 Sorry, folks, I'm just. We're recording. Okay. I got to find the. All right. Good morning. I'm going to call the June 7th, 2023 meeting of the governance organization and legislation committee to order pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 extended by chapter. 22 and 107 of the acts of 2022. And extended by chapter two of the acts of 2023. This meeting will be conducted by a remote means members of the public who wish to access the meeting. May do so via zoom or by telephone. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time by a technological means. With that, I'm going to call on each member to make sure they can hear and be heard. Lynn Griezmer. Present. Mandy. Joe Haneke. Present. Jennifer talk. Present. And I'm present. Michelle Miller is absent. We're going to. We're going to move very quickly into. I'm sorry. I've been, I didn't mean to get home till two o'clock. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to get home until two o'clock in the morning. So I'm kind of. What I want to do is get. Our appointments for finance committee resident non-voting resident members. I have not received as far as I can find in my email, any new CAFs. I know that Tracy Safflin. Was hoping that Jeff, and I'm going to say Davis, but I'm not sure if that's his last name right now. Cause she thought he was interested and she was contacting him directly. And I've received nothing from him. So what I'm trying to figure out is, and I need all your help. We have two strong candidates who have been on the finance committee. They've, they've been on the finance committee. They've been in new CAFs, et cetera. And I would like to call the pool sufficient at this time. So we can move forward with their reappointment. But I would like opinion from the group, all of you. And also if that's true. And I probably know the answer to this cause it's a government. And we have to do everything in an awkward way. Do we need more things from them? Or could we actually go directly to a vote? Mandy. So. You could do it through many votes at the town council. So we could declare the pool sufficient. I almost, almost thought I heard a motion from Pat to do so. If she made it, I would second it. Yeah. Once the pool is sufficient, you're supposed to move on to under the policy. So this is the issue. There's a town council policy. Yeah. So you can, you're supposed to move on to soliciting statements of interests and moving to interviews, which is then adopting selection criteria, making interview questions and all of that to follow the full policy. If you, if you want to make a motion, if you want to make a motion, then what it needs to do is ask the council to waive its policy. Whatever sections you want waived. And it, maybe you could do it in one motion wave the wave, then, you know, the sections X, Y, Z of the town council policy on making recommendations in order to directly. Appoint X and Y as with that. Yeah. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. Skipping everything else. Both motions would have to be going to the council. I believe the first one would have to be. Affirmatively approved in order to do the second. I think that's accurate. Okay. So it is possible. Okay. Lynn. Yeah. The only thing I would. I'm sorry. The only thing I would. Adjust on that motion. Or in that statement is to reappoint. Yeah. And then we just have to decide, are we reappointing for a three year term or what are we appointing for? Thank you. So I think the. I think the. Finance committee appointments are two year terms. Yeah. Not three year under the charge. We'd have to look at the charge, but I think the charges. Your terms. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's right. Yeah. One candidate. Would be serving a final term because it would equal six years. And the other candidate had. We was a replacement for one year. Jennifer. Yeah, I just want to, you know, read what Lynn said, the reappointment is what's important. We wouldn't. We wouldn't do this for candidates who would never. Absolutely not. Absolutely not in any way, shape or form. And it just feels to me like. We have the June 30th deadline. So I would like to move forward with that. Yeah. Yeah. The re candidates have already sent us all this material. They've already been interviewed. They've already been working. And this feels like an exception. It really does feel like an exception. So I would like. To move forward with that. When is the next council meeting? It's this coming Monday. Yeah, the 12th. Okay. And so. Mandy, can I ask you to write up the motions that we'll need? If you don't mind. I'm fine. I think I'm going to be three motions, Athena. Before I start making them, do you want to make a comment? Your hand is raised, Lynn. Yeah, I was just looking at the terms and I just wanted to see if we could agree on that before we make the motion. That right now Bob Hegner. Came on in 2019. And I can't remember whether he was appointed for a one year term and then a three year term. And so the question will be. I don't know. Maybe he had two, two year terms. Maybe that was what it was. I'm pretty sure he said two, two years. So he would be another two year term. Yeah, that would be that would cover the four. And that hallway would be another two year term. Okay. Great. That's all I wanted to straight now. Thank you. Mandy. I'm looking up the charge itself. So. Cause that's where the charge. The charge is two years for non-voting member. Yeah. That's what it says. So. So you make the motions. I'll second them. There will be three. The first one is to declare the applicant pool for the appointment of non-voting members to the. Finance committee sufficient. So, okay. Second. And let's take a vote on that. Prisma. Aye. Anarchy. Aye. Yes. And I'm an eye. Thank you. Next. The next is to recommend the town council wave. The sections. Four. Hold on. I got to read what section five is. Take your time. I appreciate what you're doing. Four, six. Seven. Eight. And nine. Of the town council policy on making recommendations for town council appointments to multiple member bodies. For the purposes of reappointing. Two applicants to the, as non-voting members of the finance. Committee. Second. And let's take a vote on that. I can explain. I can explain why I skipped certain sections. Okay. One, two, and three are complete. They are vacancy, CAF and sufficiency of the applicant pool. So we've actually completed those. So we don't have to wait. Section six. No. Section five is the section on reappointments. So that's just more of a. That's kind of what we're doing. And section 10 is the appointment recommendations. So I can explain. I can explain why I skipped certain sections. Okay. One, two and three are complete. They are vacancy, CAF and sufficiency of the applicant pool. So we've actually completed those. So we don't have to wait. Okay. We're going to make. So. Okay. Any other questions from anybody. Jennifer, you had your hand up. Just, um, and we will explain to the council while we're doing this. If it's. Absolutely. And yeah. And, and, and really emphasize that this is an exception. Um, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. As a co-chair, would you like to do that? I'm happy to, sir. Okay. I did a