 my copy before I had Athena do the finishing touch. So I have put it into our packet, into our SharePoint, but I don't know if that's shown up yet, Lyn or not. Can also put it on my screen and share it, but well, I'm sorry, I can't actually. What? What are you? Just send it to me and I'll share it. George, what are you referring to as document? This is the agenda for today and the agenda that's in the packet doesn't have all the phone numbers and the link and it should, otherwise the agenda is fine. It has everything on it that you need, but it doesn't have, Athena puts that in and I failed to put that copy and I put the old one in. I just wanna make sure that for the recording it's shown on the screen. Yeah. And I did put it in the packages now. Let me see if I can find it. Yeah. So there should be two committee, GOL committee. And I sent it to you. Okay, thanks. You might have to refresh your... Yeah, I don't wanna do that because I... I understand. Everything else lined up. So I'm waiting for Athena's thing. Okay. I think the internet's just slow at this time of the morning because everybody's logging on. Yeah, my connection is just, I have to, I've been trying and trying to upload it. So I show no attendees and I don't think that's gonna change, but... Okay, I've got it. There you go. Okay. It's now been officially shown on the screen. Thank you. All right. Back to the agenda. And I think Lynn, you get it started, correct? That's right. Good. So whenever you're ready. So can you see the agenda? I can. All right. So I'm gonna call the meeting to order and the first thing we're going to do is discuss the duties of the chair and the vice chair. And I think we should start since we have several people here who are experienced chairs. Let's start with George about reviewing what the duties are. Okay. You can hear me, I take it. Yes. I'm used to having to push the space bar, but it looks like at the moment, I'm okay. I started to make up a list of... I'm sorry, we should... I'm sorry to interrupt, George. We should confirm that everybody can hear and be heard before we begin. Okay. So Lynn, if you want to... So I'll do that. So we're going to officially call the GOL meeting to order. President, please say that you are present by unmuting your mic and saying so. Mandy Jo Hanneke. Present. Okay. Lynn Griezmer is present. George Ryan. Present. Pat DeAngeles. Present. Andy Steinberg. Present. Okay. And we have Nancy Murphy working with us today taking minutes and Athena's back up, but I'm producing for George, although I'm a member of the committee. All right. So everybody's present. George, please continue. So I apologize for not having a document, but I just sat down yesterday and installed the other things. And obviously the first thing GOL chair does is prepare the agenda for the meeting to make sure the agenda is in the hands of the clerk along with packet materials, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. And now given the COVID crisis actually even more than 48 hours in advance is really ideal. Chair creates a folder and SharePoint at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting in which all the materials, or hopefully most of the materials are present for the meeting along with the agenda. And the chair reviews the minutes of each meeting and puts them in SharePoint for review by the committee and the customer of GOL has been then for at the subsequent meeting to approve those by consensus, but they are in your packet and they're in your packet today to go over. Once the minutes are approved, the chair is to make sure that these are posted publicly working with the clerk. The chair provides or maintains timely communication with the council president and the town manager and the council clerk on any and all matters relevant to the work of the committee. And finally, the chair manages, I don't know what word to use, tries to manage the work of the committee making sure that duties are shared out equitably and runs a efficient and hopefully timely meeting. I think we also faced some other issues related to bylaws that we are hopefully we'll discuss a little today, but I was reluctant to put those into this document that I was trying to create because I'm not quite sure where we stand on the process, but that's what I have. I have those seven items, but I'd love to hear from the others as to what I'm missing and what should be added or what should be taken out. Pat, let's go with you. Unmute. I'm all ready to go on to the next part. I have nothing to add to his list. I would like to nominate George Ryan as chair. There are contributions to this discussion of the responsibilities of the chair. That's not very helpful, Pat. I have one point of clarification and I don't know if Athena's listening, but this came up with a TSO. We have the draft minutes from your meeting. Do you review them and make track changes? You're asking Athena? No, you, George. I'll meet. I should. And I think that was a point made very well by Darcy Etia. So I think that's what you're referring to. I don't make many changes, rarely make any changes. And then I forward that goes to the committee in the packet. But as track changes. Well, that's what I need to be better at. I just need to make sure I do that. Because in the past, I don't think I've been, I just, I see a typo, you know, I'll change it. But every change I make should be track change. And so that's something I need to do in the future. Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. So any other conversation about the role of the chair, role of vice chair? Who is vice chair of GOL, Evan? It was Evan. Okay. All right, then with that, let's go on to nominations for the chair. And Pat, you said you wanted to start that. Yes, I nominate George Ryan to continuous chair. I think I'll start the graph. Yeah. George, do you second, do you accept the nomination? I guess I do, yeah. Okay. Is there any, any other people who would like to nominate themselves or be nominate or would like to nominate someone else? All right, seeing none. Then we will do a roll call vote this time in alphabetical order. Let me see if I can remember my alphabet. Pat DeAngelis. Yes. Mandy Jo Hanneke. I vote for George. Okay. And Greece Mersey, yes. And Ryan. I guess so. And Steinberg. Yes. All right, it's unanimous, George. You can take over and now you need to get a vice chair. All right. I have a short speech I need to make, is that correct? Yes, please do. We need to elect a vice chair and I open the floor for nominations for vice chair. I nominate Pat. I second. Okay. George, you're running this part of the meeting. All right, so we have any other nominations for our vice president? We have a nomination of Pat DeAngelis and spent seconded. Any other nominations? Okay, hearing none. Does the candidate wish to make a statement? No. The candidate does not wish to make a statement. Okay. Then I think we can proceed directly to vote and hopefully I'll try to do this in alphabetical order but I don't think I can. That means we start with the candidate actually. Pat, how do you vote? Okay. Pat says yes. Okay, Andy. I'll Pat. All right. I guess I'm next, is that right? No, Lynn. I'm sorry, Lynn, I skipped you. My apologies, Lynn. I didn't get G before H last time either. Yes, Pat. Thank you. Andy. Yes. And the chair votes yes. So again, it's unanimous 5-0 and Pat DeAngelis is going to be vice chair. Is this where I turn my duties over now to the vice chair? Isn't that, can I do that? No, you have to be deathly ill. Don't feel well, as a matter of fact. All right. All right, well, we have a full agenda in front of us. We have two new members. Welcome to you all and my screen. We have the agenda on the screen. Thank you. And I was going to go directly to establish the meeting schedule to see if everyone is comfortable with the process of the schedule we have at the moment. So the TOL schedule, again, is unfortunately not in your packet so that doesn't really help you, I'm afraid. But we have been customarily meeting on the off council weeks. And so our next meeting is scheduled for May 6th and we've been meeting at 1030 in the morning. So I wanted to get a sense from the committee whether that daytime and frequency of meeting is at the moment satisfactory if you want to change that since we have two new members, they perhaps weigh in as to both the day and the time. I'm fine with that. Okay, Lynn is okay. Andy, thoughts about meeting schedule? I'm fine with continuing with the current schedule. Okay. The other members of the committee, you've had changes to your lives obviously is 1030, Wednesday morning, still working for you at the moment. So it works for me. Okay. If it works for me, I just wanted to mention that we tend to meet on the same Wednesday as a Monday council meeting if it works out but instead of the off ones. But things are so crazy that there's a published schedule somewhere. No, there is and I will put that in the packet. I'll make a note of that. So especially, and I can send it directly to the two new members so you can see it. But okay, so it sounds like, and the other issue is frequency of meeting. Now, this has come up at TSO and perhaps we should talk about it briefly. We've been meeting basically every two weeks, essentially. And there's been some thought or pressure from some to make that every three weeks. Argument, first of all being that it eases some of the pressure on staff right now. I don't know if people have any thoughts on that or whether we wanna talk about it some other time but