 I guess in my delegated responsibility, I will call the meeting to order at 9.39. There's a quorum. Alissa is now here. So we are just missing Sarah. And you want to start with minutes? I did. Okay. So I just put the minutes that Darcy did into our meeting packet. And so the minutes 2019 for one, there's the ones we have to do. I know I just don't know what to do those. We don't have a packet for today. It was for one, April 4th, our last meeting. I thought you said 20, I beg your pardon. Oh, 2019. Oh, I was saying 20 is the day. Oh, we're all kind of a mess today, huh? You put the minutes in our packet for today or any minutes? I did. Although now that I just opened the packet, I don't see them there. That's correct. So that's fun. So let me re-put them in. And again, I'm sorry, the date, heaven is. I see four one, but it's draught. Are they there? Well, it's draught. Do not. Yeah, that's what it should be. Okay. But you do see it? I do see it. Why don't I see it? Oh, you're in the minute packet. Yeah. It should be a minute packet. It should be, but I tried to also put it for today. Was there? That makes sense. I was just trying to get everything in one place. Darcy, you had a question in your email, right? You were wondering, you thought we had approved minutes, but maybe it wasn't captured. Oh, right. Right. Right. I did have that question. But it wasn't until, I didn't remember doing it. Can I do it? What I haven't figured out on SharePoint is, when I am opening it in SharePoint and I hit edit document, where those edits show up, do they stay in the document? Yeah. As long as you don't download it. So if it then says edit in word, edit in browser, does it matter? So I guess edit in browser is the best way to do this. Sometimes you have to, for her, for her, you're looking at two approval of minutes, right? And you're just adding none. Yes. I added, who did it with there? What I'm talking about. Added it in the browser. You're, you're working in, wait, there's two, in our thing, there's two sets. There's minutes, 2019, draft, ddoomont.doc. And then there's another one, right. And so if I open up this one, it's been updated. So it's, there's two in here. And one's, should we just delete this one? Yes. I'm going to run a few seconds ago. Yes. The minutes reflect who was there. There's no one there. No, the minutes also reflect who's asking. No, but I meant, like, there's no public here. Why do you have to say there's no public here? Okay, so I'll know that. Because I didn't know that. Because I was like, what's literally happening. So if there's nobody here, why should I say there's nobody here? So I put it around the seaside. Okay. So I would now do that. There's no public person. There's no public comment. At the end of the meeting, that does happen. Okay. It's just important to ask. Okay. Great. All right. See, I didn't know that. Because I thought, you're not here. Why would you say no one's here? Okay. So I would like that note. So far, I don't remember. And then under seven action items, should I also have none? No mistake. I think we've been treating them as actions that we are assigned to do for the next meeting is how we've been treating them. So action item would be Alissa is going to... Task? I don't think I had any tasks. I hope not. Because if I did, I didn't do them. The only task is Darcy was going to create a monkey server. For the other meeting. Yeah, but that was the seven action item. She said she would do that. Yeah, we're just at... That's what we... How? That... Yeah. Well, between now and later. It's just saved by itself. Can we? Mm-hmm. Okay. One more. All right. So that's it for the minutes. All right. I'm glad you're telling me what this is. How would you... So then, in D, it should be 5 to Sarah. So, but my bigger point was actually... See how it says that committee... Towards the supporters... I don't know what it's... Supporters... It's an air idea. You rather than kidding from the side... Yes, and the president. The president and the ruling. So moved. Second. All right. Sarah had requested of Paul that he request Lauren that we get an opinion by... She gave him a date. She did. I want to say it's been 9th. May I ask a couple of questions? First of all, so good. We hope to do that today. In other words, we will do this today and hopefully approve it. Yes. We have approved the decision tree for time console appointments. And have there been any interviews done yet? For... By anyone, for anything. I mean, has Sarah done any interviews? I guess it's a question. And... We don't have the CAFs yet. We decided not... We said... So... Slowly. Right. We weren't going to see any CAFs or anything. Correct. I believe there was also another level on that where we had discussed having... So having interview questions that are asked in the interview, but then also coming up with sort of as a committee guidelines or criteria that we're looking for in candidates. So we're not just sending Sarah in sort of blind with the understanding that those criteria should come from some of the discussions we had with Greg and... And so Sarah had sent those emails. We got a response from them. Right. And so I think that we have two things that we need to do before we start interviews. One is finalize interview questions so that when we send Sarah into an interview, we know and she knows what she's asking. The second thing is to come up with sort of decision criteria or guidelines that she can use after the interviews to say, okay, what am I looking for? She put them, I believe, in our meeting packets last week. And what I saw was actually in the email. It was an email. It was very, very brief. Right. So I think that that's... I think that we need to... Because we are... This is my opinion. Because we are so close to the interview questions being done, I think that we need to first finalize those so then we can say, okay, we have these interview questions done. But then I do think the next thing we need to do as a committee is say, especially because for Sarah, she's never appointed ZBA or a plan. She's going to probably have a handful of good people that all gave good interviews and she's going to say, how do I choose between these people? And so I think we had discussed giving her some guidelines to say, here are the things that you're looking for. We need to build those guidelines and we haven't done that yet. We need to have a conversation, I think. Right. And so I think that after we finalize... Let's check the box out in the interview questions. We need to start coming up with those guidelines. In that context, we need to return to the emails we have from Mark and from Greg. So we start building those. I think we need to have a conversation as a committee about what's useful. I think we also need to consider reaching out to some other people potentially because I don't know enough about what makes for a good planning to make those guidelines. And the email we got from Greg was brief. I think also part of it is just not just for Sarah but for all of us in the committee thinking about together as a group, what are sort of the basic, broad things we're looking for in anyone to serve on these particular bodies that we've been tasked with filling. And a couple of them are fairly technical. If this were just the parking... I mean, you know, the dog park group, I mean, we probably wouldn't be so much worried about technical qualities. You know, we probably want to know, well, do you like dogs? Things like that. I thought it would be useful at some point for us to talk as a group. I thought also Darcy was suggesting this but I might have been misunderstanding what she was saying but that, you know, that we have a sense as a group that what are we looking for broadly speaking in candidates, including in some