great job on Monday, Pat. I'm sure. DOL report. Right. Well, she should be chair. No. That's my vote. We're in good hands. No, I, I, no, I think it would be good if you, if you did that, if you don't mind it. Yeah. Yeah. And it really is finding some way to share some of this stuff. Thank you. All right. So I'll leave it to you. How you're going to present it, et cetera. Okay. Did we vote on that one? Yeah. Okay. But it's been moved and seconded. Yes. All right. Panicky. Hi. Yes. Rees Murray. Hi. And DeAngelo says hi. So it's for a favor one absent. Okay, Mandy. I moved to recommend. Oh, hold on. I actually have a document that I can read. That the town council appoint. Reappoint. Sorry. Reappoint. Robert Hegner and Matt Holloway as non voting resident members to the finance committee for terms effective July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2025. Okay. Second. DeAngelo's. And let's go for a vote on that. Jennifer. Yes. Lynn. Hi. Mandy. Hi. And I'm an eye. So it's again. I don't need to repeat that or do I for the tape? Okay. All right. That feels, that feels very good. And it feels important to me. So, all right, let's see where we're going. I guess. What I'd like to look at real, I don't know if it's a quick look, but when I went back to work on the bylaws for future, you know, the things we've been passing on and on and on, it was very interesting to see that some, at times this committee has voted. And then nothing. That I could follow in the history. Changed anything. So I'd like to, I tried in the memo to. Be clear about some of the things we want to do. And the. So I, so I know Lynn, you didn't want to do this piece meal. You wanted to bring it all together. And my report, I did not integrate Paul's. I kept it as a separate report and there it is looking at different bylaws, but go ahead, Lynn. It was just an option rather than do it. To just get it all ready and then take it to the council on one night. Yeah. And there's legitimate reasons for doing that. My concern is this has just been pushed and pushed. And even the things. That I brought to Paul and he's now working on, we've been asking for this since. We've been asking for this for a long time. I've been asking for this since 2019. Are you talking about the bylaws? Are you talking about the. The rules of procedure. Bylaws. I'm sorry. Either one. It's the same thing. Yeah. Yeah. I have my. Sadie's brother is staying here and he's staying in this room. He's not here, but his phone seems to be playing music in the background. So I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. I don't know where it is. What Jennifer. We can't hear it. Okay, good. Good. All right. So one of the things I had wanted to do is integrate Paul's. But I, I can, some of these I can give you an update on and that also includes like snow and ice. I can give you. Very quick. That's been sent to the town attorney via Paul. And we've also. I've sent sent the flag policy and the. Public way changes. Both of them again to the town. To the law firm. So, but they have not. I have not seen anything back yet on that. We had gotten some feedback, but we're trying to do that all together. So that's the update on that. What else. Yes. Go ahead. I'm really out of it. So. No, I understand. Let me try to. It seems to me like we have three bylaws. That we are actively talking about one is the snow and ice. The second is the public way. And then the flag. And I think we should place a priority on trying to get those done, not necessarily today, but sometime, maybe in time to bring it to the June 24th. Yeah. And that's dependent when we get the legal review back. I can email Paul again and say we really need it by the. In time for the 24th. And I think Lauren is. Beginning to be a little more freed up because town. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No shame or blame on her. Right. Then we have two other kind of long-term things. That I believe can, you know, if we can move to trying to get them done in the July and the August meeting. One is the bylaws. And the other one is the rules of procedure. Right. And both of those we were going to try to do everything. At once. Not both. Not both at once, but all the procedure at once. And all the bylaws at once. And so if I think if we. Shoot for a July meeting for one of them in an, in the August meeting for the other. Okay. That works. So that's sound to people. Sounds good to me. Yeah. And. Is there a preference about whether it's rules and procedure in July or August? Okay. All right. And. All right. So what would you, that kind of takes. Quite a bit of the agenda off the table. In a certain kind of way. We could go to. Review and recommendations now of rules of procedure, or we can look at the bylaws. So again, I would love feedback from you guys about that. Lynn. I think we got feedback on snow and ice. We go feedback on that. We did. We did. And. It's pretty minor. It's pretty minor. And so I wonder if we want to finish that up today. If we can. Okay. Yeah. And. Jennifer, are you comfortable with that? Cause. Okay. I thought there was only two places where Lauren had. A comment. One was waste. This boat contained waste containers. Okay. And she has a question for. Waste containers must be removed. And I think she didn't. Is it that she was questioning the. Term waste container, like. Trash cans are literally might. Is that the issue or. I don't know. I don't know. I have not seen her memo. Per se. Other than these comments, I haven't. Yeah, I've only seen these comments. I haven't seen a memo. Yeah, Mandy. Yeah. So a couple of things. I think she was just questioning what is a waste container. So better definition, which I've got a suggested language for. Right. I wonder if we could use containers for waste hauling collection. Yeah. It's kind of wordy, but. Say it again. Containers for waste hauling collection. Yeah, that's pretty clear. Yeah. Hey, do we have consensus on that change? Okay. Good. Keep going, Mandy. I think her other comment about the abrasive materials was just a clarification of. I think she was suggesting language to better explain what. Or otherwise means. I kind of like her language. The only other thing I had was when she changed from all of the timings from the wording within X hours or days of its accumulation, for example, the first one within 24 hours of its accumulation to no later than 24 hours. I feel like the ofs need changed because it just seems the wording reads weird to me and I don't know whether it's just me. Yeah, it sounds weird. That can't all be removed. No later than 24 hours of its accumulation on the sidewalk. That just sounds weird. No later than 24 hours after its accumulation. And then three lines later, no later than 10 days after receiving a notice to remedy. I think there's one more up in one in the first two lines. Oh, she didn't catch one. The owner, whether by natural accumulation or otherwise, the owner shall remove. So that one should read no later than 24 hours after the end. Yeah, thank you. Good catch, Lynn. OK, anything else? And do we have consensus on those changes? OK. So I'm going to move that we recommend to the town council to rescind and repeal. No, was it repeal and replace? Rescind and replace or repeal