frequency. Any thoughts? George, I have a clarifying question because are we meeting the same week as the council meets or alternate because the fourth is a council meeting? And then we would be kind of continuing with that. Yeah, Mandy made the point correctly that it's actually we're meeting on the weeks of the council. So that has been the tradition. So Monday is a council meeting and then Wednesday. That's fine, that's fine. And that is the way the schedule is set up for the moment. Okay. Yeah, it's my mistake. Thank you. To the extent that one of the goals of the committee and the responsibility of the committee is to review the matters that may be coming before the committee to comment on whether they meet the three standards does it work well to have it that close or would it be better to have more space between the meeting to give you more time to write reports? Well, Andy, I've found that because we're meeting after a council meeting it gives the chair more than enough time to prepare reports. So that was kind of the logic of what we arranged. So when we're meeting on a Wednesday and council is the following Monday, it's a little bit, it's not by any means impossible but it's a little bit more challenging to do it that way. I certainly can do it that way if the committee feels that that's more productive and more appropriate. But in the past, the movement to the same week as the council gives the chair a good period of time to get a report ready before the council meeting. Okay, so I thank you for that explanation then the other point that I'll raise flows from that which is switching to every three weeks if the council's meeting every other week kind of defeats the purpose of that in respect to the committee's work. Yeah, I would. But on the other hand, it might lessen the load of councilors and depending on what GOL is doing and also might lessen a little bit of a load on downtown staff and the chair won't die if he or she has to prepare a report over the weekend. I don't mean I've done that many times, Evan's done that, many of you've done that. So it's hardly I think a reason that rules out everything else. So I'll put it out there for people think about Lynn. Yeah, I can't seem to raise my hand like we're supposed to. I think I can see. I made you a co-host to win and that's why you don't have to raise hands. You don't have to do this. That's fine. A couple of thoughts. First of all, I think we could always go ahead and schedule the meetings and then if we don't need them take them off the calendar. Right. And we should know that we don't need them by the time we post them. A second thing is, and this was raised yesterday at TSO and that is at what point do we hope to be able to return to the council meeting every other week? And I have to say, as I said yesterday, I certainly enjoyed having last on Monday night off. So I would like to get to that point if we can. The third thing is remember the town council calendar shifts because of holidays. And so I think you want to say after every regular meeting and I think that that would be important. And finally, the other piece that may come to this committee fairly rapidly is requests for some bylaw changes or amendments based on what the business community is looking for as we try to reopen Amherst. All right. So what I'm hearing is that for the moment we're going to stay with the schedule that we have, but we do have some flexibility and we're going to stay with Wednesdays at 1030. So that is that. We have a proclamation in front of us, Juneteenth proclamation. If we could put that up on the screen, there actually are two copies in the packet. And someone needs to remind me who the sponsor of this is. Because I don't know. That would be me. Mandy, thank you. And Mandy, do you want to take us through it then briefly? And I'm just trying to get my screen. All right, no rush. My task here, I'm sorry, is to determine whether this is clear, consistent and actionable. And so that's what we need to do. The assumption is that everyone's had a chance to at least get it once. So I opened, so I had a new one that I'm not sure is the one that is, yeah. Both of these are dated 2019. Yeah, no, I sent one up that was 2020. So let me, I will. Hold on, I have it. And share my screen with that. Okay. So just give me. I have the other one up, but didn't know. Do you have the 2019 or the 2020 one up? I have the, that's a very good question. So there is a 2021, I'm going to share my screen. Yeah, go ahead. So people can see that. So, so this is the 2021 that I have modified. Okay, so we haven't seen it, all right. So you should, you should be able to see it now. Basically, I'm just going to go through what I did. Basically, most of what I did was add whereas clauses to conform to what the prior GOL committee sort of reached on a consensus on proclamations and stuff, which was one sentence per whereas clause. And so I fixed that in the 2019 to the 2020 version of just creating new whereas clauses or modifying it into one sentence. So that's why it looks like there's a lot of changes, but that's a lot of what was done. And then I actually modified the last whereas and the now there for clauses. I added a whereas to indicate that we have and Amherst residents have been organizing Juneteenth celebrations because we try to make sure every Juneteenth proclamation kind of, or every proclamation relate somehow back to Amherst and what Amherst is doing. So that last whereas clause was what I could come up with. And then the now there for, I modified because we normally ring bells and have a celebration on the town common and that didn't seem I wasn't sure whether it would happen or not this year and whether there will actually be something. So I cut it down a little bit to just do the bells. I thought, well, maybe bells can still ring even if we're social distancing and all, but I added the words if practical to the end of that so that it's hedged. And then I changed the last GOL in the past has made all of these just the not this like set our hand toward two thing we just write voted this blank day of whatever. So I changed that ending and that's pretty much all I did. Good, okay. All right, so we have the document in front of us. It's been vetted before by a GOL but Mandy's just gone through the specific changes she made and it sounds like she made no other changes of any kind to the wording. Does anyone, I can give you a moment if you'd like to go through it or we can move to approving it. What's the sense of the committee? George. I'm sorry. I moved to commend it before with this to the council. However, how do you make your motions in GOL? The way we make the motion is that GOL moves that this proclamation, which is the Juneteenth proclamation, the, how do we put it? We declare it clear, consistent and actionable. Thank you. Okay, that's my motion. Okay, Lynn has made the motion that this proclamation be declared clear, consistent and actionable, is there a second? Second. Pat has seconded it. Any further discussion? I see none. All right, then let's move to a vote. And again, we have to do by roll call. So we'll start with Pat. Yes. And then Lynn. Yes. And then Mandy. Yes. And then the chair votes yes and Andy. Yes. All right, so the vote is five, zero, it's unanimous. This proclamation is declared clear, consistent and actionable and move forward into the council. The next item on the agenda is night of six. I'd like to actually hold that for a second. I can talk for a moment about items seven and then come back to six if you don't mind. Okay, hold on. Sure. There's your seven. Okay. So it was pointed out to me that by Evan that with the change in our charge, we are now responsible for reviewing and making a recommendation for non-voting members of the finance committee. And we have in fact a member of the committee whose term is up and I do not know at the moment whether this member is going to continue or not but whether they are going to continue or not it actually falls to us to begin that process. And so we need to take a few moments and think about how we want to do that. I put in the packet both the... So there's a process of course that OCA has developed and uses for a ZPA and planning board. It's still being refined, but it's pretty, I think it's pretty firm in most of its particulars. And in my reading of our charge, this is the only appointment that really would require the kind of process that OCA has followed with ZPA and planning board. The other appointments are so rare, I think we'd have to deal with them at the moment, although that's certainly open to the discussion say the least, but in the short term, we need to act on this. And the first step would be to post a vacancy notice and which is what I'd like to do. And second step would be then for us to agree on a process of how we're going to go about this. And I put in the packet both the original OCA process and then I put a draft version of what I would suggest we might adopt. We may also decide we don't need something so elaborate. It's really a wide open question. We can use any process we like. As far as I understand it, the fact that OCA has already done this and that it's used it, I think is a strong case for at least looking at their process. So short term, I just wanna remind everybody because I was reminded that we actually have to do this. And Evan's thought was the sooner you start to process the better. And so I wanted to talk with you about that, both get your approval and answer any questions or get some clarification