 We're open to attendees and we're recording. Okay. Seeing the presence of a quorum, I am calling the governance organization and legislation committee of the town council to order at 930 on October 25th. Make sure everyone can hear and be heard. I'm going to call roll and then I'll talk about pursuant to. Mandy? Present. Michelle? Present. Sorry. Lynn? Lynn? Present. Jennifer? Present. And I'm present. Okay. Pursuant to order chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, extended by chapter 22 and 107 of the Acts of 2022, and extended by chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023. This meeting will be conducted via 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. Okay. It's a, and Jennifer, there were some confusions so about setting up the packet, etc. So I didn't get back to you on three and four. But what I'd like to start with, if it feels comfortable to the committee, is the reparations committee charge. I've gotten, and Athena will be able to show it, but I have responses from Kathy Shane, Andy Steinberg, and Mandy Jo, and questions of my own. And so we've been charged by, as a committee, to really look at this committee charge and refine it, and hopefully move forward with it. Jennifer. Yeah, I'm sorry. Have we seen this before? It was in our town council packet. It was in our town council. I'm sorry. I read the report. It was in the report. It was in attachment to the report. It was in attachment to the report. Okay. It starts on page 110 of the report. So it was buried in amongst other attachments. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And Athena, can you pull up? Or do you want me, I can get started with Kathy's comments. Or, Mandy, you could start either one. There's some overlaps and some questions that I have. And that Michelle. Yeah, I want to be really careful about my dual roles here. And so please help me if I, you know, get off track. But I did want to ask you if it would be helpful to just provide some sort of general, like, comments about what we thought about when we looked at this draft, if that would be helpful to start the conversation. Sure. Most importantly, I wanted to say that the biggest part of the discussion was related to giving the town manager some leeway because of that the applicant pool can vary depending on timing and, you know, who's engaged at the time, giving the town manager some leeway to decide whether it's a five or a seven-body, you know, group at a particular time. So that's why you'll see that in the charge. And then other than that, it was really just trying to take what we had, you know, come up within the recommendations and seeing where a successor body would be able to take those recommendations and sustain the process. So that's all I'll say for right now. Well, I have a question right now, in a sense, since you're bringing up the decision-making process. You seem to want two or three liaisons to this committee. And I'm wondering if it's clear to you and the AHRA what a liaison's role is, because they don't participate in the meeting, they carry questions back. So I'm a little confused about that. And that might be an easy place to start. I'm not sure if you have any insight and about that. That would be helpful. Thank you. Absolutely. Yeah, so again, you know, this document is a template. And we tried to fill it out to the best of our ability, but we didn't have any strong opinions necessarily on a liaison. I think we put in there to have one counsel liaison. Of course, counsel may change the role of a liaison and then may not, right? Or and we included one person from the CSSJC and HRC. Again, these were just sort of brainstorms. It would be very helpful for us to think about this together and decide that. One thing I will say is Anika had suggested, and maybe she sent this to you, Pat, but she had suggested when we talked the possibility of having somebody that was familiar with allocating funds programatically, like someone that might have some advisory capacity to think about that. We couldn't really figure out how to get that into the charge. And I don't know that it needs a specific role, but I just did want to mention that. OK, thank you. I'm going to throw it open to the rest of you to start talking about this. Can you? Yeah, go ahead, Mandy. And then I'd like Kathy's stuff pulled up there. My question is, are we going to go through each section individually to talk to sort of structure the conversation? Or are we going to just, you know, like what's your plan for structuring this conversation? I thought we would go through it. All of the stuff. Yeah, I thought we could go through it step by step, unless there's another way people would like to do it. I would love to give people a chance to look at the comments from Kathy Shane and if you could pull that up and then let people read that. And Mandy, you'll see overlaps and other things. Kathy's is very long. But yeah, actually, not so bad. So people could just glance through that. I'll add these to the packet as well. I didn't want to put them in there. I'm sorry. What is, you know, I'll add that. I'll add these lists of questions from counselors to the meeting packet. I didn't want to add it before the committee had a chance to put it in public. And people would let me know when they finished reading. That'd be great. Can you scroll? I'm sorry. Could you go back up? I'm a little bit of a slow reader. Thank you. Yeah. You can scroll if others are ready. I'm ready. I'm ready. I'm ready. I'm ready. Wait, I haven't read the chart yet. I was ready for scrolling, not this one. I'm good with a scroll to the next page whenever others are. So am I. Go ahead. Yeah, and this is the charge. Oh, that's just the charge. Yeah, we can go right through that, past that. And Andy's very specific comments and concerns is about Black only membership and the legality of that. So I think we can go down to Mandy. Or we can start the discussion because Mandy has also gone right in order. That's up to you guys. Jen? Yeah, I hope this is an overall question. And I just want to be clear that we only need to get state permission if we're going to make, if we're going to issue funds to individuals. But we don't need to go to the state if it's going to be we're going to give to education or housing. It depends if we're going to give to education or housing on the basis of race only specifically. If we're going to make any kind of direct payment on the basis of race, then we would presumably have to go through that process. But if we're, let's say, offering down payment assistance and the stated goal is that we want to support folks who have been historically locked out of the housing market, then as long as we find a channel for which that money can move through legally, then I don't see a need for, but I'm not a lawyer. But that's my interpretation. OK, that's really helpful because I didn't know that the state is concerned about the basis I was to make. I thought it was just the difference between whether it goes to individuals or like the schools. Right. It has to be like a public purpose if you're going to make a direct payment to somebody, whether it be money for a down payment or that's my understanding at least, or a direct cash payment, which we're not really talking about. If we decide to give money to the schools for, let's say, for history, that we wouldn't. We could decide that on our own. OK. It's interesting because the anti-aid amendment was created to stop funding going to Catholic schools because of the Irish population in Massachusetts was increasing and they were considered black like Italians were for a long time. So it's been in place. It is incredibly discriminatory and no one's ever really challenged it. It's a shame. Mandy, do you want us to read through or do you want to just start speaking? You can read through them. That's fine. OK. Everyone else. OK, people should let us know when it needs to be scrolled. I'm good on a scroll and on about others. Yeah, I am too. Yeah, me too. It would be really helpful, Athena, that now that we have this out and it's public for you to post it so we can refer back to it while we talk. It's already posted. It's in the online ticket and at your point. Thanks. Are we done with it? At the general question. That was my last item. And those are the comments that I received. Got it. So Mandy has proposed going through this step by step, which I think is a really good idea. So I'd like us to do that. Lynn. Yeah, I have an overarching question that I'd like us to keep in mind even though we will go through this as step by step. And that is the fact that we have with the adoption of some charge, whatever we do here, we would have two committees that in many ways are overseeing somewhat similar recommendations. And so I'm trying to, one of the things that we may do is have this committee have representation from those other committees to help with that communication. But in an overall way, I'm concerned that it just, it doesn't streamline decision making. It proliferates the number of people and bodies that need to do something. And I just, I'm looking for a way to streamline, not proliferate. I would agree with that. Michelle has her hand up. Yeah, go ahead, Michelle. I think this question that has come up in a couple of the councilor comments about the composition and whether the committee can be mostly black residents is an important question to answer with respect to what you're talking about, Lynn, because I think from the AHRA's perspective, it's really important that this committee doesn't get watered down into some committee that's dealing with all diversity, equity, and