and replace? I don't care which. And the committee is OK with all these other changes, correct? Yes, we are. OK, thank you. Thank you, Athena. So what are up? Go ahead, Mandy. Can you bring the motion? Sorry, I really should. I move to recommend the town council rescind bylaw 3.40 snow and ice and replace it with 3.40 obstruction of public ways and snow and ice removal as amended at the June 7, 2023 GOL meeting. Is there a second? Second. Lynn. Yeah. Actually, do Jennifer. I didn't speak. I was just seconding. Good, thank you. OK, we'll take a vote on that, and I'm an aye. Mandy? Aye. Lynn? Aye. Jennifer? Yes. Yeah, OK. All right, so if you guys keep running this meeting, we'll actually get somewhere. Thank you. So Athena, we'll put that on the agenda for Monday, the 12th. And that'll be a first reading, or do we need to do a first reading? Yeah. Yeah. OK, thank you. Yeah. And bring it. And since it's a rescind and replace, it means, Athena, you can just accept all the changes here to present a clear copy, right? Yeah. Oh, great. Good. But it would be useful. Oh, boy, do we even have something that shows what we changed over time? Well, we have the original bylaw, and then we'll have this clean document. We're going to rescind the existing bylaw and replace it with this clean document. So I mean, we have all these track change documents for our own reference. But all we need to show the council is the existing, and it would be replaced with. Got it. Let's go with it. OK. Mandy, your hand is still up. Oh, sorry. Well, no, that's all right. All right, is there? So do we want to start looking at the bylaws? Don't we need to vote? Or did we vote? I thought we did. We voted. OK, got it. OK. That was a big accomplishment. Finally. It's a bylaw that affects people, you know? Yes, it does. It's very important. I'm not laughing at the bylaw, just how long it can take to do what seems simple. So I guess I wouldn't mind beginning to look at some of the updates on disposition of bylaws. If that is where your folks would like to go. And that's fine with me doing bylaws. That works for me. Yeah, OK. Well, I'd like to take them in order. Well, I'm going to jump. I said I'm going to take them in order. But bylaw 3.15 activities and amusements. We really we already voted. We recommended to the council on March 17, 2021, we want to rescind this bylaw. But I don't know if it was rescinded because it's still in the 2020. That's I've been working with the bylaws from 2021. So so if so, is there a way to check whether that's already been rescinded? Is there a newer version of like a now? Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I didn't see I briefly looked at the agendas for the meetings three months within the three months of that. And I didn't see it on any of those agendas. Yeah, I had thought we had done it, but maybe it was something else we did. Well, it could be that we recommended it and then it didn't get to the council. But that doesn't seem, you know, I guess that could have been a GOL error. Or maybe it was done later 2021. Maybe it was done in like December with a whole host because that was the last council. Yeah, it's in the in the general bylaws. The number is still in there for some reason, but it says rescinded 12, 13, 21 by town council. So it's been it's been rescinded. OK, great. So that's and what's the date on that, Athena? It was rescinded. I think 12 December, 13, 2021. OK, all right. Well, then let's go to 3.2, which is a special board of appeals. I believe that this can be repealed because I went into the zoning bylaws. I went into 10.1 and there is does not reference. Chapter 41. But it seems to cover the same issues or, you know, so I don't believe this is necessary. And so I'm not sure why it hasn't been deleted. So if anybody else has any input on that, I went back and looked at some of Georgia's notes and stuff like that and couldn't find anything. Sorry, should we look at bylaw? I went in to go ahead. Could you put the document up, Athena? Which document? The document on bylaws. The one that I. The one that we're looking at. Right now you still have snow and ice up there. Yeah, that's the one. All right. So my question on the one that we're talking about, which is 3.2.1. No, wait a minute. I'm not sure I'm I. My question is, has anybody looked at 10.1 of the zoning bylaw? I looked at it this morning and I, it, it does not reference. Where is the Dan bylaw chapter 41 section 81 Z. Yeah, it doesn't reference it. But I don't know if it needs to. So I think it would need to. Okay. So go ahead. Yeah. So here's what chapter 41 section 81 Z reads. In part. I'll just read the impart part because it's two paragraphs long. Yeah. A city or town in which the subdivision control law is in effect, shall by ordinance or bylaw provide for a board of appeals, which shall have jurisdiction to issue a permit for the erection of a building under section 81 Y. The bylaw is a number of applications. The mayor or select men shall appoint the members of the board of appeals. Within adoption of the ordinance. That's newly established though. So I think if we amend the zoning bylaw, maybe I have to look at 10.1. Yeah. Or this one could. It does seem to me that because it pertains to zoning and the zoning Board of Appeals, why aren't we just moving the information about 81Z to that to 10.1? So I actually think given the language of 41 section 81Z, 3.2 is fine. Is it leaving it in? Yeah, it literally says the Board of Appeals established under the zoning bylaw shall act as the Board of Appeals under MGL chapter 41 section 81Z. This is the zoning Board of Appeals. Yeah. So I think it's as basic as it needs to be and is fine. Okay, so one decision is to leave it as is and leave it in the general bylaws, which in some instances is the simplest thing to do. But I think that it needs to get reported on because it's been carried for so long. And what do other people think? Pat, I think that it would be useful if we have two different documents here. One document is the original list with something that talks about its disposition. Okay. Yeah. And then the other documents would be the actual bylaws that we're going to change. And those will be a multiple sets of documents if we can change any. So I would keep, you're absolutely correct. This has been out there for so long. Even, I mean, there's only seven of us from the original council that knew about this list. So let's, I don't know, somewhere, each of these in italics and bold talk about disposition and so forth. Okay. So an example would simply be for bylaw 3.15. It was rescinded in 1213, da, da, da, da, da, da. Yeah. Okay. And so are we in agreement about keeping 3.2 where it is as it is? Jennifer? Yeah, what I want to ask is it sounds like what it's doing in the general bylaw, it's referring to the zoning bylaw, which is fine. But should we call it zoning board of appeals? Zoning board of appeals? I know that would be an amendment instead of just board of appeals. I actually found that a little confusing. I thought they're too different. Okay. That seems like a fine change to me and one that we can agree to quickly. I agree with that. Okay. Is it called the zoning board of appeals in our zoning bylaw? Or is that just sort of what