 We're recording now. Go ahead, Michelle. Excellent. Thank you. Good morning. I am calling to order the March 9th, 9th, the governance organization and legislation meeting. Sorry. This is a, we got this. Okay. I'm pursuing the chapter 20 of the acts of 2021. This meeting will be conducted via remote means members of the public are able to access the meeting in real time via zoom or by telephone. Right. So let's just take a second to make sure everybody can be seen or can be heard. I can see everybody. So I'll start with Mandy. Present. Anita. Jennifer. Present. All right. So we have a packed agenda today. And we had some. Some additions to the original agenda. So I just want to do a quick review of how we're going to go about this meeting today. So we're going to begin with. The task of all proclamation that Anna spoke briefly about at our town council meeting that was added under the 48 hour. Rule so Anna, and I have to look to see if our community sponsor Dr. Shabazz will be, oh, he's here. Great. So Dr. Shabazz and Anna will be our sponsors for that proclamation. So we're going to do our review of the child abuse resolution proclamation, I think it is, and Lynn will be here with us for that as a sponsor for that. And I also believe Mandy is a sponsor of that and we can be able, we'll get to that. And then we're going to, depending on timing, start working on our rules again. And at 10 o'clock, our community sponsor for the Ukraine resolution will be coming. So we'll do that. And then hopefully we'll have some time to go back to the rules. Those rules are just dragging out. So let's jump right into it. So Athena, if you could bring in Anna and Dr. Shabazz, that would be excellent. And we have the great Mandy. Thank you. I'm glad you got this. Sorry, I pulled up the one that I edited. They're very minor edits. So I can explain them. Great. And the, anything like that that can help us move through is excellent. So let me just welcome our sponsors. Good morning, everyone. Good morning, Anna. Is that promise? Oh, I think yeah. Peace and blessing. Morning. Morning. Dr. Shabazz, thank you for being here as our community sponsor and Anna, thank you for initiating this. Give Dr. Shabazz a quick idea of what we're doing here. So our job in GOL is to review this proclamation for clarity, consistency and optionability. So we'll be going through, maybe not even line by line if we already have a good review for Mandy in there. We'll see. We'll go by line by line quickly. And then if there are any questions that arise either you or Anna can ask them, but I'd love for you to take, if you could just 30 seconds to tell us about this and why you are sponsoring it. Sure. Dr. Shabazz, do you want to go first? You're first. Okay. All right. Sure. So first off, I want to just note, it was not my intention to have this be under the wire in the way that it was. I was planning on doing it for the next GOL meeting, but then when I looked at GOL to council timelines, we wouldn't be getting it to the council till April. So that would be after March on this was over. And so I apologize. This was literally a 1030pm proclamation writing party I had with myself last night. So apologies for that, but I appreciate you very much for getting it in. So this, you know, I mean, this is another one where once again we have teams in Amherst that are making history and we really want to celebrate that this is, you know, athletics is such a plays a really important role in not only our town, but also our educational institutions. And especially, you know, the history of women's sports is so important. I mean, for me personally, it's something that resonates deeply. So I want to recognize this team. I will continue to try to stay on top of this type of proclamation just so you know going forward. This is the second one that we are we are seeing the women's basketball team, you might say men's basketball team is heading to March madness for the first time in 24 years, which is amazing. I think I noted this at the council meeting. That is, I'm venturing I have not confirmed this but venturing that is older than all of the players on the team. So I'm guessing none of them were around the last time that you mass won a 10 championship this is really in recognition of that so I will let Dr. Shabazz I know you I believe can speak much more eloquently than me being like yes sports go. So I will turn it over to you. Thank you, Anna, and thank you all for what you do for us every day in your in your service to town. Women's History Month is not only an important time to highlight the achievements of women historically, and the ways in which they contribute to our betterment, but it's also a time to thank those and to acknowledge those in the community who are making, making history. And, and certainly this team is is a history making team having won the Atlantic 10 conference outright. And I just would say, and I know you have a packed agenda so I won't go on. Just to say that if the timing of this proclamation works out from the way I understand it might it would come, perhaps right as it would come out perhaps right as approved, right about the time that the team will hopefully win the top 16. round of the playoffs and and so perhaps be a be a real rallying point for for the town as a whole behind the team, as well as a boost to them. You know and continuing on, hopefully to the championship which is, which will be played in the first week in April. So, again, thank you all for what you do and we really rally behind all all these young young women and both as real scholar athletes so one of them was a student of mine, and, and I can just really attest that they're they're they're really, you know, wonderful, wonderful young scholar athletes. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. So let's go ahead then and move into our review. And so Mandy, if you want to go ahead and just, it seemed, I see that you made a few small changes already so go ahead. Yep, so I moved the council sponsor to in front of the community sponsor that is no, no like ding on Dr Shabazz or anything it's just we've always listed the council sponsors first for consistency. That's why I did that. And then what you're seeing here the only other changes I think you're seeing here are we tend to use semicolons before the and not commas. So, I thought I copied it from the last one. That's on me. Thank you. Maybe we missed it on the last one. No, it's all good. I'll know it now. I know it. And if no one's got any other changes through the basketball team established in 68 I will scroll this one up. Any other changes or, or questions, suggestions. Okay, go ahead then Mandy. All right, and then. Yep. Communities in the capitalized capitalized and I tried Michelle I really did try. Like I said, these were really minor the last whereas gets a period and we always just say voted this day not voted and dated. So that last time too. All right, thank you. I guess a very minor changes that I had. Thank you. And thank you Mandy for looking at it in advance and making those changes. If I, if I do not show the markup, because this has been a concern before it is on one page. If you look at size 11 and a half font. So it does stay on one page. So. Oh, there was one other thing I think we should up up at the top I just noticed this as you guys were talking a 10 up at the top does not have the dash so which way do you want it. I believe it's no dash. You might want to just spell it out. Yeah. Yeah, Mandy, could you write Atlantic 10. I think that'd be better. I agree doctors at the bottom. I'm going to just spell it out everywhere. Great. And so while Mandy's doing that, are there any other comments or suggestions on this? Looks great. It looks great. Yeah. Really good. Thank you all. Yeah, hopefully we'll do some sort of community. I know. Dr. Shabbat and I are not done working together on this for hopefully going to be able to have something where we can give this to the coaching team and then celebrate them so yeah. Awesome. Thank you. Great. Thank you for being here. Do you need to vote on it or are we good. Yes. Feel free to stay for the vote. So, thank you. I appreciate it. I'll make a motion. I move to declare the proclamation of congratulations to the University of Massachusetts women's basketball team, clear consistent and actionable. Second, the Angeles. Oh, Doesn't matter. All right, I think I heard Pat. She may have just been a little louder Jennifer. No problem. Okay, great. So let's do a roll call vote. Anika. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Hi. Mandy. I am an I too. So that passes unanimously. Great job. Thank you. Thank you all so much for putting it in. Appreciate it. Bye bye. Thanks for coming. I feel free to stay if you want. I know you're dying to stay. All right, great. So we are going to move on to the, the child abuse proclamation, the child abuse. I'm going to read the whole thing. This is the child abuse proclamation. This is the child abuse and prevention month proclamation. And if we could please bring in Lynn. To join us for this. Oh, is Lynn here? Oh yeah. Okay. Oh, she just was moving. She was in transit. When I asked that question. Welcome, Lynn. Hi. Hi. Thank you for, for coming. I love to hear from you just briefly about the history of this proclamation and the community sponsor. Right. So, and Mandy Joe is also a sponsor. Yes. Marilyn use anti. Who is the. Widow of John use anti our former town manager. Has really engaged in this cause. Working with. The. Oh God, Sullivan blanking on his name. And has honored. We last year, we did this. I think it was last year for the first time. We did have a flag raising and we hope we'll do that again. And my personal interest in this is just in general. My entire support of families and children. Is to protect the young people in our world. So thank you. Thank you. And I know that Jennifer Moisten was in communication with Marlene this year and Marlene gave us the go ahead, I think, to get this reviewed. I mean, I think she was doing some traveling. And then was in communication with her as well. So. All right. Thank you. We, I noticed in the one that I had at least, did you already take it out, Mandy, where there was. I didn't find one in either packet. So this is just my changes to last year's. So if there were changes beyond that, I don't have them. Okay. There is, it is in the packet. Can. Can you access the packet easily at this. Moment. Okay. Yeah. I think that was my mistake. It was at, I added it. And I went through the packet this morning to make everything, to make sure everything was in there and realize that I hadn't moved this one into SharePoint. So Athena may also need to add that to the posted packet. So there is a, yeah, there is a different one in there. And I, one of the things I noticed is that there was a repeat on the whereas. I'll have it in a second. Okay. Yeah. So, I think Mandy's going to add the sponsors. Let's see. It was. Three and five. Are they the same. Whereas. Yes. Okay. So. It's just removing one of those. And it was originally in the third. So let's just quickly go from the beginning and I'll look for hands if there are any comments. Or suggestions. Demi colon. Instead of a comma after anyone. So in the second whereas. The month of April is devoted to celebrating all the activities. And I don't think that time has been set for the flag raising, but by the time we, the council needs to pass this, we should know that. Great. Yeah, I'm going to. That's slightly different than the language in our last one. Last year's had and further recognize this proclamation by raising the flag from for the month. I'm fine with that. And we just have to add the date in. It was, it was like the ninth last year because that was the date that Amherst was raising the flag. So we didn't raise it for the whole month, but we'll put whatever date. Is. Yeah. And what I don't know is whether. I don't know if anyone is expecting that there's only going to be one. Community event that it might not be in Amherst, but I'll work that out with her. We can still have our own community event. And she lives locally. So hopefully. We could do that. That's great. Oh yes, please. Jennifer, please. Okay. The second whereas is the reason the T on that isn't capitalized just because it's the word. Or do we always capitalize the first. We normally don't capitalize. Okay. Just because it's the. I didn't know. Okay. That's fine. Then we need to go. Yeah. Oh, then to change all of them. Okay. Good catch. Yeah. Except for that one. I think in the fifth. Whereas. Does there need to be a period after religious organizations? Like. Could it be. It should be a comma. Yeah. It's way down. There you go. And therefore. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So. Personally, the, all of the above concepts. Wasn't. Something felt odd to me about that. All of the above concepts. In the. It's the last. Whereas. I'm wondering if there's another more succinct way to say that. All the issues maybe, or all the challenges. All of the challenges so that solutions may be achieved. Or even taking out concepts. Yeah. That helps definitely to take out concepts. Yeah. I think. That. That works. Does that work for everyone else? Anything else on this. Thank you so much for. Thank you for everything this committee does. I know you have a full agenda. Take care. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My next meeting. Mandy, would you as a sponsor, once this is ready, would you like to make the motion for this one? I'm sure. Sorry. To declare the 2022 child abuse awareness and prevention month proclamation, clear, consistent and actionable as amended. Second. I second Jennifer. I'm going to do a roll call. We'll start with you, Pat. Hi. Anika. Hi. Jennifer. Right. I'm an eye and Mandy. I. Great. Excellent. Yeah. Thank you, Lynn. Okay. All right. Great. Wow. That was impressive. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Very important things pretty quickly. So. Let's just check the time here. All right. We're going to move right into. Continuing our review of the rules. So we're going to switch gears a little bit. And then at 10 o'clock. Pete Mackey will be coming. Who is our community sponsor for the Ukraine resolution. My goal really here is if it's possible for us to finish this review of the rules. Today, I think we've, we've been. We did. There are a lot of. Suggestions and recommendations. And I think we've taken now this is our meeting third meeting on this. It could be our fourth. So let's. Try to get through it. And. We, we will likely not get to the standing committee structure. So let's see here. Where are we here? Yeah. I think we got through all of rule five and are up to section 6.1 C language below. Great. Okay. So these. I made these changes. But it feels like weeks ago, these proposed changes. These proposed changes came. Just after our retreat. And just so you know, a little bit about what I was thinking is. To me, this part of the rules felt, I think I said this in the retreat, like. A little bit confining. And also sort of. I wanted to see if there was a way to make them feel more like. I don't know the word proactive as opposed to sort of. Punitive. I don't know if that's the right word. So excuse me if I'm. If I'm not getting, getting at it, but let's just look at them. And maybe. That will become more clear. So starting with. Okay. So I'm going to go back to that. How are we doing this here, Mandy? Is this the document that I edited here? So. On the left is your wording. I believe that you've put into the. Counselor input document on the right is the current rule that. The working document where I'm documenting all of the changes we're working through that would then go to the council showing those changes. And then you could see what you just did. And somehow I just lost my view. Okay. So starting with the title of this rule. Instead of code of courtesy conduct and debate. I used the word ethics. And anything. Just please raise your hand if any of these. suggestions or concerns about the changes. This first paragraph that I added in, I looked around at some other language. This particular paragraph came from East Hampton's rules. It was sort of, I think I maybe altered it a little bit, but that was like an upfront ethics statement that I included. And then what I did here in this second part is to kind of take out some of that lengthier language and try to make it more succinct down here in the third paragraph. So these rules shall be guided by the values. I wanted to kind of get this in a little bit more of an organized shape to really highlight what we were trying to do. So we have our ethics and then the rule shall be guided by the values statement adopted by the council and shall apply to verbal and written communication. Took out also applied to all and correspondence and took out the interaction shall be guided by values and had moved that up. So let me just pause there. Any questions, comments, concerns on this so far? A comment or question, though? Yes, please. So yes, so I like what you added. And I, you know, I think that that's somewhat familiar, you know, as being used for direction. But so I had a question at Mandy and Pat may be able to answer for us was so I'm wondering if the whereas this is a guide, if some of the concerning, you know, comments or behaviors that might come in from residents that led to this direction does is this more are the comments coming in about, you know, race, color, gender? Is it was this more about a tone and personal attacks on on stances? Or I'm just curious into like how this was the reasons for this original excuse me for being tongue tied. I've been talking all morning already. Do you mean the read? Oh, please, Mandy. Yeah. Yeah. So the original 6.1 and the rest was an attempt to sort of set a tone, right, of what was expected at meetings and then what was expected from the public and what was expected from the counselors potentially separate, right, because 6.1 applies in theory to everything and then 2 is public 3 is counselors. It was a lot of it was based on town meeting code in some sense, code of conducts and all that was where the impugn the motive character integrity of any individual came from. It was not directed at offensive behavior based solely on those things. So that that is as you say it was one that in looking at what Michelle proposed, I would include all offensive behavior, not only offensive behavior based on certain characteristics because we try to we kind of want to, I think, avoid or, you know, state that we expect respectful behavior, not offensive behavior. Otherwise, I think that it's it's nice to, you know, make it a little more streamlined, as I feel Michelle has done and and it's general. But I think that yeah, I need to add a little bit of something because this will almost read like, you know, just general statements almost just like with that you would just find in any like employment poster or something like that, just so we can be a little more So I would propose getting rid of that phrase. And then I would also propose adding residents and staff to members up here. Because the original paragraph. Discussed counselor, residents, staff, all meeting participants, not just counselors. So where are you adding that, Mandy? We could say instead of members to all community all meeting participants. Perfect. Yeah, that's good. And we could set forth including counselors, residents and staff if we wanted to. I wonder, I feel like that's somewhere else, but I think having it up front is good, too. So but maybe it was it was somewhere, but I can't remember where. But that that looks really good. OK, so now see what you're doing now, Mandy, we are so blessed to have you do this role because I could not. I don't think and do what you do. Yeah. And I can't figure out does anyone. How do you get the pictures of us to be like on in a line on the bottom of the screen? Anyone? Yeah, isn't there a way so that you're not because right now minor at the top of the top of the screen, Michelle, there's a little button on the upper right hand side that says view and it has a large rectangle with three small squares above it. And if you click that, you can change where the. Oh, oh, yes. I don't see a bottom one, but. So this so to do. Yeah, I've seen it on the bottom, but now I now I see that. OK, but now I can't see everyone. There's some reason. Oh, side by side gallery. OK, that worked. Thank you, Athena. Welcome. OK, so shall I go on, Mandy? Are we are we good with what's in the right side here so far? Well, were we going to add the participants, including? I have to do because I haven't seen them yet. Oh, OK. We're moving on to 6.2. OK, so are we so during meetings? Is that where we is that where everyone? That's where we are. OK, perfect. So during meetings, all meeting participants include. Oh, this is where it was. OK, OK. Residents and staff shall focus the remarks on the matter being discussed or voted on. So does that cover it in terms of that piece? OK. Discourse at council meeting shall be marked by I changed courtesy to civility. And then I took out discussion shall be centered on issues on the agenda and shall not use unbecoming or abusive language because it felt like we had already covered that. Cell phones, councillors and members of the public, those stayed the same. Any any does that all look OK before moving to 6.2? Yes. No. OK. Great. Six point two. I changed courtesy and decorum to participation to just make it clear what this was referring to. Well, comment shall focus on matters on the agenda and within the purview of the council as opposed to on specific issues, which is what it says right now. So public participation is the title of rule five. Good point. So I don't I think we need to find a different title to 6.2. I think you're right. Yeah. Yeah. I like we could say some stability or something. But we're going to Jennifer. I was just going to say the word decorum is so subjective that I think finding a different word. Yeah, in courtesy, I just I'm with Dorothy Pam on that one. Just for some reason. It just said behavior, public behavior, civility and behavior. Yeah, I like you like the ability more than courtesy and decorum. OK, also