 All right, here we go. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. Seeing the presence of a quorum, I'm going to call. The August 2nd meeting of the governance organization legislation committee to order. And I'm going to be calling the roll to make sure each counselor can hear and be heard. Then grease more. Present. Michelle Miller. I'm present and Pat, I'll be coming in on my laptop shortly, but. Thank you. And Jennifer. Present. I still can't get rid of my second self. Hey, one of you can do the work. Office, you know, you can't. You exit her to her second self to the audience or something. Okay, let's get started because I want to end really on time or a little early. It's possible. So if the senior can do that, she will. 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 held 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. Via technological means. Members of the public can access the meeting via zoom or by telephone. And Lynn had a question about the agenda. So. I just want to go over that, Mandy. Are you ready to talk about the. The affirming care that reproductive and gender affirming care. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then I. I will go over the accessible trails. Resolution and we'll move into. The continuation of the annual route. Rules of procedure. There's going to be very short. Update. It can, and it can be held off to our next meeting if needed. So Mandy, do you want to. Start us off. Sure. The new draft is in the. In the packet. Pat, did you attend the meeting with the town attorney? I can't remember. No, I did not. Okay. Let me pull up my notes from that meeting. That's the. That will be helpful. So the, the town attorney. Paul was. Was kind enough to. Let the. Let us as sponsors Anna and I meet with the town attorney after Pat as GOL chair had sent the original draft off to the town attorney for legal review. And so Paul, Anna, myself. Lynn, you might have been there. I don't remember. We're, we're there along with the, it was Lauren Goldberg was there. And what Lauren basically said was that. That if this were reviewed by the attorney general, which it would not be because we're a city, not a town. That the attorney general might have concerns with. Some of our definitions as being not. Concrete enough, a little vague. Because there's a, it's a very broad set of definitions and all, but. Beyond that. Kp law. Lauren didn't necessarily say the attorney wouldn't attorney general wouldn't approve it. But that we need to look back at some of these things. You know, and. And some of the things she flagged were. Things like. Under the state public records laws. What can we or can we not, we can't really change the state public records laws. And so, you know, trying to do a definition that, that says you can't disclose it even if public records laws and all. So she talked about a lot of things like that. And things that didn't necessarily cover anything new outside of. State law. And then. You know. We asked about some of the sections that. Were similar to our sanctuary by law section. Particularly sections. Four and five of prohibitions C four and five and, you know. You know, They're similar to the sanctuary by law, which under town meeting the AG allowed to go through. And said they weren't in conflict with the state or constitution. And so, you know. Lauren didn't indicate that those were a problem. You know, and basically her conclusion was in many of these instances when we're doing this, the question would be our opponents litigious. You know, and what is the council's sort of. You know, level of willingness to go out on a limb. In, in the face that lawsuits might be filed. So not necessarily that any of this was against state law, but it's up against some of that. And is the council willing to. You know, be a vanguard and risk some of those lawsuits that, that would be, you know, sort of. Challenging, can we do this under state law or not? And I'll stop since I see Jennifer's hand, I'll answer that. And then I'll go forward with some of the things and then I'll talk about what we changed in response. So can I. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, so my, is that part of the concern, you know, I've been following the news in East Hampton. So that the mayor vetoed it and guess, and that's the concern about lawsuits. She mentioned that. Yeah, I think that's some of it. So the East Hampton ordinance, we based a lot of ours on East Hampton, although this new draft looks a lot different than East Hampton. We did not include some of the East Hampton provisions for that exact reason. Some of the posting and notification provisions regarding sending things to state, the state AG on CPCs, crisis pregnancy centers and they're not, you know, they're not, you know, they're not, they're not, they're not, they're not, they're deceptive practices and all that, that is not included in ours. And, you know, that I, when I read the newspaper articles on the mayor's veto and the reasonings, I felt a lot of her concerns went to those provisions, not necessarily the town staff provisions and those provisions are not in our bylaw. Cause we had some of those same concerns. We tried to keep it really focused on staff actions, the other stuff that, when in his bylaw in East Hampton added in. So Paul had some big concerns, his biggest concern was, was with the definition of Amherst official and we went over some of that and it is not changed. In our bylaw, because when we talked to Paul about it and we added some, some definitions of subcontractor to be clear about who a subcontractor is. And so, in terms of that was not in our original one contractor and subcontractor when we were referencing those for Amherst official. So we've added them in and the definitions we pulled are from our transfer, not transfer, tax incentive financing, the TIF and responsible employer bylaw. So we just pulled those. But, but we talked about the definition of Amherst official right now says that they have to be performing that they're performing Amherst official when they're performing work for the town or under a grant provided by the town. So if they're not doing the work under the grant, they're not an Amherst official for that other work, say for a grant or a subcontractor and all. And so that alleviated some of his concerns about the broadness of the definition of Amherst official. You know, and then, and then he actually asked us why we were excluding the school committee or library trustees. Lauren said, you know, we said, because we weren't sure we had the right to do anything and Lauren actually responded that the council has the right to adopt bylaws that generally apply to everyone in town. So, so we've actually removed the exclusion of school committee and library employees under the direction of the school committee or library trustees. You know, and then Lauren recommended we come out stronger in the purpose because it's really the rationale for why the school is so important. So we've modified that. So now I'll go through sort of some of the bigger modifications because you don't have a track changes version. The purpose is modified to be a little bit stronger and state more clearly what the purpose of the bylaw is for. We've added definitions for contractor and subcontractor. In particular, because of later changes down in the bylaw, the prohibitions are basically the same, although we've matched them as close as possible to the East Hampton, the newest East Hampton proposal, in that the goal was that one has also had legal review. And so it gives us that extra layer of legal review on that. We also eliminated some things for, we cleaned up the language for section C one, two and three. Section C six is just brought out to apply universally. I think it was found in sections four and five separately. And so we're not repeating. Section D is a new section. And this, this came this additional requirements for contractors and grant recipients. This is a mirror of that tax increment financing by law in a sense that says for the contractors, we have to have when you're accepting a grant or contract or contract under the town procurement laws. Here's some language that needs to go into those awards. So those contracts or grant award languages for acceptance of it. And which was sort of a recommendation from the talking to of splitting out the Amherst officials that are employees and elected officials from the Amherst officials and our definitions that are really contractors or subcontractors. It just, it creates another layer of yes, this applies to you, but here is how it applies to you. You know, so it's essentially saying put this language in the contract, which then then is mirrored down in the violation section of what a violation is, and then the remedies for employees and elected officials is slightly different than the remedies for contractors and subcontractors and grant recipients. In that sense. So that is the changes we've tried to clarify the difference between what can happen if you're a contractor that violates this. There's a couple of different, you know, the contract can be voided again, much of that language is pulled from prior bylaws that we have adopted. And then adopted for these bylaws. I know it's complicated. Not that much. A lot less complicated than our zoning supposedly. Any questions. Yeah, I'd actually like to go back to the contractor subcontractor period. I just want to review the language before we go on because I'm assuming that would mean, for example, if we gave CDBG money or money to a contractor or subcontractor, that this, you know, if they were doing this kind of work, that they would then be subject to this at some level. And I just want to make sure that it's as clear. Could you make it a tad larger? I have a hard copy, I think, but it's easier to work from the screen. Thank you. Thank you. You know, it's interesting. I would assume. Any healthcare organization, I mean, I'm glad we have this language in here, but I would assume that any healthcare organization could not provide that kind of information anyway. It's protected by other laws as well. Is there anybody that disagrees with that or sees it any differently? I'm not saying we should take this out. I just want to make sure it's consistent with what. General, you know, privacy laws. Yeah, so we talked a little bit about that. And the HIPAA requirements for healthcare contractors, you know, and healthcare providers would, would apply, right? But, but as we know from prior bylaws relating to CPCs, if they're not technically healthcare providers, HIPAA doesn't apply in a sense. And so, you know, some of the examples we've given, we're contractors working on school. You know, just school building issues or school projects or HVAC systems or something who, or in the bank center, who are not the healthcare providers, but see who's coming in. And then it's their information. You know, and maybe one of them