 car so one question I have I haven't made it through the first sentence no I've been dealing with this with Kathy no it is a comment issue are we doing the Oxford comment I'm a fan because you did not do it I wrote this on a plane that's your biggest always I'm late because I was on the plane not the guy I can't do anything I've had it I always get confused like the breakfast joints where they go you have a choice of bacon sausage what is bacon sausage okay alright so next question I added the comment from now on we are doing Oxford Oxford comments that was a consistency question overall why do they even have the we could go through a paragraph by paragraph if people would like just one last comment here's the real question did you all read it yeah we all read it because if you didn't it makes sense you're either going to take me and George at our word or we table up till next time I would like to take you at your word second but if you haven't read it you probably shouldn't I know I and again it's a living document the only change I I would add given the conversation we just had is under the first sentence where it says any proposed measure may be adding resolutions bylaws to give some examples in parentheses should we say do it's not necessary in the last step though so before we add resolutions so this is why I put the item 7 on our thing resolutions are in our chart and we've never reviewed a single one oh you know when I wrote the resolution I think we should because resolutions feel very different to me I feel like that you know I mean I wrote the one about the first church I didn't even think about bringing it yeah no one has and so we'll come up very late and time sensitive and so I was wondering whether we should remove that that was one that was time sensitive therefore let it be resolved oh I like this whereas whereas we passed 20 resolutions without a single review resolutions feel really different and they really do arise from the is the charge such that it could be read as saying they must be submitted to us first or is it simply saying that they could be in other words we would look at them if they were sent to us the charge reads review bylaws and resolutions proposed for action by the town council for form content and organization to assure they are clear consistent and actual by the town council and that does sound like everything should come to us first certainly bylaws but we don't have to we'd be authority to accept directly from it's coming things are coming in the rules as we talk about resolutions in this document it relates to right now our charge is yes but I'm not sure when we finally really do discuss a committee charge whether we want to could a resolution actually require the council to take action oh yes some resolutions do I mean it's an action to say we're going to support the temporary shelter and we voted on that action I'm trying to think what would not be actually some resolutions include action in resolution I'm going to keep it as long as it's in our charge because this can always be edited I think that's it's a conversation we have to have I don't know I actually do sort of think that it would be nice if it was but you're right sometimes they're very time sensitive the one for the temporary shelter they had the meeting that coming up that week in terms of a flag about the history of indigenous people here in this country so for me it was old hat what was coming so there's a difference in just what we're aware of so you prefer to tell them no it would come probably to us but we didn't have any I imagine it came to us I don't know so it's a different discussion but you know for instance the resolve the town to some fairly ambitious goals probably actually should come just so we can look at it and say okay is this consistent with you know our bylaws that's different than just like a resolution it's always should come our authority as individual counselors to recommend this but you have that right I think they'd be more comfortable with the postponement but I don't want the postponement to be automatic when there's a time sensitive issues right so this has to be decided by charter the charter allows the president to overrule that right when they failure to act would have certain consequences but some proclamations and resolutions you could argue don't fall under that because they should have been able to figure that out three weeks ahead of time and it's their fault on ours no resolutions resolutions in this FAQ for now yeah I agree bring back the discussion so that's paragraph one what paragraph are we in this is two now the president has a lot of agendas I know see actually the team act proposal should have come up at the first meeting because it was proposed it should have been here it really should have been in all fairness because it was proposed in November let's keep on our focus let's get to this document please one way or the other well we have a rules committee and they're getting done they are going to get done yes they are so I guess my question this document this document is is there anything in here that people felt like I misrepresented or was incorrect about well should we look one last time at substantive or is that two does GOL discuss and recommend substantive changes the answer is not ambiguous yes GOL discusses substantive aspects as they relate to clarity and sustainability this means GOL might recommend and then we're given examples of each but examples were illustrative and clear and made the point that it just can have a substantive impact function so the distinction seems to be between substantive which does not affect intent or function of a measure and substantive which does so and we can I actually the fontages were intentional to distinguish between the text of the fact and example and it can have a bylaw text which to me should always be intentional I had a lot of power in finalizing that charter I know so I can tell you why I picked this Calibri font I read a while ago