 She can just make me host and you'll still be able to screen chair Lynn. Okay, good. I'm going to make you both cohost I'm going to stick around anyway so. All right, that's what I like. We're recording. Thank you. Seeing the presence of a quorum I'm going to call this meeting of governance organization and legislation to order. According to my clock it is exactly 1030 in the morning. And pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law this meeting or to L. Is being conducted by remote participation and is being recorded. I'm going to first make sure that everyone can be heard and so I'm going to start with Lynn. Yes. And Mandy. And Darcy. Yes. And Pat. And Sarah. Okay. And we have a guest joining us. Hannah. Martha just want to say hello. Just want to make sure we can hear you. Can you hear us? That's the first question. Martha, can you hear us? Oh, yes. Thank you. I can. Okay. Male voice is just, it's hard to pick it out. Yes. I sent something to you. Five or 10 minutes ago. Just got the message. So. So we have some business to take care of first Martha. So if you'd be patient. You get to watch us in action. I'm going to turn this over to Lynn. We need to elect a chair and a vice chair. We also need to set times for our meeting. So Lynn, take it away. Okay. So first of all, welcome to the two new people joining GOL. I am not a member of GOL, but I am here to run the election. So the floor is open for nominations for chair of GOL. Pat. I nominate George Ryan. Is there any other nominations at this time? George, do you accept the nomination? Yes, I do. Okay. Then I would like to call roll to see whether or not people are in agreement that George will be chair of GOL. I'm going to start. I'll try to do this. Okay. I'm going to turn it over to breathe to get the room. I would like to get the room now. All for better. Pat. Dangelis. Yes. Dorothy. Yes. Joe. I'm up for George. George Ryan. I fStain. Sarah Schwartz. Yes. Okay. The floor is now open for nominations for vice chair. Mandy Jo. I nominate pat d Angelis. I'm not sure I want to nominate Sarah. If she'll accept that would be great. I refuse a nomination, but I'm very flattered. All right, I accept. You said you, I didn't hear you, Sarah. I'm sorry. You said I, I'm so sorry I talked out of turn. I said, I said I refused it, but I was very flattered. Okay. Are there any other nominations? Turn here a lot. Okay. Hearing none, then I'm going to also do a call, roll call for this. And I'm going to start with, in fact, Darcy Dumont. Yes. Manny Jo Hanneke. Hello for Pat. George Ryan. Yes. Sarah Schwartz. Yes. And Pat D'Angelo's. No. You now have your chair and vice chair. I turn the chair back over to George and proceed. All right. Thank you, Lynn. And thank you members of the committee. And yes, welcome to Darcy and to Sarah. This is by far the most exciting. And really, I think the sexiest committee we have here in town. So I think you're going to enjoy your experience. But the first thing we have to do is agree on a time and a date. We have been traditionally meeting at 10 30 on a Wednesday morning until 12 30. We try to come to a hard stop. We've been pretty good about that, but there are times when that doesn't happen. Hopefully this won't be one of them. So I need to hear from people whether what they wish to do about the time and date. Would you want to continue with this time and date? Or do you wish to change it? Anyone? Is okay. Good. Pat. Okay. Okay. Okay. Sarah. Yep. All right. And Mandy, I assume it's okay with you. 10 30 12 30 is okay. You had listed a possible nine 30 to 11 30. Yeah. Whether people wanted an hour earlier or not. Either one works for me. So. I'd go with the majority of people. The chair has a conflict. It's not one he can't resolve, but he would prefer to meet a 10 30. That's fine. It's just, we had. I agree. But, and I'm perfectly willing to change it. For good reason, but I do have a conflict every Wednesday from nine until 10. It's not one I can't get out of. So. Just want to note for the minutes that there is a seventh counselor in the meeting, although this is not a committee. Of the whole. Okay. However, she is here to speak to a. Proclamation. Okay. Okay. Good. All right. So we're going to keep to the. Wednesday, 10 30, and that means that the schedule that is currently posted for GOL for 20. 21 is in fact the schedule. So. If anyone wants to start filling in their date book. We have our next meeting, I believe is February 17th. 10 30. The actual minutes. I'm sorry, the agenda reads 9 30. And that's a mistake. So February 17th, 10 30 to 12 30. Is our time. And the calendar that is on our site and is posted officially. Does follow the 10 30 format. And the dates aren't written in stone, but generally speaking, we meet every two weeks. Okay. All right. Yes. So there's two proclamations. A proclamation of a resolution. We're going to deal with the resolution first so slightly out of order. Because we have a guest here. And so why don't we turn immediately to the biomass resolution. It should be in your packet. I had done some work on it. I noticed one, at least one mistake that I made. So if we could get that up on the screen. My view as chair has been always that we do not discuss the merits of a proclamation resolution in this body. This is not the place for debate of whether you think it's a good idea or bad idea. And traditionally it's not been a place for sponsors to speak for their proclamation resolution. But that's open to debate by the committee. So in my communication to miss Hannah, I asked her to be present as we always do we like to have our sponsors present, but I told her that this is not the place actually where we discuss whether we think it's a good idea bad idea and it's not the place where the sponsors argue for their proclamation or resolution in this case. So maybe some thoughts on that from the committee. That's what we usually do that's what I was planning to do today. But I think Lynn has suggested maybe a different attitude or approach. So anyone want to weigh in there briefly. I have my hand up. Sorry, go ahead, Darcy. I just, I would agree with you, George. And I think that the fact that you did not warn the the petitioner ahead of time, you know, I think she's probably she didn't probably didn't come prepared to make a presentation at this committee so I, I agree that this is this is not a content committee. So, I guess I would just say that that doesn't feel right. If, if Martha didn't have that information ahead of time. Well, I think it's more of a question for going forward to what degree, I mean, I would live if I I'll speak for linear but she can also speak for herself. The sense is that normally these go on the consent agenda, and the council does not discuss them. So, and there's also a matter of time, because if we do discuss them which is perfectly fine. That takes up time and as we know time has been precious for the council. So, where does an actual discussion take place of the merits of these sorts of things. I would think normally it would be referred to a content committee, and they would discuss it. We just look at it to make sure it's it's in the right form, etc, etc, etc. The problem with that, in my experience has been, I'm not sure it's a problem but I think it is for sponsors. There's often a time element we often get these, you know, and it's like, please get this done right away. And so that kind of creates an issue for us. Normally you'd send it to another committee they'd look at it, and then they'd send it to us and we'd okay it. Mandy. Sorry, I can't, since I'm co host I can't actually hit the raise hand. I think in previous discussions we've said when we're concerned about the potential for, you know, a content conversation that we mentioned that in a report to the council, and it's up to any counselor who would want that to remove it from a content calendar, consent and ask and move for a referral or ask for the discussion then at the council meeting, instead of GOL doing it out of sort of out of its compliance with its charge. So many of you thought is that we would allow that sort of discussion, if it came up. So GOL know it would be. Sorry, sorry, I think what we've done in the past when we were had concerns was GOL mentioned that it was really only a non content discussion and if there were people concerned with content be removed from the consent agenda. So it should be noted in as you said in the chairs report. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I was, I don't feel like we should have a presentation of the reasons for the resolution. I think we just need to look at it whether it's clear consistent and actionable when we start listening to a presentation it elicits a lot of different questions we start asking those questions we get into content. Almost by accident and I think that. That would be the need for presentation. Okay. I'm going to ask people to raise their hands. Let me open up the participants. Let me just add one of the things if the petitioner, the resident petitioner, along with the two council petitioners would like to submit for the packet, a statement as a preliminary to this but not part of the resolution, that would be fine. Yeah. It should be noted in the report and secondly, they can always submit supporting materials that then can be included in the packet. Absolutely. Okay. And I think in fact, something like that was sent to the chair, and that would be an example so that could be included in the packet and noted in the report. And again, as was said, if a particular counselor sees that and sees that they want to talk about it then that's what they would they would obviously take it off the consent agenda. Good. Okay. All right. I didn't see anyone else's hand. So I'm going to go immediately to the resolution it's up on the screen. And the only changes I made and I made one mistake at least is to insert the and I also struck the. Now we just have a title. We don't put the sponsor's name or anything else. At least that's been the tradition, and then it just begins whereas the custom is to end each with a semicolon and then and. So under this, the what is it the second or third whereas we have a reference to a study. In the past, we strike those because they don't really mean anything to the reader of the resolution or proclamation. Some thoughts on that. I have a thought actually a step back which is where you said that we don't normally put sponsors. But I'm feeling more and more that I would like us to do that I know that in Northampton they do it on a regular basis. And sometimes I would like. Yeah, I would like it. I don't quite understand why we don't do it. I think it's just custom or habit. I think it's an excellent suggestion. What do others think about formally including under the title. A line which simply says sponsors which would list in this case would list the League of Women Voters, and it would list the two council sponsors. Any thoughts on that. I personally think it would be nice for the, you know, for our archives for the historical record so people could tell, you know that it was the League of Women Voters that brought this. You know their initial resolution was on their letterhead and, you know, I think that it's of interest for historical purposes. I'm sorry. Yeah, I agree. I think I would change the wording a little bit so my suggestion would be to list the counselors first simply because our rules say that in general they must have counselor sponsors. I wouldn't call it a petition I would call it, you know, I would say sponsor counselor sponsors and then, you know, Dumont and Pam with with names and then you could add if there's a community sponsor or committee sponsor you could add community sponsor League of Women Voters or committee sponsor, you know, if it comes from the Human Rights Committee or, you know, you know, energy and climate action or whatever committee in town it might be coming from the asked for counselors to sponsor you could add that too. Okay. I would, I would delete the word petition because we are not under any of the petition requirements right now. So it would be, it would be appropriate to say petition if it was under the group petition under the charter or initiative petition or something like that. Do you have the ability to do a real time change of this. I would if I'm the one sharing screen if Lynn wants me to move it or Lynn if you could just do you want to shift to Mandy or can you make the change so we can see it. As we're talking about it, it's pretty straightforward. I don't think so I have some additions to add so it might be better for me to share. All right fine thank you Mandy. I think this is an excellent idea as far as I can remember is that it's just been custom we always just have a title then we have the document. But I think as Darcy also said having a historical record and I don't see why we shouldn't acknowledge. Also I think when a counselor see this in their packet. It gives them another bit of sense of where this is coming from, as opposed to just a, you know, a document out of the blue so I'm certainly willing to do