we call it? Hello. Let me check. Who's checking? I will. I have the zoning bylaw open to try and see where it would be. Page 100. Yeah. You just got to get there. Right. Oh, it does say the zoning board of appeals shall consist of. Yeah. So we're okay. So we should make that change. But yet section 10-1 says appeals to the board of appeals may be taken by. Well, I think we should make that consistent. Everywhere. Yeah. Right. So it's promulgated by the board of appeals. So the zoning bylaw refers to it multiple times as board of appeals. But then it also has zoning board of appeals. Just that in the first two sentences of 10.01, but in the last sentence, the last two sentences say boards of appeals. Yeah, I find that whole thing confusing. I'm all for keeping it easy and not amending anything less work for the council. Section 10.1 says board uses just board of appeals. I guess the question I continue to have is whether or not we need 3.2. I think we do. Okay. Because otherwise, so chapter 41, MGL chapter 41, section 81 Z says you have to provide for a board of appeals if you've accepted this subdivision control law or if that subdivision control law is in effect. I have no idea whether subdivision control law is in effect, but assuming it is, we have to provide for a board of appeals. And so, and we have to do that by ordinance of or bylaw. And so we have to mention it somewhere according to this law. The question is, is the subdivision control law in effect? I don't know. What is a subdivision control law? We don't know. Is this not being the town has some control over the subdivision? I don't know. I think we're making this harder than we need to. I'm wondering if we couldn't say special. Special board of appeals, aka zoning board of appeals in 3.2. Something like that. So that's fine for me. I think there should be some reference to zoning board. Yeah, that's what you call it. That's what I hear you saying. Yeah. And the simply, yeah. And because the zoning bylaw references both, it's they're saying these are equivalent definitions, but here I think Jennifer's right that we should change it. Um, so if people want to change it, I'll make a motion. Make a motion. Um, I move to recommend the town council add the phrase. Perenn's zoning board of appeals and Perenn's after the words zoning. Special bylaw after the first instance of the words zoning bylaw in general bylaw 3.2. Okay. So, so Athena, what that what I'm trying to get at is the bylaw would read 3.2 would read the board of appeals established under the zoning bylaw parentheses zoning board of appeals and parentheses shall act as the board of appeals. Yeah. It's just zoning bylaws reference. This is used twice in the same sentence. So shall we take this motion been made and seconded? I made a yes. I seconded. And let's just vote. Yeah. Chris Mer. Yes. Todd. Yes. Anarchy. Hi. And I'm an eye. Such unanimity. Yeah, the next one we already did. Right. 321, which is regulations relating to animals. And what I can do will be to contact Carol Hepburn to see if she wants to add that and see again, this was the recommendation that was made and somehow or other all this got lost. So I'll put, I'll do that. So we will come back to that one. You're on 321. Yes. Yes, I'm sorry. And I will contact Carol Hepburn to get input on that. Let's just make a note of that so we can keep this as a record. Right. So Pat too, it's in the recommendation that, yeah, but you can just note that I'll be doing it. I thought we did peeking and peering. It's still on the books. But without problems too. Or maybe we didn't finish, but this is about drones. And when I went into the 2021 bylaws, it doesn't mention drones. And it, what it's saying is to refer this to the appropriate committee for review. And I'm trying to figure out whether or not that's TSO. Or, or is that simply, I mean, it was referred to GL, obviously, but It's literally one sentence long, the bylaw. Yeah. And I think it was, if we want to get into it, it probably needs to go to a different committee. The question is, does the council want to get into it? Yeah, we need to. And I feel like we got something from the chief on this at one point, like maybe a couple of years ago on his thoughts on it. And that might have been why it stalled. Because I'm looking at the bylaw, except as otherwise permitted by law, no person upon the property of another shall intentionally people appear into the place of habitation of another. So you have to be on that person's property first. And the question is with Jones and all, you can be standing in the public way. Lynn controlling it. Yeah, I love two minds. One is if somebody wants to take this on, that's great. I have reason to believe that it should go beyond what, whether you're on that person's property. Bluntly, we've had a situation up in Flat Hills Road where there's somebody that keeps stopping and kind of scanning with a radar, a satellite dish, and we've reported it. Several neighbors have reported it. We have no idea what they're up to. But they're not on our property when they do it. They're just on the main road. So it's a surveillance of some level. We have no idea what it is. And the police have not been able to come up with an answer. So it does need to go for a much more bigger discussion about surveillance. Okay. So not just drones, but also being off someone's property. We do just drones, but also other technologically surveillance kinds of mechanisms because this person's not using a drone. Okay. Is this the committee that should be doing that? Or should it be TSO? I mean, I can't think it doesn't belong in CRC. I don't believe so. So are we making a recommendation to look at the issue of surveillance and surveillance technology in regard to this by law? Could we make that recommendation that in the coming term, not this term, the TSO looked at it because TSO has so much on their plate. I just don't see them getting done. So I think that becomes the question. If you're looking at a massive expansion, so it's not peeping or peering into a place of habitation, it's something else with other technology. You're looking at probably a year-long process and the question becomes, it's not going to get done this term. Is it a high enough priority for the council to take up what could be done if our current term is not going to take it up? GOL could recommend that the council, right now it's referred to GOL, that the council refer it to TSO and then under our automatic carryover, it get carried over for the next council to determine priority, something like that, where therefore it's not lost, but it's not deemed by this council a priority for the next council. It just it's counted somewhere. I agree with all of that. Okay, Linda, do you want to add something beyond the agreement? So as I heard it, we're saying that we think it belongs in TSO, but it's going to be an extensive process and so it should be taken up by the council to whether or not where I think I got lost towards the end and I again, I'm not awake. I can try a motion. It might be convoluted though. One possibility, Joe, is that we refer this to the, I don't know, 2024 council for determination regarding its priority and referral to TSO, something like that. Does that feel, or