takes a picture. You know, it's that information that, that things like this would apply to that HIPAA does not necessarily apply to, you know, that, that type of knowledge sees a child going into a bathroom that they don't think complies with the gender at birth. One of, one of the examples we asked the attorney or, or that we've thought of is there was a newspaper article recently as to whether can we do some of this with contractors, right? There's a newspaper article recently about a state contractor who's, who one of the, I don't know whether it was a subs or an employee of the contractor was displaying a Confederate flag on I think route two and someone complained and state contracts actually prohibit Confederate flags from being displayed on state contractor by state contractors. And so we were sort of relating some of this to that, that the contracts can actually prohibit certain things that you don't necessarily think could be prohibited. But it's stuff like that. It's not necessarily HIPAA related material because they might not be subject to HIPAA. Go ahead, Lynn. It's, yeah, thank you. It's in this kind of area. I have to tell you, I support this bylaw. That's not my question. It's in this kind of area that I do think we find ourselves into the gray areas, which is often where you run into the critical issues. And that's why I particularly wanted to go to this and pursue the issue of whether or not we think this is contrary to state law. It doesn't seem that the attorney is saying that it's contrary to state law. So I'm not sure why you think it. Now we haven't had the revisions reviewed again, have we, Mandy So I sent them when I sent them off to Pat for the packet, I also CC Paul, and I don't know whether, you know, with a in case he wants to send these off again. I don't know whether he did but but he does have a copy of them I just don't know what he did with that copy. Okay, I may at some point suggest that I, let's see what others have to say I may suggest that we get another legal review. Michelle. Thank you. I'm on my laptop now. It's not obvious. I could you Mandy just say what you said again about Lawrence advice that we can write bylaws that affect the school and the library I thought that's what I heard you say but I was on my phone. So, so yeah, let me go back to my notes on that. You know, Lauren actually asked us why were we excluding the school committee and library trustees and we said you know that's typically how the Charter is written and all of that and her response was the council has a right to adopt bylaws that apply to everyone. But then the note I have here is it could be tricky because you know this is really employees it's implying to much more than general public right this is really a employee contractor focused bylaw. So the note I have here says it could be tricky but this is this is where it's kind of weird if we're not really looking to enforce it if it's more of a statement bylaw than anything of this is our town values this is what we expect. We can adopt it knowing that other entities might not follow it. But, you know, so, so I, it's one of those. She was she was surprised we had excluded the library. You know, the, the languages except for the definition of town of Amherst we had in there except those under the jurisdiction of the school committee regional school committee or library test trustees and she's like why are you doing that. And so we explained and she said you know it could be tricky but you should try it almost is sort of what Anna and I came away from that discussion with that don't don't shy away from that in a bylaw because a bylaw is a law and we're the legislative body so we can adopt those laws. And so we just deleted it. So just to follow up I feel like there's been some concern about that in other measures that we've looked at, and maybe in the future. So I just wanted to make sure that we're not setting a precedent that we're not comfortable following through. I don't understand this is a bylaw as opposed to a resolution or something else but we might just want to think that through a little bit for, for, especially for what could come forward in the future. Okay. Mandy, do you have a response or anything that you want to add before I won't win. I don't necessarily I would say I would leave it up to you know it on and I were will take it as broad as we want but if the council is concerned about that we're happy to. I would be fine with adding that phrase back into the definition it's not something that you know we have a strong opinion on. We were surprised the attorney. So let's think about it. So, I take GOLs recommendations on that one. I think my intent I are up on this because of both East Hampton and everything going on in Amherst. So I'm going to strongly urge that we, in fact, do have one more legal review for the changes and that there also be a consultation with the school committee or superintendent and the head of the Jones library or the library trustees. Just, I'm. That's all I'm having anything else to say, I think that people can understand where I'm coming from. Thanks. So, Mandy, how are you responding to that because in some ways I, I think that it is an important thing for us to get another clarification on the changes so perhaps we should make a motion. So, so legal review. I'm always supportive of that so I we don't have a problem with sending it back I don't know whether that needs another motion or just a specific request from Pat, I'm happy either way, right. I think it would be better to go to Paul with a hey GOL would like to see another legal review of the most recent track. If there's specific questions. I would recommend if we send it off the committee's had time to discuss and think about it that maybe we want to send specific questions off to. I've found that in CRC when we do that that's helpful, you know, so if the question is, you know, Lynn you've had some questions about contractors. There's questions about the school committee, regional committee, you know, library trustees all of that. That maybe we ask some specific questions. I would, in terms of the other half of Lynn's comment, I would just want more clarification as to what we would be consulting. You know, asking the school committee or superintendent or the trustees or the library director like what, what are we going to them with. Is it a question of do they support this proposal or is it would they oppose it or is it, do they not want themselves sub their employees subject it like I would just ask for more clarification as to what we're talking to them about. This is the school superintendent has just released a extensive plan, regarding LGBTQ for the fall and the coming year, and I want to make sure that whatever we do is consistent with the plan vice versa. More my concern than anything when it comes to the library, I, you know, we, every library in the country is going through being hit up for things like banning books. I don't agree with that. But this, I, it just seems to me that we want to make sure that they feel prepared to be in compliance with this bylaw. That would be my bottom, my bottom line and for the schools that it's consistent with where the leadership of the school is trying to go with regarding their own LGBTQ and other student rights and protections. It seems to me after having read what the superintendent is proposing. There is a real balance or shared values and ethics between what he's proposing and this bylaw so I, I don't disagree with that I just think it is, it's professionally sound, given the fact that he and his staff are thoroughly knowledgeable about the plan that has been put forward and understand all of it and so forth and to have their eyes look at this because they know their plan is a way of saying, yeah, this is totally consistent rather than us say, gee it seems consistent. Jennifer. I agree that it seems that we should, you know, kind of run it by or, you know, share it with the library. Excuse me and the school, but let's say the library were to say they weren't comfortable. I mean, we would, you know, would we, we do it, I would imagine that we would, you know, would we rethink it or I would think we would advocate for them. You know, to embrace it and want to be in compliance. I guess that's just my question. Are we giving them the option not to want to be in compliance. My purpose is not to say, will you will you do this and be in compliance. It's to say, as this bylaw is written to have questions about how you can be in compliance. Okay, any further wording. It's trying to be collegial in terms of a very important statement of the town that we want all of our town agencies and arms to comply with. That's all it's a it's collegial measure it's not a punitive measure. Okay. Thank you. Michelle. Yeah, I really support what Lynn just said and also, are there any other bylaws that anyone's aware of that have extended to the school or the library and if there are not. I do think that we're taking a step that, you know, with this new form of government might be new, or something that we have not done before and just clarifying with counselors and the public that we do have the legal right as a legislative body of the of the town to create a bylaw that does extend to those other departments, I think would be important. I don't know and anyone has an answer on whether we have other bylaws that do that, or if this is a breaking ground in that way. I'm thinking about stuff like responsible employer, you know, as far as in my naive brain bylaws are, you know, that there is a requirement that everyone comply with the bylaw, the the sections of a bylaw, whether they're resident or whether they're a staff member so I'm not, I guess I don't feel the driver concern, but it's, I don't know. Will you say more about that Pat okay maybe you're helping me understand. I think I was just starting to go oh okay because I guess I'm just not quite as familiar with bylaws as maybe others are so just like I'm gonna jump to Mandy and then Lynn and then I'll come back in if they, if you need me to. Okay, Mandy and then. I'm not sure I have a great answer but but going to I'm looking at bylaws now right so so most of our bylaws are outward facing right they are. I think about a noise bylaw or, or, you know, some, I have, let's see, so, you know, you know, we've got bylaws regarding, you know, conduct on public ways activities and amusements parking animal regulation discharge of firearms right many bylaws don't specifically tell input aren't inward facing their outward towards residents and people doing stuff in our town right. Then we have a couple of bylaws that are what I would call inward facing bylaws. You know, the responsible employer one tax increment financing is another sort of directing our executives in a sense on how they need to do their job as a legislature doing it that way right that's by adopting bylaws that's how we can do that