that. Let's see what it would look like. Probably be hard to get it on one page anymore but that's all right we can look at that. Yes you can. The sake of history and for the sake of information. We can go to page two. Okay, so it would read then counselor sponsors counselor starts to monitor the Pam community sponsor League of Women voters of Amherst. And maybe in one line together. Why do we have to have them separated like that. You know, in other words, Council sponsors blah blah blah community sponsors, right after that, you know just to save space George. Thank you. Thank you like that. Yes. Martha has her hand up. Martha please go ahead. unmute yourself Martha. Yeah. You're still, you're still. My apologies. I would suggest stating the League of Women voters of Amherst but not specifically saying the sustainability committee. Okay, just the organization thank you. Great. Yeah, good. So this is Dorothy did somebody address me a minute ago, I could know. Okay, I'm going to go back on mute them. Dorothy you are a sponsor so if I can't see you and that's all right you don't have to have your video on but and if I get my window open I should be able to see raised hands. So that's my call here so let me get that open. But yes Dorothy you're welcome to speak as a sponsor. So, so far so good we're at the second whereas issue is has to do with the reference to the study. I think we've normally removed those references. Yeah. Now, we will have at least one I haven't had a chance to look at Martha's email but I'm assuming at least one document there is something that could be put in the packet. So there will be supporting materials available to the counselors if they wish to read them in the packet. The good. Let me see. I can speak up but the next issue I have has to do with the do er. And so I was going to suggest as many as already done that you we spell it out and then put the, the acronym after it. So afterwards, people know what it means. Maybe everybody knows what it means but I think it's good to write it out. And so that's one change again the sponsors can speak up if they have concerns. The last whereas this should be the and is struck and it should be a period. Yep. Thank you. I missed that. And then I think it looks like Mandy's made a few changes to now therefore be at resolve the Amherstown Council. Yeah, I can speak to them. I think we had a capitalized. I highlighted wherever my changes were because they're practically the same color as yours, but throughout the rest of the resolution it was referred to as the Palmer Springfield renewable energy. Right. And here it was only the palm Palmer so I thought for consistency we should add slash Springfield. Yes, I agree. Martha has her hand up, Martha please. It's my understanding standing that the actual developer is called the Palmer renewable energy company and so on but the plant is going to be situated in East Springfield and so it gets referred to in the in the press and in the public as the Palmer slash Springfield plant. But the title of the developer is the Palmer, whatever it is here of the power renewable energy company so I can't read this too well as to which you want to refer it to but that's that's the difference. I think main goal here is to be consistent and consistent in a way that reflects the facts as the sponsors understand them. I just looked at the title and actually the title has plan. Is that a typo or is that is that is there a team missing or is that. Yes. Yes, it's missing. Thank you. I missed that too. All right, that's why we do this folks. And we don't just do it one person it. Thank you. So I think for consistency sake we just should keep referring to it in one way. And since it's a title is the Palmer Springfield biomass power plant. I think we probably should refer to it that at least using Palmer Springfield consistently, unless it's a specific reference to the company. And so I guess that's the question is that reference to the company or is it to the plant. And it seems to be to the plant, correct. So I think, and you could take out. Well, no, I don't think that's not getting to the weeds. Okay. Again, sponsors, please raise your hand or just speak up, but that's the change we're suggesting. George, yes. This is a question. It looks like Mandy Joe made the because of change. Yes, she was a change I made when I looked at the document. And I'm trying to figure out why it's a I'm going to need help from somebody to how to do markup version I'm glad that you have it there Mandy John. I don't know much about that. But if somebody could maybe have a conversation with me later about what I'm not doing correctly about marking a document. Thank you that with you Pap. Thanks. So yeah, the only change I made here because I think, George, you were the one that added the because of there was two dogs. Oh, that was me. Okay, there were two does. Yeah. So, because of the horrible harm. Okay. And that I don't like dashes. Can we get rid of the dash. I don't think there is a dash. Okay, that's just to yeah, there it is. Thank you. That's perfect. I think it's just extra spaces. I'm trying to get rid of here. Do the changes. Yeah. The only other change I wanted to talk about was I add a generally, we have in the past, when we're talking about state legislation or state committees or the governor within a lot of this we add that we're at the resolved clause to send a copy to places. And that's what this one here is. And I took this right out of sort of who was referenced within the resolution so the governor, the Department of Energy resources, the tele, the members of the telecommunications utilities and energy committee, and then we always generally include our state senator and state rep. So that's something that the sponsors should make sure they are okay with. That's, that's fine. What was it changed from there wasn't one so I added this whole resolved clause. So it's not replacing anything it's an additional complete addition. Yeah, it makes very good sense I think this is a classic example of something that should be sent to these various bodies. So good thank you man I think that's an excellent addition. Any other comments I see patch hands still up that may be residual. I forgot to take it down sorry. The last one was, we had to change the year 2021 that's true. All right. So we have one last chance to look this over but I think we've done a pretty good job. The sponsors seem to be happy but they're welcome to speak up if they have any concerns or any other changes they'd like to make just scan it real quickly here. Yeah, it looks good. Page through slowly. Do you want to put the, at the top the council sponsor on one line and then community sponsors starting the next line. My province would be to do that. I know Pat was trying to save space. I like the idea of, it's just a little easier on the eye. And it highlights the different parties, I think more clearly, and that I think is the intent so people see quickly who sponsored this. And I put a space after the title, if you could work on it. That sorry, Mandy. You only have two hands right. It takes me a little bit to get through some of it. Thank you. I would take away the semi colon at the end of Pam. Oh, yep. Okay. All right. Yeah, I think everything else is good. Just space there before the further result and relate to that happening. Oh, that's what it is. Let me get it so. Okay. We normally throw that to that side. Yes, we do. With a space for a signature. Okay. So I'm ready to entertain a motion. I'll make the motion. I moved to declare the resolution opposing the Palmer Springfield biomass power plant, clear, consistent and actionable. Second, the Angeles. Okay, we have a motion and it's been seconded. I'm going to move to me to vote unless I see a hand raised. George, I did raise a hand. Please Dorothy, go ahead. Okay. When I come to a situation like this, where I have just a few lines on a second page in an awkward way. I increased the font size of the whole thing because this is not that large so that there's maybe two paragraphs on the second page. And I was just going to suggest that. We're going to have to put a header on the town council. So we'll, we'll just let, I think we should just let, um, Let Athena, she will deal with it. Okay, very good. Thank you. She makes things look very nice. It might be able to be squeezed onto one page. All right, any other discussion or comments? I'm going to go immediately to a vote then and I'm going to start with. Okay. Hi. And Darcy. And Mandy. I. And the chair is a yes and Sarah. I. So the vote is five zero. It's unanimous. Thank you to Martha for being present and thank you to Dorothy. I think Dorothy also is sponsor of another resolution we're going to move to in a moment, I believe. But I, before we leave this, could, could I just ask a couple of procedural questions about Monday? Please go ahead. Yes. Okay. Oh, and first, let me say an answer to what your comment earlier, George. This has been reviewed by a content committee. It was passed unanimously by the energy and climate action committee. Before we brought it to you. So, yeah, yeah, but then Monday, as I understand, then it would go on the consent agenda, which occurs at the beginning of, of meeting more or less. Yes. Which means I would not specifically speak to it. So do the, all of the council members really have enough information with just the resolution and the background memo that I sent. If you want me to send anything more, you're all busy. So don't want to give you too much to read, but right background memo plus the resolution Lynn. So Martha, I'm glad you asked. First of all, just to note that on Monday, the meeting is starting at 530. And it's starting with a presentation of from UMass about their students returning this spring and then from the town, from the town of Amherst on vaccinations. Okay, because this is such an urgent issue for all of us. This will come up in the consent agenda, which probably won't happen till 63645 or so, maybe even a little later. If you would like to add not only your statement that you sent to George, but if you would actually like to add the study that was referred to in the thing that's fine. I don't, I can't promise that every counselor will read it. Okay, but I do think they have sufficient information. The council very committed to all kinds of things. And note note the article in today's Gazette also. Okay. Again, if you just could scan and send that to me that'd be great. I can try I can go look for it, but yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. Thank you, Martha. Okay. Well, I'm going to create a someday a hall of fame of GOL proclamations and resolutions, and the one that we're turning to now may actually be the top entry that this is the thing of beauty I think so, man, man, I'm guessing Mandy you wrote it. And no Jennifer Moisten did. The year. Okay. George, you need to be careful Mandy's great. But even last time we met some of the major changes in the resolution she and I sponsored came from me. And you always assume it's her. I know. And I have an ego to know this is based based on my personal knowledge and Mandy and her life. I actually thought her daughter was involved in this because we have Chinese. And this is a first in this one. And my Chinese is a little weak. But I'm hoping that Mandy can help us here with the Chinese but so we have a lunar New Year's slash spring festival celebration and proclamation. Thank you the sponsors are their council sponsors. Hanna key and Pam. I just added that onto this. And so I have a few notes I haven't had a chance to go through I just have written notes. And I don't know what others have but I'm going to start with the very first whereas clause. I just have a problem with the the final and reset according to which. But maybe it's okay. And was reset. It could be reset. So the Chinese calendar in past always reset with each dynasty. Right, right. So the Chinese calendar in past tense reset. Yeah, okay. Okay, maybe we can just leave it then as it is. We have two hands raised. Go ahead. First, let's start with Darcy. Yeah, I just wondered if there were community sponsors. So it came from Jennifer moist and I was just checking the page so it's a town. Staff. I think she does it in her role as either community participation officer or liaison to the Human Rights Commission, but the town announcement for this reading and celebration doesn't reference any particular town committee or department so I'm not sure what to do with that. But she didn't, there was no community group involving Chinese residents that he he tried to be in touch with them and did not hear back, and rather than bypass putting forward a resolution. She went ahead and put this together. I'm happy to call her out for it. I just don't know how to write that. Well I think it wouldn't be an individual staff person it would be unless they're acting as a citizen. She is one of our human rights directors. Right, right. Yeah, I don't know what to say to that. Okay, as whether it's human rights director community participation liaison or something she is aiming to create more