you could you could hold it for carryover items and just included in a report of items carried to the next council term? I'd just like to make sure we capture the discussion we've had here already. Right, with carryover, I think it has to be in referral to a committee at some point. That's why I was thinking, I think we only carry over items that are currently in committee or have been reported out of committee but not voted on. Is that what the rules are? I think that sounds about right, Amanda, Joe, but it does seem to me that we could say that it would be referred to TSO in the FY 2024 term, but and then just make a note for the consideration or something about whether it's a priority. And I think you meant not 2020 but 2024. Yes. TSO has a lot on its plate, but if for some reason it finishes, it's not horrible that this potentially be sitting there if it somehow finishes everything it's got. And then it could also just refer it to be carried over. I guess the thing that I'm still struggling with and that is, is this even a priority for the council? Well, I know that's and I'm not sure it is. Yeah, that's one reason why I, even though I have my own concerns about issues related to this, it needs to stand the test of whether it's a priority for the council. Yeah. It's not a high priority. Pardon? What, Lynn? Is there any reason we can't say something about and put your mandate, Joe, you're saying based on the charter, we can't refer it back to the council for determination of priority? No, I have a procedure have carry over, I think, only for items that have not been acted on or so. So here's the thing, maybe what we could do is GOL could make a recommendation that the council refer this matter to TSO, but you as a, you as a president never put it on the agenda for actual referral and then maybe it gets carried over to the next council as an item not acted upon. Well, that's the same thing is referring it to G to TSO now and then having them carry it over. No, because the next council would have to make the determination whether TSO, whether it should be referred to TSO, whereas if we acted on it to refer to TSO and TSO sat on it, it's already in TSO. All right. All right. So we want to make a motion that this bylaw, that bylaw 3.23 peaking or peering into the place of habitation be referred back to the council for determination as to whether it is a priority of the council and leave it at that. That way this council could decide if it's a priority and then they refer it to TSO, but with the understanding that TSO may be very clearly state. We're not doing this in this term. If the committee recommends the council refer it to TSO and the council decides that it's not important enough for TSO to spend time on it, then they would just vote against that referral. And that would be the end of consideration of any changes for that bylaw unless somebody wants to take it up in the future. Which feels okay to me. So the recommendation would be to refer the bylaw to TSO and then the GOL report would say only do that if you're really interested in getting into it. The GOL report would also indicate what it needs looked at. Like it's an issue of drones and people standing on public ways and doing stuff. It's a very complicated matter if it goes to TSO. It's not easy. Right. So when in the TSO in our GOL report we need to you know indicate that the reason we did this referral is as observed by the bylaw review committee this bylaw will require substantial discussion by the town council and at a committee and at a committee level. So was that a motion to refer to recommend referral to TSO Lynn? It was a recommendation for the bylaw to the town council. Yeah not to. Yeah that would seem that we should refer to the council maybe without any sort of editorializing. So can I hear the motion again then because now I'm really confused. Recommendation to refer the bylaw to the town council to determine. That doesn't make any sense. You recommend to the town council that the council do something. Well kind of just that the council decide if it wants to refer it. Then you just recommend that the council refer it if it if it. TSO and then. Yeah okay. I'm sorry Athena can you repeat that. No go ahead. I'm sorry. No no I interrupted you. To recommend the town council refer bylaw 3.23 peaking and peering into place of habitation to the town services and and our reach committee. That sounds good. I'll second that. I didn't make that motion. I said so. Lynn made it. Lynn made it. The bylaw title is actually peeping P E E P I N G or peering not peaking according to my bylaws. The old peeping Tom is that where that comes from? Yes I think so. That's so much cuter thank you for that correction. Peeping. What if you want to stand out some side somebody's house going peep peep. Athena can you put the correct motion up there. I think it's just a motion to recommend referral to TSO. Yeah yeah. To the town council. Right recommend the town council refer bylaw 3.23 to the town services and now reach committee. Okay that's not what's on the screen. This is I'm making notes for whoever's going to write the report. Me. I got it. All right so that motion's been made in second to Jennifer has her hand up. Jennifer. Yeah so this is like if the next council meeting path this will be part of your report. No this won't happen until we bring the whole setback. Okay okay that's what I want to ask. Now the whole setback that we're working on because the town council's already gotten an update from Paul and now I have to just write his tush to make sure he's actually doing it. But at the point at which this is referred to the council you know someone could be one of us whatever could point out before it just gets sent to TSO that this would require a substantial amount of work of the committee. Yeah right I envision this as being a report about these bylaws and when we actually have the council meeting that all of this comes to the report about these bylaws will be in the packet. Right and that goes back to us looking at this in July and August for the rules and procedures and trying to bring it back whole mandate. Yeah just a normally a lot of these just go on consent so I would just make it make the request that this motion that we just made to recommend referral to TSO not go on consent at all. I think you're going to find yes I think you're going to find that there's going to be very few bylaws put on consent. Well I would say what we just did with the special board of appeals could easily go on consent after just reading. But somebody will pull it off because it's zoning board of appeals and no panic so. Have we voted? Let's vote in case we haven't. You have a aye. Mandy? Aye. Lynn? Aye. Jennifer? Yes. Okay forwarded for a foreign favor none opposed and one absent. All right the next thing is nuisance house and we've done uh how can we go ahead? Sorry I just realized that our vote to recommend referral is going to look really weird when none of us actually want potentially want that referral to TSO when it's a four zero unanimous vote to refer. That's what I feel uncomfortable exactly. Well let's go under our vote and talk this through a little can we do that? Yeah I think I think all you need to explain in the report