if. And so some of those things responsible I talked about responsible employer sanctuary communities is sort of one of those two right where the police department shall not do, you know, shall not hold shall not offer shall not you know all of those. So I was looking up the responsible employer one. The definitions do not contain a definition of town of Amherst. And that's normally where we define what town of Amherst means. And so, in that one when we talk about municipal contracts whenever the town of Amherst is procuring construction services subject to these things, you could argue that actually applies to all town of Amherst construction contracts not just those within the general that we would normally think of so you could without a definition that excludes, except those portions of the government under the control of the library trustees or the school committee. That means that that responsible employer could be argued that it actually does apply to any contracts, even done by any town by the town of Amherst now the regional school committee is completely different and the regional is different because that's not a town of Amherst entity that is above the town of Amherst that's a regional entity in a sense so that one, if the regional school committee is doing a contract or the region is doing a contract for services. So that's considered a municipal construction contract whether or not we've excluded it specifically from a definition of the town of Amherst because they're not part of the town of Amherst, which is, which is weird. So you could look at the responsible employer and given that we have not defined town of Amherst to exclude employees or entities departments under the control of the trustees or the school committee. That could be argued then that the responsible employer definition has the responsible employer bylaw actually requires the school committee and the library contracts to also comply with it not just contracts that the town manager manages. So I think that answers your question. Michelle that we have done some of this in the past whether we made that specific choice, I guess is a different question right that question did not come up when we were three years ago discussing responsible employer. So, you know, I could go through and look at some of the others I don't, I haven't read the sanctuary bylaw one in recently. So, I'd have to reread that one to look to see if it really just applies to the police department or town officials in general, I don't know how general it was Pat. Yeah, I'm trying to remember because I really worked on that. And I can't right now. But my feeling was it was directed at the police department, but also other town officials, but I would also have to check. It's been a long time. Michelle I'm going to jump to Lynn and unless you go ahead to Lynn. Thanks for that quick review Mandy Joe that was, and I, my recollection is that in no bylaw that we have passed have we ever signaled out or not signaled out the school and the library. And the only thing I would just add to what Mandy Joe has said is to you know if you look at this in the big picture, there's federal laws, there's state laws, there's local laws. These local laws can never require more can never be in violation of a state law. State law can't be in violation of a federal law. So the real issue in my mind goes back to what I requested earlier and that is in a collegial manner we just share this with the schools and library. Can I say something Lynn you said state local laws can't be stricter. They can be stricter. Yeah, that's what they can't be less. Yeah, right. Okay. Absolutely. Yeah, and I think, yeah, I heard you say it differently so I wanted to start it to say it that way. Yeah. So where are we with this folks. It seems to me that I could contact Paul with a specific request to have KP law look at any changes and then we could set up we could invite the school committee or school people or library trustee representative to meet with us in GL. Mandy. I just wanted to follow up I finally found the sanctuary by law and it doesn't it doesn't define town department or anything but one of its prohibitions is to the extent permissible by law, a town department or officer or employee of a town department shall not perform functions of an immigration officer pursuant blah, blah, blah, and then the other one is no employee or agent of the town shall cooperate with or enforce any federal program requiring registration blah, blah, blah. So that one also does not split out. It includes all town departments it doesn't exclude town departments not under the control of the town manager. Right. I mean because again it's that kind of thing where you're over here you take pictures you do something that you're not you know. So, I'd like to, I don't think we need a motion. I would like to ask you as the chair of this committee to call and have Paul ask for the additional legal review and have Paul contact the superintendent of schools and the head of the Jones library director of the Jones library and, you know, get back to us with any, you know concerns or issues they may have that we don't take any more of a big deal of that about that than necessary. I will do that. Okay, I'm and come back to us as soon as possible but you know because we're all sitting on this one. Okay, thanks. Okay, anybody else on this otherwise I'm going to go to the accessible trails resolution. And Okay, I think we can. I think I can you pull that up and I have already a change I want to make. So I am a sponsor of this along with the disability access advisor committee and I'd love to go down to the third whereas that talks about the 7.5 miles. Yeah, this is not. Now see I put in a new copy. Oh, I didn't know you put in a new copy let me grab that. Yeah, okay. Yeah, because I did some work on it. Mandy, we can start even before that. No, you go I think you're going to have a change to that third paragraph that I have so do yours. Yeah, I just put my hand up to go after you. Okay. If you don't like my change you can suggest another one. Can, yeah, is. Okay, I'm getting it. Thank you very much. And I'll post this revised copy in the packet. The revised copy is in the packet I put it in the packet. Maybe in SharePoint but not on the website. Oh, okay. I hate doing all this stuff. You don't have to do it you just have to let me know. I know. I'm sorry. Right now it says whereas Massachusetts has a sear severe lack of unpaid accessible recreation to a trail with only 7.5 miles appearing to be accessible in both our state parks. And it really should read whereas Massachusetts has a severe lack of unpaid accessible recreation trails with only 7.5 miles of the 4000 miles of unpaid accessible. It's amazing. Can you repeat a 4000 miles. 4000 miles of unpaved hiking. Trails. That are universally accessible. We know what our path if you don't mind. Sorry to jump ahead. I just I'm looking at the SharePoint version. And it does not include this. 4000 miles. No, I'm adding that. Oh, you're asking. Okay, got it. This is before one in SharePoint is the most up to date other than what you're going to ask. Yes. Okay, great. Universe. Listed as universally accessible maybe. I don't know. We'll go to Mandy because it's still rocky. I think that one's better. I was just going to add the phrase to the end of the original version. I assumed it was supposed to have in both our state parks and on conservation lands in our cities and town, but I like better. She's the sponsor. So. Yeah, I'm going to go with the 4000. Yeah. Lynn. You have something else, Mandy. Oh, I have a couple of other things. It needs a title. Oh gosh, somebody gave it one. So the title that we normally use for things like this are resolution in support of you. You quoted an act down below. So. The S466 and H769. Right. Expanding access to trails for people of all abilities. You can just copy it from. From the now, therefore. Thank you, dear. I did. I did this so fast and I apologize because. Yeah, that's great. Yeah, so I, I, that one. And then when Athena's done with that. Just a few minor things and then one bigger one. The second, whereas. I thought, but before after disabling condition in the third line, the and. I think as an extraneous and I think it just needs. A little bit more time. And then I would delete the comma after condition. Because I think it's the third thing in a list of four. And then I would delete the comma after disability because I think that third list is countless. Others have mobility limiting conditions that aren't considered a disability or are recovering from injury or illness. I think is the third. Yeah. List of the four. Two, whereas is later that starts whereas current. Extraneous. Yes, it is. Anything else. Two later. Inadequate should be. Not capitalized, but the one below that should be capitalized because the all persons trails, I think is a reference. Name. Name. And then. Oh wait, two more things. Go for it. The last whereas. Yep. The second line users with disabling conditions and adopting a requirement. I don't think the buy is necessary. Okay. Feel free to roll me. The current last be it further resolved has one semi colon after joint committee on environment, national, natural resources that should just be a comma. Commas and semi colons. The second. Yes. Yeah. Oh. On the third line. Yeah. That one. And then I always recommend adding. Another be it further resolved. About who the clerk sends it to. Oh, right. Right. So I've got the list. It would be be it further resolved that the clerk of the Amherstown council. Shall cause a copy of this resolution to be sent to, and I'll wait for Athena to catch up. I made the list. Corrected if you don't like it, Pat. Based on your be it resolved based on the results. Yeah. Sent to governor more here Lee. State Senator Joanne Coma Ferd. State representative Mindy Dom. The members of the joint committee on environment and natural resources. Department of conservation and recreation commissioner. Brian or ego and I'll. Call his name. Incidentally, I've served on an MMA. Committee with him. So it's Brian and a Rigo is a R R I G O. Coma and the members of the Massachusetts recreation trail advisory board. Which is listed above. And should we also send. Something to Robert Marion, the. Speaker of the house. Senate, Senate. President of the Senate and Speaker of the house. I missed those. They would be listed after more. Healy. Yeah. The, the, yeah. Senate president. Those are my changes. Pat. Yeah. No, I thank you. And I should have known to put that there. Thank you. Senate president and. Speaker of the house of representatives. Robert Marion. I am. Do you want to name the Senate president as well? Oops. Yeah, Karen. Sorry, sorry. Yeah, yeah. I'm not trying to rush you. Okay. Thank you, Mandy. Yeah. I want to go back to the definition. Way back up in the top third paragraph, I think it is. And it says paved trails. And yet, for instance, if