of these for a more inclusive community where we do a lot of these with a lot of celebrations for various different cultural ideals so she's doing it as a staff member. I just don't know in what role. Yeah, I guess I just, you know, hearing from the Black Lives Matter about how they want things to be black lead. It just seems a little weird to me that's all that you could say community participation officer period, I mean, colon and then Mr. Well, I feel like if, if she if one of her titles is human rights director. That's a more powerful title to be there. Community participation officer. I don't think it's an official title. I think we want to be careful, assigning sponsors to documents, as opposed to authors. She authored this by in a very fine desire to make us a more inclusive town I kind of echo Darcy's thought that I really would like this to come from the community. I'm not, we're going to just read this and pass it along but in the future or just thinking about this in general. You know it feels a little strange to have something like this, if it's not actually coming from members of the Chinese language community. This one isn't and that's just a fact, but in the future. You know, so that's something I think we need to maybe talk about or think about as a as a council and as a community. I'm a little comfortable uncomfortable making somebody a sponsor something just because they authored it. And that makes sense. And I think also perhaps a lot of this comes in a well yeah so. And that also. Yeah, there's a level of detail in this that that maybe we're just going to let go. We have other work to do. And the spirit of it is certainly laudable, but there is a level of detail here that that is unusual for, for, I think, given the past kinds of proclamations we've done. It's interesting I enjoyed reading it. And I think we're probably going to let it stand but I don't know people have thoughts on that if they felt that at times this was, you know, more detailed and then a normal proclamation should have. Insofar as we have normal proclamations. I see two hands up let's start with maybe these are residual but Dorothy your hand is up. Very brief just consistency. The counselor sponsors on the previous resolution were full name here their last name. Sorry. That's fine thank you. I see Darcy's hand still up if that yeah. Just, you know, like, I feel like if. If Jennifer authored this in her role as like community participation officer or whatever. Doesn't it make sense. I mean how many, how many nationalities do we have in Amherst. Are we going to have a proclamation. About all of them. Right. I don't know I guess I just, I, I have nothing against this proclamation and I absolutely will vote for it but I just feel like we maybe want to have a policy where it has to come from a community group. That in celebrating their right. Their culture. Because if it's coming from Jennifer. She really should be writing a proclamation, you know about how many about 55 proclamations or so with all the nationalities in town. We have a lot, we have a lot. That's why I moved here. So, I'm just, just saying, just saying. I think it, you know, it's, it's a point well taken. I would probably think in normal circumstances that the sponsors, the council sponsors would be in touch with the relevant groups. And, and bringing them forward or encourage them or, or, you know, saying, right, but here it really is sort of a town initiated town sponsored proclamation without any obvious clear connection to the community that is addressing. And I think that is a concern, not the idea which I think is great, and not the proclamation which I think is great, but this disconnect is, is a bit troubling. And I don't know what to do about that Dorothy. I do understand what you're saying. Okay, but I did notice in this that it's not coming from the way it's written from Chinese community or this community it said many Asian, many different Asian countries. So, I, I, that may have been why Jennifer wrote it because rather than seeking out all the different communities to make sure that they all agreed on it. So, but I think the best thing to do might be to ask Jennifer. Okay. She's not here. And again that's perhaps my fault. I wasn't, I should have been but I wasn't aware I did not remind myself that she was the author and the sponsor, in a sense. Right now. I don't know what people think I think is this something that that I guess yes there is the lunar new year is coming up fairly soon again we're facing these kinds of time constraints. The celebration is on the ninth, the day after hour. Right, right. Just go ahead. Just do it. Well, So, I will point out as a sponsor that it has the requisite sponsors from the council in order to move forward and that's all this committee generally requires. Right. So the discussion here might be more suited for a council discussion really. Yes. Yeah. I agree. That's true. Okay, well let's take a look at it. It does have a lot of detail. I didn't see a lot of a couple of small things, other than just my general feeling that this is a level of detail. It's a bit unusual and in some cases I have no idea whether it's true or not. But I assume it is. So, second whereas clause I don't have any problems anybody. I see Darcy's hand up I don't know if it's residual. Sorry. We're just going to go through quickly. The third whereas clause. I just had a question about the very last line is celebrated this year from the New Year's Eve that sounds like a, I think it's just from New Year's Eve or is that. Yep. That should be stricken. I think. Yeah. There's the content question and I don't know if it's clarity or whatever but as was pointed out earlier this actually now references a large number of Asian communities and countries, making the claim that New Year's Day is a time for family. The title of the proclamation is Lunar New Year slash spring festival celebration. That is a Chinese cultural event right it's not a. It is more than just China. Okay. All right. Good. Okay. I just don't know. I just like it. Okay. All right. I guess we'll leave the Chinese and I think it's kind of neat. I have no idea what that says but I assume it says. Yeah. I know. That's what it says. George, I have a hand up for a point you've been dealing with. When you took out the the in front of the New Year. I believe it should go back in. When you say New Year, that means January 1st to us. So the writer was making it very clear that the New Year meaning this particular Chinese New Year which is in February. It clarifies it to put the in front of it because it's not New Year's as we know it. I don't agree. I think that. What about. I mean it gives the day. Yeah, that's fine. Okay. That just insert lunar that makes it that's fine. That's fine. That worked Dorothy. So, yes, it does. Absolutely. Okay. Good. All right. All right. Next, where as the Chinese legend has it, we get a history of the Jade Emperor. It's a wonderful story. I hope someone reads this besides us. It's, it's great story. Any changes or concerns about the language. All right. The next whereas I have two small points, the lunar New Year, the top comma should come out. I think I got that the comma slash I fixed right. Thank you. And then I think the second come also comes out. Yeah. Or maybe that's an old document. Maybe I'm looking at something. It was, I fixed some of it now. It's just left over from some changes that we did. And we have the ox here in Chinese, which is great. Neil. Yeah. Good. And then the only other changes I have are in the now therefore. And in terms of consistency. So we have beginning of the lunar New Year. I think the and or should come out, right? Just to be lunar New Year slash spring festival. That right. There's a consistency sake. All residents to join the 15 day celebration. That's a lot of bowl. That's their decision. Beginning with the celebration reading of the town's first lunar New Year slash spring. I think there should insert slash spring festival. Celebrate because that's the actual title. Other than that. That's all I had. Yeah. It says voted this day of January, I think we're into February. I was working on it in January. I think that was the year of the, not the ox, but it was the year of the rat. Yes. We're moving from the rat. We're in rat and we're moving to the ox. Okay. All right. Any other comments, concerns, changes. We have raised a sort of substantive issue that I guess we'll mull on. I'm not quite sure where that ends up. Other than, I think at the council level, maybe. I'm not sure. I don't know. You know, what we really want to do. With these kinds of laudable proclamations. But are not coming from the community itself as far as we can see. But I don't know where that resides. But that's a different question. This seems to be in. The proper form. So I'm prepared to entertain a motion. Where I can make that motion, if you wish. I'm going to declare the lunar new year slash spring festival celebration proclamation as amended. To be clear. Consistent and actionable. Is there a second. Second to Angela's. Thank you, Pat. Any further comment or discussion. Then I'm prepared to move to a vote. I'm going to start this time. With Pat. Yes. And Mandy Joe. And Sarah. I. And Darcy. Yes. And the chair is an eye. So it's five zero. Unanimous. That is declared clear, consistent and actionable. Next item. We're going to pretty much going to follow the agenda. Order is changes to rules of procedure 2.1. 5.7 and 8.1. And that document is in the folder. And if Mandy could pull it up. We will work our way through it. Dorothy. Thank you for being present for both. And enjoy the rest of your day. All right. So I'm going to suggest that we start with 2.1. Election of officers. So George, do you mind if I. Talk about what I did here. Yes, I would please go ahead. I do not mind. Thank you. For those that are just joining us new to the committee last meeting, we talked about, I suggested adding the actual procedure for the election of officers into the rules so that it's clear and. Knowable by everyone. So that's what the goal of this addition and all is. I took what we followed. This past time and modified it slightly. But I think I did some great work on that. I just wanted to talk about that. I listed an advice presidential elections. Just a month ago and put most of that in there. Some things just in the order got moved around, which is why you see some deletions there. They're just in a different part. The only thing that I sort of changed. That I wanted to talk about and talk about is in the past. You know, I'm not going to talk about it. I am proposing that we do it by written ballot that is still. Compliant with our charter by knowing who wrote, who voted for which person, but that means that no one candidate potentially is preference over another candidate by the person who was voting 10th, 11th, or 12th already knowing who won. And so everyone would put their vote down on a piece of paper. And so that's what I wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about that. Count it. I know this is difficult for a. A pandemic time, but, and I haven't worked that out, but then the clerk would read them allowed. All at once so that, that no one knows who else has voted for who else when they are voting themselves for an officer. So that's the biggest change from the procedure we used in. January. Okay. I just wanted to say if we, during, if we still have a pandemic. When the next council president is elected. It can be put into the chat. Not publicly, not for everyone, but for the town clerk. So the town clerk would have a record of who it was. And they would have. And they would be. So it would be in the historical and public record, but none, none of the other counselors would see it. And I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. That makes sense to me. It seems that the chat feature would be something. If I understand the chat feature correctly, that's something that we could do. And that would, that would solve that. Hopefully we'll be out of the pandemic by then. If we're not, we're going to probably have bigger problems than how we vote for president and vice president. Darcy, your hand is up, please. Yeah. I think this is a good idea. Mandy Joe's idea. I just have a comment about this other section, which is after each nomination. Or number three, when there are no further nominations that presiding our officer will ask each nominate an alphabetical order by last name, if they would like to make a brief statement up to two minutes long. I. Really don't like that practice. I don't like that. I don't like that. And. The first time I was used, there was only one person running. And it, that made it weird. Because. It just should be. Open to anyone who wants to make a statement without. You know, going around and. Or forcing them to say, I declined to say something. That it, it is, it just. Doesn't make sense to me. That it isn't just an open discussion. Why isn't it just a discussion? Okay. Open for discussion. Who would like to make a comment up to two minutes or whatever. So I would just. Say that that I have not liked that. Can I have a question of Darcy George? Go ahead. Are you referring to the candidates making statements or the roll call after where, where all the counselors can talk about the candidates? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I. Oh yeah, I'm looking at four. I mean, okay. Okay. I have a question because I support the candidates having the opportunity to make a statement and I'll save it setting what order they make those statements in. No matter what order they're nominated in. And I, I agree with you Darcy, that. The roll call for each counselor to say yes or no to speaking is strange. So I would be welcome. I would be happy to figure out what we can do about that if there's more support on this committee for instead of calling it an open discussion. So I just want to say that the president and the president and the officer will offer each counselor. The opportunity to make a brief statement up to two minutes. Just an open discussion. Yeah. So I would be afraid of something like many just suggested that the presenting officer would. Open the floor. What would allow each. Committee member to make a statement if they so wish, and Sarah, who both want to speak. Okay, let's start with Sarah, please. I just wanted to say that I would support doing something like that. I also found it awkward that we each had to. Felt like we had to say. Something. So I think opening it up to whoever would like to say something, you know, each one of us in one time. I mean, I don't know if I would want it to be a discussion. I think that would also be awkward, but I don't think it would be a discussion. I don't think it would be a discussion. I just, I mean, maybe not doing it by roll call. But I mean, just to open it up to the counselor, I want to say something. And then if you felt like you need more order, you could say you did it. Alphabetically or something if you feel like you need that, but I don't, I don't feel comfortable having a roll call while all of us feel like we have to say. Something. Okay. Athena, please. Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I do suggest. About sending. Boats in through the chat. I don't think we can turn the chat on for counselors only in webinars. In fact, I think we can only use. The Q and a feature in webinars. I can. Reach out to it and see what other settings. I think we can come up with a solution that would. That would work, but it may not be the chat. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I don't know if I'm going to say this, but if we want to go to four for a moment, it sounds like there is consensus to try and change that in such a way that it's not as awkward as it's been in the past. I agree with what's been said by a number of my colleagues. It is a somewhat awkward situation. And just opening the floor. To comment by anyone who wishes to make a comment. And we've seemed to be more collegial and more comfortable. But it is somewhat uncomfortable to say, I have nothing to say. I mean, what does that mean? Conversation. I've modified it to read the presiding officer will allow each counselor excluding nominees to make one brief statement on the election of the office up to two minutes. Well, allowing each counselor sounds like. You could simply open the floor to open the discussion to, yeah, it does seem a little bit like, and then the question is, well, how do you make sure every counselor has the opportunity? And then we get into calling the role, which is the whole thing we're trying to avoid. This doesn't say you have to call the role. And Andy's changed that. But is there some way, I mean, this could be interpreted as, as what we're saying, which is just, you know, the floor is now open. Anyone can make a brief statement if they wish. Yeah, I think if they wish. Yeah. So we'll open the floor to or allow each counselor to make one brief statement on the election, the office. If they, if they so wish, you could just put if so, if they so wish at the end. Or you could say open the floor to each. To counselors, not to each counselor. The counselors. Right. To the counselors. One brief statement. If they wish on the election of the office. On the election of the office up to two minutes. Okay. Good. I think that that covers it. Anyone, any thoughts about for as amended. I don't see any hands. Any other thoughts about the rest of what Mandy has put here. To my reading of it. And I read it carefully. It does. Follow the process quite carefully. I didn't see any. Any other thoughts. Any other thoughts? Typo's or mistakes of that kind, but I thought. Any other thoughts here. Or do people need some do I want to take a moment and read this one last time. Okay. Make it too much too smaller to fit it all in. If you want to be able to read it. We could go through it line by line. If you wish. I mean, we take a few minutes, but I could just read it out loud. So be the president shall preside over the election of the president. And the president shall be run as follows. One presiding officer will ask counselors nominations. Four nominations. Thank you. So let's insert that. That's all right. That's why we're going to do it. The presiding officer will ask counselors for nominations. Sub one nominations are limited to a name, comma, not an explanation or discussion period. Two counselors. Do you want to capitalize the end? Okay. I'm going to put it on the screen here. Thank you. I'm reading the old document. Yep. The counselors may nominate themselves period. Three nominations do not require a second period. Roman two after each, excuse me. After each nomination, comma, the presenting officer will ask the counselor nominated if they accept the nomination period. Sub one acceptance is limited to a yes or no, comma, not an explanation or discussion. The presiding officer will ask each nominee, comma, an alphabetical order by last name, comma, if they would like to make a brief statement, comma, up to two minutes long period. Presiding officer will call the roll comma and each counselor, comma, excluding nominees. We changed that one, George. Thank you. Let's read the right one. The presiding officer will open the floor to counselors, excluding nominees to make one brief statement if they wish on the election of the office up to two minutes. Thank you. Let me read from the right screen. The clerk number five of the council will then ask counselors to vote by written ballot. Period. Now, is that something everyone is accepting? It sounds like we are, but we want to go to a written back. Okay. One ballots will list the name of the counselor voting and the name of the nominee the counselor wishes to vote for comma, or abstain in quotes. The clerk of the council will collect the ballots and read each one out loud as follows quote counselor X votes for counselor Y. Period. After reading each counselor's vote, comma, the clerk of the council will announce the results. The nominee, excuse me, the nominee who receives the majority of votes, at least seven yes votes will be deemed elected to office. If no nominee receives a majority of votes, the presiding officer will repeat the process beginning with one. And finally, the clerk of the council will swear in the officer after the election period. I have one comment. Is it clear that the clerk of the council has to wait until all the ballots are in before she. Reads them out. All right. And after all ballots. Are submitted. Right. Or returned submitted returned. Submitted sign. Read each one out loud as follows. Okay. We have Athena, please. I started to interrupt again. I'm curious if, if written would include an electronically submitted. Ballot. Or if we need to specify whether or not it's on paper, while we're in virtual meetings. And how we do that. I'm sure I can figure something out. I've got several months to do it. If we're still in virtual meetings at that point, but I don't want to be in a position of having to drive to everyone's houses to pick up. I mean, if we talk about the charter that had in writing for that 8.1 open meeting, we allowed that to be electronic submission. So it might be better than. Putting paper down here because it'll allow a little bit more. Lee way. Okay. If you think, if you think written, I'll cover it then that's right. Or something. Right. Okay. If, if written can encompass that, then. That sounds good. Thanks. Okay. Thank you, Athena. All right. I'm willing to entertain a motion to accept these changes to, I'm sorry. We would be recommending. I'm sorry. Thank you. Motion to recommend these changes. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry to rule 2.1 election of officers. As amended. To the town council. So moved. Any other further discussion, comments or concerns. Seeing none. I'm going to move immediately to vote this time. I'm going to start. We haven't had a second. Oh, I'm sorry. Second. I was waiting for somebody else to jump in. Okay. I apologize. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry by Pat. No further discussion. Then let's go to a vote. I'm going to start with Sarah this time. I. And the chair is an eye. Pat. Hi. And Darcy. Yes. And Mandy. I. Okay. Yeah. I'm going to move to a rule of the procedure. 2.1 as amended. Next item. Here we go. Do you want to do open meetings or do you want to do the rule eight? Changes. I was going to do open meeting. Unless there's a reason to do amount of order, I was going to do them in order. Okay. I mean. Yeah. So this is. meetings. And let me get it on my screen as well. I don't have to stick my face right in this was an attempt to follow the sort of discussion we'd had the last couple of weeks and the addendum D or appendix D or whatever it was in that other document. So we're trying to establish a procedure so that citizens know and we know how open meetings and initiatives are to proceed. And so this is what Mandy has suggested. And so why don't we go through it line by line? Unless people need further I see a hand up Darcy, please. Yeah, I know that the meeting that is happening on Thursday went through a process of getting an opinion from KP law. You probably talked about that already. That did indicate that digital signatures were acceptable. So the form that I saw did not seem to be open to that possibility, but maybe I'm wrong about that. So it just makes sense to me that if we have the capacity now to do digital, we and especially in the pandemic, that that it KP law pretty much rendered an opinion saying that that was okay. So are we are is is our form allowing that possibility? Pat, your hand up. Yeah, I'm not sure whether this is the place to bring it up or not, but I'm looking at a this again speaks to the issue of I understand that the petition needs to be signed by 200 residents who are 18 years or older. And I believe that's the legal requirement. However, I feel like this should say and any form should say would say that any resident can sign but or something because I feel like I am going to be actively working to recruit high school and junior high school kids for some issues. And I feel like they have a right to sign and they have a right to request an open meeting. So somehow or other, I still need to see if we can figure out a way to address that actually out to recruit high school and junior high school kids. I don't know exactly why I said that. Well, we have we have two. Yeah, Mandy, I think what we had talked about last week was let's get the procedure in that talks about eight point one, the charter eight point one. And then the council can discuss whether they want to adopt a separate rule that would allow for signatures of residents under 18 years of age to count towards a signature number requirement or written request requirement, but it would have to be a separate rule of some sort. I mean, we could put on here, if you want to acknowledge residents that are under 18, we could put on here, residents under less than 18 years old may make a request, but will their their their names will not count towards the 200 person requirement. It seems kind of cruel to do that, though. I think that we have two issues here. Let's deal with the second one quickly first and then go back to Darcy's concern about electronic signatures and the whole format here. I think, Pat, that this does raise some larger questions that are going is going to take a discussion at the council level eventually. But we're not ready, I think for that discussion. I'm not ready to make a decision on this yet. I have some reservations. I understand your desire to change it and I may be in a minority of one. But I think that's going to take a little bit more discussion. And I think Mandy's point is we do really want to get this set going forward. And so I would suggest that we not try to tinker with this and put kind of complicated wording about residents, eight younger than 18 years, because I think there just needs to be a lot more discussion eventually at the council level. I'm concerned that there won't a discussion with the council won't happen. Well, we could bring it. I mean, that's something we do and then we can council. And I think it's going to be that