is the vote in the committee was basically to give the council the choice on whether it wants to spend the time. Yeah not necessarily that we actually support spending that time. Yes thank you for that Claire that's important. It's really this part if the council deems it a priority that's the yeah key part of the recommendation I think. Thank you. Are we comfortable with that now? Okay um okay so nuisance house haven't we done work on nuisance house or is that what we're doing it in CRC? Yeah so the council has formally referred it to CRC all of this stuff along with everything else so that one got taken care of by GOL. Right so we don't need to do anything just remove it from this list. Yeah okay all right and the bylaw 3.27 I believe we're on which is the ban of EPS phone and I went through that and I do not believe that any further action is needed um just yeah oh okay hang on one second but do we need anything we need to remove it to basically just remove it from this list? Is there anything else we need to do just it's not being carried over it's been taken care of? In other words we're letting the bylaw stand as it is. Yes yes I just think we need to say that. I think what we've done in the past in GOL is that GOL recommended no further action okay and vote that recommendation and just report out on it in a report but nothing goes on the agenda at the council meeting. Okay Mandy you want to make a motion? I'll make a motion to recommend the council take no further action on bylaw 3.27. The second. Lynn is the second okay and let's vote on that Jennifer? Yes. Mandy? I. Lynn? I. And I'm an I. Now on to the uh are we ready to move on to 3.36 soliciting and if exceptions was sent for a legal review and does it um align with case law and should it be retained I don't have an um answer on that. We hear from the chief on this one uh yeah and let me see if I can find this one was amended in 2022. Okay okay and so that should okay so it must have gone for a legal review in order to be amended so we can just drop that from the list. So we should in the report say that it was amended in 2022 and I can get what the how it was amended. Yeah so we GOL must have already dealt with it. Right well I don't even remember this. Yeah I don't either that's why anyway um but I trust Athena if she says it was amended in 2022 it was. That's my copy of the bylaws say that 9 12 give me a second and I'll tell you what the motion was. Okay. We also rescinded peaking and peering. Completely. Yeah. Oh my god. Proposed rescission to rescind bylaw 3.23 peaking and peering on September 22nd 2022. September? September 22nd motion sheet my notes say it was rescinded completely unanimously. In 2022 September 22 2022. September 12 2022. September 12 2022 and it set a first reading on soliciting so let me go to the next reading on. So that's rescinded. Hmm so peaking and peering was rescinded. So in essence we're not referring anything unless we're referring the issue to that doesn't it seems to me that a counselor would need to bring that issue up and say hey we don't have it you know I'm concerned about general surveillance we don't have a bylaw do we need yeah. Yeah so soliciting the only changes we made on September 19th were to the penalty block. We basically gave the board of licensed commissioners the ability to set the fees. And which one is this I'm sorry. Soliciting. Yeah. So that's the only change we made was fee setting. So with okay. Ray fee and then Ray fee setting and it went to and it became the work of the board of licensed commissioners. Yeah and that's in the bylaw. What's interesting is that shows the change in my bylaw but the peaking and peering doesn't show rescission in my bylaw. Yeah mine doesn't either. I'll check with the town clerk. Yeah. Okay so we don't quite know what's going on with peaking peeping and peering. It's rescinded. It is. It's reported to be rescinded. Okay so how do we take away our vote? Receiving new information. We rescind the vote of. I move to reconsider our vote regarding peaking and peering. And I second that emotion. Emotion. Motion. Thank you Smokey Robinson. Yeah really. I'm so sorry folks. This is I'm just not awake. We have to vote if we have to vote to reconsider. Yeah thank you. It was seconded right? Okay. Mandy? Hi. Jennifer? Yes. Lynn? Yes. And I'm an eye. All right so now what are we reconsidering? So now you're just withdrawing your emotion. Right. I'm withdrawing the motion. Okay and do we have that's it. Who was the second? Pardon me. Oh I might have been the second. You were. And you agree. I will pay with the withdrawal. Okay so we're all set with that. I think we have to vote on that. No we don't. No you withdraw it so it's also okay. All right so we're going to just make a note that we've already rescinded that one. That takes away a messy issue. Yeah and then if if there are counselors who want to deal with it they can. Okay the pawn brokers this the bylaw was changed to reflect the critique so I'm not sure again why it was carried over and over again so the recommendation is that there's no form further action required. Correct. And this one may I go on? Do we have to vote on that? 3.49 which is the local historic districts. Did you did you want to take a vote and not to recommend no further action on? Oh I'm sorry thank you. Is there a second on that? Second. Okay. Did you make that motion? Pat? Yes. Thanks. Okay and we'll start with Jennifer. Yes. Lynn. Yes. Mandy. I. And I'm an I. Thank you. Bylaw 3.49 local historic districts. The issue seemed to be that the ZDA uses associate and the historic the local historic district uses alternate and this doesn't seem particularly important to me but the issue is to clarify and allowing the language. Jennifer and then Mandy. Right so I was I chaired the commission for a few years and I have never known them to have an alternate or an associate but. But it's in the bylaw so they can yeah so but thank you for that information I didn't know that. Mandy. Yeah it says the town manager may he must never have exercised that option. It's my understanding I don't know if we have a I've read in the paper I thought that the commission itself was looking at potential changes to this I could be completely wrong but maybe it's not changes to this versus they were and they put it on hold recently but I wonder if I mean we could propose it looks like it's the change of like two words right we could propose a change to associate to align with the ZBA language or we could just send this to the historic district for their thoughts if it's never been used maybe they would delete the paragraph right I don't know. Okay so should I show maybe what's going to happen is that I will simply contact the historic commission to get feedback about this. Okay there's the historical commission and the local historic district commission and this is the local right yeah not the historical commission. Thank you Jennifer. Sure. Nate's the staff person. Oh okay that's good okay so I will contact them about this issue. Okay Mandy. Oh sorry. Okay so that gets us down to the zero energy in town buildings and there there was a lot of dealing with this and GOL specifically I think with under George reached out and they were they don't