and then maybe think for a few minutes about the actual process that we will follow. One question I have, which may have a very simple answer and that'd be great, is do we actually have to do interviews? Maybe the answer is yes, of course we have to do interviews. I'm not sure we do, but I just need that clarified. But that's part of the OCA process is the elaborate interview process. Given the nature of this particular appointment, I wonder if interviews are required. Certainly, vacancy notice, certainly CAFs, I assume we want some, so we need to decide. We need to decide what kind of process is appropriate and we need to start that process. Thoughts, questions, comments on this item, which is item number seven. What's with hands up? Anybody have their hand up? Let me see, we have Andy. Let's start with Andy. Sorry. I'll go first and the most pat once is burning to want to go first. There were two things that I thought about. One is that I'm doing some bouncing around of what I have on my screen. One of the things is that when we passed at the council level, the current charge that adopted to have the three members it was a provision that was put in there on my motion that the council would revisit the question of having how the process has worked to have non-voting resident members and that we would have some sort of evaluation before making an additional appointment. Since that was in the motion and this may be a question that also needs to go to Lynn as president is how to go about handling that. And I'm gonna actually go a little bit farther and say that I think there were legitimate concerns in the part of the committee when it first came about because we didn't know how it was gonna function when you have non-voting members who are non-council members, I have perceived to work very well. And I think that if the committee was pulled which we have not done that would be the likely result. So we do have to at least acknowledge that that was part of the motion way back when this was first launched. And the second thing is that if we have more candidates than the one position we're gonna have available to a point I don't know how we can not have interviews in order to treat the candidates fairly if there's only a single applicant which we won't know until we advertise for positions. I think that it might be a bad precedent to not do an interview simply because what would we do if it just is somebody who just doesn't feel right? If you don't have a process to interview you can't then have an interview all of a sudden set up an interview process because it's somebody who we just don't think could fit in or would be appropriate for the role. So I- Good, okay. Now, Pat. Actually, Andy covered my, I was gonna talk about the process, the council revisiting and wanted to ask him about how it was functioning. It seems to me that it's been going very well. So I don't have anything to add. Okay, I'm gonna ask you to lower your hand, Pat. I can't figure out how to do that because I don't have it on my screen right now. Wait, let me see. I can lower it for you. Wait, I got it, I got it. Oh, you got it already for me. Thank you. So I, as a member of finance committee, first of all, feel that it's gone very well. I think there are times that adding to Andy's knowledge having some previous finance committee members has been useful. I would also say that as we enter, what is going to, without question be, the trickiest financial period of our, of our tenant, our tenure as counselors and probably even most other tenures, it's going to be interesting to see how that group manages through this with us because, but it doesn't mean I think we should stop it. It just means that I do think it's appropriate to have this evaluative conversation. If you would like finance to do it, we can do that. If you have the council do it, we can do it. But frankly, I don't think most people in the council are that aware of the interactions of the people who are resident advisory people. So my overall opinion is let's go with it. Let's collect the names, make sure that the person who is presently in that term, whether or not they want to continue, I'm not even sure if I know who it is. Really? So we do have to consider at least the rest of the CAFs. So I see Mandy's hand. Mandy, please. Yeah, so I think we should try and follow the OCA process because you guys worked so hard coming up with it and it seems to be working. So I support going that way. If we, you know, the motion originally to put non-voting members on did have that requirement. So I would support that discussion happening but maybe do it simultaneous with advertising for CAFs and advertising the potential vacancy with something that says we're doing it simultaneously. So some sort of caution on that. It would obviously be up to either Lynn or Andy on how to go about having that conversation. I'm gonna put my two cents in on maybe just put it on a council agenda for a discussion item. The only people I'm assuming that will really weigh in are those that have served on the finance committee and know what's happened to have that happen out of finance committee and then come back to the council for discussion seems a little duplicative instead of just having it all at the council discussion. But it sounds like we did have a motion that required that discussion to happen at the council level. So we should do that discussion. Maybe if we do that on May 4th at that meeting we can still be advertising before that or ready to advertise after that for the vacancy. And I think did part of the OCA process require the chair to reach out to the person who currently sits there to encourage them to apply. So, you know, I would encourage George to do that too. Okay, that's what, yeah, okay. So, well, one of the things it's too late to put it on the agenda for Thursday, right? For finance? Finance committee agenda. No, it's not. It could be item unanticipated, you know. We can just do unanticipated. Yeah, yeah. I just think that I think the point's been made very well and that this did require that it be reviewed by finance and that the council at least be apprised to what finance thinks. And so I think that's something we should do. Evan's thought to me was that the sooner you get started the better just given the time constraints. So if finance could look at it quickly and then make a decision and that could then be reported to the council and I could also start the process with a caution perhaps. I'm a little nervous about putting cautions in, but I could. I mean, it makes, in a way it makes sense but I don't wanna scare people away. And if things don't work out, we just tell them, well, the position no longer exists. So it sounds like what I'm being told is, A, I will contact, it's Mary Lutowman. I'll contact her and see if she is interested in continuing. I will reach out to the time manager's office and get all CAFs that, and there couldn't be many but whatever CAFs there are that have put this down as a possibility. We sometimes make the point that individual counselors or members of the committee can spread the word. If in other words, recruitment, just letting people know that this is something that's coming down. But, so that's, it sounds like we wanna move ahead. You want me to reach out to Mary Lou? You want me to begin the process of a vacancy notice? Okay. And Andy has his hand raised. Andy, go ahead, please. Yeah, that's one other group of people that need to think about which gets back to the CAS forms. Last year there were a number of people who applied, who were interviewed. I believe that it was Darcy who did interviews on behalf of the committee but I may be wrong on that. I've been reported back to the committee but we do need to decide are we going back to people who were previously interviewed and asked them if they still maintain an interest? Yes. The custom for OCA is to go back at least two years. I think two years at the moment that make a change but in this case, three years I don't think wouldn't be appropriate. The office hasn't been in existence that long but yes, we would go back at least at the three-year mark or whatever and anyone who has expressed an interest whether interviewed or not would be contacted and then obviously any new CAS would be included. Interviews though, I wanna push that just a bit. I'm not sure it's gonna go anywhere, which is fine but I find a statement of interest in other words, asking people to submit some kind of written statement of interest of why they are applying and what they bring to the body. Strikes me is more than sufficient and but the customer's been to do the interviews and that's what OCA has done. We don't have to, I don't think we have to do interviews but again, maybe I'm missing something here is there's something about open meeting? I mean, it's just what we need is just this vision information to make a reason judgment and also understand with interviews, that's gonna be a special meeting of this committee and there's a lot of bells and whistles to go with it. It's fine. We do it with planning board, we do with CBA. I'm just wondering if it's appropriate for this body or maybe the answer is for any kind of appointment like this where the town council is involved, interviews are pretty much just day reger, they have to be done. So it's still a question I have in my mind. Any other, it sounds like when I'm hearing from most of you if not all of you is we do interviews and that's what we're gonna do. Mandy, Joe has her hand up. Yeah, Mandy, go ahead. Yeah, so