cases, I would assume, one of the categories would be technical expertise or background or knowledge, but is that the only one? No, it would be the only one. The ability to work with others, open-mindedness, does it look like someone who actually can give the time to this? These are the kinds of things I'm thinking about and maybe some of you would look at it and go, oh, these aren't that important. I don't know if somebody has expertise or if somebody has a particular point of view. We're trying to stay away from points of view. We're trying to stay away from, you know, which side are you on? We're just trying to get a sense of, you know, amongst ourselves what are things that we would look for in a good member of planning board, zoning, or whatever other bodies we have to actually make appointments for. That's what I thought we were trying to come up with. Yes. And we don't have to do it today, but I think it would be useful for us to have it. And that was conversation. Right. So, I mean, my thought on this was that having some guidelines or some criteria would serve a dual purpose, right? One would be it would help give Sarah a sense of what she's looking for. And the other would be it provides us some backup for when we bring these appointments to the full council. Right. Because there's, I think there will be a little bit of hesitation about the fact that, you know, one person was designated to do all the interviews, right? And I think the more we can say, yes, but as a committee we standardize interview questions, we standardize guidelines for what she was looking for. You know, we made sure that it wasn't just we said, yes, I already just go pick some people. I thought she comes back to us. She comes back to us. Right. And we'll talk to her. Right. So, can I ask her questions about the people who she brings forward? Yeah, okay. Right. So, that's the thing. We want to make sure that she, that we have some input as to the type of people we hope she's bringing forward, right? I don't think these have to be really extensive. In fact, I think the things that you said, you know, are wrong. You know, one thing is I actually spoke with Steve on the bus and we were having a casual conversation about general university things mostly. And then I just off hand said, hey, when you served on planning board, it was important characteristic in a planning board member. And his was willingness to collaborate. Like that was, you know, that was a thing. The ability to work with others. The ability to work with others. And so, you know, just making sure that we capture all of those things. It is not just about technical expertise. It's about collaboration. It's about working well together. It's about understanding the role of the planning board because we don't want anyone, you know, 99% of what the planning board does is just, does this project meet this zoning guideline, right? It's not this, you know, you're not, you're not implementing, you know, most of the time you're not implementing broad visions of development in town. You're just, you know, can you, can you follow the zoning by that? So I just want to make sure that we capture those things in a document. But I don't think it has to be super specific. But I do think it needs to be done before we send Sarah out to do interviews. What about the rest of it? It looks like Mark's parents sent an email that lists all these qualities. Right. I, you know, obviously people need to be able to be collaborative. They don't need to be in agreement with everyone at all times, obviously. But they need to be able to collaborate in general. Yeah, I mean, we're just trying to come up with, you know, I'm in my mind. I'm imagining a bunch of names in front of me. What, what am I looking for here? Other than maybe I just say, okay, Sarah thought they were okay. So let's move on. But I actually, to me, this is actually more for Sarah because she, it gives her, it gives her backing, right? To say, these are the things I look for and here's how I think that they have these instead of her just coming back and saying, well, why'd you pick them? And then, you know, I think it just helps support her in what is a fairly substantial task that we haven't given to her. So, but we should do the interview questions first. Okay. I don't know. You're chairing this meeting. And it should reflect, I would think, a consensus if possible to achieve of what we as a committee are looking for broadly speaking in potential candidates. Now, we could just leave it unstated. We could, I mean, maybe we could decide, look, let's not get into the weeds. Let's just, you know, we've got the questions. We've got Sarah. And when it comes to us as a committee, we'll just talk and we'll just chew through it. That's one option. The other option is to have a conversation. I thought that was what we were heading toward a few weeks ago was a conversation of us as a group to sort of come with a sense of what are some, broadly speaking, what are some things we're looking for in potential candidates. That would definitely help Sarah. And I think it also would help us. But I, you know, you may think, we don't need that and it's fine. I can live without it. But I think we'd be good to have that discussion and we could write it up and we could give it to her or we could just have a conversation and leave it at that. For OCA, it doesn't need to choose between a... Oh, where? How can I see it? Well, I'm seeing it, but yeah, I know it's... Where, where are you? Okay. That's because I had a million things open and so I'm closing them all so I make sure I'm on the right thing. So I'm looking at... Interview protocol draft 22519 during posted meeting. And now we have you to... Okay, great. Are there, is there more than one of those? Uh... Does it have my name on it? The original one. And I mean, the name is, it says modified last by... Yeah. Or modified last. Uh, Alissa Brewer. Oh. Yeah. And the title of it is Interview Protocol. Prod, draft 02519 and 419 and 04819. So they're now three days on it. And Alissa is currently at it. And you can see it. And that's the same problem. I think sometimes... I didn't, I never saw the minutes. So this is... Do we... Look for some of the most... Modified... So it's in the meeting... 17 minutes ago should be about... Is it in our meeting package? It's in the meeting package. There we go. There we go. Here we go. I'm adding Greg's into this document right now. Thank you. So you don't have to worry about it, yes. Thank you. Mark's is much better. I'm literally just copying it in. Okay, so I guess I never saw Mark's. The machine will spell for you. Thank goodness. It'll just, it'll highlight and go. Frequency. So we can begin our... Discussion of three. Discussion of, yeah, three. I think it's great. Let's approve it. So parts of this... We have already approved. You mean of three? Yes. This was not through the first. That is bad. But we didn't vote on anything. We didn't vote on any of this protocol. Right. This is still not been approved formally by this committee. We're still talking about it. So this is 311 that we approved at one point. What was that? The process. Yeah, it's the decision tree. This is talking about... This is the interview question. This is the interview question. And I thought we'd gone through a lot. Not stuck, sorry. We were discussing three. I've looked it over and I don't see any particular issues. Describe someone. This could be, I mean, it's up to Sarah. But most likely it would be maybe the committee chair or someone. Exactly. Exactly, exactly. And it may be a bit awkward as they do this song and dance. But maybe the questions could be shared by all the people in the interview, whoever's there. Does anyone want to add anything or take anything out? Well, I would just like to say. Yes. There's no way in the world that these questions could be asked in 20 minutes. Yeah. Can we take some out? Can we? I mean, 20 minutes. No, I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm just saying that, you know, I've heard from some of the people who went to interviews for the energy committee that were interviewed for 15 minutes. Mm-hmm. And, you know, they were asked like three questions. Right. It was... Like I said, I didn't... But the question is, does that... So they could do two. But you don't want them asking questions. Okay. Okay. Okay. Can we leave? Yeah. That's right. It looks like we could go through here and eliminate some, perhaps certainly combine some. For instance, 9-11 could be combined. If we think it's important... I'm thinking at the end you'd probably say, do you have any questions for us? Anything you want to share with us? That could be a simple last final question before you say goodbye. Thank you. Right. So 9-11 can combine. Yeah. I think you can combine those two. If we decide that it's important that that be asked. 