have any issue with the definition so it doesn't seem to me that there's any real action required Lynn. I move that we take the council take no further action. Second and okay Mandy. I Jennifer. I'm sorry which one are we 0.510 energy. Oh okay yes. Okay and I'm an I and Lynn. I okay that we've gone through the list so that is pretty good if you ask me so I feel I have two I will be working on a report and I will also I guess my question is should I be integrating Paul's into our report or just keep it separate. Mandy. So I had a question about Paul's report. I think it should be kept separate but at the same time there were parts of that report that clearly suggested action um particularly the parades and public meetings one. Yes and we need the council to recommend to refer that to us for taking that action and making a recommendation on those recommendations or can we just take it up and do we want to take it up in a way five the one I'm referring to yeah 3.35 parades and public meetings in some ways it feels important to take it up simply because again this is a free speech issue and do we have guidelines. I mean it it's pretty clear that we only that we don't regulate anything except time and traffic patterns and things like that. I mean it seems logical to take it up while we're doing all this banner and rules of procedure you know it's like but do we need a motion from the council to um a motion to refer from the council or can we just do it. I don't know. Athena do you have a hit on that. Do it. One less agenda item right Athena. All right so that GOL will start working on this. So if people would look at it in a new light it's like what what are the issues that you see not necessary right now and then any questions that you have that we would want from KP law or something like that if we can get that together fairly soon we can send it forward and then hopefully we'd get it back with flags etc and public ways. Does that make sense to people. KP law gave us a pretty good opinion and so I wonder if we just need a new draft that incorporates it so we can look at the two together. Okay that's true. I'm feeling willing to do that if people would like me to try. We would love you to try. I think there's a second a third a fourth and a fifth on that. Thank you Mandy. Mandy Jo is becoming the public way expert. Expert on many things. Yes. I don't know it has the council being the issuance of the reservation. Right. So I think it also goes to if it's on the town common or town way is it a bylaw or is it and then what do we do about are we going to delegate that authority to the manager we haven't this this one's not at all delegated to the manager in our policy delegating whatever it's called regarding the control and regulation of the public ways I guess since we control it we'd have to delegate it unless or they come to us at a council meeting. You mean the person who wants the break. Yeah. Yeah I would rather not necessarily have that I would prefer delegating the responsibility as a town manager. I mean we've already delegated a bunch of it right short term reservations of the town common and public way right so it's sort of a continuation which makes sense to me because I don't know if I want to spend council time with somebody presenting why they want a parade that basically we have to say yes to no matter what and the town manager knows what else is going on how it's going to pose like staff and what else is going on. Exactly. I guess the next question is Athena do you have the bylaw itself handy if not I can put it up instead of the opinion because that I guess one of my questions is do we need a bylaw for some of this under the charter were designate the council's designated the keeper of the public way mm-hmm and so do you need a bylaw or does our policy about delegation of powers that talks about reserving the town common and parts of the public way cover it except for the issue about size but even that we've never talked about size in our delegation policy so it just brings another question of do we even need this bylaw can can I just also mention that you know we go to the town manager when people want to do road races how different from a road race is a parade speed that's it that's it there you go and most people we did road races what I had no idea we ever had a road race oh we we do them all the time yeah where well the daffodil run and we've got a half marathon oh you mean that you mean a one I'm sorry I thought you literally met with cars never mind never mind never mind that's next I'm taking Lynn grace moron with my drag races that's what we're gonna get even into more issues now Lynn you popped your hand up for a second did you but right now this says the council you make reservations with the council to hold things on the common right so that's not right which is why I'm wondering should we just be deleting this bylaw completely and and making changes to the policy on public ways yeah yeah which we're already working on so yeah bylaw that seems to me we've covered under public ways but or we need to so you would be recommending that the council rescind it when the council adopts the changes to the public ways policy yes is that right well like that's my question I guess so so KP law provided a whole lot of nice information but do I guess my question is do we need this bylaw or as keeper of the public way the policy that we've adopted regarding control and delegation is that sufficient in in essence it conflicts with the bylaw right now and so if we want to do it all through that policy do we rescind this bylaw completely which saves us one more sort of area of what's going on right and I can take a look at the bylaw and the language that KP law provided to see what we might have to add to our policy but and we adopt that policy we could also recommend rescinding this section completely I think it makes sense to have all the public ways stuff in one place yeah I agree totally well so it seems like we have consensus here do we need to take a vote yeah we need to is it is it appropriate to take the vote now to recommend rescission even though we haven't done anything else and then we just put the second reading whenever we get the other we just time it at the council for the same time as the public way stuff going on I think that's when we do it but we could take the vote yeah okay all right so Lynn Griezmer we don't have a mo we don't have a motion on the floor I'll make the motion to recommend the town council rescind general bylaw 3.35 parades and public meetings second do you want to include at the time of adoption of oh with um with an effective date to match recommended the effective date of upcoming changes to the town council policy regarding the control and regulation of the public ways thank you thank you Mandy so Lynn you were the second correct yes that's correct and I agree with that so I'm going to go ahead and take a vote Mandy I Jennifer yes Lynn I and I'm an eye we're just moving to clean up these bylaws and get rid of half of them I well and let me just suggest depending on what the agenda looks like for the 26th we might do since we seem to be just about done we might do this then but you still had the animal one to talk to Carol about