 In that case, because we have somebody who is, uh, who is remote, we're going to need to go through, um, do the roll call. So, and that's, uh, Andrew, although I, Raj. Hi, Amber. Hi, and George abstain. Okay. That's three zero. Was he one of the tension? Thank you. So now they'll bring us into public to be heard. This is the portion of tonight's meeting where if there are members of the public who wish to bring something to the agenda of both of our boards. Now is the time to do so. For those of you who are using zoom, please go ahead and raise your hand. I'll make sure to give you time. For those of you here in the room, if you don't mind just raising your hand, I'll be able to call on you. Seeing no hands in the room. So going over into zoom. Seeing no hands on zoom. So no public to be heard. Going into business item 6a discussion, potential action of the three farm management memos. That'd be great. In terms of just introducing these is that. Brad Ali. To them to please introduce for the public. Yep. He's never seen him come in. We can discuss for over a year now. And so tonight, I think this is the opportunity for us to have a conversation. See, basically, you know, the memo highlights the key points that back in August. There was the initial meeting. And then in November, both boards, yes, this was a four year extensions of the existing agreements. There are three agreements, one between the two boards, one between the two boards and the three management group. And at least for the three management group to lease the property. Full of course, go unanimously to extend those agreements for four years and ultimately things would end up in the municipal control at the conclusion of that. In February, both boards agree to extend the three agreements that were due to expire on July 31 to the secretary moment this year. And then I think it was in May. Select order revisited the issue. And I think staff and support agree that they would like an extension that results in their party management. Continue their party management of the parcel moving forward. And I think that was reiterated again. And so we find ourselves here tonight to have a conversation that the council, I think, has expressed that it's still interested in honoring the November vote, which was an extension, followed up by this. So that will be the discussion tonight to figure out how those two. Differing opinions can be reconciled. If possible. Thank you, Brad. Not sure. Greg, Marguerite, Ali, anything outside their view. Sure. Brad captured it. Well, I would just clarify one little nuance. Select board isn't necessarily looking at targeting third party. Management as the end result of the lease, not opposed to that. I wanted to have the conversation, the select board and staff brought it up. Select board agreed to have that conversation about what that result looks like. They no longer think it should absolutely be ending in municipal management at the end of the four year lease extension. Part of it is looking at the MO view that's in place that's been extended that talks about having that third party management as the. Oversight for management for the tree farm. So I think that's part of what the conversation is tonight is to figure out if that MOU and the intent of that MOU is still. In place and the end results. We did try to look into the municipal management. Having some challenges there just exactly what that would look like. So before we went too far down that road. The select board wanted to have the conversation tonight with the city council about. How to end that, what that looks like at the end of that four years and. I think that captures it, but I would look to the select board members because I don't want to necessarily speak for any of them. This is just delaying what has been discussed in the past. So, with that. Well, we had in terms of the forum for the rest of this part of the conversation. Given that this is a multi-party agreement, multi-party contract. Looking to have the bulk of the conversation between our boards with an executive session so that way we don't have another party being privy to that conversation. So as such, we would have that in executive session. So to do things a little differently. What we would do is have the public comment in advance. So if there are members of the public would like to. Raise comments. We can take that now. And then go into the executive session so we can have our discussion. I'm sorry, Andrew. Could you explain again what, why we would go into executive session because of 3rd party? What, what are you doing? Yeah, it's not just a contract between the town and the city. This is ultimately leading to a contract between town city and the free farm management group. But why would that require executive session? But we don't reveal strategy for our discussion. I see. Okay. Great. Yeah, and as we were coming into this. Um, Now, Expectation at the end of the discussion would be having public and not the possibility of having both discussion about the lease with the inter-affecting session for a session of real estate. Right. Cause the, yeah, you know, you was between these two public entities. If we're talking about sure, we're talking about at least, and sure, that's a different question. I see what you're saying. Well, right. I'm just trying to think this through. I'm not saying one way or the other. The MOU dictates whether we contract with someone else and that prefer the only mentioned entity that we would contract with this chief tree farm management group. So any results from the MOU just again. Hadn't gone that far in my head just trying