11 was the on your way out the door question. Right. And 9 would be the same thing. You know. Do you have any questions for us? Anything you want to add? I think, again, we're agreeing that that's probably something worth asking because we also like to get rid of a few things. I think if you get rid of open meeting law, quite frankly. Yeah. I think 8 can go. Yeah. You need 8. I'm not. And I'll tell you what. I've been sitting in front of you. I don't know anything about open meeting law. And it said... It never will. No. Yeah. I know. I don't know how you can... Well. Okay. We may have to keep 8. But that, again, runs through the problem of trying to cut these down. But okay. Let's see. Welcome. Fine. Somebody should describe the committee. Why did you apply? How did you learn about the vacancy? Is that something we have to ask? I mean, why did you apply and be sort of obvious? And I'm obviously interested. I have nothing else to do. Yeah. Stop it when you're very short. No. They're all great questions, but we're trying to eliminate a few here to get this, you know... Feel right now under pressure because we're just starting and we know that we have to interview a lot of people in a short period of time. Yes. But this is all going to even out. And we're trying to make a process that's going to extend, you know, into the future. Mm-hmm. I actually think it's respectful to have a half hour interview. And right now it's really hard though. It is super hard right now. Right. To have half hour interviews. Right. You know, to ask Sarah to do a half hour interview now for everyone is like ridiculous. Right. But so I don't know how to, you know, the fact that we're making this as a process that will stand forever. We can come back and change it anytime we want. Well, I think that one of the things, that's the problem. Mm-hmm. I saw the public being disrespected and these were all real life concerns. Mm-hmm. And so... Now who's going to make the hand out? The staff. Yeah. The staff. That would be great. So that's all really in their hand. That would be great because that gives them time to digest it too. And they might take themselves out of the process when they saw the time. That's boring. And a copy would be president. Copies would be president at the meeting in case that sometimes happens. People say, oh, I never read it or I didn't see it. Okay. So two can be covered by document. That can be removed by staff. Good. Available ahead of time. Available ahead of time. Well, we're hoping to get it to them before, right? When it's scheduled. Time is every scheduled time. So I could... Okay. So that will take out one step. Yes. So I said hello. Thanks for applying now. Next question. Do you want to ask them why did they apply? Yes. I don't think we need to ask how did you learn about... I actually think that's really useful because the answer will help us as a committee inform our outreach and communication. Okay. Because if they say, oh, I heard about it from the town of Amherst Facebook page versus oh, a CPO told me that I should apply for a committee position at an event. Like that's good for us to know. Really? Yeah. So you want to keep up? Okay. How about four? You want it right afterwards? I think we should get the order right too. So Sarah literally just goes through this boom, boom, boom, boom. Yeah. The less she has to think about it, the better. And that's true for anyone in this context. So the next four would be if you ever watched or attended one of the meetings, look at the web page, just trying to gauge the degree of their... So asking them you think is not really that valuable. Maybe it doesn't. Level of interest. You know, it just gives you a sense that they'll look at you blankly. You go, well, that tells you something. If they look at you and say, yeah, I looked at it and I had this question or I thought this or I thought that. It doesn't have to be long. No. It's just, yeah, right. I mean, have you looked at the web page? Have you attended any of the meetings? And they would say yes or no. And that would give us potentially some of the relevant. Obviously five is extremely important, at least for the zoning and planning, and it could be for many others as well. So what's your background expertise relevant to this committee? And the answer may be none. But hopefully there would be something. And then six is supposed to help make it so that even if somebody doesn't. Okay. So, okay. All right. Somewhat open-ended, but that's all right. Seven seems to be important. So it's six. I'm sorry. Yep. Is six somehow related to the diversity requirement? I don't. It couldn't be. I mean, it depends on what we do with it. Okay. That's valuable information to Sarah and to us. I think six is important. I think it's important. Again, this is a discussion we can have as a group as well. It seems to me it's important that that people have some experience serving on groups or committees or something that they have absolutely zero experience ever working with a group. We didn't necessarily rule them out, but it would be concerned. I'm really excited about this, but no, I've actually never ever volunteered or done anything with any group in church or school or any place that would be concerned. Is the question, have you had experience or can you provide us? It's a different question. That's a nice way to put it. It's a nice way of putting it. I like that. If we could make it, tell us, tell us about an experience you've had collaborating with a group. So leave me open. I see your little flag there. Is that Darcy's purple? That's purple. Yep. And there she is. I see her now. Tell us of an experience you've had collaborating with a group. Well, I know I agree. I know you raised a very good point. This is very concerning. Maybe she will never get the question three and 20 minutes will be up. I don't envy her doing this. I don't envy anyone. And I think that's another discussion we're going to have at some point. Seven. Well, the current chair has spoken on seven already. I still think this is, I think we can get rid of this. Where's the blue section? I moved it to one five because it didn't fit with interview protocol. It fit with that there. All right. So people were keeping seven. So I think that would be a reasonable thing to do. I mean, what's somebody going to say? I'm not comfortable. They're not. They're going to say, yes, sure, I'm fine. They're going to say, what's open meeting law? And then you're going to spend 15 minutes trying to explain the unexplainable. Sure. I think, so here's the thing. I think that it could still be a yes or no question of you read that handout. Are you comfortable working under open meeting law? And they will likely say yes, but