I'm not set on interviews. I think this, I haven't actually attended any for planning board or CBA at this point. So I don't know how they go in the timeframe. I know it, I've heard frustrations with no follow-up questions and the questions are very limited and all. And so if that's the way we're gonna do these for a position that is actually non-voting and that is a slight difference than planning board and CBA, this is a non-voting position on a non-regulatory body, on our own body instead of a completely different body. I think I could forego an interview in exchange for some sort of additional statement of interest or written answers to questions. The CAF, I don't think gives enough information given how people fill it out for us to not do something in addition to that. That could be interviews, but I'd be open for a one-page statement of interest or a written answers to questions. Maybe we still go through with questions so that we get some more indication based on what finance is looking for or things like that that's a little more in-depth than not just a statement of interest, but I'd be open for something other than interviews as long as it's something more than just the CAF. All right, all right, all right. Yes. Now, Andy has his hand up. Andy, please, go ahead. Yeah, I appreciated that last comment. One of the things that is very important is we wanna see that people who are applying and are being considered to have something of value to offer to the committee in the way of prior experience with financial matters in the public sector and with the town of Amherst or what other qualifications equivalent to that that they're offering to the committee. And the grouping that we ended up with this time I think was probably what from what I recall swayed the recommendations from the member of the committee who interviewed. And one person was not a prior member of the finance committee in its old format but had a lot of experience in public finance. And the other two had been on the finance committee in the town of Amherst before in its prior format. That was information that was valuable to have and for making the decision that they were the appropriate people to designate or at least appropriate people. Actually, there were other people who had been on the finance committee who applied and were not recommended for other reasons I gather. So it is whatever we do whether it be with questions or with an interview needs to be able to apply out that kind of information in order to make the judgment. Lynn. It's interesting as I think about the period of time we're entering financially there are some people who may say, I really don't want to take this on. And then there's other people who might say, boy, this could be an interesting period and I think I have something to offer. The fact that we only have one two-year and I believe it's a two-year position open you just need to keep in mind that this isn't a person that we would then appoint that would go beyond our present terms. Mm-hmm. So, and my sense would be before we say interview or no interview we need to see what the pool is like because if we don't do interviews and we have a pool of two or more people and if should we then decide to choose the person that's already on it almost looks fixed. Mm-hmm. Okay. What I'm gonna suggest, I'm trying to keep my eye on the you can also raise your hand but I do have the chat window open so I can see hands that are up. So don't be shy about interrupting or raising your hand but I'm gonna suggest that the document is in your packet and I don't think it's time wise well spent for us to go through it now. It's as many pointed out, it's been a process that's been used a lot but it does raise I think some questions for us in particular given this particular appointment. So I'm gonna suggest that everyone take some time between now and the next meeting it'll be on the agenda obviously for us to see if we can agree on the broad outlines of a process using the OCA process as our model and maybe further thoughts on interviews versus non-interviews. I will begin at least starting the process and we will also be wait to hear from finance about how they decide but I think we do need to make a decision fairly soon as a committee as to the process we're going to follow. So when we finally do get to further down the line we'll know what we're going to do. There's selection criteria that need to be determined or selection guidance. The process does ask that the chair of the committee be consulted and that information is included and this information is then shared with the candidates and if you do interviews they get all this prior to the interview. So it's a good process, it's a thorough process and we may decide when you look at it you may decide this is really what we wanna do. There may be some tweaks maybe we can do without interviews but I'd like us to try and decide this at our next meeting after people had a chance to look at it and think about it it'll be an important piece of the agenda for next time. Any questions about that process? I'm gonna just kind of briefly outlined it for you. So you have the vacancy notice, you have the CAFs we have to determine sufficiency of pool according to the process. If there is only one candidate and there's only one position is that are we satisfied with that? Are we okay with that? We could decide we are but there usually is a point where you decide is the pool sufficient. I would think one candidate for one slide is really not a sufficient pool so but we have to make that decision. We have to create selection guidance. We've already done some of that already but that's something we have to do. And then if we are going to go to interview we have to create interview questions. We have to decide about how the interview will proceed. I don't see why if we do do interviews I'm not, I don't see why we can't have a back and forth. Right? There were reasons why there was no back and forth for ZPA and planning. Here it seems maybe a back and forth would be perfectly appropriate if we do do interviews. So again, that's a decision we have to make and then of course the recommendation. So it's all in your packet. I created one for GOL. There's also the OCA process but essentially what I did is you know I made a little bit of wordsmithing but pretty much took out OCA and put in GOL. So it's not a particularly elaborate change but as far as I can see the only position that this would be relevant for us would be non-voting members of finance. But again, you might want to look at the charge and look at the other positions that we do have to make a recommendation on. My sense just personally was that I didn't see a process issue there whereas the here there clearly is a process issue but maybe looking upon it you when you look at the charge you may say, wait a minute, town clerk or town manager, right? Don't we have to a process for this? My feeling is when these occur if they occur then we deal with it. Spending our time now trying to come up with a process for some hypothetical appointment. I don't think it's a good use of our time but again, that's something for us to discuss. Okay, any other thoughts? All right, then I want to go back to item six. Status of bylaws for future consideration and usually the infamous three piles. I was talking about even yesterday and TSO came up. Evan did a great service in dividing up, broadly speaking, the referrals that were sent to this committee regarding bylaws and that's where it sat unfortunately over the last couple of weeks for a number of reasons. I'm going to blame pandemic. Seems like a convenient excuse but your chair was supposed to do some things. He's been busy dealing with some other things but we have in the packet the list of referrals courtesy of Evan and party one, priority two, priority three and what was agreed at the last meeting before we have, right? Was that party one could largely be handled by the chair in consultation with the committee. It's mostly housekeeping and maybe sending some things along to be reviewed by attorneys and so forth. The chair struggled with some of this still but anyway, the thought was party one could be dealt with largely by the chair and then party two and three are things that at some point we need to decide as a committee how we're going to proceed. And there I think there is a process question and perhaps could benefit a little bit from what CRC did. TSO got the CRC document that outlined a process for how to begin to think about issues in general and I think TSO is going to make use of that. I think it's very helpful. We are going to make use of it. We're going to try to put it to work. It could also be used here perhaps as we try to think, how do we deal with these bylaws? Do we just sit the five of us and just talk about them in a sort of amorphous way? Do we assign them to at least the ones that have more substance and more challenges to them? Do we farm them out to individual members of the committee to sort of prepare and then present to the committee as a whole? That's something I was attracted to but then I looked at the composition of our committee and we have the chair of CRC, the chair of finance, the vice president of the council, the president of the council and these are three people who have a lot on their plate so I'm not convinced that maybe that is the wisest strategy here. So maybe there's more of a role for the chair and or the vice chair and you have some notes. So you have the document in front of you. I don't