engagement as well. Yeah, right. Engagement. I mean, I think, Anika, that's what I was trying to do with this, is is move it away from like sort of how one should, even though that's what it's doing. How one should be to sort of. What what this rule covers? What about adding during meetings? Public civility and behavior at meetings or during meetings? Or at meetings or during meetings? Because this entire section is really related to if they're there in person. How are they supposed to behave? Right. I think it is always touchy when you're talking, you know, when adults are reading something that says behavior, you know. Yeah, so. But then again, it's like engagement, participation. That's pretty repetitive. So. Civility at meetings, if we just get rid of behavior. Yes, if I believe that the adults behave appropriately, I wouldn't mind behavior me. But I don't think they do. I will stand aside. I agree with you. I just feel like that word can just like encourage sometimes like people not tell me, you know. I'm trying to see if there's another like a synonym for. How about involvement, involvement? I like engagement better. Civility. Yeah. Yeah. That's good. They should get the idea. They don't will slap them. Yeah, see how they behave them. So be public comments. She'll focus on, I changed that from specific issues to matters on the agenda and within the purview of the council. Go ahead, Nity, please. I'm going to get rid of matters on the agenda because we can't tell them what they can say. Anything, whether it's on the agenda or not, I do like the purview of the council, but in theory, we can't stop them from talking about some random thing at the federal level. But OK, OK, I did not know that. So I guess I kind of misread public comment. She'll focus on specific issues. What that really meant is. That they shouldn't just be broad reaching comments that aren't about whatever specific issue, whether it's on the agenda or not is what that meant. OK, got it. What's really what what's in our purview? So they perfect. OK, that looks good. The party is not. OK, and then for C, generally the public shall only participate during the public comment period. So I changed that from shall not be allowed to participate because that sort of just felt like preachy in a way, like, you know, so exceptions to this rule may be requested by a counselor or a member of the public and may be made and be made at the discretion of the presiding officer. How does that feel? Because that's actually in addition to what is there, Mandy, please. I'm OK with adding requested by a counselor. I'm not OK with adding requested by a member of the public. Yeah. OK. Although wait, there have been times where somebody is presenting and it doesn't happen very often, but they'll turn. There will be someone in the audience that they and ask if they could be allowed to comment on a specific thing that the person was sharing. I don't know. But it's minor. I think that's kind of what I had in mind, Pat, I was thinking that, you know, now that I think about it, like, for the for the polls, that was a hearing. So the person that came in to speak spoke as a public comment to the hearing, right? So if there are already ways for that to happen, I'm OK with that. OK. D, there weren't any changes that I suggested. E, those present shall. So instead of saying shall not for this, I tried to make it more positive. So shall conduct themselves in a manner that respects the orderly procedure of the meeting. If disrespectful or disruptive conduct occurs, the presiding officer may call a recess or adjourn the meeting. Yeah, that's good. Thank you. OK. All right. OK, if I had a comment on and I'm not sure how I can see it. Hold on. I might be able to take your time. Yeah, that's fine. I think I got all of them on E. Looks good. Comment was can F be shortened? Oh, OK. Did that come from so it looks like it came from M.G. out the Mass General Laws? So do you have any memory of this, Mandy, when these were written? I'm going to pull up the law. OK. One, two, after notifying the chair of a public body, any person may make a video or audio or may transmit the meeting subject to reasonable requirements. Maybe that's just shorter. Yeah, I like that. But are we missing anything that maybe was intended to be in here for? Well, it talks about late arrival. That's a big difference. You shouldn't interrupt the meeting to ask, right? In this, this part, the other part, this part sort of is not an exact copy of the M.G.L., but is close. Is there a problem with copying from M.G.L. exactly? Well, as long as you know that, right? If you have the reference there, I mean, the copy would would replace those two sentences and the copy might actually be longer than those two sentences. Yeah, yeah, because the rest of it is the late attendance part. I wonder if Athena might have some so late attendance, if someone arrives after me has become rich, I mean, how I can't even understand how this would happen. This was written for in-person meetings where someone could walk up to Athena and just say they want to record. Right. Yeah. In a Zoom meeting, I don't know whether a tenant attendee choose to record. I don't know. No. OK. Was that a no, Athena? That was a no. Yes, excuse me for jumping in. A participant can record to their computer, but an attendee can't. OK. I have a question for Athena. Yes, is that because they it's just not allowed or they would not have the option to do so? I don't believe attendees have the option to do that on Zoom. But we're recording the meeting anyway, and it's a public record. So anybody who can request the reporting from us as soon as it's processed, it's usually like a bit an hour after the meeting ends. But Mandy's right. This is this is written for in-person meetings. And in that case, if somebody wanted to record the meeting, they'd have to let us know so that one could make an announcement or the chair could make an announcement for us. And yes, I read this. So, Athena, they would should notify you. I was picturing them disrupting the president of the council. They were in person. I think it says such as asking a note to the clerk of the council. Yeah, it says ideally. Oh, it does say clerk of the council. OK. OK. Disrupt. So that's where they could pass the note to Athena. Athena. OK. I was meaning that. Raise her hand and say, hey, Lynn. All right. So maybe we just have to keep this. The way that it is after all that. Yeah. Yeah. I would. I'm sorry. No, go ahead. I would imagine it's open because, you know, as this really didn't account for virtual meetings, you know, even if someone is not as a participant, like there are ways that people can always record their screens or, you know, so there are ways that you can record the meetings, you know, even if not a participant. So I think this is kind of, you know, this is a deep water here. You can only. Yeah, it's clearly following state law. State law assumed that we have to think that this was more important for meetings or more logical for meetings that weren't always recorded, which were committee meetings at some point, right? Or other town meetings. This doesn't obviously apply to other town committee meetings, but the council committee meetings before Zoom were not always recorded or, you know, it was up to the chair at some point to record if we were in the town room and if we weren't, it was not recorded. And sometimes it took months to get