you go to the Conti trails. They are considered accessible, but they're not paved. They're gravel finish. This says unpaved accessible. Yeah, but that those would be unpaved. Have a severe lack of unpaved. Excessive. Okay. Got it. Thank you. And then the other thing is there seems to be a spacing problem. In some of the paragraphs. Sometimes it looks like one and a half. Other times it looks like. Yeah. Okay. That's all. Thank you. Yeah. And I've seen if you could take care of that because I. Okay. Is there anything else on this? And I do apologize for the sloppy nature of the. Submission. Please take. Jennifer's comment while I'm. Oh, I'm sorry, Jennifer. I didn't see it. I was watching. So I have a question. I don't know if this is, if I should raise it after we vote on this, or if it should be raised in a council meeting, because it's not really a GOL conversation. But I was just, I have to say, I was confused. And it has to do with. Whether the council liaison to a committee or board. Can sponsor, you know, a bylaw or resolution. I don't have any issue with it at all. I was asked by the committee to do this. Yeah. No, I have no issue with it at all. It's just that he came up. When we, we discussed it, I think in the spring, and I was confused by this because we were told. Go ahead. Yeah. I'm just wondering, because I thought we were told that. If a counselor is a liaison to a committee or board. That they couldn't. You know, offer public comment. And I remember it said, even though it was counterintuitive. It was counterintuitive. Maybe we shouldn't be the liaison. If it isn't that they can't. Liaison is not supposed to engage in the discussion. That the committee is having, but they're supposed to be. It used to be away from the table, but we don't have that with zoom. And they're, they're available to answer questions. And also to carry out requests of the committee. You know, there was an emphasis in, in certain counselors on the liaison on the planning board, taking part in the regular meeting as if she were a member. That was what the issue was about. This isn't done at the express wish of the committee. And I do believe all our resolutions, et cetera, need to be sponsored. By someone on the council. Mandy. Point of order, Pat. Point of order. Yeah. Jennifer was speaking and you were interrupting her. I'm sorry, I thought she was finished. No, I was just asking for some clarification. Cause I remember being the part that confused me during that conversation as we were told that. It would actually be better if we had an interest in a subject matter, not to be the liaison to that committee. So. Okay. So this is. So let's say, okay. So it happened to me once. I don't really want to get into this, but the first time I went to an affordable housing trust meeting when the former chair, he asked if I would speak. And I said that I couldn't. Yo, that was not my role. And he said that he would, he wanted me to, so what would I, what would one. You know, if we can. It just seems that it's a little gray that we can actually cosponsor resolutions or bylaws, but we're not even supposed to. I think that at some point that this needs maybe in the council. Well, we're going to, we're going to get to that and rules of procedure. Yeah. But what I'm going to say is this was at the request of the committee. I do want to hear from Mandy, Joe and Lynn. And the other thing is it is, it is. There was never any rule about not being on a committee where you cared about the content. It was about participation and staying there as a listener and being available. Mandy. Thank you. So. Our council rules on non voting relate liaisons rule 10.8. I states that liaisons shall report any of the other bodies pending policy or budget recommendations to the full council in a timely manner. And so the, if they're sponsoring this, they're going to have to go through the charter rules. And that's clearly their pending policy or budget recommendations. Right. That's being reported to the council. Our rules of the council in a different rule. And I'd have to look at that one require that at least one counselor sponsor any resolution. Unless you're going to go through the charter rules on how non sponsored stuff comes to the council. And so I think those two rules written together. That is, is told to report. Policy. Content. Pending policy things from the DAAC to the council. And in the manner of reporting that of they have a resolution, they are asking the council to do. She's also choosing as any councilor could to sponsor that resolution. So. You know, outside of NASA, potentially her role as liaison, right? If she had reported it in a, in the same way, any other committee that HRC regularly. Essentially requests counselors. To sponsor. Proclamations. No, I had a question for consistency. I truly had a question for consistency because we were told, yeah, so I just, I wanted that, you know, because we were told we shouldn't even offer public comment if we're liaison. So I was just wondering, you know, where, where, what was, how, at what point were we allowed, I was just asking for clarification this I took away from that conversation that we should really be at arms length from the whatever committee or board or commission that we're the liaison to. And I know that on I think also is sponsoring with the stretch bylaw. She's a co-sponsor with ecac I think she's the liaison to that committee so I was just really sincerely trying to get some clarity on that I have. I think this is a great resolution, I have no issue with Pat as the liaison being the council sponsor I just wanted to be clear. When we say we have to be arms length from the entity that we're the liaison to, you know, what, what that means. Since I was still commenting. Oh, no point of order, huh. Go ahead. Reporting pending policy or recommendations to the council is one of the jobs of the liaisons and our council rules also require that if certain people if if residents or committees, you know, those are a little different I have to go back to the bylaw rules, but that particularly for proclamations and resolutions that council sponsor a lot of times they come to us as counselors not to the whole council but someone will email us we've got to Medicaid for our all that people just emailed counselors and said hey, you want to sponsor this and counselors can take it up on their own there's no prohibition and our rules that say liaisons cannot sponsor. There are resolutions that are brought to the council or to them by the committee. The rules say during those, their committee meetings liaisons are basically to remain silent they're not voting members of the body they cannot make public comment during those meetings, their rules don't say they can't come to the council and state their opinion on the committee's actions. I'm just going to say one thing very quickly and then I'll go to Lynn and then Michelle. I watched Pam Nolan young who is the staff representative on the disability access advisory committee and they started engaging her in conversation and wanting information from her. More than information they wanted opinion and what she said, very simply was, I cannot do that as in in my role I cannot do that. And that's all we're asking liaisons to do. Lynn, my comments not about the issue what you can or cannot do is liaison. It's an editorial comment. Okay, if Michelle wants to go ahead, go ahead. I was just going to suggest that when we're going through the rules that we have because I can sense there's some tension in this conversation and if we have it within the context of the rules, we'll be able to think about it more holistically. So that's my suggestion. Athena and then Lynn. I just wanted to note that staff liaisons this is for counselors liaisons to town committees not staff liaisons. I know, but okay. Yeah. Lynn. I'm going to move the resolution up again. Okay. That's not the wrong one. Sorry about that. I have too many windows open that's my phone. Okay, the correct format for listing Senate House bills, numbers is not to have a space after the period in the S, or after the eight period in the H. There's no space, and I don't know whether below we have to correct that or not. That's all. There's still a spacing problem in some. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, go ahead. That's it. Yeah. Okay, anyone else. And I would love it if somebody would make a motion. Other guide, Mandy. I moved to declare the Athena can you page up to the title. The resolution in support of S466 and H769 and act expanding access to trails for people of all abilities clear consistent and actionable. Second second. Who seconded it. Got it first. Okay. Doesn't matter. All right, and we'll do a vote on this Lynn Griezmer. Yes. Mandy Johanna key. Hi, Michelle Miller. Hi, Jennifer. Yes. And I'm an eye. So it's unanimous. Thank you, everyone. Now what we can move right into the. Actually, is there anyone. No, I wanted to note our intern up on the mezzanine who's going to be with us for the summer, one of the interns. Naughty is here in the audience. I've asked her to attend or extended an invitation to attend because they're going, our interns are going to be working on a project. A resident. Participation guide. And so I've asked them to attend this conversation because I thought we might be talking about public comment and, and it might just generally be interesting to them so welcome Naughty thanks for being here. Yes, really. And what I was going to do seeing her in the audience I did not know who it was. I was going to call for public comment now. But see, and so I'm going to call for a period of public comment but seeing no one other than Naughty. Well, come on. She could make a comment if she wanted to. Yeah. Right. Yes. If you would like to make a comment or say anything about yourself, we would love to hear it. And if you want to be quiet, that's okay too. And if you'd like to say anything you can raise your hand. Thank you. Okay, we're going to assume that the public comment period is over for today's meeting. And let's move into the annual. The annual never ending it seems to me review of rules and procedures. I just wanted to point out that we're working on a. The changes that we've been tracking that the committee's discussed are in a version of the rules that. Is outdated because there were changes adopted earlier this year. So I just wanted to make a note of that. And when the committee. Makes recommendations, we'll, I'll just need to check that there aren't any in conflict with previous changes. So we've gotten a little. Or if, or if I can do side by side, if that's however the committee wants me to do that, I can do that. I have a question of members of the committee when we, we had voted unanimously. We had a limit public comment and we got a lot of feedback. And did we ever go back and undo I think that we did. Did we undo the 35 minutes and not have. I think there's a reference