inclusion issues or dealing with all issues that relate to BIPOC folks in the community that it's really specific about black reparations. And so we want to consider what the legalities are. I mean, the composition of the AHRA was specific about how many black people needed to be on it. And that question hasn't been raised or to this point been questioned from anyone. But I do think that that's come up enough times that we may want to consider that as a starting point for focus. I would agree that we need to get a read on the legality. My question, and you just said something I thought was very interesting. And it was to have, is there a committee, should there be a committee, that basically works on a variety of issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion? And sometimes it has to put on a certain lens. And other times it has to put on a different lens. And what we're now, and all of that falls under our director of diversity, equity, and inclusion in many ways. And that would be the logical place where the liaison would come from. So that's what raises this for me, is do we need to, or if we look at HRC as having some of that same charge, do we need three committees with a lens? Or could it be two or even one committee with multiple ways in which they have to address their job? And for me, it's so many times we're dealing with people that says, well, what committee does that go to? Or we're dealing with people who say, well, then shouldn't this committee or that committee weigh in? And so I'm trying to get to the point that we don't have this multiplicity of confusion for the public, as well as, frankly, for the council in the future. Yeah, I have a comment I want to make, but I'm going to call on Mandy and then Michelle. Thank you. First, I did bring up the legality of the composition of the assembly and, frankly, CSSJC when it was stated the same way. And it was not well received, even the mentioning of the possibility that it might not be legal. I'm just going to say that. So it's not that it hasn't been brought up. It was not well received by the council in bringing it up. I, Lynn's question gets to, I guess, some of what both Kathy and I were seeing in this charge, which is, what AHRA has explained by what they would initially want the committee to do is very similar to both what CPA and CDBG committees do. And so do we need a third committee? And then given what AHRA recommended in terms of the programming of the funds, if this were to go forward, do we need a third committee or that programming a lot overlapped with both CPA and CDBG programming goals in some sense? Not a complete overlap, but even AHRA said have, at least for housing, CPA change their rules or not change their rules, but think about new priorities or additional priorities and all. And so do we need a third committee doing a lot of the same thing that two committees are already doing from that point of view? And then you look at the other part that some of what I was adding, a new bullet point about actual structural racism and eliminating that versus the payment of money to repair past harms, does that need a new committee or can that be folded into the Human Rights Commission's role and work or CSSJC's work, recognizing that structural racism is not just against Black people? That's why I recommend maybe HRC. But can some of the work be folded into other committees so we're not creating yet another committee that needs staff, that needs application, that needs that, that we already know it is hard to find volunteers for the committees we have? So I don't know where I stand, but I bring that up. Michelle, then Jennifer, and then I'll take a turn. Yeah, I would just say to consider two things. One, we have a $2 million fund if we're thinking, a $2 million commitment that will eventually be developed to $2 million and set up as an endowment. I think that is a significant amount of money that in my mind really does warrant having a stakeholder body to assess and determine what sorts of ways those funds will be used. The other thing I would say is the input is really important. So input coming from the Black community into some focal group that can focus on taking the voice of the Black community on a yearly basis and really direct the funds where the repair is needed. We have to remember that what we signed up for here is Black reparations. And what that means is we're determining what harm there has been historically and continues to be for the Black community. They're the harmed community. And then we are using the fund and other resources that we have to repair that. I feel we would be taking a major step backwards if we went and tried to have this be done by the HRC or by any other group for that matter. I understand the complexities and the extra time that this would take to have an additional committee. But we went as far as setting up a $2 million commitment for this. And we made a commitment to the harmed Black community in this town. And so I just really want to, without judging necessarily like the thought process here, I just really wanted to put that out there. Jennifer? Yeah, I agree with Michelle. I think that this is a very specific committee. I mean, this has a specific charge. And it's to address past harm to a particular community, not to all communities who experience discrimination. And I don't. So I think to spread this charge out among already existing committees, yeah, I don't. That doesn't seem appropriate for the charge, for what the purpose of this committee is. And I don't think that this committee is going to be hard-pressed to have volunteers, to find volunteers. I think there will probably be more than there are spaces. That's just my feeling. OK, I'm going to take a moment. I feel like this needs to be a separate committee for reasons that Michelle already shared and Jennifer shared. And to me, it needs to represent Black community voices. The problem that I'm hearing about are twofold. One is, who is the Black community in Amherst? Right now, we have only certain people speaking out and other members of the Black community intimidated to speak out. So it seems to me that this council needs to find ways to reach the Black community. And that is a pop, we can do that. And the other thing that I'm concerned about is the reason that we're bringing up membership, not being Black only, is because of Andes, we have had a resident threaten a lawsuit. Now we have no idea whether they would go forward with that. But that's a hell of a threat for us to begin to think about. I also feel like if we're going to unite and we're going to find ways to collaborate, it would potentially be very valuable to have non-Black people on this committee supporting the goal of Black reparations. We also haven't decided, as a body to counsel, whether or not this is going to any Black person in Amherst or are we holding the line, and I have, I am not stating an opinion here, are we holding the line only for descendants of slavery? Or are we opening it to the full Black community? And how do we, as a community, define that? It starts to make like, I'm trying to think one drop of Black blood makes you Black, which was used to stop people's lives and intimidate people. So I think we need to think about this very carefully, but it does need to be a separate committee mandate. And then Lynn. Yeah, I guess one thing I'm still struggling to understand is what I see is the disconnect between reparations for past harms to Black people and what was actually recommended in the AHRA report and what Michelle, you've said about how we can structure payments. The recommendation was for any Black individual to be eligible for whatever programs, payments from programs that we come up, even if they move here 10 years from now. And even if they have no history in the United States, if they move here from a different country, which is a completely different understanding of what reparations for past harm is. But number two, you've also said even today, we might not be able to, because of legal constraints, limit the payments to, say, Black individuals for home ownership opportunities, that it might have to be historically marginalized all of that, which then almost takes it out potentially of the Black reparations realm, because any historically marginalized community, women, low income, other non-Black individuals would be eligible for those programs. And so that's part of what I'm wrestling with as I look at a charge like this and the comments that are coming through of using reparations funds for repairing past harms, yet multiple places and multiple statements have been made that it wouldn't necessarily be only directed, number one, at Black people and number two, at Black individuals who have actually been harmed by their time in Amherst. So I don't know what the answer is, but I guess what I'm saying is this is where I'm, I don't know what to do with this charge because of some of those statements that have been made. Okay, and I'm trying to figure out right now and I'd like some input from people, Lynn should be going next, but I'm trying to figure out, Michelle, do you wanna respond or do you, can you wait till we go through and get to you? I can absolutely wait, I'm taking notes, no worries. Okay, thank you. Lynn? So yeah, I just wanna give a parallel. If you're on a scholarship committee at a university or a college, you have different funds you're overseeing. Some of those funds have restrictions to who they can go to. And yet the scholarship committee is a single committee. And it says, okay, we have these funds and they have to be, only go to women, okay? I