 call this meeting to order. We've received the Planning Commission document. We actually asked for one change, which you made. And I would ask, does anybody in the Planning Commission want to ask any questions, I'm sorry, on the select board, any questions of Jan or John at this point, or make any comments? Are we all clear what we're talking about? Well, this is supposed to be a public hearing. There's one here. Come on in. I don't know. Bill. Who's that? Oh, Bill, are you here because you want to hear about the zoning? Oh, okay. So would it help you to have a little bit of an overview? Or have you had a chance to read it? I could not find it, any word to read it. Oh, it's on the book. Yeah, it was hard to find on the website. Well, what I have is what I have is dated September, 2023. Oh, it's heads up. That is the one that is fine. Okay. Because that's the one that was presented after the Planning Commission's public hearing, and that's what was presented to the select board. Okay. And if you grab that off of the Planning Commission page. Down to the bottom. On the callus. Yes, that's what I said, that's what I found. Yes. But there's nothing with any markup. There was one with a markup. Was there further up? But I think that was further up. Okay. It's not fully marked up. It's one of those that are kind of marked up. But you have to understand that that would be the third or fourth iteration. And so to see a markup from what it was way back in the beginning to where it is now. Yeah, there is one that's different. Essentially the whole Shoreland District, which is section 2.7, right? If I remember. 2.4. 2.4, that's all new. And the whole River Corridor overlay district is all new. That's what I'm hearing about, yeah. Oh, okay. Yeah. That's right, River Slash, flood hazard. Plus there was some changes to the process for going for a permit in the historic district, which was just going through the DAB. And those are basically the three things you did. Is that right? Am I missing anything? Yeah, other than that, it was mostly just cleanup here and there. So your concern is the River Corridor? Yeah, can I start with some questions? I think that's a good idea. Let's do that. I mean, I started doing this. And of course, because I now live in a River Corridor, supposedly. A lot of people were surprised. Okay, substantial improvement. Substantial improvement to section 9. I found no section 9 had anything to do with substantial improvements. What that means. It's not in section 9. Unless I'm missing it. So I don't have any definitions. I stupidly can't find my file. I must have left my file with the zoning at home. Can you help? Yeah. Substantial improvement in River Corridor. We're doing flood hazard. It's in the, the table, there's a table there. There's only one with Article 9 definition, section 9.1. Oh, you're in definitions? Yeah. Okay, that's not River Corridor though. Oh, where's section 9? Section 9 is the very end of its definitions. And we placed all definitions in section 9. 2.7 is the area that's got all of the language for flood hazard overlay and River Corridor. And in the River Corridor section overlay is a section that's got a grid and it tells you what is allowed and a substantial, a substantial, yeah. It's page 33. It's there. And by the way, in section 9, there are two sections of definitions. There's your regular definitions and then bottom is the definitions that rely strictly on flood hazard because by state, the state River Corridor they have their own set of definitions. And so we put them at the bottom and they're signified. The bottom of the definitions. Yeah. Okay. If you scroll all the way down because that's where the definition for what you're looking for is. Okay. Is there a way we could make that site more clear? Section 9B or whatever it is. I wish I had a different. Well, I don't know if there is a way to make it more clean or not. No more clear so that he wouldn't have gotten confused. Yes. I don't know. There is a statement at the very top that says that there's two sections. Okay. I thought. I don't see that. I'm sorry. Here we go. Yes. Now the element starts over again. Oh, okay. All right. I didn't see that. Okay. And Bill, a lot of that information is, we don't want to say mandated. It's almost required language that comes from the state. I understand that. Yeah. And Jan, if we don't have that language, we become ineligible. Or if we do have the language, we become eligible for more FEMA reimbursement. Yes. In the case of an emergency. Is that right? What we're doing now makes the flood. Yeah. FEMA and it also means the state's requirement for Iraq. And who decided the flood hazard overlayed the boundaries of that? Who decided that? The state maps. Yeah. Because it shows the court analysis house being there. And she's. That's right. Doesn't make any sense. Yeah. They took the river course and expanded it. Yeah. And then added a buffer on without. And that buffer may be running through a solid piece of stone hillside. Yeah. Impossible to erode. Yeah. The states decided that's what they're doing. John, I had along those lines my limited experience working with the state and those maps because they're made in office with a map that just, they do simple deletions. Was there any indication that they, as they get out into the field or at request that they would be adjusting those relative to site conditions? And that's definitely anyone who's got a question about what they can do in a math group or a court where they should call the state and have them come out and look at it. We did that on a property on Nelson