know if you had a chance to look at it. I've made very little progress with it over the last few weeks for a number of reasons but I was assigned essentially to try and work my way through party one and I just have questions. I mean, with bylaws in general, I spoke to Paul and he's ready, he said, I said, Paul, really, can you, this sort of thing, are you ready to get some of this stuff from me because it'd be legal review questions mostly and he said, fine. So he said, when you've got it, send it. So he's didn't, I was hoping he'd say, don't bother me for the next six months but he said, so there's legal review is a question, I think and Paul's feeling is that pretty much everything should get legal review. So there's the whole question of process for us, sort of like CRC's question in general, what are we actually doing with these bylaws? What is it that the committee is trying to accomplish? And clearly one part of that is the legal review process. At some point we need to send these to Paul, to the attorney and then it comes back to us and we had this issue with the most recent bylaw where the attorney's comments and changes, we couldn't understand some of them. We were sort of in the dark. And so one of the things that at the last meeting of GOL that was made clear that when we do go back to Paul for further legal review of bylaws that we ask him to convey to the attorney or attorneys that they come with some little bit more elaboration, a little bit more explanation for the changes they're making because otherwise we're left to guess. So that's where we're at at the moment. I think there's a process question and also a question of legal review and what the committee feels is appropriate or not. The time manager's feeling is just about every time. So I'll answer that one more thing. So thoughts, questions, Lynn? So first of all, I wanna also recognize that Pat was on the bylaw review committee and gives frankly, I'm probably the one least comfortable with rewording of bylaws. But I'm willing to partner with somebody to take a pass at some of these. And then the other question I have is given the present situation with COVID, are there some of these that might be more important to get done than others because of either reopening or because the situation we find ourselves in. And so those are just two things to add to the discussion. Other thoughts? Pat, Pat you muted. You need to unmute Pat. Yeah, I find and I figured out how to raise my hand. So now I would enjoy the opportunity to work with Lynn on rewriting some of these and looking at them, reviewing them. I mean, we have also just to add to the mix, we have three counselors who have three bylaws that they've asked us to look at and to make recommendation on. And there was a time stamp on that. I'm sure it's long past, but I know Mandy had one, Kathy had one and Darcy had one. Mandy's I believe is with the noise ordinance. Mandy's, I'm sorry, Mandy's with the noise ordinance. Kathy's was with the condo conversions as I recall. That's right. And Darcy's was with the plastic bags. And the plastic bag bylaws are in the packet, but your chair is somewhat at a loss as to what he's supposed to do with it. And so I need some advice, counsel help. You know, I would assume that, that someone has a proposed bylaw like Darcy with plastic use bag, right, reuse, whatever. It comes to us for, right, clear consistent and actionable. We now also have the opportunity to comment on, to offer some thoughts on the content as well, according to our charge, but it may also go elsewhere. Shouldn't we be looking at something only after it's been vetted by other committees? Because we're supposed to be looking at it in the form that it's then going to go to the attorney and have the attorney look at it. So again, it's just simple process questions that I know in my simple minded way of just not clear on. I have two documents for you to look at from, one is from Darcy, one of them perhaps is the original, but anyway, and also I assume that with a bylaw there comes a sponsor. I mean, somebody who wants to, right. And so I know Darcy has certainly expressed an interest in when are you gonna take this up? And I should be involved or should be able to speak on it. So again, just process questions, things like that. So with Mandy's, with Darcy's and Kathy's, they have individual, in a sense, sponsors or individual people who want, at some point, something to happen with these. So, and then there's just this pile of stuff that I've shown you and that, right, that we need to wade our way through. And to my knowledge, none of them have any particular sponsors. They're just things that we need to kind of work our way through. Help me hear or just thought. So I see Mandy as your hand, Mandy, please. I'm gonna try and address a whole bunch of stuff. Thank you. First thing on open meeting law, if two people agree to work together to do that, they have to post the meeting. So I would recommend that we assign a specific bylaws if we're going to go that route to one person only and that person can choose or not to consult others as they want while working on that before they bring them back. So, and I'd be happy to take some. I think this list is good. We might want to start. The list doesn't remind me what we were being asked to look at for each one. So I have to go back to that document and see that. But maybe we start by saying either what might be important with getting us restarted or just start going through this list. Start priority one, assign two to each person to determine either what the changes would be or that it needs sent off with changes to an attorney or it needs to go to another committee. And then at each meeting of GOL, we make those recommendations or decisions by vote. I would personally recommend for the three that the counselors wanted changed before we did this that we deal with those maybe first because they were specific to counselors and as just a courtesy to the counselors. Darcy's I think is a clear consistent and actionable issue. So I would keep that in this committee with that discussion going there. Mine is probably more of a TSO issue because it was removing certain language of the bylaw on what would be a violation of a bylaw. So that's actually more substantive that I would think should go to TSO first for that potential discussion instead of that substantive discussion here. Kathy's is quite substantive but I have no idea where it would go. She pretty much wanted to keep the whole condo original bylaw in this one. And there was a deletion of the whole thing or a very large modification and she'd want to modify it back. That one was all sorts of, so maybe bring Kathy in to talk to us about what the goal is and then we can determine whether it should be sent off to another committee or whether that's more appropriate in our committee. That might actually be more appropriate in CRC thinking about land use but I have no idea at this point without really seeing what she was doing. But I think maybe we tackle those three first with decisions on whether it's gonna get handled here or in a different committee. Okay, okay. Let me start with yours, Mandy, for a second. I see Andy's hand up, so let me stop. Andy, go ahead, please. I'll be very quick because I think we're going in the right direction with the discussion. The priority of saying that there's a counselor sponsor, I think is a good one but there's a whole list and I wonder if at some point the list should be made available to the council and if there's counselors who want to make the case that a particular by-law is important for consideration whether we should consider that request because the council is aware of this list. I didn't know it existed until I got the packet for this meeting. The other thing that I observed in looking at the two versions that were in the packet of the by-law that Darcy is proposing changing for the plastic bags, I was having trouble figuring out what the changes were. Yes. And I think that it's really important that there either be by having a markup version that shows the changes explicitly or an accompanying memo that does so. If we're talking about amending a current by-law it would be really helpful to know what the changes are and even a statement of why. I agree. And obviously what you have in your packet doesn't tell you that and I guess I'm looking for some guidance which is perhaps a bit simple-minded on my part but it seems to me what I need to do is reach out to Darcy and have her provide us with exactly that so that we can then set about the task of clear, consistent and actionable. That would be my thought that I should that would be and I put that on the agenda for next time but without the appropriate document with the clear sense of what's being changed and what isn't and I don't know. And when I'm looking at those two documents like you Andy, I don't know. So I would reach out to the sponsor and ask her to do that. And once we had that, we could then proceed Pat. I'm mute Pat. Damn it. Mute Pat. I watch it. I don't get to the F word really fast. Never on trouble. If you're looking at both of them, I don't know what I thought was that we are trying to reduce purposes and so that we're looking at a reduction to the final paragraph. The primary purpose of this bylaw is to reduce. So we're getting rid of all the world economics report financing and stuff like that. And then it seems the other changes, she wants to add compostable bag, which is different than a biodegradable bag. And so those