wanna, I'm jumping into this and yet I'm feeling the tension of jumping in and somehow or another being labeled as opposed to what we've done. And I'm not, okay? But I'm just looking at, I mean, $2 million is a big commitment and at the same time, it's not that big, okay? And yet we wanna create an entire committee and structure to just oversee that. And yet over here, we have the CSSJC with all of the recommendations that it has and some of those are parallel like a youth center, that kind of thing. And I just wanna make sure that we think about what it is that makes sense for tackling this critical issue in Amherst and not basically bifurcating everything all over the place. And so I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't have a committee that has a focus of reparations. I'm just suggesting that maybe there is one committee structure that deals with all kinds of diversity, equity and inclusion. And one of its tasks is this. And frankly, maybe CSSJC's gets folded into that as well. So that's why I'm coming at it from that perspective. Thank you. Yeah, no, I think your perspective is a good one. I understand the simplicity issue, but yeah. So Jennifer? Yeah, well, I see diversity, equity, inclusion as being very separate from what the charge that we're talking about for this committee. I mean, if we wanted to, and I think we would need to discuss this with CSSJC if it made sense to maybe be a subcommittee of that committee, but I don't think we should be the ones to decide that. But I don't think it's part of DEI, that that's a much bigger. I don't think it's just, it's very separate. I mean, that makes me very uncomfortable that we would put CSSJC, DEI, the Human Rights Commission and reparations in any way together. But I think if we were to say there was some, I think that we would have to have a conversation with if we were gonna make it a part of an existing committee, we would need to have a conversation with the ARA and that committee. I don't think that we the GOL should be deciding that. Jennifer, I agree with the AHRA, I'll read, I've never called it that. Be consulted on this, I really do. And I'm just gonna say in a general way, CSSJC is Community Safety and Social Justice Committee. So there is a possibility of it fitting there. I'm worried in another variety of this thing is we've got all these people from other committees coming into this committee. And I feel like whatever we decide, there needs to be solid ground and structure around whether we put it in another committee or we form a separate reparations committee. And I'm, yeah. Okay, Michelle. And then Lynn is your hand up. Okay, Michelle. Yeah, I just wanted to say that Lynn's observation about the tension is real. And I encourage us to really take our time with this and not feel like we have to have a decision by the end of this meeting. I really think we need to allow for these questions to come up and to be taken in and responded to in a thoughtful way. And also to trust that some of this, we really are creating something new here. And so we don't have a lot to look to. And so I think that trusting that some of this is gonna come with time and we may need to make adjustments and we may try something and that may not work and we might need to try something else. But I do think we have to consider like the primary, Lynn, your example about the scholarship committee so I understand what you're saying completely and from a simplistic and efficiency point of view that makes sense. But what's so special and significant about reparations, black reparations, is that we're asking the harmed community how they see repair happening. So we can't really imagine if that scholarship committee was made up of 90% of people that were not from the harmed community. We can't ask that committee to put on the lens. It's just not in this case. In my opinion, we can't ask a majority white or majority non-black committee to put on a lens to make decisions about how repair should happen for black people. I feel very, very strongly about that. And I think there may be a way and I think we've discussed that the CSSJC charge may need a looking at because there's been some confusion about what the role of that committee is as well. So it's possible that there could be a committee that would encompass more of this. I just think we have to not look at this through a DEI lens. This is not, reparations is not DEI. And that's for the benefit not only of black residents but of the whole community. If we started to try to co-mingle those, it would be in my opinion detrimental to other identities in the community, not just black folks. And I just wanted to respond, Mandy, to some of your questions. I think that what you're talking about is so... It really is central to the discussion on reparations, whether you're talking about it federal, state or local. And I do think we need to continue to have that discussion. Our recommendations took into account the legal limitations that we had. I think had we not known from KP Law early on that we had those legal limitations, then we may have possibly less programmatic recommendations and more direct benefit recommendations. I think we're trying to kind of have a hybrid. And as we develop whatever, whether it be programmatic or more direct benefits, there's going to be a legality piece that we're gonna have to consider and an eligibility piece as you've brought up several times. And I think that's really, really important to keep at the forefront. And I don't think we're gonna be able to necessarily work it all out in this charge. I think we're gonna have to have some space in this charge and be willing and flexible, be willing to say, you know what, we might not get it right exactly right this first time, but this is our best at it and then we can revisit it as we go along. Thank you for giving me all that space, Pat. Pat, I just wanna correct one thing. I never suggested it be a subcommittee of another committee. Thank you. Pat, you're muted. Yeah, I'm sorry, their phone kept ringing. I didn't hear it as a subcommittee. I thought what I thought you were suggesting, Lynn is this be added to the charge of another committee that it'd be suggesting specifically. It's, can you clarify, Lynn, because let me finish, please. What I thought you were saying, and this may be true for others or not, is that you wanted to, I hate using this word in this one, integrate this, the issue of reparations, Jennifer's nodding, into another already existing committee. That's what I heard. And I'm not saying that's a good or bad idea right now. I'm just clarifying, is that what you were talking about? Or, because that's not a subcommittee to me. I've never, that word didn't even occur to me in this practice so far. So is there something you wanna clarify, Lynn, or is that what you mean? No, I have said in the beginning that as we look at this, I think we should look at simplifying where the public can go, whether that is the creation of a committee that includes a variety of different charges or whatever it is, just that was my point. I'm done discussing this. Thank you. Well, that's too bad. It is too bad. Whoa, I do not understand what's going on right now. And I think that we need to stop as a committee and talk about what's going on because we're not gonna be able to continue. Michelle? Yeah, I just, I will make a recommendation. This is totally normal. What's happening right now? And of course, I think what my recommendation is, we just received a lot of information from our colleagues that we really haven't had a chance to digest. We've had some discussion. Those suggestions from our colleagues are now in a packet that other of our colleagues can see. My suggestion is we pause and take some time to review those, take some time to think about this. There is, nobody's wrong here, really, honestly, nobody. This is a really fruitful discussion. And I think that pausing right now would be a really good opportunity for us. And I know as a chair, Pat, you have to think about timing and things like that. I never think about that, go ahead. If that works for you, I think that we pause, we take in some of this great feedback we've gotten this discussion that we've had and then we come back to this. Either later in the meeting or at our next meeting. That's my recommendation. Thank you. I want to thank Michelle for her words and her recommendation. I would request, if possible, if we bring this up at another meeting, Kathy referenced the CPA committee. I had actually tried to find the CPA committee charge and I could not. But I referenced the CDBG charge too. I was able to find one. I don't know whether it's the most recent. And then we're also having had discussed the Human Rights Commission and the CSSJC. It might help hold the next time to be able to see the draft charge for the committee we've been discussing this, A, B, R, C. But also those other four charges, just to sort of see they seem to be the most relevant charges for whatever reason that we might even incorporate language into a new charge and all of that. But it would be helpful, I think, if we had those charges in a packet to all reference, if possible. Jennifer, I'll try and find those in Adam to the next meeting packet, Mandy. Thank you. Thank you, Athena. Yeah, no, I just wanted to say, I know, Michelle, you said at the beginning, you were a little concerned because you wear two hats, but I think it's just incredibly helpful. We couldn't have this discussion without you being here since you're on both committees. Right. Yeah, so thank you. Okay. I'm trying to figure out, go ahead, Lynn. I would ask that we also get the