at least then you have that confirmation that they read that part of the handout, but that's a two second. Unless I said, oh, could you explain that to me? But that would actually be useful. Read the handout. Right? RTFM. Okay. So I would, yeah, I like that. So we're adding to the handout that we're also giving that chance so that it helps. Well, how would we wait? Again, I really want to have it so it's worded so she can literally read it off the sheet. Are you comfortable working? It's a yes or no question. I just don't see how it's going to, okay. No, I don't know. That's my point. It shouldn't take up any time. Okay. Well, what could you think of that? Every one of these tells me something about this person. Okay. Seven. I'm trying to say to myself, okay, the answer yes or the answer no. What does that tell me? Either way, it doesn't seem to tell me anything. Yes, they're comfortable. Whoopie-doo. No, they're not comfortable. I don't know what that means. So help me understand what the answer to this adds to my understanding of them as a candidate. Does it say they actually read the handout? I guess that tells me something. Yes, go ahead. And that's in the handout that they've been given. And so you just want to have this question to, so you know that they actually read the handout and at least have been told that there are restrictions they must operate under, whether they like it or not. Yes. It seems like we're probably going to want to know the most about. Yeah. And I think we need to have some flexibility on it, like the ability of, for example, the staff liaison or the committee chair to ask a follow-up question or at least say, can you tell us more about that or something like that, you know, or... In other words, Sarah's ability or my ability or anyone else's ability to actually evaluate and answer, at least in the technical area, would be limited and you have someone present or if someone is present to ask questions that could be more focused in terms of expertise and experience and so on. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it seems like it makes sense. And we've sort of said that this is only going to be asked by... Questions are only asked by Sarah. Alyssa, do you have a question? Oh, right. That's true questions. But she can say, can you tell us more about that? You know, she can say that. Oh, sure. And so then, you know, because there is a lot to say about some people's expertise, you know. All right. So you're thinking Sarah can still... She doesn't... She can be asked by a staff person or by a chair or committee, but it's a question that... We are not going to answer that. Sure. So they could start from the beginning of their resume back in 1950 and go down the list. Or they could just, you know, get right to like, what is their specialty? So you want to know what their focus is. Like they have an experience and expertise in, you know, area you want to know. Well, the key word here is relevant. What have you been focusing on? What is your... What's your specialty or something like that? Right. And how is that relevant to this body? Right. Right. Yeah. I'm not interested in your resume, but, you know, yeah. But that's Sarah. Sarah's going to have to do that. Right. So the question is, does the questioner have the flexibility to do that, or should we put in a follow-up question there around her experience? Please, please, you know, what is your... What would you describe as your focus or your specialty or something? I think we can leave it as it is for the moment. Well, do we have flexibility? Does she have flexibility? Yes. You mean to ask a follow-up question? Absolutely. I mean, she could spend the entire 20 minutes on four of what she wants. I mean, she'll do what she does. We hope she'll follow this pretty much one, two, three, four, right, but she may decide, maybe set four, we'll raise all kinds of issues, and they'll spend 10 minutes on it. But I don't think we can put it into a template, right? I mean, we're trusting her to use her common sense and to... And I guess you just want to make sure that she feels empowered to ask follow-up questions? Yeah. I just feel like that is probably the most important question as far as us being able to then look at them and say, okay, yes, this is a person who has deep knowledge of this area or whatever. Well, I think that's also a discussion that we need to have as a group, because I, while I agree with you, I think there are also other areas that are also important to me that might defeat or overwhelm expertise. Somebody might be a really impressive expert, but in a couple of other areas, they're very deficient, and we might reject them. True. That's true. In terms of character, open-mindedness, maybe they don't have the time commitment. Maybe this person is an expert up the wazoo, but as you listen to them talk, you realize they're doing 13 other things, and you think they just don't have the time for this. I think we can leave it as it is and trust Sarah to be... We got a whole new statement up there. I don't know where they came from. There's a gremlin. Did I write that? No, but we know it's you. We had the suspicion. Evan was just like this, and I'm like this. Darcy's talking. This is not an interview committee. There is no standard interview committee. Just OKA, Designee, and additional people may be available. Right? All questions. We don't know why the town manager is being invited. Right. How does the president have no speaking role? Any other reason that we always use... I actually feel uncomfortable with that, because we only have one representative of the town council who's running an interview, obviously. The council appointment, you know? Well, he's just there to get perspective if she wants it. I mean, he doesn't have any decision-making power. Right. And he can't even speak unless she permits him. Correct. According to what we just wrote. We don't have a different opinion. I'm imagining me being there instead of Sarah, and I don't know squat about either of these bodies, and someone's going to look at me and ask me a question, and I'm not going to be able to answer it. And I'm going to look like an idiot. I think it's if-available. It would be nice to have a staff liaison, and if-available, nice to have a town manager. I used to have some people available who actually have some knowledge and expertise about how they're... Oh, he's got... How many? I have no problem with him being president, approaching whatever you want to call him. Yeah, and I think if they can be president, that would be great. I think the benefit of having them there is, to me their role wasn't to explain the committee, even though that was originally part of the process. It was so that afterwards when Sarah is tasked with a huge decision of how do you go from this to this, she can then ask. Right, because they were, you know, if they weren't there and they just have the CAF, and she's having to be like, well, in the interview they said this, but if the town manager or the committee chair or the staff liaison, all of who are knowledgeable people to some extent, could be there for her to then call up and say, you know, I'm really trying to narrow it down. And, you know, would you think of this answer? She's getting their input, but that can only be the case if they're there. They are. I know, but I want them... I want us to be the deciders. We are the deciders. I mean, with all due respect to the town manager, he just has a very commanding presence, you know, when he's at any meeting, and he, you know, his opinion is... Well, you can't express his opinion at these interviews, nor would he, but I guess your point is that his presence alone could be, what? But then he can't express his opinion after the meeting. I'm going to value his opinion on any