are the changes that everything else is the same. Okay. So Pat, do you feel that we have enough information in front of us to proceed to the question of clear consistent actionable? And then the next step would be, my understanding in a process, the next step would be for us to send it to the lawyers. I don't want to send anything to Paul and to the lawyers until we are satisfied that this is what we think it's supposed to be. Yeah, I understand that. I guess what I have trouble with is this is a bylaw that has already existed and in the format and it's been reviewed by the, yeah, by the law firm, by KP law in order to make it. And we've, so it's already been reviewed. And I feel like what we're changing is very minor. We're not changing the use of the regulations or anything like that. Here we're talking about purpose of the bylaw and we're talking about adding a definition. So I don't see why that has to go again before the KP law. Particularly given the timeframes that they work with, this feels different. It's not a new bylaw. It's not a complete revision or transformation of a bylaw. Okay, I see Mandy and then Lynn. So yeah, so the difference between the two is the one that does not have the long, the one that starts with a purpose instead of a findings and has four definitions instead of five is the current bylaw. That is in the, that we passed when we passed the big rewrite and the rescind and replace the one that has the findings paragraph that's much longer and the extra definition is Darcy's proposed change. She wants to add the definition and add the longer sort of purpose paragraph because she was not in support of the shortening of the purpose paragraph that happened between the one that was in place and the one we passed in the rescind and replace. So the original one that town meeting passed had even more definitions, had a larger set of whereas clauses or purpose or a full page of that. And she has shortened that but she did not like the full shortening. So that's why I say it's more of a clear consistency and action ability. I think the bylaw review committee determined that the large one was not necessary and was not in keeping with what their goal was in bylaws but Darcy wanted it put back in. So I think our recommendation, our discussion is on whether we recommend enlarging which would then require adding that definition in or whether we recommend keeping the bylaw as is either way, I don't think it needs to go to an attorney. Okay, okay. Lynn. So I have a question to start with. I believe the rest of this list came to us from the bylaw review committee. Yes. Am I correct? Yes. So, and it was referred to GOL for us to figure out what to do with that. Right, right. So having said that, let me just go on. I wanted to make sure I remembered that correctly. So it seems to me that it would be appropriate to ask each of the three people to meet with the committee, maybe not all in the same meeting, but to meet with a committee, discuss the changes they want and then we can either decide to keep it in the committee or send it off to another committee but give each of the counselors the benefit of that meeting. So I mean, if we want to start with Darcy or whatever, although I do find it interesting right now since we're not using plastic bags or at least not very many, we're certainly not using reusable. So that's one option. Another option is, another thing to point out is I'm not clear that every bylaw needs a council sponsor unless our rules say that because basically this big list in front of us that's been prioritized, they already come to us from a council review. That's right. And the real issue is what do we as GOL want to do with them? Right, right. And I mean, I can always take them back to the council and say, please check off one, which do you think are most important and two, which you'd like to be sponsors for? But is that what we really need or can we do that as a committee? So I think we can do that as a committee. That was the whole point of the bylaw review saying these we didn't get to and GOL and for it being referred to a committee because I think bylaw review wasn't sure any one person would want to work on any of these and be the formal sponsor. So the committee would be the sponsor is what it would be instead of an individual counselor. Okay. All right. So let me see if I can again speak up please, but I'd like to just summarize what we have come to if I can. It still seems that the priority one is something that the chair should be able to work through and be able to make recommendations to the committee. And if the chair has a problem with any particular item, he can also, he can reach out for help. But priority two and three could benefit from the committee looking at them and seeing if any of them are things they might like to what study look into. I think we do need to start. I'm speaking for myself. First of all, I need to start moving this forward. And part of that is my job with party one. And second thing I'm hearing is that with the individual counselors, Lynn would like all of them to have the opportunity to come and speak to us. I think that makes sense with Kathy. With Darcy, I'm hearing that actually we have what she wants to do. And I wonder if at the next meeting we should simply go through that and decide whether it's clear, consistent, and actionable. Do we want her present for that discussion? We certainly could ask her to be present. Do we want to have her come first and then do the clear, consistent, and actionable? I'm a little unclear as to what to do with that. It sounds like that one's ready really for prime time because she's made her changes and it's now up to us to look at that and make a recommendation. Lynn. I think it's courteous to ask her. If she'd like to be present for the discussion and the committee's okay with having the sponsor there in the sense that, I mean, that's kind of what I think we envisioned for some of this that things could be clear, certainly with proclamations, declarations, and so on. The dream was the person would be there and if there was an issue we could address it right then and there, so okay. So if we do Darcy and Mandy Joe next time we meet, we don't have to call it a committee of the whole. No, we don't. But I have a question for Mandy. Kathy, another different time. Yeah, absolutely. I have a question for Mandy and Mandy's got her hand up and so does Andy. So Mandy, first of all, you're coming. I was gonna get rid of one from priority two list. So 3.44 tax increment financing. The wage theft package that is now currently in front of TSO includes essentially a similar thing that the wage that sponsors are seeking to essentially repeal 3.44 and replace with one of the bylaws that they proposed. So I think that should be on well down below the list because it might be dealt with through TSO anyway. Which one is this? I'm sorry. 3.44 tax increment financing. Andy, I'm sorry, Mandy, where you finished, I'm sorry. Yes, I am. Okay, sorry. Andy. So I guess the question that I was thinking about and it's really goes back to all of you who have experienced on this committee to answer the question is how do you decide what goes into the committee discussion to clear consistent and actionable and what goes, just gets referred to the council. The idea of having a definition of what is a biodegradable bag is one part but also the actual definition. Where did it come from and are such bags available? Does it, in what purpose does it serve to our questions that need to be asked? How do you decide whether that falls within this committee's realm or should be deferred to council discussion? I'm willing to, I see Mandy's hand still up. I don't know if she's, but and Andy's hand of course is just right. I find that that line is impossible to draw with any certainty and I've kind of resigned myself to that. And in my reports, as in my last report, I tried to distinguish the more, clear consistent and actionable part from comments about the merits or substance of the issue. And I guess my feeling personally, just alone speaking myself, is that we can't keep that out completely and I'm not sure we should even try, but at least in reporting to the council, we should try to distinguish between the issue of clear consistent and actionable and matters where we had thoughts about the merits, problems, issues, concerns, and that would be separate in the report, is the best I could come up with. I don't know if that's satisfactory, but that's the best I could do. I just don't see how we can with any of these issues or many of them avoid getting into some areas of substance. And insofar as we do, we just need to separate that out. And assuming we vote and we come to an agreement about that area, it would be reported as such. If we don't, then it just becomes a discussion we have and it never gets in the report because we never actually made any kind of formal decision. I don't know if that helps, Andy, but that's the way I've handled it so far where clearly we were also straying into the area of comment on the merits. And this is with the percent for our bylaw issue. That's how I dealt with it. Mandy had a question for you quickly. You were thinking that your item might just go to TSO. So I'm wondering if you do want to be, have a place on the agenda, which is fine, to present your case or whether you want to wait and decide what you want to do. Clearly Darcy, I think we can certainly put on the agenda and she would be notified. Would you like also to be on the agenda next