legal opinion that's been asked for by several people now about committees. That makes sense. I'm just wondering if I interrupted you. I thought you were finished. I'm sorry. That's it. I'm wondering if the legal opinion would be of the charge as it is now. And that would be helpful. The legal opinion would be... And it would probably have to be, go ahead, Lynn. The legal opinion would be is whether or not you can appoint a committee with the requirement that certain membership be of a certain race or other qualifications. Like, you know, if it was an all woman committee, can you do that? Okay. The only thing about that is that feels like a question that could be, that other questions could be attached to that that's sort of a pretty much a yes or no with some detail. And I don't know if I wanna keep going back and forth with KP law or whether we wanna collect some of these to present to KP law. So it's not slowing down the process. I feel like we need to slow down the process of what we're going through, absolutely. But I don't know if I want things going to KP law piecemeal and I will take the advice of the committee on that, Michelle. And Pat, if you'd like, I could work with you just to start to identify some of the legal questions that have come up from our colleagues, from the AHRA. We could start to put a list together and then maybe have that prepared for this body when we talk about this again, so that we can sort of see if that's a good list. I agree, I think that going back and forth back and forth to KP law for a variety of reasons isn't the best approach. And I think we may need, there's like a chicken and egg situation where we may need some information before we can get to the next step. So I think we can find a middle ground there but I'd be happy to help you with that, Pat. Thanks, I don't know whether that constitutes a subcommittee, Athena. It does, yeah. If Michelle's just gonna put those questions together then that's fine and she can seek advice from a member. I was just gonna point out that this committee has just three meetings left before the last council meeting and I was gonna raise this later under future agenda items just that this committee will need to start working on a carryover memo and wrapping things up. So if this is something that the committee wants to make a recommendation to the council on before the last council meeting to just think about how much time we have left and if the committee is gonna agree on a set of questions that you'll ask KP Law for advice on, that's, I'm just worried about the timeline and. Thank you for that, Athena. Anything else, Athena? I'm gonna take a little time and probably step in stuff but that's life. I may have gotten distracted because my phone kept ringing and messages were being left and I'm trying to focus here. I do not know what happened that made you upset, Lynn, but I do know that all of this is extremely difficult to talk about and so I just wanna figure out if we can't do it, then how do we do it as a community? So I don't know what you can share or what you won't share and I apologize for not knowing and it could have been something I said or something but I kinda need to know what's going on. I am not upset, per se. What I have done is stuck my neck out. Yes. And it's been misinterpreted as being against this, as being trying to push this back into the white community, any number of things, none of which is true. I didn't, I didn't. Pat, I don't think we can debate this, okay? I just wanna be very clear. I'm not trying to debate anything, I'm trying to figure out what the hell happens. What I'm proposing people think about something and in the process of asking people to think about something as always happens or often happens at these kinds of conversations, I get labeled and I've seen that happen to other counselors and it is one of the reasons why no one wants to speak up because it's a delicate issue to discuss and it is, and when you do discuss it, it's hard to find the right words. And what I just don't appreciate is having my words twisted, thank you. Lynn, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I don't, I'm gonna accept your feelings and the validity of those feelings but I don't see how your words were twisted and maybe that's a conversation we can have privately. Michelle, you were gonna say something? Yeah, I was just gonna say that I also accept Lynn's feelings but also I'm wondering where she felt her words were twisted and if there's a repair that needs to happen there. And again, maybe this is not for the public discussion necessarily but I just wanted to say it is hard to talk about these topics and even maybe Lynn, you were referring to your suggestion about looking at the scholarship committee and just it, you know, this is a unique situation. And so it doesn't mean we shouldn't look at all sorts of models and so yeah. Anyway, I'm sorry that there's, that your seems that your feelings were hurt Lynn and I hope that we can restart again next time. Thank you, Michelle. Everybody on this committee except perhaps Michelle has been called a racist by the community or has been called some other name and it's sad because it affects every member of the council, it affects members of the community and as I said earlier within the black community itself and the BIPOC community itself, people are afraid to speak out. So it is probably the biggest problem that we face as a community. Okay. All right, the other agenda item. So I'm gonna bring this back next week. Athena, I may sit with you and try to make up a schedule if you have time but we can arrange that, but you were gonna speak. I was just gonna suggest we take 30 seconds to breathe. Yeah, why don't we take a five minute break? I can't see the, let me see. It's 10, 25, let's come back at 10, 30. Thank you. Please take your pictures off. I apologize for eating, but I'm starving. I'm gonna take my picture off temporarily. I'm not sure I like my chewing face. We have a thousand things that we really need to deal with. I definitely wanna get to some of the continued look at the rules of procedure and I wanna find a way to get that worked on so we can have it ready for council in some format. But I'm thinking we had talked about specifics for town manager goals last time and is that a place that people want to look at right now? I could use some help from the committee on where we go next. I forget what the timeline is. I'm ready to look at it now. When is a first draft supposed to be at the council? I'm, I think I do know that because I don't right now. I'm just checking our plan. I think it's November 20th as we have a draft on the agenda and then a vote on December 4th and December 18th, if not December 4th. So we probably should start the discussion today. Pat, you're muted. I can't see either. I have not gotten a lot of input from councilors but I will try to see what's there and pull it together for our next meeting. Jennifer and then Michelle. I just have a question. Last, for this year's town manager goals, did we actually not finalize them and vote on them till January? Right, so this year we cannot do that because the council, right. Right, because this is not something that feels like it could be a carryover because we're setting the goals for the next council. Michelle and then Mandy. That was similar to what I was. I remember Lynn saying last year that we were really getting the goals pretty late to the town manager. And I think it's because we took extra time. I remember really working on the goals last year for multiple meetings. So yeah, I had the same observation. Mandy and then Lynn. So I went through them this morning and have marked up my PDF of the goals with changes I think are logical or need done because of what he's been doing and done and completed. So they need revised for that reason along with some things I'd like to add. I can go through them now if Pat's for next meeting planning on bringing in a sort of revised draft based on comments. I can send them to Pat. It would probably be easier if I had the word document to send so that I could do a marked up copy for combination instead of just a written on a PDF. I just added that to the packet. Excellent. But I can briefly go through some of them so that it's been out there at least if people would like. And then I was saying CRC is still trying to come up with its own potential recommendations related to the goals that CRC's charge put some stuff in to CRC for. I don't know whether we will finish that but it will be on our next agenda which is before CRC's next meeting. I'd like to start working on that and having you put them in but I'd like to hear from Lynn first. I want to confirm the timeline and the fact that our last meeting is on the 18th of December and we do need to finish them. However, I also want to mention that the next council can always go back in and revise something. The thing that is most unfair is to not give the talent manager the goals so he has a maximum amount of time to achieve them. So and Mandy Jo, I believe you did similar something last year. I'm sorry you didn't have the word document but thank you for doing that. Okay. Anybody else before we have Mandy start with her edits? Mandy, do you prefer to share your document or should I make changes in here? So I just have a PDF with handwriting that's probably not readable. Okay. No, no, no, I'll try and make notes in here and I'll post this as revised and add that to the packet. And some of them, as I said, are things that I haven't been through the full manager self-evaluation but some that he indicated he had completed so we would either delete