to think out loud. Any. Discussion of the MOU would automatically impact how we, what we agree with as far as. What ends up with tree for management group in a contract? The tree farm group has no signature, no say in the MOU. But they did not prove it. They're not, they're not. They were mentioned sure because they were the entity at the time, but I think there's also a clause in that it says that it could be any. If it. If it is, you know, if the proper things are followed, I think there's a 4 year. Notification we're supposed to provide to be firm management group before going with another entity that's still in place there. I don't, I don't, yeah, it's, it's in agreement between the 2 of us now. So just looking into our. Yeah, the MOU was a part of the. Public packet. So, yeah, that's fine. We can have that the MOU conversation. Open session then. During that conversation at the conclusion of that conversation, go into executive afterwards. That's necessary to talk about the other 2. Sure. I asked a clarifying question. I believe I heard it stated that in February, we extended the lease for 4 years. Okay. Okay, thank you. That was the plan. Okay, I'm good. Okay, so to go back, let's have that conversation about the MOU 1st. As we normally would, and then go from there. For the others. Just on my going into the MOU. So it's like where you all had the conversation last about what you wanted to see out of this. Okay. Great. Talk about that. Sure. Sure. I can do that. So what we're, what we're looking at is putting together a lease agreement that has stipulations in it that addresses the issues that the concerns that have been raised. Access to the property. Access to financials. Meeting to follow open meeting law. Warnings, things of that sort. So transparency concerns with the pre firm management group. How it's being operated. So, so we want to put more. Into the lease agreement and then monitor how they do over the 4 year extension. And in that, you know, at some point that we could, we could agree on some sort of schedule to say, okay, if they're not meeting this by this date, then we can start talking to that. Talking about other options, or if they're continuing on, then we have to have a different discussion. Do we want to continue to a third party? Continue with third party or take it. So, so I think that's the. That's the, the, the, the view the select board has given given that. Today's September 28. And December 31st is 3 months and less than a handful of days away. I don't know that we can work through. All of the. All of the issues that we will that will come up with regard to sharing responsibility for the municipal responsibility for the group. And the fact that the MOU includes. Language in there that says that if you want to have this discussion with the 3 from group and needed to start in 2018. It's now 2022. So, we have some feeling that we should honor that 4 year. Stipulation that was in there initially. So that's where the, that's why we talked about this before we voted on before we go in a 4 year. Extension agreement. We'd like to have an extension agreement have. Essentially, I guess a final period. See how. The free farm management group moves forward with stipulations about transparency. And then at some point during that 4 years, make a determination with it. We can, we can certainly talk about the schedule. Can I ask a question? Yeah. So we had a unanimous agreement with both boards back last time we discussed this back in November. Is that correct. And that it right and it at that time, I think what. I think what the agreement was what we were trying to say was that. Because it was 4 years, we would see if. Working together, the 2, the 2 municipal. Rep departments and the tree farm management group could come to some agreement and understanding of how to address all of these issues like transparency and access. And yet, you know, satisfy our need for greater transparency and oversight of their operation. And at the same time, we would retain the good, the good services that they're providing the volunteer services that we would have to compensate for if they left. So my understanding was that was kind of the concept. Of behind the 4 year agreement, but maybe. Maybe my memory isn't serving me well. So I'm looking to you, Andy and. I mean, is that kind of what we had in mind and my, my, the point of my question is I'm trying to understand exactly what has changed. That makes it different now. So again, I can comment on a couple of things. There are 1 is that there was, we have seen from from. The village at the time that. The proposal that included in this year, we will take over the control of the finances. Here, we will do this with this year. We will do that. So that was a takeover plan. Not any valuation plan. That's completely different than what we're thinking at this point. And just, and to answer the question of how we've gotten to different thinking is our staff review the proposal. And given all of the things that we're doing to figure out how to. Be a town on our own. Right. It was. On staff's recommendation was that we revert to pushing. All of that work to figure out how to also control manage the. Out to a different date. Okay. That's what it clarified to when we did talk. The. Impression that this, the village trustees had. As that as we approached that motion, it was that it would be 3 years. And then all of a sudden the select board motion for 4 and we were stuck either. Blowing it up. Or agreeing to the 4. So, and. So. When you're. Regardless of my depression, I think I'm the one to propose 4. Okay. I think if you