time? What's your thought on that? I mean, I can be on the agenda. It depends on whether this committee wants to discuss whether certain lawn equipment or whether the definition of noise or excessive noise needs to include certain lawn equipment or not. But that to me seems a more appropriate discussion for TSO than here. And so to me that would be a recommendation coming out of TSO. I'd be okay with if this committee took this referral of mine and essentially transferred it to TSO. That would be fine with me. Okay. So that would be an item for discussion next time. But the vote to transfer. Exactly, or whatever, but yes. So you would like to be on the agenda as well with that. My thought with, I see Pat's hand up Pat. I've been reflecting on Andy's question about where did the definitions come from? And it seems to me that within a written bylaw, the definitions that are listed are the definitions that the town are using. And it may be that when a sponsor is presenting a bylaw or replacement language, that they need to say this definition of compostable comes from, to establish some kind of authority for that definition. But to have it listed, it's in the bylaw would be not, I think it would not be helpful or it just would be time consuming for somebody to read it. Okay. And Andy. Yeah, just follow up on Pat's side. I think that what I was really getting at is, if somebody, and I don't think Darcy would have done this by the way, but if somebody just made up a definition and there are no biodegradable bags available that meet the definition, that's something that the council ought to know. And so having just some ability to ask the question where did you get the definition from and are bags readily available is helpful information. At some point, either for the committee or the council. And that's why I was asking that question. All right, well, I'm gonna make a suggestion and see what you all think in terms of going forward. We'll review before we're done today, what the next agenda is looking like it will be. But I'm thinking somewhat larger issue of this document from Evan. And if I would ask you all to, between now and the next meeting, take a few minutes and go through it. Mandy's already caught one item 3.44. She may catch others, you may catch others in terms of anything A that you'd be interested in. I just your thoughts on these items. And the answer may be none. You may go look through it and go, I have no thoughts on this whatsoever. But the chair does need some input and guidance from his colleagues as to priority two and priority three. I'd like you to look through the whole document but I consider my responsibility priority one and I need to act on that over the next week or two. And so if you would take some time on the agenda would be going through this with your comments thoughts, if any, and then making some decisions about specifically how we're going to proceed. In the meantime, I'm going to invite, we will have Mandy, obviously we'll deal with her bylaw, which we made, we'll discuss. I will invite Darcy to come and be present for discussion of her bylaw. And we also have the issue of the appointment process that I'd like you to think about. Again, another document that if you could look at and have your thoughts on what you think is appropriate or not. That's my thinking at the moment for going forward. Any thoughts on that? Concerns, questions, no way, don't want to do it. So I'm giving you a little bit of homework but just general sort of overview. And obviously I have a lot of things to do with priority one. Okay. Item eight quickly, I think, sorry for a moment. Is the clerk of the council still with us? Or is she? I'm here. Hi, I'm working on it. This is just a question. It came up and I think we can deal with it fairly quickly. And I think Athena might have some thoughts on it. A resident raised an issue about track changes for rules of procedure. In other words, sort of keeping some kind of track of the changes that we make. And I think Athena had some good thoughts on that but I thought it should be discussed by us to what degree we think this is even feasible, let alone appropriate. The most important thing is the rules of procedure be up to date, which is what the clerk of the council does a very good job at. Do we also need to have some kind of sort of historical document that shows changes and over time, I'm not sure that's needed but we had a resident raise that issue and it came to the clerk of the council. And so item number eight, do we need track changes or some kind of index for rules of procedure? So someone in the future can go back and see. I don't know, I think, but if they wanted to, they could go back and see what changes have been made. So Athena, did you have a thought? I think you had respond to that and maybe you put an end to the issue but is that ringing any bells? Do you have any thoughts on that? Yep, I do remember that conversation. I emailed her back with instructions about how to find records of the changes. So in the rules, when I post them, we have the dates that changes were made. So it takes a little legwork to research what changes were made on which date but if you look at the dates that revisions were made to the rules and then go back into the council packets for those dates, then you'll see the votes or you could look at the unofficial records of votes and see what changes were made according to the date. So she was looking for an easier way of finding those things and that's what I suggested the committee, let me know if you want me to do that in a different way. Right, good. So I guess that's the question for the committee to what degree they would like to have this for themselves or feel it's appropriate for the public to have or whether the current process, which is a bit cumbersome but not impossible, is certainly adequate. And if people do have a question, the clerk or the council can simply direct them and say this is what you do. Manny, any thoughts? I do not vote for an index. We looked at that early on as GOL about, I don't know, almost a little less than a year ago, was referred to GOL because the rules committee was not able to get to an index. And we looked and that would have been hard to create, hard to decide what words to choose to put in an index. So as an index, I'm gonna put my two cents into, I don't support that. Track changes within the document itself are just gonna get cumbersome. But what I've seen in the past, things happen is instead of tracking exactly the changes, that there's a one pager before or after the, I guess, the table of contents that says, that would list each of the dates as we're listing in the rules themselves. We now have dates that are like amended on and then there's like 12 dates right now. Each date could be listed and then it could just say rule whatever, amendments per date and then it could say the specific rule that was amended without necessarily the change so that people could easily go, oh, I'm wondering what they did with that rule. Then they know exactly which date in the council minutes to look at or in the council vote to look at instead of having to look at each one. And that might not be too hard for the clerk to add in for Athena to add into the document or us as we do the amendments for GOL to just list, what was our last one, May, April 11th or whatever, rule 10 point, whatever, K. Something like that that doesn't go in too much detail but isn't that hard to do and might still be helpful. Okay. Pat, you're so soft-spoken, Pat. Pat, you need to mind on mute. Fuck. I knew we'd get there eventually. I know. I did it on- You had to declare this meeting. I did it anyway. Athena, I'm trying to figure out from you, it seems to me I don't think the work is necessary. I guess I feel like the public can do a little research and so it seems like extra work and so I'm interested in your response to how much work it would be to either do Mandy Jo's version or any version of this kind of record keeping. It would be extra steps. So right now the way we, oh, Lynn has her hand up as well. Right now what I do after changes are made to the rules of procedure is I post a notice on the bulletin board and there is a short description but that's not included in the rules themselves. So it would be an additional step. Okay, Lynn. I think this is a dangerous precedent to set. It means that any document that we change and change and change is to start looking like, you know, an edited document of somebody's doctoral dissertation process. It, again, as long as all of the versions are there, there's minutes to accompany those. I really feel like this is a demand that we just can't meet. Okay, Andy. Yeah, I agree that we shouldn't go down this path. If we go there, then we're gonna have to get into the questions with bylaws too. Do we have a responsibility to create legislative history and make a track record of legislative history? We're not the legislature and we're the council and I don't know that we should jump into setting that precedent without a lot of thought and it really ought to be possibly much a broader discussion than a single committee. Okay, okay. Any other thoughts? What I'm hearing here is, I'm sorry, so I'm Andy. I just wanted to quickly say, this might just be an issue for this one, so I support everything that Lynn and Andy said. Most councils and most legislatures, when they adopt rules, adopt them every session. So every two years, a new set gets adopted or formally supported, which means in two years from now, there's