of these things, very much so. And I think that we're giving Sarah the discretion to say, if she's in a position where she wants to ask his opinion, she can. She can. But that doesn't mean... This is our committee. This doesn't take it out of our realm. It just says that if Sarah wants to ask his opinion, because the other thing is too, the town manager has done lots of these interviews in the past, and so if she wants to... If she's sitting there and she's thinking, oh my god, I just interviewed 20 people for planning board and I need to pick five, and they were all great, we want to give her the ability to say, Paul, would you think of this person? Right. I don't agree with that, because I feel like the charter divided up these different powers purposely to have to give different people their turf, and this is our turf. For this particular set of committees, this is our turf. So anyway, I've just said my case, so I don't want to say any more. So where are we on this side? Well, we're at that question number, where was it down here? Open meeting law, and then I thought eight and 10 could be combined, but I think nine should come before it, so nine would become eight. I think it's important to ask this question, but again, I hope into what people think, but are you comfortable with the time commitment? People feel like that's an important question to ask, or maybe to say, well, everyone's going to say yes. That's fine, because then you at least have that confirmation. It's good to get that confirmation. It's a question that doesn't take a lot of time, but then later, if you hire them, hire them, appoint them, and then they say, oh, well, I can't make that meeting time to go, well, you told me you could in the interview. I mean, one of the problems that many committees have is that people get on them, and then they just don't come. Right, so we want a verbal confirmation that they will be there. And then I think you can combine eight and 10 into nine. I'm amenable to that. And then you can say thank you, and you look at your watch, and it's 19 minutes and 40 seconds. Yeah, sure. And then you say next, it comes the next person. I know, I don't know. We need to have a discussion about this today. But maybe it's not out of order, but we'll raise it later. Let's do a trust, I think. And Sarah, I don't see how we can just have one person do this. I think we have to trust each other and share the burden. I don't see how we can ask her to do 20, I mean, however many interviews it's just, it's just inhuman. I think we have to trust each other. We have a set of questions. I think what are you saying, you'll take Planning Board, I'll take DBA, you'll take Rancher Authority, I think what I'm saying is that whoever's available, we just share the burden as equitably as we can. I don't really care about whether it's Planning Board zoning. You've got 18 interviews, and you have one human being. We should, each one of us, we should divide that by five, and basically, and do it. And we follow the interviews, and we follow the protocols, and we come back, and we tell people what we can. It has to be one person? Just do ZBA. One for Rancher Authority. Can I explain? Right. Because if you interview for Planning Board, and I interview another three, and then we have to decide, now you and I have to have a meeting to talk about that, and we have to compare them, and all of a sudden, now you're starting to run against OML. So, well, but it's still as possible that we can at least divide it up. Okay, I'll have a discussion over time. But I think that the reason that we decided against that was when we said before, who wants to do Planning Board? Yes. Right? Because that's an incredibly powerful decision-making body, and whoever gets that has more power than whoever gets participatory budgeting. So we still could possibly do it for some of the other bodies, but if we're planning, and maybe we're selling, we just go ahead and... I mean, we could decide to give Sarah Planning and Zoning, but then we could divide up... The rest of them? The rest of them, so she doesn't have to do RCV and PBC, because I don't know... Those are going to be easier. They're less contentious positions, right? They're not expertise-driven positions, right? You're just looking for good people who are enthusiastic about right-choice voting. I don't care about because it won't be an open-meaning law problem. We actually probably... Okay. Right? Somebody has to be probably... Well, the other... Maybe one way of addressing that desire... Yeah. ...if I say... You can follow a different process, man. I actually think that those should be a different process, only in so far as that we share a pointing authority. That's... It was already going to be weird. So it was already going to be weird. Right. So already, that's a different one that we would have to tackle, so it doesn't make sense for us to follow this, because... Yeah. They just want to be... It should be a joint process. Okay. I'm sorry for raising it. Yes, because that one was... But it does... That's a good point. So we have the ten questions now. Is that fair? Yes. And ten is a lovely number, historically, and very... Anyway, so could we agree this is it, and we can vote it into perpetuity? Never to be changed. Just like the other ten commandments. So... Oh, no. What are you doing here? You added words to two. To two. Yes. Why did you apply? No, no, no. To two. Romano to two. Oh, sorry. Robert, she would be... Yes. Very upset. All right. This is not an interview. Maybe we should put it in bold rest. It's under Romano to Chulnel. We're actually... They've moved us up to Romano to... They've moved us up to Chulnel to... Because this is where our chair has been busy adding text. And the question is, do you approve this addition? I like the sentiment. I want to hack the wording. Sorry. I want to hack the wording. Please. I want to hack it. That's not ready for publication. Right. It's just... No, this is... I understand what you're talking about. Maybe just say, okay, does it mean may consult or may solicit the opinions of something... Rather than start with a negative, just say after the interview, okay, does it mean may do this? I'd like... Is that a listening language there? Well, yes, at the moment. Till we tear the pieces. I like it. You'd like it is not required. Well, no one said she was, or he, whatever it is. The reason I have so many words for you, George, is so that if the town manager said what I said now, then we're saying... But I'm not sure that needs to be in this. This is for... This is currently out there, but this is not... Right. It needs a public document. Right. So, certainly... What you're saying is that she doesn't mean may solicit the opinions of those who are present at the interview. Heaven is editing this. So, I just changed the word around. I know. But the content is the same. Right. But no, the content isn't the same. No, she liked the idea of do not require, or is not require. Two people that like one language and two like the other. So, what content... I didn't change any content. I just reword it. Can you change that language about is not required to solicit? No, it's still there. It's still there. It's in the second paragraph. After the interview, the OCHA designee is not required to solicit the opinions of others who were present at the interview, but may solicit the opinions of the staff, liaison, committee chair, and or the town manager who were present at the interview. It's a little repetitive. I can fix that. I know. The OCHA designee absolutely, absolutely, absolutely, cannot solicit the opinions of other town counselors. And this is again... Well, the only people who would potentially be present at the interview are those... Exactly. That's just the... You could just