and the state verified that their map was correct. We had them come look at this building here when this was being done and the map wasn't correct. And what Bill just mentioned, the hillside at Elsa Inkins, there's no way that there's gonna be an event that's gonna knock out an entire hillside that's solid solid stone. So yeah, any questions you should contact the state and I think we made that clear. And there's a process for appealing to their decision? Yes. You, yeah. In my experience, Bill, it's not a formal process and as much as it is an invitation to say that I feel like there's a discrepancy and they come onto the parcel and observe it and have a conversation about it. And if it doesn't meet the qualifications then they go back and adjust the map with site-specific information. I know that that's been something that I've observed them do for either habitats or other site-specific things that just don't, that aren't relevant to- Same thing with flood hazard. Yeah. You're not sure of an apple tree? Call the state and have them take a look at it. And in that case, if you wanna do a Loma then you have to hire somebody who will get you a Loma so that you can be outside of the flood hazard. And going back to your point, we had this, the people from the state look at this one property. I mean, they actually went into the river and went up a river and did the measurement from bank to bank and all of the other things that they've been doing to verify that this property that they were looking at was in fact in the recorder. On the other hand, that same property, the stream as it was depicted graphically between the two ponds is between Nelson and number 10. The stream wasn't located correctly on the map. So then when the flood hazard area wasn't as correct as it should have been with the, now that we've got one foot light our contours, it's easy to see stream channels. And it was clear that the location of the stream had been misrepresented on the map. So all good reasons to get the state to come look at it if it turned out. The map stream, I mean, the maps changed pretty much. They just seem to change. Bill, did you have other questions? I don't think so. Okay. Well, thank you for the question. I need to use more reading now. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Is there anything else? My goodness. You want to invite comment or questions from the online community? Ask if there's, you don't usually, but sure. Yeah, let's see if there's anybody who wants to make a statement or ask a question. David Noreen or Scott, would you like to ask any questions or any comments? I'm good. Okay. Jan, that email you sent us a week or so ago, may I make a public statement about it? Oh, yes. Okay. Jan is leaving us. She's not leaving us. She's retiring from the planning commission. After how many years of service? I don't know. Too numerous. Two hours, six or seven. I joined planning, I think in 2013. 2013, so 10 years. And you've been chairing it most of that time? Chair for the last five or six. These guys probably know more than I do. She's going to run the road for a minute? Yeah. No. Jan has done incredible service. She's shepherded this, this drive, this major rewrite of the zoning through the whole process. And we're almost to the end now. And yeah, thank you for your service. It's, okay. Shall I declare this hearing closed? Does anybody else want to say anything? Okay. We're closed. Oh, thank you so much. And I guess it's up to us now to decide what do we have to do? We have to actually have a motion to warn it for a vote. Is that right? Well, as part of the warning, I wasn't, I mean, you will eventually approve that entire collection of- Okay, so we don't have to have a specific vote on this. I wouldn't think you need to do anything tonight. Are you guys, well, we're going to look at the warning tonight. Are you guys all okay with this? We're putting it on the morning? For a vote by Australian ballot this March. Okay. Yeah, Larry. Just curious about, you did indicate that the possible action is also the select board accepting the report of the planning commission. It sounds like some kind of a formal- Yeah, you're right. It does. Let's see how let's do a motion to accept, formally accept the report. Will somebody please move that? So moved. Okay. Rose, you got language for that? To accept the revised land use regulations. I guess I would say proposed amendment to the land use and development is the official title. And in the event that there was no, that the select board had no proposed changes and in that event are moving it forward so that the population can vote to adopt it. I mean, but basically what's the warning is to adopt these as the amendments. Okay, Rose. That's kind of crazy language, but the checklist. Okay, so Jordan moved to adopt the amendments as proposed by the planning commission. All right, do we have a second? Just a second. Okay. All in favor? All right. And it's unanimous. Thank you. Wow. Thank you. Thank you. When are you guys meeting next? When are you guys meeting next? We meet next. A week from. Tomorrow. A week from tomorrow. And what's on that agenda? Don't know yet. I have, I need to have your minutes so I can set up the agenda. The town plan. It's all the town plan. Okay. And so we have that meeting. We have the first Tuesday will be another meeting and then February 18th, which is a Sunday. We're having our first callous wide meeting for the town plan. First of how many? First of how many meetings are you thinking of? What? How many meetings? You said first callous wide meeting. Does that mean you're planning