those recordings so people could come in and potentially record it to have it quicker. Now that everything's recorded, it probably isn't. As, you know, applicable, right? But at some point, we might go back to in person meetings where it becomes applicable again. Yeah. Can I just see a hand? Yeah, may I make a comment? Yes, please. So once we go back to in person meetings, I I'm strongly advocating that we continue to do Zoom recordings with the virtual public access once we move back to in person meetings. But if even if we did that and we had a Zoom recording, a member of the public once our meetings are open to the public physically again, a member of the public could come in and say they have a tape reporter and they want to record the meeting. They need to let us know. OK. All right. So we'll leave that as is then and we'll track it in case things really evolved at some other point. OK, so I like that change, Mandy. So moving. So I this G down here, the council supports the right of the public to express dissent and dissatisfaction with its local government in civil and respectful manner. That was actually all the way like in the beginning, I think of this. Where? Yes, it was in that longer paragraph. Yeah. So I sort of shortened it and then added it down there. And I think I just saw that Mandy brought it above the recording paragraph, which I think makes a lot of sense. Any other comments on that? Before we move on to six point three. All right. So six point three. I changed the quorum to etiquette. And I guess that word also could have been used up. Yeah. Public participation now that I'm right here. Yeah, and engage or public etiquette during meetings, we could say. I think that might kind of make things. Pat, I see you have a different, maybe a different idea on that. I watch eyes, too. I can't hear you, but you're muted. Sorry, I like civility better than etiquette. But yeah, it's a monitor that I'm not going to. I don't think etiquette to me sounds more. It sounds like little white ladies, but they're even more so. I don't really like it. I have to say, I prefer to quorum to etiquette if we had to go there. But I don't know. Yeah. What about it for the six point three? We just say counselors conduct. During meeting. Is this also during meetings? Well, it's the debate piece that really gets into the weeds a little bit here about like how counselors are allowed to debate. So I think that's why that word debate was in there. Right. Because it says like that the. Yeah. President can call on one and only two people can debate at a time. I still think counselors conduct just would be fine. I think that would be fine. I think conduct would be too. OK, it's basically trying to remember, to watch the English Parliament, they actually really get. Yeah. Well, that's I took the word etiquette actually from. Maybe from that, like it's it's sort of the formal word that's used. Right. But they are so not abiding by that. Well, these rules mean nothing. Actually, we won't go there right now. Exactly. It should mean something. Yeah. Well, yeah, that's a whole other. Yeah. Oh, please, someone. All I was going to say is I liked your changes in general and I have to go through them again to read them more closely. But I liked the changes generally that made it more positive, like this first one in a instead of not speak until only when. You know, I did like that you tried to make it more positive instead of negative. That was my intention. Thank you. Yeah. I just felt like I was getting like, slapped the whole time I was reading through the the the the list. I was getting slapped on the hand or something like that, you know. OK, so to I think. Yeah, I don't know why I can use the ordinal numbers. Do we? OK, then, yeah, I keep that. I don't know. That was just minor. Um, so D, counselors shall listen without interruption, as opposed to shall not interrupt a colleague. So to sort of put forward the listening aspect. Listen without interruption and then F. Let's see. I think you added an F. OK, so this, yeah, I love feedback on this is a change. A counselor may be granted additional time to speak and that's beyond that three minutes at the discretion of the presiding officer. So I have been in meetings where it felt like there are a counselor, maybe had additional. Things to say, but. Sort of held to the flock, which I also understand why that needs to happen. But. I wondered if there were thoughts on this. I'm fine with it, particularly because it says by request. It's not something that can that a counselor can automatically assume. And I think that's right. But the presiding officer always has the option to write. Yeah, and could could we add by request prior to beginning speaking? So it's not they've talked for five minutes or three minutes and then are trying to be cut off. And then they're like, wait, wait, wait, I need two more minutes. Like that was my question. Like, what is the request? Because, you know, people will start with like, well, actually, you know, it's two two fifty five. I need to keep going. So but the only problem with. They got like, if I say, I'm going to need an extra two minutes. I don't know. It's how town meeting did it. And I think that that to me, that's more fair than using your whole three minutes and then saying, oh, wait, OK, more minutes, please give it to me. I can go with you and Anika. Or even we had, you know, I think Anna from the last meeting would have been a very example that, you know, she had questions, but, you know, she had quite a few and she acknowledged so, you know, someone else could go and ask to, you know, come back to her. Yeah, that's a great example. And also I've heard Charlene say like, that doesn't count in my three minutes. Right. Yeah, well, we've got to work on that with Mark because she does that all the time. So I appreciate, though, that she says it. OK, so let's see where I just added it on to instead of creating a new S. That sounds good. Yeah, that's good. Yeah. So then we have H. And. Oh, wait a second. So now we're in G now. Yeah, the old G was Councilor State shall stay focused on the issue at hand until a decision has been made or the discussion has been postponed. And I changed it to on the matter being discussed or voted on instead of issue at hand. Every one OK with that? OK, J changed the word can find their remarks to focus their remarks and then K. If possible, the requests and the responses to those requests will be made available to all counselors prior to the meeting. And I believe that the sponsors of the moratorium did an excellent job demonstrating that. And I personally would love to see that practice go forward. I think it was very helpful. Any any issues with that one? OK. OK, so this came from a comment that Alicia made during our retreat that I wanted to reflect. And so. Counselor shall communicate to the council how they would like to be addressed at the first meeting of the session or at any reasonable time thereafter. Counselor shall use the requested names to address each other. So that is a change. We've gotten very used to calling each other by first name and it would require us to be more nuanced. So if different people had different ways that they wanted to be addressed, we would have to try to commit that to memory as best we could. But I do think that it moves. It is more reflective of our values. And so we voted. I'm sorry, I interrupted you. When we have the