probably going to be a completely new adoption and then they won't get changed as much because they'll probably just re-adopt whatever's current at that time and it'll be a different thing. So this legislative history might not actually matter as we get to further and further sort of elected councils. If that's the way this council goes with an adoption of rules for that legislative sort of elected body and when new elected members come in and the whole body's sworn in again, they might re-adopt a whole new set of rules. Good. What I'm hearing here, and I'm open to obviously if you disagree, speak up, but there's a sense that, hey, the clerk of the council handled this perfectly properly and there's procedures that the steps you can take to get this information and that's what was done. And there's no need to add yet more work to her workload and every two years, these will probably be, the history will be completely gone anyway. So I wanted to discuss it. I appreciate it. I appreciate Athena's contribution as well. I think we can leave this then unless I hear otherwise. We discussed it and we feel that the current situation is adequate. So good. Thank you. Public comment may come a shock to the new members, but there is no public present. So there will be no public comment. And if there were, then I would read this long statement, but I'm not going to. We have the minutes in front of us in your packet. I do try to make sure that the minutes for each meeting are available to you before the meeting for you to look at. And so I'm assuming that you've had a chance to look at them and any, I see Andy's hand up. I did notice some things in the minutes, such as of course it's, I was a member of the committee at the time, but I'll need to get trying to get over to where my, on my own copy. So I can just tell you what they were that I noticed. At the very bottom of page one, I think the word you meant is protect and not protest the town. Very bottom of page one, create, is to be like, that is creation, yeah. And, thank you. The other one that I was a little bit confused on wording was, as I read through it under number seven at the bottom, towards the bottom of page three. Yeah. It seemed like it was not, that it could be worded, Ryan stated the opinion, but if committees will be reviewed with the ASANs, it should be done by GOL and then sent to the council with suggestions and suggestions. I think it was a spelling error there. Right, there are a couple of typos. And that, yeah, right. So a little bit of wording in that sentence that just didn't, it didn't read well when I read it and so I was playing around with a little bit. So those were the two observations. Okay, all right, all right. Anyone else? So what we look for here are changes to the minutes and what I'm seeing is a problem with the wording at under item seven and typo in at the end of page one. Any other changes? And I'm not sure what I can do with seven. My dim recollection is that, and I believe we did agree to do this if I'm not mistaken, right, that GOL will at the end of each year take a look at non-voting liaisons. And so we did agree that there should be an annual review and the GOL should do it and that we would make a change to rules of procedure, which we did. Am I correct there? No. Yes. I see Andy's point, but I'm not gonna make any changes to that. It's, you know, and there's a typo. Any substantive concerns or changes with the minutes? I'm sorry. No, that's background noise. Yeah. No, that's my background noise because Rebecca's talking too. That's all right. No, in seven, I think if you just add the words after add the words priority list after the word if, so it reads Ryan stated the opinion if priority list will be reviewed and at the ED and then you're fine. You're talking about the priority list. Yeah. Okay, all right. Fair enough. Any other concerns, changes, observations about the minutes? I see no hands. I see no hands and any, okay. So with those two amendments, with those two changes, can we adopt these by consensus? And then I would send them, I will forward them to the clerk of the council. Please. Okay. All right. If I can find my future agenda items, I've already given you sort of a preview of coming attractions, but I'd like to hear from any of you as two items that you feel should be on the future agenda. So I've asked you, what I've suggested is we'll have both a spot for Mandy's by-law and invite Darcy as well. I'd like us to review the process for appointments for non-voting members of the finance, so that document. And I'd like us to spend some time on the three piles. Lynn. Yeah, so this really comes from being at the CSO meeting yesterday, I was the producer. The one is, do we need to make a change to our rules of procedure that talk about appointments from the town manager for department heads and for town committees being automatic referrals to TSO? It's already been done. Okay, great, thank you. And then the other one that came up, and this may not be an automatic referral, but they now are the long-term public ways group. And let me just use an example. So the discussion came up about whether or not there will be a proposal from the farmers market about reopening at some point this spring. You don't know. I mean, it's right now, we don't have one, but would that be an automatic referral to TSO? Would it come to the council first? How do you see that being handled? Mandy. So not everything gets automatic referrals. We did it with a lot of appointments just to speed stuff up. Something like a farmer's market might be substantive enough that maybe it needs a discussion in the council before referring or simply because some of those stuff might not need to go to a committee before being voted on as this council is done. So we can discuss it as to whether to add it. I mean, great review as you may remember when we did some of the spring street stuff, we didn't bother to refer to a committee. On the other hand, the longer-term issue of the handicap space on and spring street is still before TSO. And I felt like it's possible the farmers market thing could come up pretty fast. And frankly, the council may meet before the TSO does. I mean, I guess I would say if the committee wants to discuss a potential change to put automatic referrals of that in, we could, but I'm not necessarily in favor of that. I think the rules work as they are for that right now. And I'm bringing it before this group because we now have rules of procedure as part of our charge for GOF. Right, right. That's all I needed. Okay, any other thoughts on that? Amanda, your hand up again? No, please take it then. Yeah, no, no, I'm working on it. So we had at one point talked about consent agenda being added to the rules. Yes, yes. I hope we should go back to that to make sure that we can add that in so that we've got a place in the agenda for it to go. We've been muddling along in doing it, but I think it would be good to have it in the rules. Good, that something actually was on my list as well. I think quickly the question for me is, how does that conversation get shaped? I had gone off and done my research and came up with something off the internet that seemed perfectly, but I'm not sure that's even necessary. Maybe it's a fairly simple process that you're thinking of. So Lynn, what's the thought here with consent agenda? I think if you go to the motion sheets, you'll see how Athena's been framing consent agenda. And there was some work done on those. I would just take it right out of there. And we would then put this in the rules of procedure so that, I mean, just help me with the... It defines what goes on a consent agenda as being items that are thought to be non-controversial. And then it goes on to talk about how if any one counselor does not want that kept on the agenda, we take it off. It basically is the rule we've been following and it works, so I just take it off of there. So yeah, I think we would need two amendments. If you're thinking about next meeting, I could probably draft them up. One is to the actual agenda order because I think we would want to add a consent agenda item into the agenda order. And then a rule on, as Lynn just said, what goes on a consent agenda or the reasons and how that operates. But I think those are the two. So you'd be adding an actual rule and then you'd be amending the agenda order. Good. And Mandy, if you do that, it'd be great. So if you could do that, and if you can, you can send it back to me, but two amendments. And it was on my list. Thank you, Lynn. What we've been doing is just taking the consent agenda as the first action item. Would you change that Mandy, Joe? Yes, most agendas have it as a specific item on the agenda list generally before proclamations. Before anything that would get voted on is the consent agenda so that if anything's pulled off, it goes, you haven't finished that item yet. Okay. Good. So I'm going to add that to the agenda for next time. And very good. Any other items that people have, they would like to be considered. We've got already, looks like an interesting agenda for next time, but any other items? All right. I have nothing, there's no item for non-anticipated by the chair. So I'm ready to call this meeting to a close. Unless I can- When are we meeting next? We next meet on May 6th at 1030 in the morning. Great. And you've got your homework. And so thank you all. But I'm going to declare this meeting returned at what I have about 12, 14. Thank you. All right. Great. Thank you all. Take care, stay well.