discussion that's going to be the final one. But I'm certainly willing to put that on an agenda. But and maybe even next time. But I don't feel comfortable taking it up now, given all that we have on our plate and given. But that's just my thought, that's one person. So the rest of you need to think about whether this is something you want to tinker with right now, or whether you want to wait and come back to it. Because I think it's going to take a lot of talking, at least to convince me now, maybe everybody else has gone how, but I have some reservations. I also have a question for Mandy, which came to me at the last council meeting. I still don't understand how we can overrule the charter by changing a rule of procedure. We can't overrule the charter. Yeah, that's how one requirements section eight one requirements are the requirements. And so if a resident wants a open meeting of the residents under the charter, they must have 200 signatures of 18 years or older residents. But we as a council can call a meeting any time we want. So if we want to mimic the charter open meeting of the residents within our rules, we have these work sessions, we have these discussions, we could add a council rule of procedure, open meeting request that just says 200 residents aged five or older or whatever, but it would not be a request under the charter. Okay, it would be the council saying, Hey, we want to expand it. So we're going to create a new meeting type. Okay, another council could delete, right? The charter we can't change, but another council after two readings could delete that that new meeting type. Okay. All right. Thank you. That helps me. I it's your point is well taken. And I think it raises a lot of questions in my mind that I'm certainly not eager to discuss today. So I'd like to discuss them. I'm even willing to put them on an extra gender or agenda agenda soon. But I'd like us to make a decision on this today. But that's just me. So others may speak to that. But that's what I would suggest that we move this forward, if we can, and come back to the issue of age, and maybe an entirely different meeting process under the rules of procedure. If that's okay with people. Can we come then? I'm sorry, anyone? I was just going to get back to Darcy's. Yes, please. Could you comment? So a quotes the charter essentially section a the request in writing by at least 200 residents. So I wouldn't want to add language to that one because it's a charter quote, essentially. But b and c are sort of where I think we could address Darcy's concern that it's not clear that printed names, typed names, electronic names are permissible. You know, see, we say you can submit it in person or by email. You know, that implies a scan thing or an electronic thing. And b is the one that says they provide a legible name and legible address, we could instead of legible name maybe move to electronic typed, you know, we could provide some options there, maybe. I just I think that's where that concern could be addressed more and then certainly add similar language into appendix b, that sample document whatever we decide on in the rule. Why can't an electronic signature be just assumed to be sufficient as a signature? Why do we have to specify it? We asked for a signature, whether it's in ink or blood or electronic. You know, do we really have to be that I mean, the point is we need three one of three options you need to provide us with. And you know, so it's electronic fine if it's if it's handwritten. I thought Darcy was referring to just the listing of the name, not the three options of phone number, email address or signature. Does misunderstand you. I'm sorry. Yeah, I just wanted wanted to make it clear that the petition could be made in writing or electronically, you know, I hate or electronically. So could just put those words in there somewhere. Okay. And Mandy, where would you say if we do that where again, I think you were suggesting it if you just repeat where would we put it and how would we put it? Yeah, that's what I'm not sure. I think it should go in either B or C. Right. Okay. You know, because C says the request shall be submitted either in person or by email. Right. Right. You could say residents making the request shall provide either in a written or electronic form in B. The residents making the request shall provide in either a written or electronic form and then the rest of it would just go that way. Would that be with that cover it? About through a written or electronic document. Yeah, right. Something to that effect put it right there. Because I hear what Darcy's saying and going into the future and even now, I could imagine that someone would put a petition together electronically. And people would fill it out. And we wouldn't insist that they then turn that into a into a physical document where people have to sign it again. So with that meet Darcy's concern. Yeah, and then that could be emailed to the the term council. Should we also say something in appendix? What does it appendix B or something? Because that gives the impression that it's just an old style written form that's being required. We will make right, we would make the requisite change there as well. No, I think that that's excellent. Any other thoughts from the rest of you about this? I mean, I'm assuming you agree that that both of these formats are appropriate. And we want to make that clear, both in the rules of procedure, but also in the document that we're creating that would be available to the public. So everyone knows that you can go either way. So I just added the appendix B in the title for written or electronic use. Thank you. That looks good. Okay. Okay. So Mandy has made a few changes back to the actual text. Right. So that's the one I think we need to talk about. Thank you. Do you have anything you want to start us off with here, Mandy? With D? I mean, this is the one where we were hung up last couple meetings in the committee on notice. Yep. And so I've provided a couple options. One is they notify everyone whose name was on the request. So all 200 plus. In the comments, I said, you know, some other options include the first 10 residents who made the request. So the first 10 listed or the first one listed, you know, that number could change to whatever I picked 10 because the initiative petition chooses 10. And it's not the first 10 on the initiative in the initiative petition. The petitioners have to declare what 10 will be sort of the lead put initiate initiators for notice purposes. Or we could just say it goes on the bulletin board and their, you know, and leave out of the rules, whether the net, the residents who signed the request or made the request are notified at all specifically, or sort of the two options that are also on these in the comments. No, no. Well, I've already spoken on this a little bit. So I'd like to hear from the rest of you first before I start. Here's another one. It could be notify the resident submitting the request. You know, whether that's the person who actually sent the email to town council at or who went to the clerk of the council by hand and said, here's the request. Pat, your hand is up, please. Sorry. I think that would be adequate because there would be public information put out on the town website, but also in the council meeting, I'm sure it would come up that we've received a petition or a request for an open meeting and it would be announced on the agenda and verbally and when the presiding officer says, these are the things that are coming up. So there would be ways for community members to get the information. So I don't think we should burden the staff with sending it out to everyone. So just to the one resident who submitted their request or just either that or the first 10, whichever people are more comfortable with, but I think it's enough to have just the person who submitted the request. I mean, for those of you who weren't here present last time, I'm sure you can imagine the argument was that this just puts that puts a very strong heavy burden on staff and it's also an expense if you have 300, 400, whatever. On the other hand, there's the desire that the public be notified. We don't we want them to be there. They've gone to this effort to have the meeting. The meeting is now going to be held. We want to make sure they know when and where it's going to be. Now we have fairly robust procedures for getting out information. We some of us have newsletters. We all have district meetings. But is that I guess the question is that sufficient in terms of making sure that everyone is notified or at least has an ample opportunity to become notified as opposed to having staff go through the entire 200 or 300 or however many names and I assume send a postcard. I guess it would have to be done by mail. You know, if you don't have a mailing address, I mean, again, the question becomes well, everyone has to submit a mailing address, I assume. Do you want them to call them? So the burden factor is what led some of us to think there are more than ample ways for citizens to find out when meetings are being held. And so it's not incumbent on us to notify every single person. So Darcy and then let's actually Darcy first then Sarah, please. Yeah, I would say, I mean, my preference would be all of them in particular if there were digital petition that would take no longer to notify all of them by email, then it would be to take to contact one, but that's assuming it's digital. But so a compromise would be the first 10 and that's customary for petitions like this is to notify the first 10. Okay, Sarah, please. I'm wondering if you want to agree on which way put out the meeting, the request was granted and the meeting was happening actually in this so that when people when the one person submits it, everyone who has read the petition or who wants to look up our would say, you know, if you want to say the first 10 or the one five, but then I don't know if you want to say the council or the town will put out an announcement of this and then just put the ways in which we are going to put it out whether on the website, you know, 24 hours after it's a, you know, announced or I just think maybe you should, if we made it official where we were putting it out, because I think that sometimes people are like, well, what can I find if this is going to happen? So if we're going to say that district meetings will have it, we shouldn't leave it ambiguous. I guess is what I'm saying. We should decide which way and just put it there, maybe. Okay. Thank you. So go ahead, Mandy. We just have published notification ceramics. A good point that we don't say how, how early that notification should be published. You know, it has determines this, you know, and the council president sets the date, time and location. It says once the council president sets it, the clerk shall publish notification. We could add a sentence that says notification shall be published and sent at least however many hours or days in advance. Pick a number. One week, seven days, 10 days. I got the sense from Sarah, though, what's more important is that people know where to look. So we have the phone on the bulletin board. Right. Exactly. Is that enough? And that's a question for Sarah and for all of us. But maybe I'm misunderstanding her point. But the idea was that somehow they would, you know, in the document itself, perhaps as well as in the rules, it would say where notification would be. Sarah, please. I think I was just looking for clarification, just being on the public's end. I mean, I think it just makes it clear if we're only committing to the bulletin board, then that's fine. You know, I just think if that's what we're committing to, then we'll just say the bulletin boarded. But yeah, I do think within a certain amount of time, because it will wait for forever or they could just say, oh, I'm reading this. This is when it was accepted. I know that I'll find it seven days from now or 48 hours from whatever. I'm fine with the timeline just to make it specific. Thank you. At least 10 days in advance of the meeting, seven days in advance, seven and 10 because of the charter stuff are practically the same. And seven doesn't count weekends, 10 does. So they end up pretty much being the same amount of time. Let's put 10. We suggest 10. And we could add town calendar to instead of just the bulletin board. They're slightly different. The town calendars, the meeting notices go. Yeah, that's a good idea. Oh, speaking out of time. It's all right. This is how we do it. This is a group process. We don't so don't worry about that. Are we to 10 residents or one resident? That's a good question. I don't know any. I've heard 10 a lot. I to me and part of it is just it seems like whoever the first 10 are is somewhat random, isn't it? But maybe the thought is whoever's putting this together, you know, knows that and so make sure that those 10 people are, you know, obviously very much involved in it and would we assume then spread the word. So are people confident that the use of 10 in the past is pretty much captured? Some of the more passionate and involved individuals, they tend to put their names on first or is it just a random thing? You could just get 10 people who you just got on the, you know, out in front of a stop and shop or something. And, you know, they get the notice, but they go, well, OK, what am I supposed to do with that? Perhaps an unanswerable question. So we'll leave it at 10. OK. So let's read it. Once the council president determines the request. Oh, excuse me. Once the council president determines the request meetings, the requirements, I think there's a problem with that. The request meets the requirements. Thank you. Of Charter section eight point one and sets the date, time and location for the meeting, comma, the clerk of the town council shall publish notification of the open meeting on the town bulletin board and town calendar and maybe a comma there and notify the first 10 residents who made the request notification shall be published at least 10 days in advance of the in advance of the meeting, in advance of the meeting, I guess, of the open meeting. Yeah. Any thoughts on that? Changes, problems, concerns, I'm not seeing any hands. Are we ready to accept? Shall we look at appendix B? Yes, you're right to be part of the motion, right? So let's take a look at the appendix. For some reason, everything's in 14 here. I'm just going to change it. OK, so appendix B. You could just scroll. OK, that's all right. So, yeah, so that's what it looks like. So this is what someone would see on their screen if they're doing electronically and also something they would see physically if we're handed to them. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Darcy. Um, should we just I'm a little confused about the language of written or electronic and then down below it says this form is to submit this written request. So. So again, that language right here is taken from the charter to submit the written request. Right. So it seems like. Above above it, maybe it should say of or paper or for. Yeah. And maybe I forget what we put up above. But so then written covers. Both. Yeah. What if we were to take the written out, even though it comes from the charter language, is the charter language sacred here? It does seem to create potential confusion. Someone reading that might think, well, this is actually an electronic, not a paper thing. Do we need the written? Could it just be you must submit this request? I think that might make it less confusing. And because up above, it makes it clear it could be paper or electronic. I would normally understand written to mean paper, to read, you know, handwritten, whatever. That may just be me. But if we could just, even though it is the charter language, I think we could still, in this case, it's not being quoted or anything. I would suggest say just this request for an open right. And that way, I think people would see that you could do it either way. Mm hmm. What what did we say up above? Um, do we need to change that to paper or not? Through a written or electronic document so we can change that to paper or electronic. All right. Yeah, I think that that that's good. Where's the appendix? OK, so. Town of Amherst, Massachusetts, requires for an open meeting of residents, Amherst Home Rule Charter, Section 8.1 and the date, the following residence, 18 years or older of the town of Amherst, submit this request under Amherst Home Rule Charter, Section 8.1 to the Amherst Town Council for an open meeting of residents of the town, stating the following specific issues or concerns related to matters upon which the requested body may act. Parenthesis, please include purpose or purposes of the meeting. Should we get rid of the please because you must include the purpose of the meeting? OK, that's fine. Yeah, thank you. Then we have a legible name. Then we have a legible address. These are both required. I don't know why. Check if 18 or older, since you must be 18 or older. Help me here. This is this is broken record, D'Angeles. Yeah, I think that should be there. If you're allowing people who are 18 or under 18 to sign this petition and I think that they should be able to sign it right now. The rule is that we're only counting the 18 year old or people who are 18 year older. But I think that we have a responsibility to see out there. So I would like to see again, see something here. You may sign this if you're 18. I don't know. And I apologize. I don't have a better argument, but I'm uncomfortable with that column needs to be there in some way so that people who aren't 18 are welcome to sign it as well. So I changed it to instead of check if to confirm 18 or older. Because there's nothing that prohibits anyone from signing this and encouraging people to sign it. But it only in terms of the actual open meeting being called 200 have to be 18 or older. I understand that. But I think that there should be possibly something in the introduction that says you are welcome to sign because. Well, I don't know. That's my broken record. I said I was going to be a broken record. No, no, I mean that maybe that's something we can discuss right now. I mean, because the change wouldn't require any kind of rule procedure or any kind of special meaning or anything else. It's what we'd be saying. And this is maybe we don't want to talk about it now. But what we'd be saying would be, you know, anyone is welcome to sign this. But I don't know. Does that what's any thoughts? Yeah, Mandy, what we could do is somewhere in this title range. Amherst Home Rule Charter Section 8.1 somewhere underneath maybe put something like. To comply at least 200 residents, 18 years or older, must be listed or something. Yeah, something that in this title says to be valid. You know, I'm not coming up with some great wording, but we don't actually have anywhere on this document and on this appendix that it needs to be 200 people. So maybe under that, in that section heading sort of you put. 200 residents, 18 years or older are required for a meeting to be called or something, and then you could put the following residents of the town of Amherst. You could get the 18 years or older and then we could go back to check if 18 or older. Yeah. Yeah, my original question was, why is this even here? Is there something legally, even though because the original thought was only people 18 or older were going to sign this because that's what it is. And so why are they checking it? But by putting it here, it does open the opportunity for encouragement for others to sign it, as long as it's clear, as Mandy said, in the actual document that only those 18 or older will actually count to the quantum needed to the 200. Yeah. Right. And that would be perhaps a way to address the concern that Pat has raised and others have raised or the desire to encourage others, especially teenagers, to become involved in this without us having to fiddle with the rules of procedure and not being in violation of the rules of procedure. In any face fashion, simply by making some adjustments to this form, such as Mandy suggesting, what do people think about that? Would that be a way of, in a sense, doing both things? We do have a document now that's ready to go, assuming it's approved by the council, and it does allow or encourage all residents to sign it. But only those 18 or over will be counted in the quantum. Is that? What about the changes? I just did. I went back to check if 18 or older. And then up here, I said, for the council to call a meeting, 200 Amherst residents, 18 or years. Or older must be listed. That's certainly better. Okay, it's better. All right. The hard woman to please. All right. I know, babe. It's better. And I get, again, I understand, Pat, that at some point, maybe soon, we want to have a discussion. We want to have a discussion. As to whether younger aged residents could be counted to the quantum. Right. I mean, it would be terrible to have in this. If you're, if you're less than 18 years old, you're not counted. I don't want to say that. And I understand right now with the charter and everything. That's who we can count. So this feels like a compromise. And it may provoke discussion amongst the counselors. When it comes to the council for their decision, this one very clearly suggest a certain approach we're taking. And if people have concerns, they can raise them, or if they like it, they can speak to it. That also might give us a sense of where GOL might go in the future. The tremendous council resistance to this suggestion. That would be a sign that maybe. You know, GOL probably not going to take this up, but if we get either no response at all or a positive response, that would seem that we could then take up further. Yeah. All right. Dorsey has your hand. Yes. Darcy. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah. I would just say this is, this is a, I really like this as an improvement. You know, like phase one of moving toward getting a, getting the vote for people under 18 and Amherst. But yeah, you could definitely take this and, and try to try to get young people to sign it. And then. You know, a petition that had. You know, 50 or 100. You sign it. We'll, we'll, we'll be given more weight. You know, And it would also be evidence to me and not that I need it, but I think probably given my nature, it would mean something to me if we start, you know, if we start getting. Documents like this and a large number or a substantial number of young people are signing it. That would be evidence to me of, you know, that we really should seriously consider lowering, lowering the age. Right now to me, it's fairly hypothetical. I think that. Right. So that's, yeah. So I'm sorry. Go ahead, Pat. No, go ahead, George. I'm sorry. I'm going to move us on. So Pat, please. That's fine. Okay. Shall I make a motion? Yes. I'll second it. I know, but I know. To recommend the revisions. To rule 5.7. And the addition of appendix B. To the council. Second. So we have a motion that Joe, I'll wish to recommend. These changes to rule 5.7. As amended. It's been seconded. And the addition of appendix B. I'm sorry. And the addition of appendix B. Now I see the letter E there in the document. Right. Can we get that out of there? Thank you. Any other comments, thoughts, changes, concerns. I see none. I'm going to move immediately to a vote. This time we'll start with the chair. The chair is a yes. Mandy. Joe. Hi. Darcy. Yes. Pat. Hi. And Sarah. Okay. Very good. Unanimous five zero. Third item. Is. 8.1. And let us go there. How are we doing on time? We're at 1211. Okay. George, sorry to interrupt. I just wanted to let you know, we have this on the, on the calendar tentatively for the council meeting on Monday. Lynn wanted me to let you know. We have these changes to the rules of procedure. First. First discussion on Monday, they, if we're done with them today. Right. Okay. It's good to know. All right. So again. We were asked to. Figure out a way to be clear as to who can introduce bylaws. And so that's what these additions do. General bylaws are non zoning bylaws. And they follow in general, our requirements for. Proclamations and resolutions other than the fact that it adds town manager, designate or town committee. Into it. So that's something like ECAC or the housing trust. Or the historical commission could actually propose a bylaw. Could introduce and initiate a bylaw. Change revision. If it's a general bylaw. Zoning bylaws add a whole lot more people. And I will say that is because chapter 40. A adds a lot of people. And so I tried to make that list. The councilor's ZBA planning board pioneer valley planning commission. An individual owning land. The request of 10 registered voters. Those. So one, two, three, four, seven and eight are directly out of. MGL chapter 40. A five and six follow the above general bylaws. And. And so does not. Follows the other three in the general bylaws. Okay. I've seen Darcy. Darcy, please. So I'm just wondering what, what's the, what's the impetus for the change? I think Darcy, there was confusion amongst the number of people about. Who could bring. Bylaws to us. And it felt that it needed. Some clarification. So it is not trying to exclude anybody. But it is trying to give some. Clarity to who in fact. Can actually bring a bylaw. And with zoning bylaws, it's actually governed by MGL. Right. At least to some degree. But with. The regular bylaws, it was very, very unclear. Could an individual citizen bring a bylaw that we would have to. So what's the, so here. Point was to get it clear. I don't know if that helps, but that was kind of the drive behind it. It wasn't to exclude anybody, but it was, there was just a lot of uncertainty in people's minds as to what. Who could do what. So does the general bylaw. Like you said, doesn't include an individual citizen. And. Anything else that's included in the first section there. So the general bylaw does through group petition or initiative. So one random resident. Cannot come to the council and actually introduce. A bylaw amendment under the general bylaws that we would then have to consider. They would have to follow the group petition. It's the same for resolutions and. Proclamations