or revise to address that. Some are my own requests for additions so are not just updates to the goals. But I can go through what I've got. Athena already started with the years. There's one more in the third paragraph of the intro for the year which is a minor change obviously. And I'll wait till she's done saving. So one thing I'd like to add to climate action and I'll talk about this because it's just right now I don't have great wording. And I don't have a new sub-goal but to the first sentence, something about climate resiliency that we need to not just make progress on our action goals of carbon neutrality but we also have to somehow prepare the 2023 in the third paragraph, Athena. Yeah. But we somehow have to prepare the town for being resilient in the face of climate change. And so I would add I'm requesting personally in addition to that first sort of sentence that talks about progress on the council's climate action goals some sort of addition that says prepare the town to be resilient in the face of climate change or some I don't know the great wording but something like that that talks about the other half of climate change trying to prevent it as much as possible but also being able to respond to. Oh, not in that in the actual climate action section, Athena instead of general objectives. It was the first sentence like right before you get to the number one something like that. In terms of it looked like from the manager's evaluation that he going to that one number two says complete JPE formation and then submit the CCA to the DPU well, it's already been submitted. So we would in that number two I assume the update would be not submit the application but start with and start implementation of CCA upon approval or something like that. So delete the submit part completely. Now that, so Athena if you just submit the yeah, and then you can take delete all the way to start because start would be the complete instead of start or start implementation. Yeah, I don't know whether it's complete or start and then we just have to add the modifier implementation of CCA upon approval. I think he also indicated under the carp stuff where we get to the letters B, D and F have been done still within climate action. It appeared Paul indicated that in his self-evaluation B, D and F. And then again where I don't have anything if we're going to say we need to prepare to be resilient maybe we want a numbered goal along that but I don't have wording for it. You know, because we've got a one, two, a three and a four with an A, B whatever maybe there needs to be a five. I don't know. We can talk about that later. Yeah, I think there does need to be a five but keep going. Yeah. Community health and safety. Item number one, I am hoping can be deleted by the time we pass this. But it can't be yet. Well, this is for next year. So I'm hoping we can propose something because it have that in there. It might want to be instead of support implement the residential rental bylaw or something instead of maybe we don't want to delete it completely but I think implement something like that. Again, I haven't thought through all of these. For economic vitality, CRC talked about but we don't have specifics that both numbers one and three, we should have specifics instead of just you know, review, facilitate review and revision. We thought about maybe recommending specific action of what parts to be done but there's no specifics there and all. So adding, thinking about what the specifics could be. We might have more from CRC in another two weeks on that. Similarly with housing affordability. All of them are prioritized explore in short, numbers one and four say prioritize or explore. Again, for specifics or something, maybe we want to add propose instead of prioritize and instead of explore in number one and number four and same with number three, instead of increase the diversity, propose measures to increase the diversity because you might not be able to increase the diversity without doing something regulatory. And then one thing in looking at housing affordability that I thought was missing personally was something about rental prices. So whether we want to add something about a number five that would be propose measures or whatever to lower rents that might have the effect of lowering rents. Again, I don't have wording but another of my personal thoughts on that. A lot of them focused on home ownership but not rental costs. And that means that he could begin working or the council could also in support of them work on re-establishing rent control in Massachusetts, things like that, you know. But something about rental costs, yeah. For major building, capital building investments, number one, we have the financing plan. So I thought the financing plan part might be able to be deleted. This is still, I think this is going to, this part is going to come up. Oh, okay. There's that five million that's still out there but I think it's gonna come up before the end of the year. So we can say like if completed. No, it would just be that part of it, the devise of financing that I thought might be able to be deleted because the rest still needs to be in there, right? Support the committee and meet the milestones and deadlines. But yeah, that one, who knows? Just thinking of it. Yeah. And similar with number two, the report to the council on state of financing will be this year. So I was thinking that could potentially be deleted if we're looking towards next year's goals. And instead mirroring the language of number one. So work in its realized to renovate, expand and meet milestones and deadlines or something like that. Just so it mirrors number one. I don't know whether there are any more milestones and deadlines with that, but. And I'm kind of frustrated with three and four. And Hickory Ridge has been proposed over and over again as an effective site. It's being used now by the fire department. The chief has said that's as far out as it could be, but it's not problematic where it would be. There's no timeline. There's no, there's, we have had the same goal for the whole time we've been on the council. And so I'm not sure what it is that I want this because we don't have a location. We have it identified and nothing's happening with it. The town manager is not bringing it to the council. The council is not asking him to. So how to make this more specific? I'm at a loss, but maybe my friend Jennifer or my friend Lynn will have good ideas. Jennifer? Well, no, I was going to say that I guess we respond to this in the evaluation, in our evaluations that, but when we have the same goal year, objective year after year, and we don't have to change the wording, that's a problem. Yeah. Lynn? I show the frustration, but again, that should be reflected in the evaluation. I actually have two things and I don't know whether they should go here or elsewhere that I would like added to this. About the projects? Well, the question is, are they major building, are they major capital building investments? The reality is the renovation of the senior center that has been discussed under ARPA money is a major project. It's probably two million plus project. And then the whole issue of how do we catch up on repair and replacement of roads and sidewalks, which at a minimum is a $40 million project. So I really wanna see those reflected either here or someplace else, but I think of them as major. Yeah, I agree. There's a whole separate section four is in the goals are infrastructure management. So I think that some of what you're saying would go in there, Lynn. It might, but they're so large in scope. Yeah. I don't think of them as kind of just small projects. I mean, under the road issue, what I really wanna see is a multi-year plan developed and begin implementation for roads and sidewalks. This is, you know, if we can't talk, we cannot address this with a $2 million a year plan. We're never gonna get ahead. And on the senior center, he's the town manager has already talked about that being a major commitment on the proposals that he came forward on ARPA. It was probably the one most agreed to by all of us. And the next one was the canopy over the high school. If it could be figured out how to do it on property, we don't own. So. But right now it feels like the distribution of ARPA funds. But I think, how do people feel about adding the roads and sidewalks to capital building? And I mean, maybe then we change the category to major capital investments. So it's not just building. I mean, the senior center is a renovation. The solar power, solar panels on the high schools is a separate issue. But roads and sidewalks and feels like, I don't know, what do people think about that, Michelle? And then Mandi and then Jen? I think we should consider having an entirely category all on its own for roads and sidewalks to really raise it to the level that is required right now. So I think we should consider that. I would also, I know the youth center is somewhere here, but that's another 500,000 that's already been set aside for that, so that's already been thought of. And then Pat, I just wanted to ask you, are you saying that some information has come to us that Hickory Ridge is the chosen location for the center? No, no, it is not chosen. That's where I'm confused. Okay. The fire chief says that it works fine and they are using it and the firefighters themselves have said, it's much easier on their return back into Amherst because they can go East Hadley Road. Is that something that we can prescribe? Like, can we say? I mean, it seems like that's a bigger discussion that the council would want to have, but are you