first council, we voted to go to first names and that seemed nice and kind of cool and and I supported it. But after watching some other committees where people are called by their titles, there's an element of respect to that that I that. I don't know which I started I that I started to like that that it. I don't know. It roughed out or filled out a bit of the person. So I'm not sure. And I don't know if I personally want to be called Counselor DeAngelo's because I don't like the power implications in that. But but, you know, so I'm not sure where I'm going with that. But that's what I have to say right this second. When we're in person and we have, you know, we can have a plaque or whatever at our in front of us. So if you wanted to be called Counselor DeAngelo's or Miss DeAngelo's, you could have that that would remind us who wanted to be acknowledged as you know, in different ways. Yeah, I see what you're saying. OK, yeah, and I think what this is trying to do is to say that we have the right to choose how we want to be called. So if you don't want to be counsel, right. And what I'm saying is I I'm conflicted because I certainly have seen positives by about adding a title before a person's name in other committees. It's I don't know. So, yeah, yeah, Anika. Oh, I'm sorry, Pat, you know, no, no, that's all right. So the possibility is important. That's why I like it. Go ahead, Anika. So, yes. And so we're also like, gosh, I'm going to black like over two months. Are we two months in? Yeah. So we're two months in with this require like we'll go back and ask. I mean, I think I think what you're doing is great, not to be cliche. But I think that, you know, in looking and when this was written, it's almost like we're, you know, so if we're looking through the quote, kind of 20, 20 woke limbs, you know, it's almost as if we're looking back 10 years and this is almost or more of this is only what three years old. So as to not be confusing, is this something that we would need to ask everyone again, because, you know, sometimes it'll just be habit. We're so used to referring to each other as first names and, you know, it'll just come out and as to, you know, not be not be disrespectful or make anyone feel uncomfortable with this, you know, be something that we have to, you know, ask, you know, maybe send a memo to to counselors to make sure everyone is comfortable or how they would like to be addressed. Going forward, or is this put in for mainly going forward? I mean, I personally feel like if these are approved, we should ask Lynn to do something to, you know, to honor this now, not for next session or any next year, even just to do it immediately. So however, Lynn would think would be the best way to do that, whether it would be in a public meeting or by memo beforehand with requests to come in. I agree. And I I think that that could be something that in the report, we note that if this is approved, we would like for that to for Lynn to take that on. Mandy, in some sense, I'm like Pat, I'm conflicted in what I would choose if given an option. This this letter K as original as currently in the rules was definitely in response to the vote and a discussion the first council had about formality or not formality. And so the informal, I think, is good. The formal is also good, depending on the situation. Right. And so I do actually like this change because, you know, it as as Anika was saying, you know, it what we put in there in in some senses, a harkening back to before anyone was ever asked what they wanted to be called. And that seems, you know, as I think it was Alicia was saying at the retreat, not good. Right. And at the same time, it's interesting in thinking back about what we did with first names going back to gender discrimination to where there is a lot of times where in the higher ed institutions, the female professors won't be called doctor whatever, or, you know, they'll be in some sense titled down and the males are not. And so I I'm looking now this sort of in a new lens of a majority female council that went, let's do first names. Did we ourselves almost create a lack of as much respect as we could have had if we had kept with the formality? So I support this change at this time. I might even potentially in thinking about it even longer, go even farther and say, maybe we should be as formal as as most other councils are as I think more about it. But I think this is at least a good first step. All right. If there aren't any other comments, what I'd like to do is pause here because I do believe that we do six point four so that we're off. Yeah, that's that's that's that's yeah. I may bow out and come back when I really know you're. This is literally two words. Two seconds. OK. Yeah. OK, so we we sort of already discussed this, right? The whether we wanted to use the word etiquette or decorum. So here we let's see, where are we here? Six point four. What was it before? We could just say civility. Yeah, perfect, perfect. Is that work for everyone? Yes, I agree when it gets. All right, great. But great. OK. So welcome, Pete. Thank you so much for being here. I'm just going to check to see if Lynn Lynn thought she might join us as well. So this is Pete Mackey and Pete is a friend and the community sponsor for this very powerful resolution in support of the Ukrainian people. This is something that came about. I'm going to have I'm going to let Pete talk about this in a second. There are also other sponsors. That wasn't for so. Yeah, so Lynn I had wanted to. Jennifer and Dorothy as well. And so I had actually learned from a mutual friend of Pete and I's Pete and Pina is Pete's wife. Also, my friend, and I had learned that they were very interested in finding ways to help the community show support for the people of Ukraine. And I also was feeling that way in my household. My children's father is Russian and my children are Russian. So we've been speaking a lot about this through that particular lens. And then I brought it forward to Lynn. I said I may have a community member who's interested in bringing forward a resolution. Lynn was also very interested in this. And so he just did some magic and wrote this really wonderful resolution. So, Pete, I just want to give you 30 seconds, a minute, whatever you need to just sort of talk about what this means to you and why you brought it forward. And then I'll explain what our process will be so that you understand what we're doing in our review. Thank you, Michelle. And thank you, everyone, for the time. I'm going to try to minimize my imposing myself on your meeting. But thank you for including me and thanks to those who have already stepped forward as sponsors of this. Obviously, Amherst is a community that in many ways makes its voice heard on issues of the day and always I find in an empathetic way of leadership. And when Michelle brought to my attention that you might consider such a resolution, my wife and I were very eager to put it in front of you for consideration. Obviously, it's impossible to watch what's happening in Ukraine and not be grievously sad and search for whatever any of us can do as citizens. I do want to just say that my wife and I have initiated a social media effort focused on getting the voices of women and children heard. We have a Facebook account and we just started a Twitter account. If any of you are so inclined, you would welcome. We're trying to do what we can to give people