went back and watched the video tape. I see that I was one who said 4. Yeah. And I, I don't know why. I'm looking at dawn because I think we were looking at each other at the same time. I can't remember why we said 4 instead of 3. For some reason 4 came out, but I, at any rate, we're, we're 1 year down. So we're looking at 3 more. Essentially. So, so when you're negotiating a contract. The time of the contract doesn't pass before you sign the contract. I don't think so, but we're not. I don't. I'm not there to agree that another year has passed that year has passed. And therefore. Yeah, I don't. I would say that I think we have a larger concern in terms of what the end result is before we talk about a number of years. I think we have a larger philosophical. Decision to make around what the end is, regardless of how tree farm does. Whether they meet our benchmarks or not. You know, I'm not sure that. I'm personally comfortable having that large public parcel run by a third party when. I think the reason it started that way, if I'm not mistaken, I think someone who was around when this was signed. Said that through. Minded me that the village did not have a wreck department at that time. I don't think they had a wreck department when the second extension and the 2012. The dates are very fuzzy when the. Ria somewhere around 2012, and we didn't have a wreck department with the school. Now we have a very successful. Recreation apartment. Is very capable of running that public parcel. For the entity. So I think. Hearing what you're saying about the town not being in a position right now to take that on is 1 thing, but I think to. To move towards a question of whether that's going to be managed or managed by a 3rd party is something I think for me needs to be decided 1st before we. Talk about length of any contract that might come. I may be the only 1 in the council that thinks it feels that way, but I don't. I think I am. So, I'm just going to put that up there. Thank you, Raj and Tracy. Yeah, I just wanted to comment on George. I think you mentioned 4 years. I was. I think I saw Raj's jaw drop when I said 4 years. I made the motion reading the room. I felt that if it was 3 years, the select board would not have passed it. And I preferred to go with 4 years rather than the select board. Going it down so that we actually have a path forward. A lot has changed since November. You are now a city. At the time we also felt that we would have an agreement as part of separation that would govern the tree farm. We do not. This gives us would allow us some assurances to have open financials transparency in that matter, public meetings, public participation in meetings, things of that sort. While also adding runway to our timeline because December is coming up pretty quickly. So, it would allow us to enter into a planning mode to have those conversations. Raj, like you're talking about, what is our vision? Where do we want to go? How do we get there? So, from my perspective, that's how I see this. And so, just going back to what Raj was saying, part of I think even some of the. Underlying all describe us frustration. Maybe that's just for me personally is. We had the agreement back in November as to where we were going. And here we are now in some regards reaction we had already previously to because there's. Now a change of heart, if you will, as to the select board and the site or path forward. And to be clear, the intent back in November was go work on this agreement. Here are sort of the guide rails guard rails bring it back to us so that then we have something to discuss. Quite frankly, that didn't happen. We had started conversations back in May to try and reinvigorate those conversations. In addition to preparing for separation, all of the agreements that went into that, the legislature forming a city. So it didn't really have legs at that point. So here we are. And reinvigorating those conversations to try and identify a way forward. Just add to that the meeting that was supposed to be a joint meeting this spring was canceled. Although it was part of the discussion that supposed to be had this spring, but that meeting never took place. I have no idea what happened in that time. I don't recall. So we had a joint meeting schedule. It's one minute. My first part of the board. Yeah, I've been a while for sure. Right. And as Tracy said, the intent of the four month extension that we did provide was that we would work out. How all that was going to happen. We asked, we did ask for a joint meeting many months ago. And this is the first opportunity we've had to get together. And so, you know, we're very close to out of runway here. So I know with what we've talked about from the city council perspective is we like the original agreement. We like the original intent of that conversation of where we were going. That's where we're happy to continue with. So what I'm trying to do is figure out how to best have that as a change within this, within this draft. Thank you. Before we go into other public comments, I think that we've had sort of our say as to where, where perspective are where perspectives are where we feel what brought us to this point. Do you want to take that break for for public input? Is there more conversation from board? I don't know that I'm entirely clear. I know that I know where we are. I might be the only person, but I'm not sure. Are we saying that we're where we are and where we're comfortable with is with the four year continuing with the motion that with the motion we agreed to last November to end the contract for more years. And at the end, we would possibly