that there are studies versus Times New Roman that the sans serif fonts are easier for those individuals that have dyslexia to read and the ones with serifs are a lot more problematic for those with dyslexia to read so I have stopped using serif fonts you are the only person that I know that wouldn't put that much thought into what font I read it in a news article and it really struck me as that's huge of all I have to do is stop using that and it could make it that much easier because dyslexia is fascinating so we could change this back those font changes were intentional to distinguish between example text but I understand I get now why it was just those specific areas and that's fine with me can we go back up to the second paragraph of the process this is actually where I most want people to sign up on because I don't know if I invented anything I think you did I think I did too that's why I want a commentary after GOL review the committee will provide a sponsor with a red line version of the measure that includes GOL's recommended changes if the sponsor agrees to those recommended changes then the GOL will vote on a motion that declares the measure clear consistent and actionable and it's forwarded to the full council as part of the GOL report so far so good that's the one I have question I thought our agreement was we're going to work with the sponsors but that we may not always declare things clear consistent and actionable even though we've worked with the sponsors and I guess and the thing that that flags me here is providing them with a red line version and if they don't agree to the changes we would hold it completely why say we may with but what do we send forward I always thought we would send forward I guess that maybe we never made that decision what would we send forward we send forward ours that are and indicate that they don't agree or whatever they agree remember having a conversation as a group that decided that the sponsors always their proposal their proposal if they and if we say to them you need to do this to make it clear consistent and actionable and they say no putting it forward but we can say we can say a 05 vote input in our report to the council we did not recommend this as clear consistent and actionable because of these reasons so how does it come out of committee then well it comes out of committee with a recommendation not to act with a the council decides whether or not we act I guess how does it get removed we have not been using the word recommendation except for policies that the council we've been using declaration and so it would be we declare that this is not clear consistent and actionable I mean so let me ask a question of what we just did today we didn't do it with CRC we didn't do it with the others the income changes were not something we created they were requested not the ones that we agreed to today and those are simply based on based on our charge so these are these are technical changes what's the point of taking a technical change back to them since there's nothing they can do about it anyway so they could say no we don't like it but that's not an issue with us that's an issue with something else no but according to right so if we follow the process I outlined here which I'm now we would then send it back to FINCOM and say here's our here's what we changed here's our recommendations and do you agree and if they said yeah sure if we go to the council we would but that would require a right and we don't meet again until the 24th so we could vote very consistent and actionable contingent on FINCOM accepting the recommendations but then if they we send back to them and they go we don't like this then it comes back to us then it comes back to us with something else and then we've got multiple people I understand how it can be a little sloppy because we meet off so our declaration would be qualified so we could give an absolute declaration because everything's done the way we expected it but in the case of FINCOM there would be a qualified declaration unless at the council meeting if FINCOM had raised an objection then it would have to bounce back to us but if they hadn't then the council could go ahead and ask is that correct we don't need to have any other meeting we don't have to write it could be done even between so we've given this qualified declaration and that goes to the council and in the interim FINCOM has the chance to come back and say yay or nay and they can also do it at the council meeting itself right isn't that adequate they don't have to wait they don't have to wait for another meeting of us to come back that's the thing we're trying to avoid I think that's part of it the back and forth before the vote I wonder if it could be so after GLL review the GLL will provide the sponsor do you have a concern about that I don't have a concern about that I've got and if they agree to it I wonder if this is too specific if we could just go with we expect to work collaboratively with sponsors to reduce potential disagreement between GLLs this is trying to spell out the steps so people understand but you're right we also don't want to constrict ourselves it has to go back and forth yeah but that may happen it may not so for example if this is say a bylaw that seems to me that we would refer back to the people who created the bylaw or the chart so it would be planning board you don't have to go back then I don't think to CRC and then they send it back to because we're looking at different things and let's see we're talking about the sponsor so if there should be a sponsor not multiple sponsors it should be a sponsor and maybe others get involved but there should be a sponsor who's responsible for creating us and shepherding it through the process so ever that entity or person is to whom we would send it and after that it's not our problem it should be there I don't see how you can put that in a paragraph and this I think gives people some sense in the process that may have some tweets involved