asking for us to include that specifically in terms of location in the goal? The council has to vote the location. I'm sorry, what, Lynn? The council has to vote the location. Yeah, which we haven't done because it never comes back and I don't understand that process anymore, but what I was mostly referring to is that we identify and secure, we've been, this is the same goal for the last four or five years. So how do we get movement on it? Because there is none. Or if there is, it's not being shared with the council. So I think we should really like pause there for a second and ask the question. Lynn, you just said that it needs to be voted by the council. Is that on an agenda for? I have not been asked to put it on an agenda by the town manager. So what do we have to follow? Okay, so let me just, we could force the issue by saying we want to, but you cannot move to schematic design until you actually identify the real location because schematic design is done based on a location. And I agree with Pat, there's been this discussion kind of out there, oh, let's use Hickory Ridge. But then there was also the discussion out there for many years of let's use the DPW site. So the two of these keep going hand in hand. And at some point, the town council also has to vote money. So it's, there's a lot of, you know, that has to go into this. So how do we make, can we make this more specific Mandy and then Jen? Yeah, so I want to respond to a couple of things here. I think we could instead of say identify and secure, bring to the council for a vote, a location for the replacement or something like that. I want to say, I believe town meeting already funded the schematic design phase. There might need more, but I believe town meeting already voted the borrowing for schematic design for the central fire station. We, years ago or something. So it's also was a public cost score now, but it's already partially funded I believe through a vote of town meeting. I don't necessarily agree with a roads and sidewalk section. I would not put it under capital building investments. I think building investments is our buildings. It doesn't have to be a new building, but I think it's them meant for big buildings. So community centers, senior center, youth center, all of that instead of specifics though, I hesitate to use this document to avoid conversations about priorities of building, including priorities of a youth center versus a senior center versus just a community center that includes it all. So I would say instead of specific centers, and I actually had, I have a note on the youth center is talked about in the community health and safety part of this up above. And I actually had made a note that I didn't bring up as I was going through. Do we want to say community center instead of youth empowerment center? But maybe a number six or something that talks about identifying for the council or presenting the council with other major building investments with its trade-offs or something so that the council can actually have a conversation about large projects instead of using the document to sort of agree on projects that maybe we haven't actually had discussions on but putting them in there as if it's been discussed and agreed upon. For roads and sidewalks, I would stick that, keep that down where we've kind of got it in management goals under infrastructure management maintenance and land stewardship. But again, part of that discussion involves what, number one, how much money and a plan but also number two, what are we aiming for our roads to be when we look at the road to index or whatever that has excellent, good, fair, poor, awful or whatever the five levels are on there. Where are we aiming for? Because that changes what that number is. Are we aiming for everything to be good and better? Are we aiming for everything to be fair and better? Three and better out of a one to five scale, two and better? What are, we haven't had those discussions either and that really changes the cost estimate, I would assume. So again, I would argue for a discussion or some sort of presentation for discussion on something like that. Because if we do end up saying, we wanna spend 40 million on roads but we gotta know what we're giving up for that. You know, that's a major discussion. That's not something that should just be added into these goals of do it in my mind. And maintaining a list of future roads in sidewalk repair is that gets added to, but nothing, what happens with that list? Where are we going? And I think we need to have some specifics there. Jen, you're muted. Sorry, I click on it and it goes back to you. But anyway, so yeah, I think that we do need some specificity. You know, now that I've just completed one year, you know, the first year you're on the council for the first time, you know, you're evaluating the town manager on goals that were set by the previous council. So this is, I feel like the first time I've been involved in setting the goals and then seeing the self-evaluation that comes back. And I am concerned that the goals get so general that if the town manager reports back that he's working on something, then we say, oh, great, he's working on it. But have we really moved anywhere? So I think we need to have some specificity of exactly what should be accomplished. So it's not just that, well, we kind of worked on something. And yeah, so I'm just wanting, that's just a general comment. So I do think when we say the thing about the DPW and the fire station, it just doesn't change from year to year. And I think that's frustrating to us. It's certainly frustrating to the public. So I think with sidewalks, you know, I was agreeing with Michelle, but I think it coming under infrastructure, but yeah, I think we need something specific. So like we got a list in one of the town manager reports of this 10 roads that were next being done. Yeah, you know, I drove to some of those roads. I wanted to now understand how those roads were selected, because they don't necessarily seem like the most major roads or the roads in as much need. So it's just a general comment of how can we structure what we're asking to be done in the next year so we can really evaluate based on real benchmarks next time, a year from now, whoever's on the council. Any, Lynn, and then Mandy? Yeah, I either, to me, the issue of road repair and sidewalks is one of the most single most things we hear about from constituents. And I would really either urge that we have it as a separate goal or that we put it up in the policy area and we put it up in the policy area and refer later in infrastructure, or we do what was suggested earlier and we listed under major capital projects, not building projects only. Mandy? I guess I'd be okay with changing major capital building investments to major capital investments as was suggested, I think by Michelle or Jennifer. Think of it as me. Whoever it was. Doesn't matter. Sorry, I knew it wasn't me. I would keep it as investments, not projects. I like the word investments there. I obviously have more, I'm happy to let this conversation continue before I get to some of my other suggestions, but. So we would want, are people in agreement with this change? We can do it by consent. Is everybody okay, Lynn? I'm fine. Jen, I don't think we have to vote if we can come together. Yeah, I kind of think about it actually. Please put a note under at the end of this. Add in roads and sidewalks. Yeah, that's right. And then the other thing that keeps coming up is where do we want and is it in the right place that would be the issue of, go back up to the top to the first, second goal, I think it is. Yeah, the issue of, under here, the whole issue of the youth center. Yeah, I mean, number three in community health and safety deals with both a center and programming. Yes. Right. And the plan, and there is money in our put aside for that. And I believe the town manager plans to have some committee convened for that, but that's down the road. He hasn't done it. Okay. And as long as people are fine with it there, or should it go? It does seem to me like that's the place it should be. Well, there seems to me a difference. Yeah, I agree that it should be here because we can start programming. Without having a building, we have rec facilities and there are possible, I've talked to Amherst College at Indian quite work for space and stuff like that, but there are options. So it's more like, can we get something up and running? We also need to clarify, are we talking about a youth empowerment center, which was the original proposal? Or are we talking about a, what are the details? And again, those are conversations that are difficult to have. And I'm gonna call on Michelle and then I'll go to Jen and Mandy if that's okay. Yeah, I was just picking up on, I did see that the town manager, I think in one of his reports said that he was putting together a committee or an ad hoc task force to determine about, so is that something that we wanna explicitly put into the goals that the formation of that committee, unless Lynn, you have some knowledge that that's happening in the next couple of weeks, if it's not, then maybe putting specific, since we can pick up on something we know is already sort of in process that he has stated, maybe making, putting that in here to solidify that. And we're, so that would be as part of number three or it would be? Part of number two, right? Oh, number three, yes, exactly. Like, you know, whatever language we might use to say, like to form the committee, I could pull up actually the town manager report and use the language from there if I can find it, that he- Well, let's