have municipal takeover or possibly not. Is that what you're saying? Or is there, I'm not quite understand. What I'm saying is that with our previous conversations around having this come back under the purview of the municipalities is really where we were where we were headed where our conversations that we want to take this. Is it the select board's desire at the end? If we continue with the four year lease select board's desire at the end that we would absolutely have the municipalities take back control of the property. Is that what you're saying? No. Okay. That's why I'm seeing too very, I don't, you're saying this agreement. I'm not seeing, I don't see it. Right, right. So, and I don't think I, and I said, and Trace, and thanks for correcting me. I couldn't tell it was you or me who did the four year thing and you were right. I was trying to read the room as well. But as I said, I would look at to see if we couldn't come to a three tripartite agreement at the end of four years that we would then have municipal takeover of the facility. I might at least my thought was that wasn't being an absolute position, at least for me, but maybe it is for the other city council or something. I'm not sure. So, to be clear on something that we're not, we're not saying absolutely. No, we're not take it over. We're just not sure. It's, it's, it's still a possibility. Right. Absolutely. But it's not a. Okay. It sounds to me like Andrew is saying that the city says we absolutely want to take it over and the select board is saying, well, we want to work on the issues that are there. We want to understand what it really means to us to take the time that we need to understand what it's all we can do it successfully. Rather than trying to cram all that into the three months in two days, right? Okay. George, the initial. And we're coming back to that initial resolution. The initial resolution did include municipal management at the end with the formation of a business plan. And a transition. The resolution. The original resolution after our discussion that we were talking about was it three years? Was it four years? The original resolution appears to read that the select board offer a lease agreement to the tree farm management group for years. And that Essex Parks and Recreation and Essex Junction Recreation and Parks. Assume the management of the tree farm facility thereafter with the understanding that the lease agreement would need to be developed with that transition plan and business plan. There was a lot of talk about coming up with a business plan for how that would actually look. Okay. I think there's some public comment and question as to whether EGRP could actually and EPR could manage that. But within that framework, you could still envision having a third party operate the operate the property. You could still say municipal control, but with the third party actually doing the opera, they could still be there. Nothing how that works. I'm not seeing anything. Okay. Yeah. Aside from, you know, contracting for services, maybe, you know, if I'm not sure what service would be left over if the municipalities are handling the programming and the scheduling. Right. So, George, you're right. There isn't an agreement as to where that end path is and what the end result is. Right. So that's your articulation was spot on. Okay. There isn't agreement. Yeah. So if I was saying that there is and then I apologize. That's no problem. No problem. Great. There's a question real quick about the hand in the room. It's not Kendall Chamberlain. No, I can't see the, I can't see anybody. So I'm just curious. Yeah. Kendall and speak. No, I keep trying to go back and forth between. I didn't pull. I don't know who's. Yeah. Sorry. It's kind of tricky when you're doing. Sure. Appreciate that. So it sounds like the thing that we're going to need to try to figure out is how do we resolve that difference of where we're trying to go and what our desire and goal is. Back in our city council. That's what we had discussed and where we had settled. It sounds like you. You all have settled on a knot. So. Sorry. That sounds like that's where we are. I guess I don't want to. I like when I asked this. And so I apologize. It comes across that way. But why is with the city with all you have to do informing the new city? Are you in such a hurry to take over the tree fair? It's not that they were in a hurry. We're not asking to. Take this agreement and turn it into a one year agreement. We're going to make it effective as of the new calendar here. So I would ask for members of the public if you could please mute yourself until I've been called upon. Please. And thank you. Just for clarification. Sorry. I don't want to. So yes. It sounds like the city council's stance is yes. You absolutely want it under me. Management. But for a clarification. Saying. It sounds like the select board does not. Is is inaccurate. The select board stances. We don't know. It could be. It could not be. But that's what that runway gives us time. To have these conversations in plan four one way or the other. So just a minor. Clarification. I don't want you to think that we're absolutely. No, we don't want. You know, municipal management. It's just that. Many things have changed. And we would just like some. Like I said, some runway to. To think about it and have these discussions collaboratively to identify. Where do we go and how do we get there? It's been a lot of back and forth dates. Can you just reiterate to me that the timeline. I just thought I'd already say the end of the. Fiscal year. Voted on for. December 31st. We're talking