to two hours something happening at two hours, but we did change. We did undo our recommendation. Is that correct. It never passed the council so there. So wasn't a change. So then I'd like us to first look at if that's all right with you. Athena's recommendations. Did you want me to pull that up or do you want to. How would you like me to do that. Yeah, you should pull up. The rules are my memo. Yes. Both. Can you do both. Okay. Sorry, I still have too many windows. Yeah. I went, I read through these and I would love to hear. And first of all, thank you, Athena, for putting this together. And I'd love to hear from any other counselors their reaction to these possible changes. Jennifer. I have a question. These, these aren't substantive changes, right? It's just for clarity. No, no, I don't think it's, I'm sorry, it was further down when it got to be. I'm sorry, I'm voting on abstentions. I just like that, that wasn't change. I know we'll get there, but that's not substantive. You just wanted to have it be clear. Which one. The truth, I guess voting requirements. Like you asked, I think maybe it was. This was just a consistency thing because the amendment. We do anything. It's just, yeah, it's just matching that later rule with the earlier rule change. Okay. And in this document, we can make. We can recommend substantive changes just to clarify that because if that's not something we can do when we're looking at other things. But that one was specifically to just match quite a change earlier in the rules. Mandy. So I think it would be easiest if we go through the theme as requests starting from the top instead of jumping around the document. I'm sorry I jumped us around. And Pat wanted to know, I think rule 4.5s request is reasonable and logical, but I know the reason we originally put the two and three days in or the three days before the meeting in was to ensure that in some sense that Athena had the documents before the weekend so she didn't have to work on the weekend, right. And to ensure that things that were on the agenda that the council was adequately prepared for items on the agenda. I, I, in some sense I agree with all the changes because you know, I'm one of the committees that's like I can't follow this if the things on the agenda on Monday and the committee's meeting on Thursday right I just can't yet I don't want to wait two and a half weeks for it to be on the agenda. So I don't know what the solution to ensuring that things are received on time so that counselors have enough time to review items. Or, you know, I don't know, when and Athena what do you do about the agenda items that you know you put it on because Paul requests that it goes on and it's Friday afternoon and you still don't have a memo are you are you going to just pull it now or that's what I don't want the change in the rule to actually cause more weekend work for Athena. Pat if I can. Yes, please comment on that. So one of the concerns I had about this, because the council doesn't enforce it and that there have been in my recollection absolutely no objections to things being submitted to to any council discussion or action on something that's been submitted past that deadline. So in my mind it's, you know, it's, it's kind of a moot rule, but also, I feel like there is the potential for some challenge to a council action because it was in violation of the council's rules. And so that was where that came from and also it's just frustrating to know that there's a rule that says that I need Wednesday and not getting them until sometimes Monday. So it was to alleviate some of that frustration with council not enforcing itself. So I just want to make sure what you're trying to do is not be rigid about it. The council is not rigid about it. I understand that believe me. And so I'm just concerned. Right. Yeah, I'm concerned with the council not being in violation of its own role and that that creating the potential for some outside challenge and also to just be consistent have the rules be consistent with practice like you said yes, but it doesn't see somehow or another I'd like the rules to still say something about what would be the optimal. I don't know how to say this. In other words, I'd like us not to say not think well okay now everything's not through until Friday or the following Monday. So how can we say it's still desired that it be available by Wednesday. And so I'm wondering if you want to respond to Linda or Athena did you want to respond to Lynn. I put in timely manner. Because that was what I, I thought would be clear enough that earlier is better and not rigid, rigid in a specific deadline. Mandy and then Michelle. I like the fact that it clean it. Latina's language clarifies who the materials get submitted to I think that's right now there's no clear. Who do we submit it to is it just Athena is it Athena and the president is Athena Paul and the president like who is it. That part of her rewarding I would take her rewarding if people are concerned you could potentially maybe add time after timely manner comma ideally three days prior to the meeting, something like that. Again, though I hear Athena's concern though that if we put a time in even if it's an ideally X. If it's not there and we act on it. Could there be a challenge or is the challenge moot given that if we acted we essentially approved the failure to follow the rules by default, you know by voting when the rules weren't fired followed on when it was posted type thing. You know, so we could add the language, but I would at least take Athena's proposed language to begin with Michelle. Yeah, I'm, I may be thinking about it. The problem has clearly been stated that most of the reason that someone might not get it in in three days is because they have a committee meeting that meets on Wednesday or Thursday and that makes it difficult. So, could we use language that says every effort will be made to submit materials within three days of a council meeting and then just specifically address the, the reasons that that might not because I personally think we should still try to have every everybody in the pattern of getting things in within three days of a council meeting as much as possible but these are exceptions because of timing. So why not say both you know every effort should be made or will be made or to submit materials within three days of a council meeting. If a committee meets within three days of a council meeting, every effort will be made to submit materials in as timely as a matter as possible. I come on this one my position is to be a little to be a little bit more rigid, you know, but I totally understand what Athena saying that if we're breaking the rules all the time. I think it's just a situation that it's just disrespectful probably I would I would feel as the person on the receiving end of that. Anybody would support like that kind of breakout of language. Jennifer. Yeah, no I would support that I mean maybe it could even be stated you know with the exception of committees that meet within a certain amount of time at the council meeting. Yeah, I'd love to get your reaction on those suggestions. I'm, you know, open to the committee's changes that's ultimately your decision what you want to recommend if there's specific words you want to insert here. Just let me know where and all. I'll plug them in. We're wearing what works. I was going to see, can we pull up is it easy enough to pull up side by side that the rule as it stands right now in the rules so that we can look at them together. Yeah, I have that open hang on. I can read 4.5 you would like me to as it is stated in the. Oh, sorry about this. That's right. I was looking at the page and not the. I believe it's on page 10. Here we go. Yeah. So maybe here we just after no later than three days prior to the meeting period, then maybe we say for committees that meet. Would you say just committees that meet Wednesday, Thursday, or in the rare case like a finance committee might meet on Friday I've seen. So is it three or four days would you say Athena say within a certain number of business days. So the three days by definition is only business days because of how we count under the charter and everything. Okay. Which is Wednesday. So it's basically it's saying that if the committee meets within that three day window. That they're the exclusion, essentially, so if a committee meets within the three days prior to a meeting, every effort will be made to submit reports and materials in a timely manner. Get at it. Materials in a timely manner. As soon as like maybe even just to say as soon as practical maybe. Yeah, or something exactly. Yeah. Yeah, you know, I think that's better than every every effort because that kind of it sounds very clear but I think it's actually kind of nebulous. Is it does it say every effort. No, it doesn't know it says as soon as practical. But you were you were bringing that up so I joined. Oh yeah I changed course once we brought up the actual language it. Jennifer Michelle are you done. Um, yeah, I think so Jennifer. I like this because it's also saying that unless you fall within those three days, if that's the only reason you can. The rule will bend. Otherwise you have to get it in three days prior and then it also so then it, it takes it out of, you know, if somebody says well this counselor what's got it in the day before and, you know, so it, it's almost like the public comment it makes it clear so there can be no, you know, feelings of favoritism or the rules were bent for one person not the other that this is the only time the rule can be bent. Mandy. A couple requests and then a question so I liked Athena's wording about what the documents are so I would ask that we replace the current phrasing of all items for the agenda including reports to documents and exhibits to be used at a council meeting including committee reports. And because I just liked, I thought better description of what's going on. And then I actually liked Athena's last two sentences, instead of our last sentence at this time that the copies, you know, so when we're submitting to submitting to them three days before, but Athena, you know, provides them in a timely manner. You know she's got them when she's got them she just provides them to everyone in a timely manner and then I really liked that the rule doesn't apply to materials used in executive session. That seems obvious. So I like that one. My question is, if we keep these, the time limit of three days in, what's, what happens when the rules broken. And I guess that's that, you know, I, what is the, what's the results of breaking the rule say finance committee submits the report Thursday morning. So they didn't meet the Wednesday deadline because they meet on Tuesdays. What happens, does the agenda items that that report was for get pulled, or does it just mean we don't get to see the report but the agenda item is still on the agenda. Like, what actually what