to have more than one callous wide meeting? That won't be subject to debate. It's the initial one. And you know, we did have our discussion and said whether we want to meet in each of the hamlets, but we thought we would like to use this space and have it be show that it is central. It is callous. It is the callous town plan and that's how we write it. And so it will be both virtual, I think we can figure out the hybrid stuff and the howl, we're gonna do both a hybrid meeting. Just like this. You're right, and we're hoping, I think the public relations campaign will start soon. We've got a draft, it will go on the front page forum and I'm assuming Jira don't want to move that along every week and then we'll put in the link and kind of build it up. Great, and you're gonna be talking about that at the next meeting? Yeah, I mean that and we've got, we've drafted some questions that we want to ask, maybe we pretty much decided at our meeting this is our listening chance for the public to talk, the planning commission to listen. Each person has a set of, from the town plan to draft up. We've established our protocol and we've established who will be controlling the document. And I guess it's just a moral follow up at this and the next meeting for that. Okay, perfect, thank you. All right. Yeah, thanks so much. All right, it's 5.20, we've got another 40 minutes and I, did you guys get a chance to read the rules of procedure? Hey, should you mention about mapping? Oh, I think the 22nd. 22nd, yeah, on January 22nd, Franco Rossi is gonna come in and make this presentation. Right, Franco Rossi, okay. From CAI. Yeah, and he has to be on early. He has to be on early, he wanted to be on at seven, didn't he? Oh, whenever time you guys wind, it sounds like he's available today. Is that a regular set for reading, right? Yeah. No, no, that isn't my name. No, he said he would come on the 22nd, which is our next meeting. Okay, I think that's an early answer. Okay, well, we can talk about that. Yeah, we're looking forward to it. And I think he told us how much time he wanted, but I can't remember. Half an hour. I can't remember half an hour or 45 minutes, anyway. Is there a way for him to do that remotely? I wouldn't be in Minnesota that week, which is a real long run, sounds long to ask for it. So. Oh, oh, oh. I don't know the answer to that. When you're on Zoom, you can have the demo on the screen. Yeah. And share the screen with Zoom. That should work. Yeah, it might work better. Right. Yeah, I think that's great. Okay. Okay, great, thank you. Okay. All right, we're gonna move on to rules of procedure. And I left my file, but let's try to do it anyway. Do you guys wanna spend a few minutes working on that and you save us some time in March when we're trying to get organized? I think that'd be great. If we're going now. I may have to look up some of these shoulder. I sent you a draft. This was. When we all sent you edits. You and Gabriel were the only ones who sent edits. So this draft incorporates the track. That's what I thought, because I read it and I was like, this is way better than I remembered it. Yes, thank you, James. Yes, really. So did you close the public hearing and now we're in the regular select board meeting? I suppose so, yes. Yes, yes. Okay, so I would ask if anybody has any other comments they would like to make on this. You've all had it for a week or two. You're making this meeting, so it goes so fast. I was wondering if the regular time should just be six. I mean, we've been running. I didn't change that, did I? I think it was seven. It has always been seven. And we've been operating this entire year with it at six. And we seem to like that. Yeah, I haven't found that to be any more painful. I don't think it says the time. Under the meeting section number one, it says second and fourth Mondays of each month of the town hall. You're right, it doesn't list the time. Maybe it should, I don't know. Would you, yeah. It probably should. Okay, add time to meetings number one. I remember somewhere a time was always called out and I think maybe it was just on the warnings saying that it were on the website, so it just kind of habitually kept getting warned as seven for a while. I think it was a week. Okay, so you need to change that. Maybe it's better not to have a time because sometimes it's five, or maybe we have a lot going on, sometimes it's seven, somebody has a common flag. Well, if we said regular meetings shall take place at six o'clock. It's not a problem, yeah. Okay, I can fix that, or somebody can. Anything else? Really, would somebody like to? We're meeting. Yeah, yes. Move to replace the rules of procedure. What we did last time in last April, I think, was adopt the rules of procedure as written by the last select board, and this changes those. Would you like to move to replace those with this, with the one change noted that will put the time in? I have one other question before we do that. Okay, go ahead. Under the public participation section, bullet number two, it says each meeting there will be up to 15 minutes allotted for public comment. I know that's the standard, but does that limit us to 15 if we have something that we think there's gonna be a lot of comment we might put on the agenda that it's 45 minutes? I just don't want that. Language to limit. I guess I would have been fixed on the third one, but that may be a separate thing if people are talking about agenda items as opposed to the public. Yeah, that's a good point, Jamie. It does, it says if it's more than 15 minutes, we'd schedule it as an agenda item, so we could