on January 1st or. Would it be a four year. And then consideration of. I guess I don't understand that. Yeah. Don was asking what the. The rush is from the city council without having this become a municipal managed. Endeavor. And the response was up there. We're not trying to rush anything or make that faster. But rather we're trying to maintain that end goal of. The end goal is to have the city and municipally maintained. Park entity. Just like every other park within both the. The town of the city. In four years. So. To that's what the original intent or what the original motion was. So there was a, there was a proposed schedule. Which I don't think is. Was included. I didn't see it in the packet. I don't think it's an area. Did I just not. The one that said. Financial takeover of this state, but you know, it was. There was a, there was a schedule. That was proposed. And. The, the rate at that, which that schedule is moving is set. And that proposal. Again, it's again, I think it's in the packet. I think it might be. It says there's following recommended terms. Says. 1124. 23 seasons. At the end of the 22 season, the tree farm would hand over all physical financial assets and municipalities. And it says 1123, which would be just coming January. The municipality stuff. Sure. It's a fiscal year for the property. And that. Expenses related to tree farm. Got to be managed by municipalities as well. As directed by tree farm until 1231. Which would be the coming year. So in the packet ether, you want to page three. I'm on page one. On. On the. So I'm not sure our packet is the same. I'm on. I'm on your packet. This is sorry. It says, okay. So page one of the, I don't have a page three of 40. Yeah. I just have one of the, of the. Right. One of three. And this, it's different. Different different. Put together. Right. Page three of 40. I think is where he is at the bottom. Recommended terms. Yes. Is the following where the recommended terms. Cause that's what I was reading. And that's kind of. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Recommended terms. Cause that's what I was reading. And that's kind of why I asked. About. The timeline because this timeline is like effective immediately. Well, this, you know, this is from back in. November. So this would. Not obviously, I guess this would need to. Be adjusted because we haven't done anything essentially since. So. I guess. In that, in that scenario, which we're not necessarily saying. And then I also had, I also had the same concerns. I think we shared as a board was with the. With the, with the contract. And they're terminating the contract. You know, it was fully written in there and about the transformation. Or the transition. Period. You know. Where is that part of it? The MOU says a four year. We needed to start having discussions with the third party. And 2018. About the next contract. About the next. But not about whether to extend it or anything like that. Just. Talk with them. In that time period. So there's no stipulation that says that you have to before termination that you have to give them a four year leeway. It's just an inference being taken from the statement. I, I, I don't, I can't offer a legal opinion as to what that means. You know, if you don't, if you miss a, a date in the MOU like that, does it, does it imply that. I don't, I don't know what it implies. Not a, I'm asking for your people opinion. I was just asking about your opinion. My, my thought is that we owe them four years of notice. Because that was the intent of the MOU and. You know. I was bringing it up late. I mean, it's like. It's like I have a contract with Greg Dagon over there. I miss one of the, one of the dates that I have in it. Then it's, you know, it's not his fault. Yeah, I, I think it's difficult. Oh, I see. I don't know. I don't want this to come off as crass or too hard or anything, but I, I think it's difficult for us to talk about the intent of the MMP of the MOU from 2010. When George is the only person in the room who was there. But I think George might be able to speak to the intent. I mean, the MESS were. Yeah. That would be a bad idea. Because you've already seen how poor my memory is. Just like a couple of months ago. But anyway. I think you end up using the words that are on the page. Yeah. And somebody's going to have to interpret them. And my, my interpretation is in, you know, others could interpret it other ways, I'm sure. Great. Well, I think in that respect, if I can, in that respect, we put them on notice November of last year. So with that resolution, if that's what you're saying. So that means four years from November. It's the four years. If we're going to give them notice, whether we gave them a letter saying, this is what's going on or this isn't, I guess. Yeah. What that means and what the responsibilities are from this. I just wanted to put comment about that because I'm kind of trying to read through all this and interpret it all to myself. And what kind of hung up, I hung up on was a contract extension is extending the current terms and not a new contract. In my opinion, I don't know if that's right or wrong. But as I read all this, I was thinking about the dates and things. And when we extended the contract, we extended the existing terms of the contract with known articulations, we just simply moved it on for now a year. As the contract was written originally as well as extended in my opinion. So in some way, it feels like we're spinning our wheels. If I'm dealing with one feeling that way at this time. Would it be helpful if we went through the changes that are in the MOU to identify