yeah yeah and we and we still need to make sure we get everything back from KP law that we need right the local historic commission yeah so it's ambitious to think we're going to be doing that so I just take back what I just said you could do a first reading if it's a light agenda and the bylaws all need second readings yeah and so a first reading gets half of it done and then it sits there yeah I'll know better today whether it's gonna be there's there's two issues coming um up and we're trying to juggle when they're gonna be on the agenda I know that sounded mysterious but I didn't mean it and you can't say we'll say no I'll be glad to tell you but go ahead the 12th Jennifer 12th is the budget okay yeah 12th is the budget and there's several actions with that but based on the meeting Monday night I don't I don't see anything arising but there were four counselors absent the finance committee is getting ready to take up on Friday the issue of councilor compensation and then the town manager is developing a report with Sean about ARPA money and then at some point very soon ahra will be coming forward with its recommendations that's kind of where yeah what's the second issue that's coming up on you said there were two issues those are it's really I you know councilor compensation may create a certain amount of conversation uh the issue but more importantly I think the ahra report and recommendation it's going to be a big one and I think that there may be some considerable conversation around the ARPA report okay all right is there anything else in Paul's disposition report that we want to look at right now I have to find it I had it earlier and then I did I feel like everything else had still working on right the staff is still working on recommendations and it was just that one that sort of had an actual action to it okay all right well I guess there was about three licenses and permits this 3.7 had an update did anybody see anything specifically that wasn't supported or that we need to look at in terms of changing a term or anything like that I did I don't think the town attorney recommended any changes yeah I didn't know I don't see that they did either and um you know the the big thing that's changed since then is the court case regarding um back taxes and I don't um that what didn't seem to be part um Lynn can you give me a brief outline of what the court case is that on back yeah the court ruled um that when a town takes property for back taxes they can they may only keep the yeah the back tax okay um and the rest must go to the owners yeah which makes total sense totally I mean I guess the question would be if it applies to building permits and all do you add it to exemptions or not right but that was not the question KP law was asked but but the bylaw itself has a has nine exemptions nine licenses that are exempt from this right well it does the um that our bylaw already allows us to not deny any application revoker suspend or um to any person business etc who isn't like wet that are refused to pay any local taxes so I don't think there is anything we need to change there either or yeah I mean I guess that that's the question I don't think there were any changes recommended it didn't seem like it I think this review was done now before that court ruling but I don't know do you want me I don't I don't see it as an issue I it's actually something I'm going to bring up at Paul when I meet with him okay and so then then if there is an issue which somehow or other doesn't feel like it you would you could let us know yeah absolutely other than that other than that it's still in Paul's court for most of the things in his memo okay well the only other thing on the agenda is to look at the towns yes sorry so so you're not recommending no changes this is going to be oh no we should do that oh for Paul yeah is this are we waiting for Lynn to talk to Paul or what's happening next to 37 we're going ahead with this yeah you're going to recommend no further action yes so it was referred to Paul to to request something from the town attorney and he's done his update right so it's not sitting in gel right now except he referred this back to gel no he did yeah it was a gel recommendation the council referred to the town manager so which we did that was it that was in like 2021 or so you're saying if Paul wants any changes he should come to us is that what you're saying man did you yeah I I think his his update or whatever if he wants yeah I think he needs to provide the changes if he deems that changes are necessary but it doesn't seem like there would be from what we have AP law whereas the other one that parades specifically recommended changes so I felt like okay so the committee agrees the town manager would bring changes if he wants to yes if he deems them necessary or some shmugi way of saying it um thank you it is it's about 11 o'clock it's not quite and I'm going to make a suggestion that we call for public comment and then I'd like to end the meeting early just let's approve the minutes there's no yeah so um Lynn you want to make a recommendation to or the motion to approve the minutes um were the minutes in the packet I don't think they were oh then we can't do it so we have to do it that was basically my question I'm so convinced I'm missing things that I didn't see it in SharePoint that doesn't mean they weren't online Athena oh I'm sorry yeah I didn't see them to put them into SharePoint but I haven't looked in the last couple of days so I did this a week ago before I left I'm so sorry about that I have them um I must have just failed to put them in the packet I'm sorry about that that's okay we can approve them at our next meeting yeah okay put them in the packet and approve them now Pat you should officially call for public comment note that there's nobody in the audience yeah no I know there's nobody there anyway at this point in our meeting I would like to officially call for public comment if there are any uh people who would like to make public comment they should raise their hand now and seeing no hands raised I'm going to call and enter the public comment period um I would very much like Jennifer go ahead continue I don't know if this I just want to just make a comment that yesterday the um MMA had a webinar on the court opinion I'm not click don't have the names you know about um public comment I just want Southboro yeah Southboro didn't get to watch it but um you can listen to it I can send the link if that's oh please do yeah okay please do that would be very helpful I had the same problem Jennifer I didn't get to go yeah send the link all right so I'm going to make them a suggestion that we end the meeting now and that we move looking at uh both the Southboro case of public dialogue public comment public you know conduct issue and then rule six uh as part of our next meeting if that's comfortable with people because I'm not being it's yeah does that mean meetings early I know I just feel like I failed you guys and I'm sorry but I'm just so out of a very productive meeting actually yeah well that's because you guys kept it going okay anyway so see I am going to end the June 7th GOL meeting I'm adjourning at 11 o 2 a.m and thank you all thank you get to sleep yeah