put form committee right now and then if you see the, then Athena, the language that would be helpful. Athena? I'm sorry, I'm bumping the line for Athena. This issue of the town manager forming a committee is coming up in finance when we're talking about the disposition policy, the surplus property disposition policy because the formation of a committee is really an advisory committee to the town manager is really at the discretion of the town manager. And it seems a little odd to have the council specify how the town manager would bring a recommendation to the council. So you're saying the form committee should not be there? Lynn, you're not next. Hang on one second. I know, but I wanna be clear that what I think Athena is saying is something that we should all keep in mind. How specific do we wanna get in terms of how something should be accomplished versus just say please accomplish this? That's all. Thank you, Lynn, but I think Athena wasn't quite finished. That's all right. That's pretty much what I wanted to say. I think saying the council wants to see this as a request coming from the town manager, rather than saying exactly how the town manager comes up with that request. I think that there's a, you know, the executive function and the legislative function. And I think that sort of, I'm trying not to use the word micromanage because I don't wanna be insulting to your suggestion, Ms. Michelle. But I think it gets a little bit, telling the town manager exactly how to do his job. I'm sorry, I was just picking up on what he already put out there in the town manager report. So just to sort of give, I don't wanna say throw a bone, but like he's already put it out there. So let's put it in here and then he'll be able to accomplish it pretty quickly. But I totally get your point as well. Okay, so I'm gonna suggest we remove it. Jen or Mandy, yeah. I think Mandy's hand went up first. Okay. I was gonna say Jennifer's did, but I'll go, I suggest splitting that from community health and safety number three into two, we're moving the explore options for youth empowerment center into number, I guess it's five or into some version of number five that building their capital investments as some sort of explore there in somehow how I talked about it else, but keeping the programming part in number two, in this section, and maybe something like increase programming for youth and in particular incorporate something like that. I also worry about something that Athena was trying to talk around, which is getting too specific. As Jennifer said, we need some specifics. We've struggled Jennifer with this for five years, how specific is too specific, how specific is not specific enough, right? And we're still working on where that balance is because we don't wanna give him, give the manager exactly how to do it so that there's no leeway for his judgment. Yet we need to give some guidance, right? So maybe increase programming for youth empowerment or something gives him a way to figure out how to do it without being specific in how or what we wanna see. That was my comments there. I obviously have others for other things. Okay, Jen. So getting to number four, propose a plan and timeline for the creation of a resident oversight board. Okay, so shouldn't for next year be to seat the resident oversight board? Like if a plan and a timeline was being created this year we shouldn't just say, well, keep on proposing a plan and timeline. I mean, like, isn't two years enough time for the resident oversight board to be impounded or so to speak? I agree with that. So it might need reworded but the RFP or whatever failed the first time, right? So there's a second one out there. So maybe it's create or propose the language for, I don't know. That seems like what we did. I mean, I realize I just feel like we have these vague things that seem to just go from year to year to year. So I guess what I'm saying is you can't make him seat one, one, one doesn't exist. And so I think this year we're just proposing a plan. That's really amorphous. No, I was saying propose a, you know or create the board or something instead of the plan, move it one step further but not seat the board. There's a difference between I think getting the board documents and charge in place and actually putting the people there. Either way his review this year on that item is probably not going to be good. Okay. We do create and like bring appointments for approval. That would, does that touch on what you wanted to do, Jennifer? Yes, I want to get it very much to happening. I want to go back to existing. Okay, yeah, Ditto. I want to go back to the youth empowerment because we have increased programming for youth empowerment. We don't have programming for youth empowerment. I think we need to develop that. It's, you know, and I'm talking to Councillor Walker and other people. There are very specific kinds of activities that would be doing that. So I would like to see increase to develop programming for that feel comfortable to people. I see a nod from Lynn. Okay. You guys are doing great. Mandy, did you have something else in this section? Not in that I have some, I had gotten through everything up to the racial equity and social justice goal. Okay. Okay, let's look there. So this may be controversial, but in number four last year, we had added starting with public safety departments. I would recommend, I would request we delete that phrase only because in theory, that should have already happened this year. And so we should be moving on from public safety departments to... And members. Identify other departments or just leave it general. But the starting with was this year. And then I have a suggestion about the AHRA report where part of reparations and the resolution regarding structural racism is to revise, my understanding has always been that part of it needs to be to revise or identify and then propose revisions for policies that the town has whether they be bylaws, policies, regulations, whatever you call it, that create structural racism. You know, the one that has been referenced many times in terms of structural racism is housing zoning requirements and single family only zoning, but I'm not going that specific. I'm just using that as an example in the country as something that has been generally identified as single family zoning can be considered structural racism. But I'm suggesting we add a fifth item to this that relates to proposing revisions to policies, bylaws and regulations to address and remove structural racism, something like that. So that we've actually start reviewing all of our regulations to see what might be structurally wrong with them in creating these problems that the reparations report seeks to repair through payments and other programs, but those programs are never ending if we don't fix the underlying structure that has caused them. And so this proposal goal here is to try and identify those underlying structures from a municipal point of view that we ourselves can fix. If we are going to go with that, I would say identify and propose because it's not clear that, you know. That's fine too. Yeah. Sina? I was just wondering if, I think that is within the time managers authority to pull or to ask HRC or CSSJC for input on those things. It's already within their charges. And so that would be part of the tell managers. I'm sorry, I was just thinking through this out loud to make sure that all works. So would you say in consultation with? No, he couldn't figure out how he wants to identify and propose. I just wanted to make sure that it was like, is there already a body that he can, you know, seek input from? And I think that there is, that's all set. Sorry, I'm just saying, thinking that through a lot. One of the things that'd be great if you would remove from your vocabulary is, I'm sorry. I am sorry sometimes. So am I, sometimes. Michelle and then Lynn? I, this is maybe picky, but I'm wondering how people feel about the word dismantle as opposed to remove. Just, I'm fine. I don't feel, you know, I just, I think dismantle gives it more of a process than like remove feels very, you know, abrupt. We're not gonna be able to abruptly remove necessarily, but we can identify things to help us dismantle it in the process. I think that's a good point. Lynn, two things. Number of under racial equity and social justice, this one we've just added, I just wanna be really clear. It's almost like we have to have a process because I think some of us, maybe all of us, would probably look at a bylaw or policy and not even know that it had structural racism issues and got engaged in it. And so it's almost like we need, I just wanna, maybe we don't need to say anything more than what we've already said because we don't need to be prescriptive. I just wanna say, I don't think that this is a easy task. It's not. It's very complicated. Yeah. And yeah, getting the eyes to see where it exists. We had talked in GOL about creating an equity lens and then that got moved to DEI. So in a certain kind of sense, this is in process. But what Lynn is saying, I guess what I'd almost wanna say is begin identifying and proposing revisions. If we got this done in one year, I would be astounded. How do you feel about that committee begin to identify? Feels okay to me. Michelle. I personally don't think we need begin. I think we can, cause these are all getting get carried over, but I'm not against it either. I do, I do want it to pick up on what you said though, Pat, that I know from speaking through the reparations process with Pamela and Jennifer, that they are in the process of developing a lens that we can go and look