put, the staff liaison, committee chair, and the town manager. Well, I mean, you could just... Go to staff liaison. Could you? Could you? I guess that's my question is if Nate Maloy cannot make a planning board interview for one candidate, can she still solicit his opinion about that candidate, even if he was not at the interview? That's a substantive decision. I think it should be if they're at the interview. The staff. For some reason, I have been thinking all along of staff rather than the staff liaison. Right. Wouldn't we prefer to have staff, like Christine Brestra, rather than Nate Maloy? Right. Right. There are a couple of people who could be... More about the issue. I would think that. Well, the person who goes to the meeting to have an interview to the deliberations. So, the question is, is the OK Designee only allowed to later consult those who were at the interview or can she consult these people on a particular applicant, regardless of whether they were at the interview? That's the question before us. Given the number of interviews it's possible that they just can't be there for any number of reasons having nothing to do with the town manager. And so, I think we should... You think we should restrict it to other town council members, right? I don't know. I don't see where this should be involved, but I've already said that. So what if we just put a period after town manager and left out the relative clause? Who were present at the interview? Designee absolutely cannot solicit the opinions of other town councillors, meaning us, other members of the OKA committee? Right. Or any town councillor? So, say there was a town councillor who had a... knew of someone who was applying for the planning board or whatever. Right. And they can't... by telling her, this person applied and I think she would do a good job or whatever. Here's a name that I want you to know that I personally... She can't do that. Or she can't go to Shalini and say, don't you know this person? I just interviewed them and they seem good. Are they good? Right? Like, she can't... So, yeah, we can't stop other councillors from coming to us, but we... Okay, so we don't want to solicit any more other councillors. These three people... Can I wordsmith this just a bit more? Face? I take out the absolutely... Okadesigne cannot solicit the opinions of other town councillors. Let's get the absolutely out of there. Don't we want to have Alyssa's hand print on that? I was going to say, but you can hear Alyssa in this. I can do it myself, dammit. I'm just suggesting it. People can't say it. And I would also just suggest and after the interview, the Okadesigne may, but is not required to solicit the opinions of the staff liaison committee chair and or the town manager. That's what I would suggest. But again, you may like more punitive language. I know, I'm trying not to be too bad, but after the interview, the Okadesigne may, but is not required to solicit the opinions of... And I'd get rid of others, just of the staff liaison committee chair and or the town manager. The Okadesigne cannot solicit. I can get rid of absolutely. That would be my suggestion. Cannot solicit the opinions of other town members. Backspace, how about that? That's how I did it, but I don't know that it works on your document. It's definitely not required. Are you okay with that? Yeah. So it's somehow, necessarily anyway, to discuss all the applicants and decide together. That's right. Absolutely. Absolutely. But somehow they need to know that, you know. There's still many changes here. I don't know what's going on. Is this Alyssa? I think so. Stop it, Alyssa. We can fix it later. All right. I think it's just right as a paragraph, but whatever. Good. Can we... Without Sarah here, can we actually vote on this? So, we could, but my question... Well, my question is what are we voting on? Because this document... This document's not ready to be voted on. Because there's a lot of notes in it, and also we haven't discussed anything under four yet. So we could vote on one, two, and three, but we can't... I wouldn't say that we could vote on the entire document. We could hold off then. So we might want to just do it all at once. And we, Sarah, present would be nice. Especially since we're putting this on cycle. The website. I'm not... Why are we going to change seven? I'm an optimist. Yes. Just for the Sarah's sake, for the sake of all the poor people who get dragged into it. I'm not sure. We're good. Okay. Then moving down to item four, which is up here. Right. This document is... Technically, you can have a meeting if they never answer our calls anyway. So I would say... Yeah. Town manager appointment. But... Yeah. That's in the future, though. So here's the thing. We should be doing that right now. We have a million things to do. But... We've got to prioritize them. Right now. Today. So that... And since she's not here, we can have a meeting. So that's 22nd. Can't stop. We have to decide that morning. No. I hear you. We don't have to take place in that 20... No, no, no, no. We don't have to take place in that 20. We don't have to take place in that 20. We need to get the power rolling. We need to get the social media back. So... Because we want to start interviews. Probably by a lady. Because we need enough time. We want to give... When did we say we're getting these things to council? Town council? Do you remember off the top of your head? No, this is J.D. May 30th, is it? May 20th? I thought it was... It was not the absolute end of the month because there was still another town council meeting. We gave ourselves a couple of days. You have to start interviews by April 15th. I'm sorry. Well, that's what you wrote down because you backed it up. Snort. Castle rolls. Okay. Because May 13th was the OKA's last meeting that you could then name these people. Because it has to go to the full board of... May 20th. Yeah. That's what we said. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So we said, yeah. Okay. So even without formal approval, are people comfortable with what we've have so far to let Sarah at least try to begin to do interviews? Is the question that Alyssa's asking us? And my initial response would be yes. Okay. Do you want to vote on this? So... So... Is that in here? Yeah. Those are... Right. Exactly. Start scheduling interviews around interview process for ZBA and planning board. As soon as possible. Or... So we're just voting on the interview. We're voting... Yeah. So we're... Move to accept interview questions as amended for April 19th. And if I could... Oh, could this start the interview process for ZBA and planning board as soon as possible? Or at her discretion? I don't know. As soon as possible, I think... I think just authorizing her to start. We're not authorizing this whole... The entire document. And I think it would be helpful. Maybe we have... This is called interview protocol draft. Interview questions is the only thing we're voting for. And so maybe three should simply say interview questions for OCA Designee rather than interview protocol. You're going to change the question. Thank you. Thank you. And that's all we're approving. So we're approving just three. Roman numeral three. Yes. No, there's the town manager. He is not in there. It's not town manager. I agree with the whole document. That would be an issue. But for three, it's just a question. Yes. Right. Well, but no, we were also voting on her starting the process. And you don't want her to start the process. And I don't agree with the process. Okay. Yeah. I don't agree. I don't agree with the process. So your intention is to abstain from any vote going forward with regard to this? I still don't agree. Yes. I have no objection to that. So I'm going to accept the interview questions as a matter of time. Second again. Thank you. And I start the interview process as OCA as soon as possible. Yeah. And that's already been voted. Did George second again? I did second again. Approved. That's correct. Thank you. You have to run. We're getting there. If I got Sarah to agree to send a doodle to try to find a time that we could. 