like what happens, because that might what people think happens might change my thoughts on timings here. And then Jennifer, and, oh, actually I'm going to jump to Athena. And then I'll come back. The council's practices for nothing to happen. Nothing happens. I've brought up with Lynn and Paul in agenda setting meetings that my suggestion would be to not include items on the agenda when I don't have those materials. By the time we meet for agenda setting, but that hasn't gained traction, because a lot of times staff are working on things up until sometimes the day of the council meeting. And sometimes there's a reason that materials aren't included in the packet until the day of the council meeting. I think the, the town manager has, especially regarding the budget, you know, sometimes that's submitted right on the day of the council meeting. So, I mean, if the, if the council isn't going to object to items on the agenda, when the materials aren't used, I mean, I don't understand the reasoning for including a deadline when it's not enforced at all by the council. But if people have feelings about handling that in a different way, that, that makes sense, then I would love to hear it. Michelle and then Jennifer. I'm thinking about the same, the same questions. And I, one part of me thinks, well, a counselor has the right to postpone in a meeting if, if they haven't had the time to read something because it hasn't been submitted. I'm not right to say, I'm not ready for this, I need, I needed more time. And it might be too punitive to say, you know, at the discretion of the chair, an item, if the materials were not placed in the packet, an item could be removed. So, I, you know, I, I'm kind of going back and forth on it, because I agree that putting a timeline in without saying every effort so without it being an intention, and actually being a rule. You know, why then do we have a timeline that doesn't have any consequences to it if it's not being followed. I'm, yeah, I'm a little bit, I'd love to keep exploring that. And here up from others too. Pat, if I could respond to that real quick. Absolutely. So, counselors wouldn't have to use that right to postpone under the charter, typically rules are enforced by the council itself. So someone could raise a point of order and say this, you know, this report wasn't submitted within this timeframe. And so I object to this being taken up at this meeting, but that has never happened. So again, why have a rule that says that there's a deadline when that has never been objected to I think maybe in the past, one counselor in the previous council was pretty adamant about things being submitted in that timeframe. But even during that council, I don't think there was an objection to the council discussing or acting on an item on the agenda when that deadline wasn't met. Jennifer and then Mandy. I did, I think, you know, Mandy raised a good point about if a committee meets on Tuesday, then they're not with it. So I don't know if there's a way to say, a committee must get the report in within three days of meeting. So, yeah. But then what does that mean if a committee meets two weeks before they still have to get it in within three days. Yeah. Yeah. Andy. So in more talking and when Athena brought up some certain things like, let's go back to the budget. For certain reasons Paul, whether it frustrates me or not the day we get the budget presentation that that council meeting on May whatever one or that that may meeting. We don't see the budget until the meeting, essentially, that's what when Paul likes to release it for for whatever reasons he likes to release it for right. We also don't see the presentation from that we're going to see at the meeting a lot of times the presentation ends up in the packet but it ends up in the packet. The presentation itself during the meeting, not three days beforehand again, for same reasons but other presentations might not to and this is all documents and exhibits so this is all the presentations the staff member might do. And so would we, you know, if, if the budget isn't released till Monday and that sort of tradition. And interestingly, the counselor in the past that liked to enforce this rule as much as possible actually agreed with the budget coming out on Monday of the council meeting and not three days prior. So enforce it for only some things right. So would we as a council. If a counselor said hey the budget wasn't released until today so I object under the rules to, you know, to hearing the budget presentation today. The council in order to then potentially hear it would have to take a vote to waive the rule. I do, but is that something we really want to face if a counselor does actually object to taking an item up. When we're not just talking about committee reports now right we're talking about staff who've worked on stuff and for whatever reason they didn't get it in on Wednesday and all and so the more and more I think about this the more and more I actually like Athena's which is just a timely manner with potentially this expectation that that be three days in advance. You know, if possible or or, you know, whatever but not having this strict shall be submitted three days prior that it more just be timely, and, you know, yeah. Michelle. Is there, I mean for me, it feels like this rule shall not apply to staff. Or that we should consider that this rule shall not apply to staff. Because I think there are a variety of reasons why staff, there are a variety of reasons why any of us might not do it but it feels like is this rule saying that staff is held to the same guideline Okay, so I feel like we should exclude staff from this personally. I do not think just saying in a timely manner is while it will cure the issue of the frustration. I have concerns that it will create much more sort of inconsistencies and confusion. Without that guidance. I have concerns about how how that might. So I'm going to mute you. Two things. So the first one is, if we don't apply it to staff the only thing it really applies to is committee reports and not the rest because almost everything else comes from staff. Committee reports are generally the only thing that doesn't so it means it wouldn't apply to, you know, poll hearing hearing notices it, you know, although those are out early but it wouldn't apply to, you know, committee reports from other committees that aren't council committees maybe but you know it wouldn't apply to any requests from Paul or reports from Paul on any items related to say water and sewer rates or tax rates or something like that and and part of the reason this rule originally came in was because those items were being submitted on Monday morning for a Monday evening council meeting and counselors were really frustrated that we just didn't have time to prepare for the meeting. So that was more of an expectation from staff hey if you want the council to hear it on Monday, the council needs more than Monday morning to see the materials to do its own job so I don't think we should exempt others. My next question is three days. So I'm going to give you another a different, a different aspect from that which is rental registration that is coming to the council in five days. It is a new bylaw. It is a new set of regulations. It is a lot of information to take in along with a report and to think about. I could have submitted it today at 5pm to Athena for posting sometime tomorrow under the current rule. Yet, I would almost argue and I think every committee member on my committee because I heard it in my committee two weeks ago, or a week ago or whenever it was said, the council needs more than three days or two days with this material they need the opportunity to see it well more than Thursday before a Monday meeting. They need that time. And so timely manner could actually be more than three days for some items that are massive, depending on what the intended council action on a Monday is. If the intended council action is a vote, maybe two days Thursday evening is not timely enough, maybe a week before is more timely so I, you know, I, you know, and so think about that when you put in three days. I could have met the rule by submitting something at 5pm today as a committee chair on rental registration, but I'm not sure the council would have thought that was necessarily timely. Yet, there would be no objection under our rules for saying it wasn't timely. So just another thinking about what timely versus three days does. Thank you, Lynn. This as this is a very interesting conversation to listen to. And, but I actually support Athena's language. I think it's more realistic. And I think it. My only hope was that we could still get people to get things in as fast as they can. And I think. So I, I just soon go to her language. Thank you. Michelle. Yeah, well, I, again, I think that it's, it's ambiguous. And I think it's up for interpretation and I think that a timely manner is going to be for somebody who has, you know, kids and a full-time job is going to be different than timely manner of somebody who does not, for example. And we all look at time differently. And I think that leaving it out there ambiguous like that is going to create inconsistencies and also the conversations that people are being treated differently that this person was allowed to include it within this day because they thought it was timely and then this person wasn't. And I mean, I mean, we'll all be allowed to but I just, I don't, I really, I don't think the point of rules is to leave something so ambiguous that we are leaving ourselves in a vulnerable position in all of the ways that I just stated. I will, I will not support something that does not have at least some legs to it in terms of expectations for our counselors and staff. Athena. As someone with kids and a full-time job. I would like the committee to consider how it wants to enforce this rule and be consistent. So I would love if there were consistency about that deadline, but in some cases it's not possible. In some cases it's practice not to. And without writing in a bunch of exceptions. You know how, how does the council want to enforce that does the council want to instruct the president to you know when we set the agenda on three days prior to the meeting. Ask the president not to include agenda items when there aren't materials available. I mean. I would like to hear that because if there's a way for the council to enforce this rule so I don't have to work on the weekends. When things come in over the weekend. That would be lovely. But that hasn't happened. Mandy. Michelle, I got a question for you. If we go with Athena's language. Sort of language so if we look at your. Athena's language had had posting in a timely manner, but not anything to do with timings on when documents are submitted and the current language has posting in a timely manner but submitting the documents no later than three days prior to the meeting. So