that we've adopted as, as a GOL. It has to have a counselor, a counselor can, but the residents need to either find a bylaw, to introduce that measure. Or go the group petition route. So in the, I've seen in the past that. Where the council president. Gets a request from a, a citizen. And then she sends it out to the whole council saying. Does anybody, is anybody there? Is anybody interested in. Sponsoring this. Well, Darcy, these are just bylaws. It's okay. So we're talking about bylaws here and not about proclamations, resolutions, et cetera. So with those, yes, she will send out a notice. But with bylaws, the question. So general bylaws and sunny bylaws. That's what we're dealing with here. Not with proclamations, resolutions, citations, et cetera. Is that. So I think the president could still operate the same. The question is we have a lot more requirements. It has to be. In the form necessary for final adoption. As Pat and I and Kathy can attest. And, and even Shalini with. I don't know. The wild animal act. A lot of the times when you get a request for a bylaw, it's not in the form necessary for final adoption. And so a counselor, if the counselor wants to sponsor, it has to do a lot of work to prep it for actual introduction. And so the president, if they get a request from someone like, like there was an email to the council regarding the wild animal act. They can send it out and say, does someone want to sponsor it? Be aware. Here's your requirements. I have a question. Mandy about group petition or initiative. Just a practical question. One requires a somewhat less number of. Voters to sign or to write to be right. So why would one choose one over the other? Is it that the petition process is a little more. A little more distant from the council directly. I just question about why would one. I mean, it would seem to just be, you just choose whichever one requires the least number of signatures. Yeah. Go ahead. So the difference is with a group petition, the council. Must. Act. And if the council. Says no, that's the end. With an initiative, the council not only has to act. If the council does not adopt the. The. Initiative measure can move forward with an additional number of signatures and go to the voters. For adoption. Whereas the group petition ends at council action. Whether that action is a referral, a tabling, an adoption, a non-adoption, a failure to adopt initiative does not necessarily end if the council fails to adopt. Or does not do anything. It can continue on and move all the way through to showing up on the ballot at an election. And with that procedure. Be acceptable under MGL for zoning bylaws. Do we have the freedom to do that? I, the other. So that helps me with the first category. Thank you. But the second category. Again, it's my ignorance, but my sense is that. That zoning, the zoning process is strictly governed by state law. And we can't. Come up with our own ways of doing it under state law, but maybe we can't contradict state law. We can't contradict state law. So state law says we have to consider something. A zoning bylaw request made by 10 registered voters. But if we deny it, if we say no to that request. It doesn't go any further. But if they get, I think it's going to go further. I don't think it's going to go further. I don't think it's going to go further. I don't think it's going to go further. I don't think it's going to go further. But if they get, I think it's 250 or 200, I'd have to look up the charter to move through the initiative process, then it could end up on a ballot eventually. And I guess the question, and it's just a, it's just a question. I haven't really thought much about this is. Do we want zoning bylaws to be. You know, have this available to them because nine is clearly something we can put in or not put in. And they're already, yeah, go ahead. Nine. Is required by the charter. Even if we don't list it here, they can always do it. For zoning. For zoning. Yes. Number nine, because that's a charter allowance. So we as a council can't say we won't accept that for zoning. That is bylaws. Any bylaw. Okay. All right. So the only thing for zoning. Or for zoning and bylaws that we could remove. I mean, we could counsel counselor would be weird, right? But manager or town committee, we could remove in general. For zoning. For zoning. Yeah. The zoning list. It would be the manager or the town committee. Yeah. The town committees other than ZBA and planning board because those are specifically listed in the, in MGL. Yeah, I would think that they are, those would be questionable. I may, could we discuss? I mean, Darcy of your hand up. So let me, let me go to Darcy. Yeah, I just, um, I guess I, I want to make sure that. Residents know what their avenues are and say, for example, what they want to do. I mean, I don't know. I don't know. A group of people. I can't remember. Did they come? I think at some point they came to the council and there was a request made. Does anybody want to work with them? Essentially they asked for meetings of individual counselors and they sort of lobbied individual counselors for. Hey, we want to get the council to pass. Are you willing to help us do that? Yeah. So they were savvy enough to know how to do that. I guess I'm interested in making sure that. It says by counselor sponsor. And that's what. I think everybody knows that. Find a counselor to sponsor it. Yeah. Okay. Um, so. We, so we aren't taking on the task of. People are interested as counselors. We're putting that on the residents to go out and. Contact counselors. Go either way. That's a natural. Yeah, go the way. You know, I mean, I think there are many, many avenues. That are available. So we're more cumbersome than others, but they're there. George, you said you were concerned about the manager or designate or the town committee. Yeah, I just want to talk about them. I'm not sure I'm concerned, but I'm thinking, but I'm thinking that, you know, normally it would be through the planning board. The CBA. Think about our IDD, whatever the TSO ones are requiring. That's right. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that, that should stay. You're absolutely right. Time. Committee, you know, we're going to be getting something that's sort of planning department, but it's also historical commission. So, you know, there's the meetings. There's other committees that may. Want changes. ECAC, I think is eyeing some bylaw changes. Okay. Okay. And your thought is that they would then. Bring them forward. And they would have standing. Yeah. And, but it's still in the end goes back to the planning board and it's subcommittee, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Bylaw. Yeah. Exactly. So that good. Okay. I think that's. That answers my concerns. Any other thoughts or concerns about this? Yeah. I think that's a good question. So Darius, the point was to help clarify things and hopefully this does that, but I don't know. We'll ask them thoughts on whether it does, but the reason it was motivated by desire to just to be very clear. So when somebody says, you know, well, who can bring a bylaw? We can point to the rules of procedure and say. There's the answer. And if there's anything missing, we should bring it up. But I think this is pretty good. An exhaustive list with many avenues available. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know how many parties to, to bring. Bring action. But that was where this came from. Well, if I'm not, I don't see any other hands or any comments. So I'm prepared to entertain a motion to recommend to the town council. Changes to. Rule 8. One. And I don't think we amended it. So it's just as presented. I'll second it. We have a motion and a second to recommend these changes. As presented to the council. Any further comments or questions or. Okay. Then I'm prepared to move directly to a vote. I'm going to begin with Darcy this time. Yes. And Pat. Aye. And Sarah. Aye. And Mandy. Aye. And the chair is also a yes. So that is five zero. So I know we're almost out of time, George. Could we deal with 9.4, 9.5. The unanticipated items since we're trying to get all the rules to the council at once. We're definitely trying to get all the rules to the council at once. The chair is thinking the council meeting is on Monday. And he's going to have to prepare a detailed and exhaustive report. To satisfy the council. But yes, I'm willing to go there. We are close to our ending time. I'm willing to stay longer. But, and I just need three of you to agree. We do have a couple of other things we need to talk about briefly. I don't want us to just stop after we get through 9.5. Are people willing to tackle 9.5. Because then. I'm hoping it'll be quick. Cause I can explain it since I'm the one that. Proposed. So I just put them up. I will type them into the document we were working on, but I sent an email to George, the KP law update. E update we got. Indicates that the governor signed. A law that changes. MGL chapter 40 a section five. Right. And we have in our rules. References to how many votes are required for zoning bylaw stuff that directly relate to that section. And that section changed. So I thought while we're updating our rules, we should update. The rules to conform with the new law. And so what is happening here is. Under our current rules, the law, well under the law before it was changed in January. There was a. A sort of a protest way, which would have upped a properly protested zoning bylaw. Change to require 10 votes. That has now been rewritten. To go down to only nine votes. Two thirds. So that's why it's a recommended. Delete it from the requiring 10 votes and essentially moving it to nine votes because that was rewritten under the law, the governor signed. The law, the governor signed keeps some zoning bylaw changes. At two thirds. Moves other zoning bylaw changes to simple majority. It is too difficult to. In the rules of us to elucidate which are which. Because it gets very complicated. So the way I was trying to deal with this was. Instead of saying a zoning bylaw change at nine votes there, change the wording to certain zoning by law changes in accordance with the charter and MGL chapter 40 a section five and then repeat that language, add it in. Into the seven votes and essentially repeat that language. And then it's on the. Hopefully our town attorney as zoning bylaws come. And GOL to determine. Quantum is needed for which particular. Zoning change. And so really this is, this is not. Anything other than the law changed at the state level. And I'm trying to make our rules conform to that new law. Darcy, please. To me. Darcy. Yeah. Do, do we need to. Do we need to double check it with Kpila? Or not. Well, we've all received the memo and we got a memo actually came from KP law. So what they probably do is they'd simply say, well, did you read the memo? And I actually went to the, to the. The, the acts of 2021 or whatever to see the actual language to try and make sure this, this worked. So my, my reading of the memo supports the changes. Mandy's making here and there obviously she's absolutely correct. That, that is very complicated in for a number of these. And there makes absolutely no sense. And I'm not sure we could do it. To specify in each case, what is what. So what this does is it simply alerts anyone reading this and alerts the counselors to the fact that there has been a change. And. And so the 10 votes is out. It's now a two thirds. That just goes. And then for the others, it simply says certain. And alerts you to the fact that there have been changes. And to learn what those changes are, you may very well have to. Resulted KP law. Or read that memo very carefully. Or attended GOL meeting. But I think this is a good way of just alert. First of all, making our rules of procedure come into conformance with the law. Cause right now they're not. These, these statements are false. Given the current change in the law. So this brings them in conformity with the law doesn't try to find, you know, to, to specify what's what in each case. Cause that would be far too much, but simply alerts people to the fact that it has changed. And so I would think this is a pretty much straightforward. No brainer. But that's just my thought. Anyone else on this. The memo is a typical KP law memo. It makes my stomach. I think we all read in George. Yeah. Right here. It's good. I mean, it's just, you know, it's why I never made it to law school. So. All right, then I'm prepared unless there's further discussion to, to make a motion to accept. Recommend to the council. Sorry to recommend to the council. Changes to what rule of procedures. This again. Rule 9.5 to conform to. Chapter 40 a. So MGL chapter 40 a. 3 to 4. And then the next question. So what is the final decision? Yes, I think the final decision is presented. Is there a second. Second. Pat can have it. Has seconded. Darcy and Sarah to step up. They're new. They're newbies. They're newbies. They're just getting. At least one meeting. Pat. Get their feet with it. They're going to write. They have to learn how the culture works here. So we have a