15th is Patriot's Day. Right. On Tuesday morning I could meet on Wednesday morning. Yeah. Thursday morning. Any of the mornings next afternoon. I just feel like, you know. No. It's all right. It just you got your schedule. So that's not possible. It's not possible. Are you available? I teach Tuesday and Thursday mornings. Wednesday morning I have bylaw review committee. Okay. That's. Any afternoons? I have all of those afternoons. Tuesday afternoon. I teach. I could do late afternoon like four o'clock. On Tuesday. Yeah. April 16. I could do four o'clock on Thursday as well. Either Tuesday or Thursday late. Those would be good for me too when I think of Tuesday. No, you're essential at this point. Tuesdays and Thursdays are more good. If those can't be there we're not having the meetings. Okay. So, Darcy do you have your email open by any chance? I'm just wondering maybe we can just send an email to Oh, Sarah. Sarah and Alyssa on Tuesday or Thursday at four o'clock. Around four o'clock. Okay. And then if they say yes and then Sarah can officially schedule a meeting if it's Tuesday that yeah that gives us enough time that gives plenty of time to post. Oh, yeah. In my mind it was the end of the week but it's the beginning of that week. Can I ask who was Greg's last name? I know more Greg Stutzman Stutzman S-T-U-T-S-M-A-M Yeah. Okay. I have the two names. Yes. Apologies. So the question is do we want to adjourn this meeting or do we want to try to continue? And what would we discuss if we continue while we're remaining items on the agenda? So at some right, I mean welcome to law on the agenda because of how the agenda has been posted. I think that so here's what I think I have something to be but Ditto, we could take or do we just adjourn? So here's I guess where we're at. Let's work. Welcome back. I think it would be worthwhile to vote to ask to add. She's not even here. That's right. It's not even here. Okay. So I can make that motion. Let me see if I can get this forward. Move to request the town manager work with staff to develop a handout that describes the committee. I think we're just talking about planning board in zoning, right? So it describes the the planning board, the the scope, the work, the function of so I'm looking at so I here, why don't I I'm going to read what we've said but I can just leave it to you if you want. The committee does time commitment, current meeting schedule, homework required, restrictions placed on the committee by open meeting law, and when the committee meets. Can you read back what we have so far? Move to request town manager to work with staff to develop handout that describes what the committee does, time commitment, homework required, restrictions of open meeting law, and when committee meets. I missed two words in between. I think it sounds fine so far. For planning board for planning board and ZBA to provide to to distribute to distribute at interviews to distribute to potential applicants prior to the interview. At the scheduling of the interview. Yeah, at the schedule. At the schedule. To distribute to potential applicants. There's a long motion in my apologies for that. No, that's okay. To potential applicants. Actual applicants, right? Actual. Yeah, sorry. I'm taking potential appointees to applicants. To applicants. Thank you, Darcy. At the time of the time. Okay. And you made the motion. I have made the motion. Is there a second? Second. Is there a second? Any discussion? Is there a discussion? Okay. What she said. Those are favorite. Unanimous. 3-0. 3-0. 2-0. 2-0. What's the what what time range do we have? 4 o'clock. You have to be after 4, right? For your teaching schedule? At 4 o'clock would be probably the earliest I could do it. Okay, so. I'm in Holyoke at 315. I'll be back here so 4 o'clock. Okay. And if they come back and they say I can do 430. That's fine. But 4 o'clock would be the start of the time. So until we know to some extent I want to say is there anything that absolutely needs to be decided between now and the 22nd? For the we're not we haven't done anything. Because I would prefer to just adjourn this committee. But I want to make sure that there's in case we can't do anything I want to make sure that there's nothing that absolutely needs to be done between now and the 22nd. Because you don't have to do anything about that finance committee. We could do that the morning of the 22nd. And the review of the retail manager number nine? Yeah, that's we're moving past that. Is that something that needs to be? Nope. Okay. So I think that there's anything that we will there'll be no public comment because there's no public present. Motion to adjourn. I move to adjourn. All those in favor? Aye. Alright. I'm going to be real quick. Because otherwise I'm going to die. I'll read it back. No. Doris, can you do we turn off the turn? Well, we're about to have a self-committing meeting which I... Oh, are we having that? We have it as opposed to meeting so we can open it and adjourn. Oh, okay. Alright, did we turn off the oh, I see. You can email me the minutes so I could follow the pattern because I've been doing it differently. Yeah. You know, I didn't do public comment or because there's no public here. Yes. Why do you have to include it? But obviously your template does. Right. So I want to make sure I can do it that way so then you don't have to keep editing them. Okay. Yeah, edit what... Send me what you did today because as I said I was doing it narrative form differently. We just put it in this template that Mandy Jo created. Oh, okay. So... As I said because when I first doing it, I said I was doing narrative and she said that was fine but then now it should follow that template. So if you can send me that what happened today the minutes today then I can replicate that. I have to go too. And there were none. So I did put an agenda in the packet and I did put an agenda in the packet. Including for this meeting? Where did you put the minutes? Okay. It should be in the standing committee file. It should be a title. Sorry. I tried to put a subcommittee or something. Yeah. Outreach subcommittee minutes. Where do you see that? So I'm in the larger standing committee outreach appointments documents file. Subcommittee minutes? Yeah. Subcommittee minutes should be there. And did we so there's and there they are. There's we did we approve March 18th last time? You didn't approve any minutes that time. There were like four minutes that were done. I mean for the regular committee. Right. But for the subcommittee have we approved? No because I only have been there's only there's only two meetings of it. So why don't we at least approve those two sets of minutes and then if there's no other set of the subcommittee last week. Right. Okay. So so this is where you have to Yes. So this is the subcommittee. Yeah. So subcommittee we have a quorum. So I will call the meeting to order at 1133 a.m. There is no public present. We are missing Sarah who is also a member of the subcommittee. We I did put an agenda in the packet based on the posting that Sarah posted. I'm going to much we were So our thought was we have two sets of minutes we could approve we could if we to do something so that we're not just calling this meeting to order in a journey for no reason we could approve the minutes. However, the approval of minutes was not included in the posting. I think that we are not we cannot do anything that is not posted. That would seem to be I it seems