where we do have agreement so we know where we don't. So now we can try to limit this conversation a little bit. Yeah, I guess we can do that. I guess, or I'm hoping to look at Bob and I'm not sure who made the, who made the changes. Yeah, I don't know. Changes. There's, I mean, I see. Yeah. There's, there's comments, right? Who did that? Was that okay? Okay. Thanks. I just wonder where it came from. So I think in general, it's certainly all of the read it. I think we don't, I think we're on the same page and had to deal with that. I think we also did, do that and change the city. I think that we also didn't necessarily make that one at all. I appreciate that. Same. The school district name. I'm not sure of the difference. I think rewording. It sounds like, sounds like it was worded as if the urges from the state was in the future. Let's hope to put you with another entity. Ask a quick question, please. The initial purchase in terms of the first handover from the state to this village in the town has expired. Are we under any requirement to keep any language from the previous semi? There's nothing deeded in this that says any of this, right? Is there, sorry, is there anything specific to this parcel and a deed, lean or otherwise, that means that any of this has to remain? So the MOU remains in perpetuity until we mutually agree to change it or the parcel is subdivided. Okay, so there's nothing, so as long as we agree to change something, we agree to change it. We can, but again, I don't know, I'm not fully cognizant or fully understand all of the terms imposed by the state. So I can't say that we can change absolutely everything. I don't know, I don't know how all that things together. We should probably find that out eventually. If there's anything, right. Except for the next part where it says the town and city are named as tenants in common in the deed, that seems to be fixed. You say that again? The next section being, you know, the town and city are named as tenants in common in the deed, that's definitely fixed. Yeah, the MOU can't change the deed. Right, so with the purpose of this MOU, we provide the orderly efficient management, the ability and performance of planned lease agreement. Does it need to say in performance with the plan lease agreement or is the purpose to have an orderly efficient management and oversight facility? All right, because this applies again, but like it's been written as if the lease agreement isn't true. Okay, right. I think it's implied if we come up with a lease agreement as a joint owner that what we're doing is to make sure we're in conformance with the lease agreement we're executing. I don't see how that would be required to be in there. So rather than try to rewrite this thing in this meeting, should we each look at this in detail and try to make proposals for changes? And as we've done agreements in the past, I think it's gonna be tough to Smith this live here. Certainly can, trying to respect the date of September 28th. Yeah, well, but he asked for a meeting back in April or May. Yep, yeah, that's a big issue, right? What happens to say the thing, maybe we need to talk about what happens if we don't come to agreement by December 31st. No, we don't, I agree with the pre-farm management. I think we could all speculate, but maybe not a big point. Yeah, so if we do that, I guess the city council will need to prioritize at our next meeting to take a pass. Or let me rephrase, would you like us to take a pass to have our proposals or our proposed changes to this for them to review at a yourself meeting? So this is an initial proposed pass by town staff. So yeah, Karen, do you wanna have a comment? Yeah, if I may, just a suggestion for tonight. I mean, this is obviously, this is the draft form of the town staff. I don't know if anything significant could be changed in there. I don't know if I'm wrong, but the big question for us has been a staff that the single nations about third party groups that the 10 still hold. It sounds like it's probably not gonna be answered that tonight possible suggestion is of worth getting to attend to your session later on tonight. Talk about what the terms of the lease might look like and see that there's some sort of background for the next school to do this. It sounds like the direction is not gonna be anything out of the discussion about the lease. I think I'll back out to see where they're looking to wait and decide to see the adjustment. I'm okay with that. City council or select board members, anything? Can we still hear from the public though that's been waiting to speak? Sure, absolutely. I just wanted to make sure that that was the path that the boards were okay taking before we did that. Not seeing anything different online either. So if we do that, then what we can do is take a public comment on the topic. If you're okay with it, take a public comment on the topic. And then our next agenda item that we've also in the second session. Sorry. I believe our next. Both of the next, yeah, the other. Agenda item is business assignments also. It's definitely a discussion discussion. So then just go through, have the public comments hold off on the other items, finish off the consent agenda, reading file, language, executive session. Yes. Great. So there's no disagreement from members of the boards. Great. So then we can turn things over into the public for public comments. I know Betsy, you've been waiting the longest with your hand up patiently. Thank you for that. So why don't you go ahead and pick some off. Thank you very much, Andrew. So I remember last November and that you all voted yes