just change that. She'll be approximately 15 minutes, and then, you know, we, okay. Does that work? If I just say. Or you can say at least 15 minutes? We could do it that way? Yeah, I like that better. At least, yeah. Okay, change to at least. All right. Yeah, are you gonna submit the changes in a document? I'll see if these are on the website somewhere. The final group. On the website? I'm sure they are. I'm sure they must have lived there. But there's a lot more changes than just this from the last, what would be on the website? Yeah. So this needs to be changed, and then we need to replace it once we vote it. Yeah, right. Do you want me to do that or are you gonna do that? I'm happy if you want to do it. It's pretty simple. Thank you. All right, so I just wanted to share and have those so that we're gonna add the time, the meeting time, and we're gonna say at least 15 minutes. Yeah. All right. Anything else? I'm in trouble finding it right now. I stumbled on something on the section where it talks about continuing meetings. Where were that? Back to meetings, bro. Yeah, that was under the meeting section. Yes, you had given me some. I think it was you suggested. Number eight, meetings maybe recessed to a time and place certain. And then you had me add some language. I think it was either you or Gabrielle that said in that case you'll try to warn it. Yes, okay. And that was reasonably possible. I think that did get in here. In this case, I've only noticed that the meeting shall throw in so many possible. I didn't see any just kind of. Oh. I'm not, I thought I saw it earlier, but no. Meetings be maybe in terms of the meeting shall be provided if possible. Here it is. It's number three, but that's an emergency meeting. Special meetings have to be worn pursuant to number five, which is the same as the warning process. It makes it the same warning process as it is for a regular meeting if it's a special meeting. Great. I think my question was on continued meetings. Well, continued as opposed to emergency. So, cause what we've sort of been doing, we haven't been warning continued meetings on the assumption that if you were at the first one, you know when it would continue to. I kind of think it's better to warn the continuation of possible. It's apparently not. Right. I thought I saw it in here the other day, but now I'm not finding it. Where do you want to begin? I thought, I just wanted to quickly take, no, it wouldn't be an organization. How are you doing that? So we have organization, you know. And then it's agenda. It's a much-get agenda because Okay, so that's how you do a regular meeting. Conducted in a single. And then it says prior to a 24-hour meeting. No. Sorry, I should have bookmarked it, like just. Okay, we've ascertained it's not in meetings. What comes after meetings? There's no use of the word continue or continued. So, I guess it is. I think we need to be recessed. So, again, the only recessed is number eight under organization. The meetings may be recessed to a time and place. That's it. In this case, some public notice. Oh, in this case, some public notice of the meeting. Thank you, George. You should provide it if possible. Does that cover it, Jamie? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I didn't think that last time, did I? Right, I think it would be best practice if we... Now that you're adopting these rules. Yeah. Yeah, but sometimes we continue it to the next day. Right. So, you probably can't warn it. But if we continue it to a week later, then you could. Then you can. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, anything else? You're welcome. You ready to move it? Or do you want a few more minutes with it? The only other thing that I was kind of wondering and wanted to have a little conversation about was the agenda items. Okay. That would be under agendas? Yeah, or is that just really, I don't know if that was right. Business shall be conducted as it appears in the notice of agendas. Sorry, I'm just trying to catch up my thoughts. It's okay. It's giving way new chance to catch up on the football. Let's go. This is starting again. Oh, okay. Oh, it's a good one tonight. So under organization number four talks about how no one has the authority to represent or act on the border less specifically given that authority. But doesn't the chair have that role? Like if someone has to speak, if questions pose like media calls, isn't the chair empowered already to speak? I mean, yeah. I mean, any of us can speak to the media and talk about what's going on. But I can't say the board decided, or the board, I can't give a board opinion unless the board tells me that's their opinion. Okay. I think that's what that's. I guess it's more of a spokesperson role, which on a lot of boards is sort of by default, the chair's role. Maybe that's gonna help work here. I wouldn't think so if the press called Ann, she could talk, she's not forbidden from talking to them as long as she doesn't record. That'd be different than being the board thinks. That's right. I think this far, like most media is like, it's going and yeah, if it was something, I think so, about like an important issue that we need to have a single board voice, I would think we would have to. None of us is empowered to do that unless we specifically say you take the lead on this and you're like, we authorized Jamie to make a couple of decisions on the Curtis pond on our behalf at one point. Yeah, right. We've made it a couple of other authorizations. I think number four kind of speaks pretty clearly to that. I don't know that we've had any issue with