but it gives them some idea as opposed to just a general statement that we're going to collaborate more with you trust us that's really not saying much this says here at the steps we'll take and they may involve withholding a declaration so it's encouraging them to take it seriously and pay attention I don't see that we can change it any more the sense is some sort of thing with the sponsor you could just reverse the sense you could say Geo expects to work collaborative with sponsors if the sponsor rejects the changes they may withhold the declaration so just switch the sense I think you're making it harder and more complicated I might be I guess my thought is so how I said it and I can easily change this wording a little bit how I set up right now is we were advised we'd send back we'd say do you like it then they'd say yes I said we could do a vote contingent on them agreeing my thought was well if they don't agree then we have to come back but now I'm thinking that actually we should because if we say no to be consistent with the law you have to change SME wording here and they come back and they say no then we probably should come back and discuss as a group and vote because that gives them an opportunity to come to us and say here's why we don't agree with you so I think that it's only a problem if they have to come back if they accept it but we can do sort of contingent approval and in that case but if they do reject they actually probably should come back to the committee because then we have to be like okay so why are you rejecting this right but I don't you can put this in an FAQ that wouldn't create so much confusion right so let's not overdo it I think it gives a general sense of what we're trying to accomplish and our collaborative approach and that there's a possibility that if they don't play ball they could end up with a declaration that is not favorable what about just adding to the instead of after review and a circuit would be this and you think that this has been made clear yeah I think I can agree with this because I think it's very clear and gives everybody a sense I have an idea with that I'm just kidding I think you actually brought up a good point yeah I mean we'll see I think we haven't been doing it with something well that's how we're trying to imagine what it is we're still suffering from the attack sorry I do love the GOL is the last step in the process sponsors should finalize all the procedure I have that they give so that we know what comes to us but it's there before we start so if you all are comfortable I can make some minor changes to this and then we can vote on it next meeting that was going to be my question agenda item for next meeting yeah but it should be brief because all I'm going to do is change some minor things in this group it will not be brief however I think it will be this is the recommendation of late CRC doesn't say public ways in that regard it does say and so can the question is do we make a recommendation and refer directly to CRC because we found something or do we make a recommendation to the town council and say please refer this review to CRC well we we agree that if the long say it right this has parking I don't actually know if this it makes sense for this committee I think if CRC wants to pick that up or if individual members who have a concern about these want to bring that to CRC that makes sense but I don't necessarily know that this committee should be recommending the CRC look at fee structure or just to say it's not within our purview no I know it's not within our purview which is why this has to do with waving fees or fees in general so the slide part is to do that but then their part and then we would so the theory is that we should everything should have a committee that can go so is your thought we were delegated the task of providing a recommendation of how we handle public ways we only are providing a recommendation regarding reservations of public ways or changes to public ways however there are other aspects regarding the regulation of the public ways that should be looked at but we think that we would like to give them to is that I'm looking for the justification of how GOL can tell another committee do we go to the council do we go directly to the committee it would be a recommendation that the council refer the matter to and yes that sort of it goes to the larger discussion regarding vet planning and licensing and fees so the CRC doesn't have that what we set up in that sense but there are there's no subcommittee right now you're on our meeting I guess my question is is this something we as GOL want to recommend but this is saying that this is going to the town council the town council would then refer to so no I mean I know you're going to drive to get it on the agenda so but I'm curious whether that you're on camera another one thing yeah it's a bylaw change so in the bylaw we just reviewed that as a bylaw review last week so my personal opinion is that I don't know that I would like this to be a recommendation but I do think that the report that accompanies our policy should say there are aspects of public ways that we did deal with one of them being fees, perhaps the other being lunch cart regulations, CRC may take up and then if the full council says yeah we actually think they should take it up then the full council can recommend or if CRC when it meets says that fee thing or if an individual council wants to bring it to CRC I don't know that I feel comfortable making it a recommendation of this committee just something that's brought to the attention of the council and the report would be my preference to members of CRC here hopefully you will who know who have some expectations we're not telling you what to do but you can hit, hit, hit they're pushy aren't they so pushy we got through everything except minutes because we didn't have any we didn't have any minutes so we got through everything we got a couple of highlights for next week I am shocked and