motion. Before we proceed to a vote. Seeing none, I'm going to go directly to a vote. I'm going to start with Sarah this time. Hi. And Pat. Hi. And Darcy. Yes. The chair is a yes and Mandy. So again, it's five zero to recommend these changes to nine point five to the council. So we have miraculously gotten through all, I believe of the ROP. Changes. There also were a couple made at a previous meeting. And my understanding is that the chair's responsibility. To put these all together. Maybe I'll consult with Mandy at some point or Lynn. As to the format. So that counselors, when they get it, will be able to see clearly. Both what was and what is being proposed as a change. And I'll provide a rationale for each change. In a document. Mandy. So I've got them. I'll do the four that we did today. I will touch base with Lynn who was holding the document for the ones we already did. So that they can all be in one document that then I will turn into a PV PDF that can be used for the meeting. Right. And then I will provide a report which will. Provide a rationale for each of the changes. And then I'll pass the slide. I think we can do, I think we can wrap this up. I think we can do something right. Darcy, please. Thought that we were going to vote on the rule about. Limiting our, our. Our discussion for our presentations to two minutes. And being able to interrupt. To call the question. I believe. Help me here, Mandy. We did make the recommendation at the previous GL meeting. Right. That is, we did make that recommendation to allow counselors to call the question. To interrupt and call the question. We did not, to my memory, make any change to the length of, of the, we kept it at three minutes though we wanted to discuss changing it to two. We haven't done that yet. Are there any others that we had outstanding? This is that. Darcy's correct that that was something I believe I wanted to talk about today. Actually, no. No, so I think we voted. Let me get my notes. We voted at. On January 1st to add the language to call the previous question before the phrase, or to doubt the presence of a quorum. And the phrase or to speak without recognition after colleagues. So we voted to recommend the changes. To six point three D. And six point three E two minutes. Unanimously on the sixth. Yes. Okay. We also made a change to ROP 4.3. To change shall to may. Like the actual practice of the chair of the president. So we have Darcy made three changes already recommended three changes to the council. Now we've made another set of changes, but we have not, as you pointed out, we have not yet. Discussed. The voted on changing the time limit from three to two. No, that, that was part of the one. Apparently. Yeah. I believe what we did was we wanted to leave it the way it was. To see how it worked in the council meeting with Lynn bringing it up as an issue. That's what I thought. Maybe my notes must be wrong then. And then. What I'd like to change it to two, because I thought that three minute. Three minutes for presentations. Sorry. I don't think it's necessary for counselors. To speak more than two minutes. In a particular turn. I guess my question is just a very practical one. And I apologize to my colleagues. I don't remember if we actually voted on that. My, my report. Could be read as saying we did. And I'd have to check the minutes now. Did we actually vote to make that. Yeah. I don't know whether we voted either George, but we decided not to change it until we actually implemented it in the council. Or say that our vote on January 6th was to also change three minutes to two minutes, but because we were going to bring these as a package and that would take months. Or whatever. That we were going to ask her to enforce the three minutes to begin with. Yeah. I think you may be right. January 6th minutes. Yeah, we have to check that. So Darcy, that there's confusion there. And it's on me. Whether. Yeah. Okay. Maybe Dandy has a moment. She can check. My report. That I wrote apparently. Seems to suggest that we did in fact, make that proposal, which means we voted on. I mean, I mean, Hanna key moves seconded by the Angeles to recommend the town council revised rule 6.3 D to add the phrase quote, to call the previous question and quote before the phrase quote, or to doubt the presence of a quorum and quote, and to add the phrase quote, or to speak without recognition and quote after the word colleague. And to revise rule 6.3 E to change three minutes to two minutes. Five zero by roll call. Okay. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. And the previous meeting. And so it would be in this group of proposals to the council. And the council, of course, may very well reject them. And counselors, including yourself can certainly speak to it. But this committee has already in a previous. You know, existence already voted on that. Okay. I wish I had been part of that discussion because I, you know, I think that's a good point. So that, that's, you know, so you would definitely have a voice there. And, and I think it's a good, quite open question where the counselors, in fact, want to give up that extra minute. And that's a decision that will make us a body, but we did recommend it. And I'm sorry. I didn't remember that we as part of the vote, but we did. Yeah. Yeah. But we do have in that report also are a list of things that are future agenda items. That I would like us to just begin to think about. In terms of going forward. So at the moment again, this seems to be recurring every meeting. The timeline for the town manager. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this and see what you would like to do with it. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this for creating this timeline and making sure it's an agreement or hopefully an agreement with the town manager's wishes. But also the process of evaluation and, and so forth is something GOL is not supposed, is supposed to manage or oversee. And so that's something that I'm going to reach out to Lynn on and hopefully bring back to us at some point soon. The bylaws for future review. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this. I'm going to talk to Lynn about this. I have two members, obviously, and one of the members, Andy had a three bylaws that he was working on. He's brought me up to date on where he stands with them, but there's still some work that needs to be done. And I was thinking of. Well, I don't know how. I was thinking of reaching out to individuals. And requesting them to take on those. Missing those bylaws that need still some further work. I'm probably going to be working on that in a little bit. I don't know. But I'm going to be working on it. I'm going to be working on it in a little bit more time. I think it's going to be a great summary. And Mandy's done most of the work. She needs to do for hers. I still have a little bit more to do on mine. Yeah. So that documents in your, in your packet. I know you've got a whole lot of stuff that you were supposed to look at. And for this meeting. At some point you might have just glance at it. But I just want to make sure it's, oh, can I do this as chair? Just reach out. I don't think I can, but I just don't know. I don't think I can do this. I don't think I can do this. I don't think I can do this. I don't think I can do this. I don't think I can do this task. And, and, and they can say no, or they can say yes. And then I can report back to the committee. I'm just trying to sign up. It's not. It's you're asking somebody to. An assignment for the group. Right. I mean, I could put the document. Yeah, I could put the document up or Manny could put the document up and we can look at it now, but it's, it's already six 1241. And I can just point out, I have two items that. I mean, Sarah, for instance, I'm going to ask you to do that. I'm going to ask you to do that. I'm going to ask you to do that. I'm going to ask you to do that. I'm going to ask you to do that. And, and both involve things that did, you've had experience with in the past. And I was going to ask you to consider. I don't have to decide now, but ask you to consider taking on one or two of them. And it would be easier for me to, to give you the details outside of the meeting for you to ponder and get back to me or get back to the committee. And the same with Darcy. And so rather than take up time now, I was going to reach out to you individually over the next meeting. I'm going to ask you to do that. I'm going to ask you to do that. And it's available to you today and it's available to the public. It's been available for a long time. And I want to just point to one or two things I'd like to ask you to do. My question to the committee is, can I do that? Or do I have to wait till the next meeting? Why would you not be able to do it? Yeah. That's my. Okay, good. So I, you know, and again to the public, if they're paying attention, I'm just trying to divvy up work. And so, and you both are free to say no, but I will reach out to you on that. Okay. So that's the item of future bylaws. We had committed to get this done by March. I think it's still doable, but a lot of it is you'll discover requires work by town staff. And they're, you know, as usual, they're doing 40,000 things. So I'm reaching out in my case, I'm reaching out to, I'm reaching out to Dave Zomac. Who is it? The finance director. You know, I know that Andy was reaching out to Dave Zomac. And these folks got a thousand things on their plate, but we're trying to get these bylaws. Issues settled. Okay. That's the motive that motive here. So I will reach out to our two new members about that. Okay. On that list, there are a number of things that we could begin to take up. And I guess I need some thoughts from you quickly about what you would like to have on the agenda next time. At the moment, I'm not aware of anything. That is other than the time manager timeline. And the bylaws for future review. I'm not aware of anything that is coming to us. Lynn is no longer with us. I'm not aware of anything that is coming to us. I'm not aware of anything other than what's on this report in this report. For instance, do people feel that we should talk about. Whether we should have a single policy for. Making recommendations. Committee recommendations for finance DBA and planning board should. Right now it's split between two committees. We have our own procedures here on GL. CRC has its procedures. We have our own procedures. We have our own procedures. We have our own procedures. We have our own procedures. Whether it's certainly been raised by some counselors. Whether it should be a single, whether we would want to recommend to the council that there be a single process that all committee, all council committees follow. Or do we want to allow individual committees to follow, to adopt their own procedures? That's what we've been doing. But I think some have an issue with that. That could be an item on the agenda. I think it's important item to get on the agenda. I would second that, George. Okay. Good. Now we also have the issue of how public comment is to be shared in the report. What we came to as a committee, the last time we met was the thought that maybe a website could be created and the chair could reach out to the town clerk. The council clerk. I'm sorry. Again, maybe what people need to do is read the report. But there are a number of things here that would be potential topics for us. And I think that's what we're going to talk about in the next month. What have we learned from COVID? You know, do we want to change or make any recommendations about accessibility? So these are governance and organization type issues. They're in the report. I certainly add, at least for next meeting, I will add as an agenda item on the issue of a single policy. And we can talk about that. If you see anything else in that report that you'd like to add to the agenda. Let me know. I'm not going to be making the agenda for a while. But I'm looking for topics. We have a lot to do with the bylaws still. So I definitely would like to have some time to actually dig into that next time. But often we don't have time for it. So that will be on there. And then the time manager, town manager timeline will be on there. And right now it looks like also the issue of a single policy will be on there. Anything else that people have in mind. They want to raise now, or you could send me an email. We don't have the minutes for today's meeting. So we'll hold off on that. I do not see any public present. So we do not have. Public comment. And am I missing anything? I got pieces of paper here everywhere. I think that is. The entire agenda. Okay. So I'm prepared to call. This meeting to an end. If that is acceptable. All right. Welcome aboard. The same thing. Welcome, Darcy and Sarah. Thank you. Read the report. Please. And if you have any thoughts, other than the one that's raised today, let me know, and I will reach out to the two of you over the next couple of days and we'll talk about. Those bylaw reviews and see if you can get some of you to take, take on some. Okay. Go well. Take care. Bye bye.