for this. So we have a contract basically in MOU. And then- Just a moment. We have an echo in the room that I don't know about anybody else, but I'm not quite understanding. So hold on a moment. I think we'll take one of the TVs. Okay. There we go. I'll let it again. Okay. I remember last November when this vote happened it was a unanimous vote. And after the vote you said you were going to get together so that you could make a list of objective criteria for the evaluation of the chief farm management group so that you would know, you could say, yes, they're doing a great job or well, this is what you did wrong because you had to give them information for why you were not going to continue their contract. And that's what I remember about that. But it seems like what you're doing now is you're opening another part of a contract up because this is like a new negotiation of terms with this conversation that I'm listening to. Is that correct? That's what you're doing? Renegotiating it? We have a four year contract with this, a four year MOU. But you want to renegotiate this now. Is that correct? So Betsy, we only extended the contract to the end of this calendar year. I thought it was for four years. No, it was only until the end of this year. I'll go back to the moment. Thank you. Not seeing any other hands up in Zoom rules. Any members of the public which speak to this item that are in the room? Okay, any? So then it has such that next business item 6B would also be an executive session which would take us into the consent items. I think they're all for the city council. So city council, I maintain the motion to approve the consent agenda. I move we can, we approve the consent agenda. I'll second. Thank you, Raj. Thank you, George. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. I'll say nay. I pass unanimously. Thank you all. The reading file. And if there are board member comments. Just one comment. The construction site at 195, 197 Pearl. If we could make another reminder, I think they got a formal letter reminder. If we could make another reminder to not block the sidewalk, one of our busiest roads with no other options for pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchairs, strollers has been blocked every morning this week for periods of time. It would be great if they need to make deliveries and do other things for more than a couple minutes that they arrange for or they need to arrange to safely close the lane. But now students use it, people with disabilities use it. It's unfortunate for them, I realize, but can't keep calling PD on them. Great. Thank you, Raj. Tracy, saw your hand. I didn't notice this before now, but in the packet, the check warrants are the town of Essex accounts payable? So I'm curious whether that was a misclassification that it's for city council only or if it was included by mistake? It's just the number that's used and the drop-page accounts and all that. It's a merged, because we have the merged finance systems under the account numbers, if you look under account where it says 210, everything beginning with a 2 is us, everything beginning with a 1 is you. Greg Marguerite, am I wrong on that? Yes. Okay. So let's just... Hold on. Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Yeah. Yeah. I was gonna say that. No, we... Check that box. Yeah. That's come up before on hours wondering, wait, why are we approving the town's finances? That's not right. Thank you. As long as we're taking board member comments, I wanna mention that there's the Explorer Essex event coming up this weekend. I'd like to invite all of you to come and have a good time. Thank you, Greg. George. Yeah, I know our new manager is looking for stuff to do, so I wanna give her a couple of things. And so I would like to have, not right away, but sometime on an upcoming agenda, two issues. One, to begin the conversation of what we're gonna do with the Public Works Department and replacing or renovating or whatever we're gonna do with that building. I would like to begin to put a stake in the ground about how we're gonna approach that, particularly with the budget season coming up. And number two, I would like to have an architect's report about this building and get us back on track for the renovation of Lincoln Hall. I'd like to start with, again, to go back and have John Alden's report about the space needs in this building and potentially hopefully with John coming here so we can discuss it with him. Yeah, thank you. They're all upcoming. But along that note, real quick. Regina, this is your first city council meeting as the city manager. Thank you. I appreciate you being here. Thank you for having me. Yes. Very excited. Must also like to welcome you on the top six. Looking forward to working with you. Thank you very much. Exciting to be here. I've seen the hands up on our members who are virtual. So for these new business items, I'm assuming six B may be faster. And so should we prioritize that conversation so that that way our police chief can have their evening and then go into tree farm? Yep. While I pull that up, anybody have we see more for six B? Okay. I move the select board and city council make a specific finding that general public knowledge of contracts would take, would place the town and city at a substantial disadvantage. Can I get a second from city council? I'll second. I'll second. George, all in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed we say nay. Raise pass unanimously. I move the select board city council. Oh, sorry. I shouldn't always speak for myself. I moved it. Quick minute. City council enter the executive section to discuss contracts pursuant to one VSA section 313A1A to include the city council, town, city manager and police chief. I guess I can't do that. You can include either board or town manager. City council, select board, town manager, city manager, deputy town manager and police chief if you want, Rick. Not for the first part. We're gonna. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Rog. Second? I'll second. Thank you, George. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed we say nay unanimously. Thank you all. Okay. I need similar motions from the select board. Okay, so you have enough? I do. I move that the select board make the specific finding the general public knowledge of contracts would place the town at a substantial disadvantage. Thank you, Tracy. You have a second? Second. Thank you, Ethan. The discussion was in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? That's just five zero. I move that the select board enter into executive session to discuss contracts pursuant to one VSA 313A1A to include the city council, town manager, city manager, deputy town manager and police chief. Second. Tracy, if you're Ethan and you've heard the discussion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Any motion passes? Five zero. Great. Thank you all. So if you weren't named, you don't mind. So do you want to do the little ones for the other one too? Thank you for the concession. Make a motion. Just think you said go ahead and make that for the other one. To make a motion for the other one. So if we don't come back in the open session to make a motion just to go back to the executive session. That would make sense though. Sure. You want to go first? Sorry, I feel like we're done. I do. I have one here. You got it? I don't have those. I think it's the right one. It's in the back, right? Yeah, good. Let me see if we can just make sure. That's good. Move that the select board enter executive session to discuss the negotiating or securing of real estate purchase or lease options in accordance with one VSA section 313A2 and to include the town manager, deputy town manager, director of parks and recreation, city council, city manager, director of extension, direction recreation and parks. You had it all promised. And our ones met. Okay, we have a second. Second. Thank you, Tracy. Further discussion. Please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, we should pass this time so don't. Can I get a similar motion from the city council? I move. I move to find the premature general public knowledge regarding contracts associated with the tree farm recreational facility would clearly place the city at a substantial disadvantage because the council is disclosing its negotiation strategy if it discusses the contract in terms. And I also move that we go into executive session to discuss contracts under the provisions of title one section 313A1 of the law statutes to negotiate or secure real estate purchase or lease options under title one section 313A2 of the law statutes and include Regina Mahoney, Brad Lach, Harlan Smith, members of the Essex Select Board, Greg Duggan, Margaret Ladd, Marie Ladd and Eli Baugh. Thank you, Raj. I'll second. Thank you, George. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? We say nay. Also passed unanimously. Thank you all. Did we miss one? Did we miss one? I'm looking. I don't see it under the recommendation section, but I'm double checking the. You're not going to just do it from me saying it. You can't just remember it. I could try, but it would be the best. His motion was Raj's second part. The first part. Right. Right. I'm only seeing one of your recommendations. I remember real estate needs the premature knowledge. I'm not sure we have the same thing that you do. I'm on page 5040. Yeah. Yeah. Page 5040 is what? There you go. I'm on page 41. You're on the second motion for 6B. So it's page 5040. If you're seeing the PDF. If you're concerned, you could make that motion from what I'm hearing from Greg is, it's not necessary. So if you all want to feel free, if you don't. You. Okay. Well, since you're supposed to do it before you do the other one. Yeah. Is it procedure fun? So my question is. These motions. I do not have. I just changed the language. Recommend emotions on five or 40 or. Saying that it would place the city of the town. Am I missing something? No town. Oh, I see. So I think. I can change the word. We don't need your suggestion that we don't need to make this decision. I think we're ready to go. Okay. So if you didn't hear your name. By seeing you, if you want to wait out in the hall, you are more than welcome to. Are we coming back to make a decision? I think we assume we. Might be for the tree farm might not be. Don't know. Yeah. So we may or may not be coming back. But. Yeah. So how do we do we have a. We have a break out. So we do that so they can still attend. Okay. Channel 17. You do. To break down. Yeah. Oh. Okay. So we don't have another room to go to. It's big enough. Yeah. All right. So we need to go another room. No, we don't. I don't have another room. We don't have a room big enough. If this. So. If you don't mind. Yeah. That'd be great. Thank you. The discussion from the select board. All those in favor, please say aye. Motion passes five zero. I didn't take a motion to adjourn. Make a motion to adjourn. Okay. Your second. First. Oh. Well, the select board. You already made it. Second. And available all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. That board adjourned. Council, I'm going to adjourn. I'll second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.