what if we say. Something like, like, what would you think about Athena's first sentence which is almost, you know, shall be submitted to the president and the clerk of the council and right now the phrase in the first sentence is no later than three days prior to the meeting. What if that phrase becomes in time to. Well, in a timely manner comma something like, ideally. No later than three days prior to the meeting, something like that that, that does. It allows for interpretation but also sets forth an expectation. We could leave the committees who meet within the deadline shall submit their materials as soon as practicable something like that practical, but, but what would you think about that. You want to respond Michelle before I call on Jennifer. We have a very large score. Let me make sure I understand your question Mandy so you're, you're saying to actually let me say this, my, my, what I feel is important is that there is some expectation that is not up for interpretation that is not ambiguous that it is not, you know, inconsistencies in the ways that we think about what timely manner means and so I think if there's a way to say, I mean, I'm not, I don't love the language like ideally or in rules, but I did suggest language like every effort. So, I mean, I would be fine with something along that line. I just don't think that we should completely leave it open to in a timely manner and then the other question I had is you said, Athena did not and I even just, yes, Athena brought this forward. This is not personal. I just want to say that, like, this is not about who brought it forward or not just like what we're looking at here on the right side of the screen says, this is submitted to the President and clerk of the Council so that doesn't give any timeline I think is what we've completely removed a timeline and then we're saying that Athena, then it's on Athena to make it available to the public in a timely manner because we don't have any way of making it available to the public or counselors. So those are two separate things but Athena can't make it available unless we've given it so it, you know, one depends on the other so real quickly this is meant to match what the Council's practice has been. And I feel like a while I understand the reasoning for doing that I don't think the practice is effective, or I think we need to have, we need to consider what the practices and then create a rule. We need to know what the practices and the one that we're willing to enforce and then create the rule around that, in my mind, as opposed to just matching what we've been doing, which probably isn't the most effective and efficient way of doing things. Jennifer. So could we also have something like materials have to be submitted to the clerk of the Council by 3pm on the Friday before the meeting, both because it is completely unreasonable that items can be coming into the clerk of the Council over the weekend. So even for counselors like all look on Friday to see what's in the packet just to sort of plan my time for preparing for the Council meeting. And so if on Sunday, a big document appears it's like, you know, so I, yeah, I would think it would be reasonable to just whatever days we're giving from that, you know, if it doesn't get in before 3pm to the clerk of the Council on the Friday before the meeting, then it's not going to be in the packet and it may mean that an item has to be moved to, you know, it can't won't be on the agenda. I think we could even say, I think the exception for the budget is that Paul wants to present the budget before everybody has a chance to swoop in with their comments and if it's posted before. So I actually do understand that that that might be the one. Well, and even for staff, so that staff aren't working over the weekend to get items in the packet on Monday. I mean, I don't know if that would even be a relief for staff to know if it's not in by Friday that they don't have to be cramming over the weekend to get it in the packet on Monday, you know, within hours of the meeting. I just an idea. Mandy Jennifer was getting to something that I was thinking of, which was maybe we just add to the rule that items not submitted by whatever time on Friday will not be added to the packet until Monday morning. Like, just put it in the rule that if you don't submit it to the clerk and the president by this certain time, no one's seeing it until Monday morning. And if no one sees it before Monday morning, it's clear that you risk the thing being pulled from the agenda because counselors will say we didn't have enough time, like, you know, but but there's no. I think something like that might solve the problem we're having of what's, what's the consequence of not meeting the three days. And maybe it's not the three days that's the consequence because because we aren't enforcing that you don't get to see it at all we're not pulling things from the agenda from what I can tell so what does the council want as the consequence and maybe it's just stating that we're not going to make Athena post anything on the weekend. So you're out of luck. When we step back a moment and say, when we started Jen to review, and then we meet again the Wednesday before seeing it and I do. We pretty much assess at that point, what we think is going to come in or not come in. Okay, and when we think it's going to come in and not come in. It's just two times and I'll cut any number of you may have gotten this message message that says, you know, it seems to me like it'd be best if we move this item to, you know, two weeks from now or whatever. So there is an early screen, it actually starts two weeks before the meeting or we can have before the meeting and it happens again five days before the meeting. It's something like Paul's town manager report, you know, he thought he had Friday clear, he was going to get it in by three o'clock, and a water main breaks and something else how it happens and it just isn't going to happen. I don't care how many kids he has or whether he has a full time job. It's not going to happen. So, I think there is an enforcement, if you will, want to use that word that the reality is it's up to Athena and me to enforce it, because nobody else is going to enforce it, except in the case of what Mandy Joe has said and that is something in the packet, people look at the agenda shows up on Monday morning people look at the agenda and say, I don't want to discuss this I'm not prepared to discuss this we didn't get it too far that far in advance. Frankly, most of the time, I've already pulled that agenda item, or I've said this is going to be a first discussion we're not going to act tonight. So I just want to, I want to make sure that we understand where enforcement happens how agendas really happen. And the fact that, you know, things get pulled before you even know they get pulled, or they get delayed before you even know they get delayed so. But in reality, the enforcement for this is going to lie with the president and the clerk of the council. I'm going to jump to Athena before I go to you Jennifer. Lynn, are you suggesting that when we meet the Wednesday prior to a council meeting that you will pull things from the agenda that we don't have materials for because I can go back and count the number of times that I'm asking for materials on Thursday or Friday. That's been many, I'm suggesting, I know I'm suggesting that we continue to see whether or not we're going to get them and in some instances, based on either the practice of that person or what we know is going to be involved in getting it to us. We can pull the agenda at that point, but that we. What I was trying to say, I think it is that we actually are continually tracking with counselors whether they're going to get us material or not. And, and we do pull agenda items, or we postpone them, and sometimes frankly, we can't postpone it. The action has to be taken in the timely manner of the next meeting. So, there's a lot more mix in this soup, then I think a hard and fast rule will accommodate. Could, could we be better could I be nasty or oh yeah I can be nastier. It's about being insistent. Right and I have to, I have to check in with staff continually sometimes Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, once we've finalized the agenda to make sure they're going to submit something when are they going to submit it are they going to submit it over the weekend and so on. So, again, if, if our practice is going to be not to include things on the agenda when we don't have materials on Wednesday, then let's make that the practice. Like you said in some cases that's not possible, and our, and our practice hasn't consistently been. We don't have it, it's not on the agenda. Jennifer. Yeah, I still, I like having a deadline on Friday, I'm concerned about saying if you don't get it in by certain time Friday it's not going to go until Monday. It gives people the option to work on it over the weekend and have more come in a Monday, I thought. If it having a Friday, some point on Friday deadline would also relieve staff from feeling like they had to cram over the weekend to get it in Monday, it would reduce the number of items that went in Monday, and I know that a counselor has asked that it be pulled but I feel like if there's, you know, one or the counselors that work full time and so if it goes in Monday, they may not even see it till their, the council meeting begins. That sort of puts the, you know, they may feel like they don't always want to be the person asking that it be pulled because they haven't had time to read it and I understand with the town manager report. I totally get it that he sometimes can't help but have it in Monday, but there's, I like to read the report before the meeting and sometimes because they're long if it gets posted Monday afternoon, it's impossible to read it and then have questions that we want to ask so I, I know we always say maybe exceptions is giving too much leeway but I like the idea of if an item's not in the packet by some point on Friday, it doesn't go in. That's all I have to say. Michelle. Yeah, two things one I think I just want to caution us when we're going through these not to think about the particular people that are on the council right now or that in the role of council president right now and whether those people might by practice enforce or not enforce or because we have to write these roles as if anybody might be in the roles. The last thing I was going to say is, is there a difference between. So I guess what is the rule for a counselor bringing materials up in in a meeting that haven't been submitted like, is there a difference between materials that are placed in the packet, and whether or not that decides if an item can be kept on the agenda in the past, or is it true that, you know, items can just be brought up right in the middle of a meeting that haven't been placed in the packet, or that the