through all of these things as Mandy suggests using. And I have seen a little bit of that work and I think it's really great. So I think that's sort of gonna happen. I have no, it can say identify. It's just that I think that goal is gonna be there for the next 10 years, cause we're never gonna complete it. I just, and I don't wanna hear us talking about it. Well, you know, have we completed this? So that's all. Well, except that next year, it could be continue to identify. Well, I'm fine just to say identify and propose. It doesn't matter. I just think that people need to be realistic about the nature. I think it's a begin because we haven't asked for this before. Right, the other thing I wanted to, if we're okay with that, we did skip over the issue of the senior center. Oh yeah, that's right. And that's up under major capital investments. Yeah, it would be senior center, community center, youth, but I don't know. I think Athena's note should say how to word or something. The wording needs to be better. And we've got disagreements on this committee about the wording of youth empowerment, senior, and all of it together, right? Right, but it should be here now. Yeah, there you go. Just leave it there. That's all, so we can go on. So my management goal ones are much smaller. Let's do those. I want to come back to administration and leadership because that's kind of got a big question. But finance, we just have to update the years under the finance one. FY23 goes to 24 and FY24 in two locations goes to 25. I wondered and within that one last budget cycle, Paul talked about forming a some sort of financial working group regarding the school budget and town and all of that. I wondered whether we should put that into this item. I don't even know what he called it and whether it's even been done, but go back to what he said when he presented the budget and all and add whatever that was to get reports from that group. I just don't know what it was referenced as. So Lynn probably has a response to that. I don't remember the reference, but it brings up another issue and that is we usually have invited Paul to meet with us to discuss the proposed goals. And so either in the next meeting or whatever before we take it to the council, we should have that because he'll provide the exact next to that. And yes, the group has been meeting. It's mostly unfortunately it's another one of those things that Sean was chairing and I'm not sure where it stands right now. Item four with so infrastructure management number five, the maintain a list of future road and sidewalk repairs. I wanted to add repairs and new builds or new or I don't know what the wording is, but not just repairs, but particularly with sidewalks, new additions or some wording that references, hey, is there a future plan for adding sidewalks and what is that plan? I just don't know how to reference it. Well, then I just have two more after that. Could keep going and then I'll call on you. In community engagement, item three says propose a plan for community visioning. I think we've got the plan. So I think it would be implement the plan beyond proposed. And then back up at number one, administration, this is the one I skipped over, administration and leadership number three is maintain essential municipal services. And so my question to the committee is, should we define the word essential? What are our essential municipal services as opposed to non-essential but stuff we have more funds for? And I will save that for last because it is a massive conversation, I think, because all of us probably see different services as essential, but should we be having that conversation? It was in number three, administration and leadership Athena. So number one, the big one management goal and it was the second paragraph, number three, that last sort of thing that uses the word essential, the very last line, essential municipal services. And should we, it's just a question, should we be defining that? And if so, how do we define that? That was all I had. Jen, you've been waiting patiently, thank you. Well, this is what I wasn't gonna say, but first I'll respond to Mandy. I agree, we should do that. I mean, I personally tend to think of essential services as those in the absence of will really notice it. If water doesn't come out of your faucet, you notice it right away, but perhaps roads and sidewalks should be added, but I think we should have a conversation. I did wanna say for infrastructure, oh, I don't know if this is getting too specific. It probably is back on Roman numeral four for infrastructure. This is probably getting too specific, but I wanted to kind of address the C-click fix because I've made a big, I really let residents know about that. Maybe I guess it was last year. Like, no, you really do have some agency to try and get roads or sidewalks fixed. You go to C-click fix. And then I've been hearing back, and it's even my own experience because I put something in a year ago that you don't hear back from it. So could there be some way, it's feeling I think to residents like a black hole, like it's something we tell them they can do, but and then, so I don't know if we can get that specific. I even know that somebody wrote to everyone on the council, they said they put in for a road to be repaired, some big and nothing ever happened. And then the response they got back, well, actually that's not a town road, it's a state road. And then they said, well, could there be something in C-click fix? So you actually get something back telling you it's not a town road. So it's never gonna be fixed going through C-click fix. So I just feel like there's some things that create, we're trying to give the public something. So they feel like they have some agency and aren't frustrated. And yet it's in this particular case, case creating kind of a source of frustration. So can we get that specific here? Okay, I'm gonna say that it's 11.25 and I would like to run this meeting over a bit and I wanna make sure that's okay with everybody. Is that possible? I have a hard start. Okay, then we're gonna have to end, excuse me. We're gonna have to end the discussion pretty close because I've got a call for public comment. I do not believe there's anyone in the audience but I need to call for it. So and then I will come back to Mandy and Michelle. So yeah, there are no, okay. So at 11.25 I'm calling for a period of public comment for the GOL committee seeing no one in the audience. I'm closing the public comment period. Thank you. I think Mandy, you were next. Yeah, I like Jennifer's idea. I would get it a little less specific than C-click fix specific ticker systems to IT departments always have these, right? And as counselors, I see it myself when I submit a ticket to IT, I get responses back from IT with a closure of, hey, we've closed your ticket, right? And C-click fix opens the ticket sort of things but never closes them visibly to the public. And so whether it goes on infrastructure management or community engagement, it might be better for community engagement if we don't specifically do it with that but that ticket system for public closure. Yeah, you're not saying, yeah. So it's there and it's there for us to look at. I'm gonna bring it up because people are saying they have to leave them. We have a meeting on November 15th and we have a meeting on, we have a meeting in my calendar as not on the 22nd which is the Wednesday before Thanksgiving. I'd actually like to cancel that meeting and move it to the 15th of November. We also are meeting on the 8th of November. So that would be two in a row. And I'm also thinking about is it possible to add Wednesday the 29th or an extra meeting in December to make sure and cancel them if we get the work done but to make sure we have everything done that we need to have done. Jennifer and then Mandy and then Michelle. I just wanted to say, unfortunately, I'm gonna have to, I will not be able to make the November 15th meeting. Okay, well it is, yeah. Okay. In case there's a quorum issue. Okay. And that right now is not a meeting but we do have a meeting on the 22nd and I believe that's the day before Thanksgiving. No? No, I had one on the 29th, not the 22nd that our next meeting was November 8th and then the 19th and then the 13th. I would be okay with adding one on the 15th. I can make that meeting. And I can make that. Lynn, would you be able to make a meeting on the 15th and on the 15th? I can make 15th and I also wanted to say since I am the only one that is not running for reelection if you would like me to chair the meeting on the 8th because you might be exhausted or whatever you might be. I'm offering to come back as a chair for one meeting only. I am making a decision by myself. Yes. Cool. All right. Thank you. Good luck to everyone. The rest of us might be hungover no matter what one way or the other. Right. Nice offer, Michelle. Really nice. Thank you very much. We have two minutes. Is there anything to add right now within the two minutes? I brought this up earlier, but I wanted to make sure that it's on your radar that we'll be talking about the carryover memo. Yes, I have it on my radar. In November, okay. Yes, it will come up in the, yes. Thank you. I'm gonna probably do a run on it and then see where we get with it and bring it to the committee. So thank you for that. Did you cut your hair? Yeah, looks nice. Okay. Didn't know if it was just pulled back and falling out or falling forward. All right, I'm gonna adjourn this meeting unless there's anything anybody wants to add. And thank you for your work, everyone. I appreciate it. Thank you. Bye-bye. Take care. Thank you.