silly if we feel comfortable we can move forward. Let's just do it. Okay. We can call it a topic not reasonable anticipated by the chair who in this case is me 40 hours in advance because I was only given two hours advance that I was going to be doing this. So in the minutes I reached subcommittee minutes let's open the ones that on March 30 they are the minutes from March 18 that's correct and it was simply a dialogue conversation and I tried to capture some of the main points but there was a general discussion of what we meant by outreach. We have president the town manager so is there anything that people see in here that needs to be changed probably the line that's just a bunch of question marks. I didn't I could not tell me who made the comment I think it was Lynn I would assume Lynn because she was there yes I think that's fairly so they're on Saturday so she probably brought it up she's the one so we'll change that is there is there any other revisions to these minutes okay then I will move to approve the minutes from March 18 as amended second further discussion all those in favor five three zero okay so we will open then the minutes of April 1st yes I am so I'm just gonna add none under approval of minutes two since we did not do that meeting so I have I have no changes to make okay but as far as what's on here we all feel fine okay then I will move to approve the minutes from Monday April 1st as amended second all those in favor fine alright so we've done that so I'm gonna skip around on this agenda a little bit the only thing I would say is takeaway from last meeting was on here so Darcy yours are you still planning to create a Google form yes okay and Sarah isn't here to ask is there anything else that people feel that we need to talk about with regard to either topics one or two takeaway from the last meeting or defining the purview of outreach communication appointments subcommittee yeah so if we're looking at the it should be if you go into the is you find it no I can't so if you go into the meeting packets yeah thank you today's meeting that's right and then there's a packet in there I structured it the way the 401 was so subcommittee meeting packet so there are the first three agenda items is there anything new that people feel we need to discuss with regard to this I don't really know what's meant by refining and writing our charge around communications so I do see that something that was brought up last time I think the thought was that we had talked about outreach the question then Rose will what about we describe you could argue that that has nothing to do with the subcommittee because this is the outreach subcommittee well this is no subcommittee on outreach communications they've changed the name that's good I like that so I think that was the reasoning behind it but as to who would and what would be the I mean I could take that on as a task would you like to discuss the subcommittee on outreach and communications apparently now I thought it was just no no no I just my understanding when Sarah created this was that it was basically a subcommittee to deal with the question here so all I did was I copied from last week no no and last week it was subcommittee and outreach and communications so this was last week's agenda the only reason I have that in there that's fine I'm not committing that's fine with me and that's what the meeting posted us we are officially communicate outreach and communications for hence number three then makes sense given the name of the committee and I could see what I could fashion up related to communication so George do you want to take that on as an action item not take three so George is going to take on the action of trying to draft up something that refines and somehow clarifies the charge around communication for the OCH Darcy is going to do the form connect the meeting date and time I would say as of now April 22 at 11 a.m. we're not going to piggyback it on the other meeting that we're trying to arrange correct April 22 at 11 30 I guess or 11 there should be at 11 we're not doing a great job with that so Sarah was also going to invite March and month so we could that would be an action item for George we don't know if she did that or not she's nice so yeah we'll just assume that she'll bring that to us next time um there's no public so there's no public is there anything else within the scope of one through three that we feel that we should tackle at some point I thought we wanted to see if we could just get a a handle on what counselors are doing that's what Darcy is thinking on correct it's really what Darcy's done so that's covered so no I don't see anything to do you know prodding them sometimes I think we just want to know I mean I think part of it is just being able to you know when people ask me about what the counselor is doing one of the things I'm trying to emphasize is how hard counselors are working at outreach through office hours district meetings some of you have some of this information collated or collected yeah that nice is not necessarily means we'll do it yeah I know Shalini and I are of what you learned everything that came up yeah things that we learned things and then and so so I don't know whether so I think there's two aspects to this right I think one it would be useful to be able to publish in our OCA report either maybe once a month or once every other month here is everything that counselors have done formally for outreach right because I know that you all are doing things and sometimes I see them but you're right I think it would be nice to see sort of all of that collated because then that's also a public document that people can see what's out there what counselors are doing because you guys do office hours a lot right Sarah holds them weekly and so I think some of those situations probably know that but people who are interested in sort of broadly might not know these things so and then I think to your point it would be interesting for us maybe and I don't know where this would go but if we collect that information that comes out of those right and there's you know obviously district issues that are brought up well there's just district issues that should be of interest to the whole and so if we published picking up on Evan's thought a report by annually whatever but the committee would sort of produce a report that would and I'd be happy to work on this there would be a sort of description of what outreach was like over the last four months six months whatever just literally a list I think that would be useful I don't know about monthly but no that maybe I mean once you get sort of a system created and you have you haven't organized it's not a big deal but yes monthly or whatever it could be I mean it depends right it depends how often people are doing things could be quarterly but it's getting published a spring one that says since we've been seated here's everything that's been done with regard to outreach you know it isn't that you do it as you go along if you know if counselors were asked you know twice a year to collate everything that they've done and outreach that would be a big task I just go to my phone you know but we had some way of regularly reporting it might not be so good and it would be a task I think that we could take on yes that seems if we could buy time it would be something worth doing and communications but we'll talk about that next time when George has this beautiful language that he's going to draft for our charge just to get us talking about is there any additional things you want to talk about within the scope of the first two first three topics alright then you both have action items in that case kind of enjoying this I suck at the emotion all those in favor alright so we adjourn at 1147 a.m.