public hasn't seen. So, I would love some clarity on that because if any if we if a counselor can just want to make a motion for example in a meeting and they haven't submitted any packet materials or a memo. They can just go up with a memo in the meeting and they want people to look at it. How does that play into what we're discussing. Yeah, and before I go to anyone to possibly answer that or make a different comment I'm going to say that it is right now let me look at my 1119 and I am ending this meeting at 1130 because I need to stop and eat before 12 o'clock meeting. I just want to, I want people to be aware of that timeframe. I also, well, I'll keep my comment on this issue to myself a little bit longer go ahead Mandy. I was going to comment on the same lines of Michelle which is okay what does what's not in the packet requires pulling something. If, if the, let's talk about a poll hearing if the poll hearing materials from ever source or in the packet but the memo from the DPW is does it get pulled, because not everything was in there if, if for the water regulations the water and sewer regulations were in the packet and the memo from the DPW was in the packet, but the actual presentation they were going to do to summarize everything is in the packet, but will be in the packet eventually because it has to be since it's a document referred to at the meeting, does it get pulled you know I, I, I just don't know the longer we talk the more the more complicated the whole issue of enforcing it becomes in the packet because there's so many different documents and exhibits to be used at a council meeting for every agenda item. What's so important that you pull an item off the agenda and what isn't as important that you don't pull it from the agenda. Randy Joe's hit on a couple of things for example, you know we might have a written report from a committee, and that might be in the packet by Wednesday. But they're going to do a slide presentation as a way of helping the audience and the council understand everything that's in the report. But that slide presentation isn't available till Monday. Kind of, I mean, this gets into really, really great areas. I mean, you're sending me an incredible message okay. Tighten up. Fine, tighten up. But I really ask each of you to be in the shoes of having to enforce. I mean to Paul. No I'm sorry we really don't want your town managers report, because you could not get it to to us until Monday, or whatever else Jennifer. Yeah, I guess I just wanted to say you know I think there's a difference between a slideshow and the materials. Yeah so I don't know how we distinguish that because I do think you know if you have. If we have a financial report, and then there's a slide show that's going to be made as part of the presentation. I wouldn't feel ill prepared if I hadn't seen the slide show. If I had been able to read like the finance finance report so I don't know. Yeah. I guess that's another gray area. The current rules says all items for the agenda. Would include a slide show the slide show, it would include, you know, a markup version of something that was submitted late it would include everything. And Michelle you had asked about motions during the meeting. I can propose motions during the meeting and it's helpful when they send the language to me so I can put it up on the screen but a proposed motion. I don't think wouldn't be included in the. The rule wouldn't cover a motion that was brought up during the meeting, but you know what it would include theoretically a counselor, bringing up a document during the meeting that they knew they wanted to discuss that wasn't included. But we can't really it's hard to, we have to leave, you know, the president of the, you know, council president discretion, and that's there's. And that may just be the way we're human it has to be, and just, you know, trust that, you know, it will, the rules will be applied fairly. I mean that's what it seems to be coming back to that it's very hard to just make a hard and fast world. Michelle, if I'm sorry Pat, if I may go ahead no please I prefer that you just been Michelle I'm curious because you stated that you feel strongly about there being a deadline. So, how would you propose that deadline be enforced would you would you prefer that things not be on the agenda if they're not submitted what about a slideshow or something like that. I'm not going to thread the needle, or are you saying that the council should counselor should be objecting during the meeting when materials aren't made available I'm I'm curious about your take on that. Yeah, I guess I just want to clarify that I don't think there should be a deadline I think there should be an expectation. That's my that I just I don't want to leave it so open that people don't have some expectation of what would by practice allow for counselors and anyone involved in a discussion. You know the time to to review. I mean, I'll be honest there are meetings where I'm not looking at things until Monday at noon. I mean, and there are other times where I am looking at things much earlier so I'm not, it's not like about having a hard and fast deadline is just about providing some sense of an expectation for what would. And that again I know Pat disagreed with the language in every effort to make every effort, but that is a way of saying, this is what we would hope in a best case scenario. And again, this question of enforcement. I do think that counselors should have the right to postpone a discussion if they don't feel like the information has been there long enough to give them the time. I think the president should have the discretion to say, you know what, I've asked for this multiple times. This is a huge topic, and I've already heard from multiple counselors that they're struggling with the content and they're going to need to postpone it and therefore, you know, we're going to push this like I think recently there was the the street lighting one maybe that got postponed, because I think there was some sense that there was additional input coming in and maybe people needed more time to wrap their minds around that and then I don't know what Lynn's reason was I didn't ask her for postponing it but I'm just saying that I think there are times where we have to trust our president, whether it be whoever else and if we don't, then we have to say you know what, President, you haven't been enforcing this and it's creating problems for us, and we are we need you to do something different. So I hope that answers the question Athena. Mandy, quickly because we're going to end soon. What would Michelle would your concern and would everyone's concerns right be with how it's written now be solved by changing the shall in the first sentence to should that gives an expectation but it's not a mandatory so there's no like violations of it, in a sense I think normally legislative drafting you avoid the word should because it's not mandatory, but maybe that's just what we need here that it would be material documents should be submitted to the President and clerk of council no later than three days prior to the meeting. And then, you know, committees with meetings should submit materials as soon as practical. And the agenda and materials shall be provided in a timely manner something like that leave the shall there for the timely manner would that solve a lot of people's concerns I think it would solve mine because then there's not really that issue that Athena's brought up about the violation of the rule, and how do you enforce the violation. But it gives that expectation. I think with should you could probably just take this out about committees who meet three days prior. Because that leaves that wiggle room about. We just use a thing as a language language of the original suggestion using should there, instead of Shelby. And again, if there's not going to be any enforcement. Then, but I am very hesitant to say that something important on the agenda can't be there. I think we need to look up about reparations or street lights or disability access that were really we need to needed to look at but the person didn't get the material in until Monday morning or whatever we're really going to not deal with that. We can postpone so they can do that. I really feel like we're making this more complicated than we need to. I can deal with adding ideally three days prior or changing to should in Athena's original statement, but we're going to hear one more comment from Jennifer and then I'm going to suggest that we think about this and bring it up at our next meeting. Okay, so I'm going to go back and agree with Mandy suggestion, even that if it's not in, even though I thought it might make too many things come in Monday that if it doesn't get in by certain point Friday it doesn't go into Monday, so that we can relieve whoever is in the clerk of the council's position from not having to get items in over the weekend. Real quick. I do that it's not required that I do it over the weekend, because the rule is to get it in. Get it to counselors two days prior so you know I do that if there's a new clerk at some point in the future, when there's a new clerk at some point in the future. They might not work on the weekend they might clock out at 430 on Friday. And, but the rule is that I get it to you two days prior to a meeting so essentially I'm violating the rule. But unless we put it in that it does mean point of order you're interrupting. No, no, no, I just want to make sure she understood me. Yeah, yeah, I know that I know that. I'm not required to work over the weekend, but I know that counselors want to see things with enough time to digest them before a council meeting and so I feel like I do that as a courtesy to the counselors. But we don't have to get it I realized the time, but I just wanted to, I didn't expect this particular thing to take so much discussion but I really appreciate the thought that you've taken, and that you're willing to hear my suggestions at all so thank you all. Yeah, thank you. And Jennifer do you have something quick that you wanted to add. I wanted to say I wanted to make it so that Athena is not allowed to post on weekends. No, I'm kidding but you know what I mean so you. Right. Anyway, I'm going to ask if you have any suggestions or, or anything on 4.5 to get them to me and only to me. And I am going to share them with Athena and have her reflect on them and I'll do that on Sunday at about three o'clock no. But I do think if you have anything else you want to add to this. Also, if we're going to not interrupt people. Then we need to be consistent and I'm an interrupter but so are several of you. And if we're going to call point of order on that we need to be consistent about that as well. And I'm going to unless there is the committee decides not to I'm going to adjourn the meeting at 1132. Okay, thank you. Yeah, Athena, if you could send me the link I'd appreciate it.