spokespersons so much. Yeah, and you've been making decisions on IT and you and Ann have been making decisions on the shed case, we did authorize that as the lead. Okay. Jordan, how are you doing? Well, now that got distracted. So far, I don't think it's been an issue. I'm just trying to find where I was reading it, but it was taking up agenda items that aren't on the agenda, on the warned agenda. And I think one of the practices that we've done pretty well is in addition to allowing folks to make comment on any non-agenda items in the beginning of the meeting that we've solicited, or made a call for any additional agenda items that need to be addressed. And I think that that is a helpful practice just to get in the habit of making room for anything that needs to be brought up and then scheduling that into the conversation. Or so, I just didn't see any language that really- That allows for that? That allowed for that. Number six, under agendas? Under meetings or agendas? Because a lot of her additions and deletions that are- Maybe made as the first act of business. Yeah, I think making it the first act of business, otherwise it just gets moved on or scheduled for another time. Does that not cover it for you? It does. You don't have to apologize. Under agendas number five, I believe the last sentence is completely repetitive of the first sentence. Because posting it on the website, the town website is listed as one of the places that has to be posted, right? Good catch. Yeah, I think that's true. So we can strike that last sentence. I think that whole last sentence can just go. I agree with you, yeah? Everybody else too? Thank you, Jamie. Good catch, yeah. Kara, you got that. I got it. Okay. Anything else? So is this document and these rules or procedures, is this something that we currently have and we've had right along and spent on the town website and you just want to revise it or it's something that needed to be done that we really do have? It's kind of both. We wanted to make some changes to it last March and we started the process and then we just- And the flood happened. Well, first of all, we just got so buried in trying to figure out what was going on with the Curtis Pondam and the Shed case and so on and so on that we just- It according to the rules, it needs to be, it's supposed to be re-adopted the first meeting after town meeting every year. And so we adopted the old one. Intending to change it as soon as we had a chance. So we'll review it again next March. That's right. I believe it's a statutory requirement. It is. You have to adopt some sort of procedural rules and so that is either, I think in many cases for a lot of organizations, Robert's rules, which can then get pretty burdensome if not everybody's familiar with them. Otherwise, second to that, you have to have some sort of documented rules and procedures that get adopted every year after organizing the board. So I just thought since we had a little downtime here, we may as well do it and then we'll just, it'll be easy in March. We'll just, we won't have to talk about it. The main reason for my question is in my 18 years with the select board, I don't remember a formal document like this. Yeah, I think it's a statutory thing that- And I noticed they talked about it. I know that the first meeting after town meeting is the organizational meeting and they would just say it and that would become part of the minutes. You know, it would say we meet such and such and this and that and we'd lay out some things but never with this amount of detail. And so I just find it very curious but I think it's great and it's thorough and it's important and we should follow the rules and we should have this. But I just don't ever remember. I mean, and I was with the select board till 2021. I mean, this is based on the one that we inherited. Yeah, so it, yeah. So it might have been with the last select board. Right. Well, it's, which is based on the model, VLCT. Yeah, yeah. This is something I think the legislature did about 10 years ago. Same thing happened when I took over the DRB. Turned out we were supposed to have done it in 2015 and nobody had done it. Yeah, yeah. So we have to go through the process. I think it's very good. Yeah. Okay, anything else? Like to get on to executive session if we could. Oh, yeah. Do you have to adopt this? Would you like to adopt them tonight or do you want some more time with this document? I'd make a motion to adopt them as proposed with the edits that have been discussed. Right. I think there were about four, weren't there, Cari? There's a time removal of a set of things. The changes? Yeah. Do you want a year? Do you want a year? There's three. I got that meeting at start time of 6 p.m. Change the public comment period to at least 15 minutes and strike the second sentence of number five, about one more minutes. Yep. Okay. I'll second that motion. All right. All set. All in favor? All right. Thank you. So those will replace the old rules of procedure. Great. Yay. One of our, the list that's been on there forever. All right. As you know, Cari and Donnie interviewed a candidate for road foreman. And... Do we need to pause everything? We will need to do that once we make a motion. All right. I would like to suggest we go into executive session for a few minutes to just hear their report. Could I have a motion to, oh, under one VSA section 313, A1B to discuss hiring of personnel. So moved. Okay. What's that? Jamie moved. Would somebody please second? Ann seconded. All in favor? Aye. Okay. So, oh, and we'll invite Cari. Obviously, Cari has to come in with us, but...