a path to action and supporting each other during this war. So in this case, I looked at a sample of a resolution that Michelle kindly shared with me in the way that the Town Council typically does these follow that model in writing this. There's a couple of things I want to say. Obviously, I've started from the big picture, worked my way down to the details and then pivoted to what the resolution is intending to do on behalf of the town of Amherst. There's something I need to stress, let it be said to say the least. I am not an expert on Ukraine's history or Russia's history. And so I would ask that before we go too far, we have a scholar. We have any any number of them that I can that I know at UMass Amherst, long other places I work in the high rate field. And I say that in particularly with regard to the reference to the Budapest memorandum, there are many different interpretations of what those security assurances meant. We would never want anything to come from the Town Council that isn't expressed with full confidence. And so I would ask you, I did this very fast, frankly, in the spirit of trying to put this in front of you quickly. I would want the fourth item there to be reviewed by such a scholar to make sure I've gotten that right. I took it from publicly available sources. So I do want to stress that there is a professor who specializes in Russia at UMass Amherst in particular, who works very closely with the organization dedicated to helping imprisoned Russians who are protesting against government action to get out of prison. I think she would be a natural choice. I can easily reach out to her. There's another professor that you all may know in our community who is perhaps the world's leading expert on Gorbachev. And he's a friend and he could easily look at this as well. And I think both of them would would read a paragraph like that and tell you right away, change this word. They wouldn't need to do any research. They live and breathe in that space. So that's very important for me to convey to you. And basically, I'm here to say I hope you'll consider something like this and to answer any questions I can from the perspective of a citizen just trying to help convey our community's objections to what is occurring and perhaps to inspire other communities to do the same. Thank you so much, Pete, and thank you for that that suggestion. So if you would want to email me the names of those people and I can initiate for you, we can talk about that. We'll talk about that as a committee. The other thing I want to say is that Lin and Tom Manager Backelman were successful in finding a flag. I that was a difficult. It's difficult to find flags, Ukrainian flags right now. So we will have something planned around that, a flag raising. So we're waiting for more information about that from our council president. So, Pete, just so you know what our job is in this committee, we are reviewing this document for clarity, consistency and action ability. So generally what we do is we go through each of the whereas statements or the be further resolved statements, whatever the measure is calling for. And we'll assess whether it's clear, consistent and actionable. We generally don't comment on like content of a particular measure and depending on what it is, you know, sometimes there's more or less of that. But in this case, for example, we've already flagged the one that we want to make sure we have reviewed by somebody outside of our group. Sometimes these measures will have to go through a legal review. But in this case, that would that would be more for like a bylaw or something like that. Do you have any questions about our process before we begin? No, I mean, you know, this is meant as a draft for the council to do. I believe it is appropriate with its authorities. So, yeah. Excellent. OK, great. And I just want to say that Keena is also in the audience. And so really happy that she's here. Oh, Keena's here, too. Yeah. I gave it to you. Oh, I've never presented with my wife in the room. I decided to wait to surprise you. I started out with I first want to say I love my wife and then I would have proceeded so. All right, great. So let's start from the beginning. And it looks like. So in terms of the title, Mandy, if you would just scroll up there. Resolution supporting the people of Ukraine and their democratically elected government and condemning Russia's war against them. Are there any comments or questions about the title? Looks good. OK. Great. So we have our council sponsors, our community sponsor listed here. Would would you want to add Keena? Absolutely. Yeah. So Keena is spelled K, Y, and A. And is it Mackey? Last I checked things move fast in this world, though. It's about a long morning. OK, so let's start with the first whereas and please just raise your hand if you have a comment or suggestion on that, Jennifer. Should it be cause of democracy? I'm not just just for democracy. I don't know what you think of democracy. Do you have a comment on that? Yeah, I will say I'm affected by the extraordinary partisanship of our nation and trying to make clear it's an idea. And so to me, I think this is more about the idea of democracy around the world rather than democracy as a form of government. OK, that's fair. OK, thank you. All right, anything else on. This whereas, OK, moving on. The second whereas and Jennifer, your hand still up. Oh, no, I think. Right, not seeing any hands. So we can move on to the third whereas been straightforward there. OK, and so we already have a comment here on the fourth whereas and we will I will ask Mandy and Pat, who've been on this committee before, how we handle that with the vote later, but we'll get to that later. And by the way, Michelle, I'm assuming the same scholar will read the whole thing, right? You did. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, time is limited. And people are treading into Russian Ukrainian history, right, which I didn't know any more about than anyone else until a few weeks ago. So, yeah. Yeah. Well, and thank you. Thank you for doing the work to understand it and put this forward. All right, so moving on to the next whereas comments or questions. All right, moving on. So the one you're on the one Russia functions. Is that the one you're on, Michelle? We are in the years since Ukraine. Yeah, the one Mandy just highlighted. Yeah, I don't have everyone on the screen at the same time. So I'm just checking for hands. I do not see any. Would you like to make a comment on this one? And that one, I'm sorry, just scrolled out of view. There is. So that last point and election manipulation, I mean, it is indisputable that Russia has done that in other nations from Syria to Crimea to the United States. The only point I want to know is we all know the last point will be controversial to some. It's beyond dispute from every intelligence bureau in the United States, full stop. I just want to point that out. Would anyone like to comment on that? I agree, I've done a lot. I've read a lot of books about this. Not on that issue, but I changed the one semi-colon to a comma. We could put that group of three with semicolon separating them instead of commas. But we just need to be consistent. Which way we do it. It's whatever your style, guide, boards. We pretend we have a style guide, Pete. I'll just tell you, I have a style guide. No, go ahead. I have a PhD in English and I will tell you, technically, it should be semicolon, but I don't care. If you all want to do it with commas. We'll do the two semicolons then. I understand the reason because of all the commas and long phrases within those two. Yeah, I was trying to do it all in one fell swoop about Russia and not create another whereas, essentially. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, OK. All right, we get with that one. Yeah, great. Yeah, I'm sorry, you're not on it. When you get to the one, I think it should. So then experts now are saying it's going to be more than five million people, believe it or not, when this is done. So I think we should just say more and millions of Ukrainians because it's going to change almost by the day. Yeah, I think that's a good call. Would you prefer millions or would you prefer us to update it the day we voted? That's up to you all. I whatever you think is best. I mean, I think we could update it and then include language that recognizes that it's not ending there. Right, it's going to be continuing. And because I do like there's something about seeing a number that can be very profound. So that would be my. That would be my recommendation on that. And again, I guess that will come when we go to vote on this. We'll talk about as amended or as. Mandy, did you were there other? Did we skip a whereas this one? OK, OK, OK, OK, so it looks like we're good with that. Then I don't see any hands. So we're going to write add. How does that? It's not the greatest, I don't think, but I'm trying to fit in the. Yeah, it's not over. We, the country. It's you could just put already in front of driving. But which indicates more is more to come. That's great. All right. So then moving on. Any questions on this one here at the top? OK, not seeing any. So moving on to whereas Russia's war in Ukraine. So obviously I was trying to make clear that our problem is not with the Russian people and we're sympathetic to them. I don't know if you feel that says it strongly, you know, I did. I really felt that that that that point was being well made. And I think that's a really important point to me. Anyone else have thoughts on that? All I would say is I was quite impressed with the whole resolution and the drafting of it. You did a fantastic job, Pete. Thank you. Yes. All right. So then moving on to the next questions or comments. OK, whereas the people of Ukraine and their leaders. So I deleted the why, but that's how I've seen it in print. I don't know whether in Wikipedia, bio uses two Ys. OK, but but I think it's probably again, I think this is a scholar's call. If it's Anglo sides without a second Y, I don't know. OK, so we can include that as a question to the scholar. Review person or people. This is one of my favorite of the whereas this one here really touched me. Very small point. I would like if the double Y is how it's spelled in Ukraine, I would like to keep that because we've done enough in this country to change people's names to make ourselves comfortable. OK, I'll leave the comment there just to make sure, but I have rejected my deletion of that second Y, Pat. OK, good. So moving on then. We join any comments or questions on this. OK. And now, therefore, be it resolved. Any questions or comments? OK. So just read through all of the be it further resolved with the mall at once. The second one, I just got rid of the and before the end before the word sovereign. And then we can talk about my draft for the final or the second to last be it resolved. Are we seeing you mean this one in red that talks about the flag? Please go ahead and talk about that. Yeah. Well, I pulled this from our child abuse awareness portion. The that portion of that proclamation. We should have something to indicate an end date. A start date would have to be whether we're doing some sort of ceremony or not. That might be in April. It might be in March. Who knows? And then the end date, what do people think about an end date? Wording, I don't personally, I'm not sure we should put a date in. It should probably be some action that causes it to come down or something, not a specific end date. Yeah, I think it should fly until the war is over, that Russia has failed. That could easily be 15 years. I know. Well, OK, OK, by it. And it does. So this is a bit of a side question, but also I thought of it when Manda just said if we had a ceremony, I know that community member make gauge had commented and as to whether it was possible that we also joined in solidarity with many cities and towns around the world with being able to project the Ukrainian colors somehow into Town Hall. And I'm not sure if that has ever been done. I mean, I know that's been going on for years, but I'm not sure that that's been done here. Or, you know, if we have the capability, what would be needed? Do we already have a projector that would be able to or would there have to be like actual lights put up so that can be something to think about if possible, to coordinate with the raising of the flag. But what it's worth, I feel confident we could raise money if it was required to help the town build a developer or purchase a projection system to do that. I feel confident we could raise the money to do that. I don't know whether the town has that capability at this point for Town Hall. It would be something you have to ask the facilities director. And just to say, our council president is looking into that to that suggestion. So Lynn has mentioned that in addition to the flag, she was talking to Tamal at your bathroom and about that. So yes. And there was also along that same line, Anika. There was a community member who. Recommended adding and maybe I should get the language, but I think you're covering it probably Mandy here, but adding sort of like a moment or moments of silence. And I'm not sure how that works in terms of the schools or where else, you know, I think Lynn added a moment at least a moment of awareness at our last town council meeting. But that that also was a suggestion about having moments of silence. So I don't know if anyone has thought so much. And moments of silence are great. And in this case, we also need probably moments of voices speaking up, you know, so. By the way, on the timing thing, I do wonder because I would be leery that the worries everyone would have that this war could be an insurgency for the next decade and there's no end point, whether it might be a because I wouldn't I would hate that fear to interfere with your desire to have the flag raised or the colors projected, whether it might be wise to say until such time as a town council determines they should be like removed or lowered, however you want it to word it. I was thinking of figuring out similar language of putting an end date here, you know, the end of the war or ex-date unless the council renews the flag raising by a vote or the flying of the flag by a vote, it gets complicated. But and if I could, that might also want to we may also want to reflect that with the colors. So maybe they're separate because with, you know, projecting the colors is kind of more of a right now awareness, standing with others who are doing this now, whereas the flag, you know, if it's there, it is a flag, would there be a reason to take it down? But so in the event we had to, at what points, if we had to stop the projection of the colors before the war is over, it wouldn't be seen like, OK, this is fine. We no longer, you know, see this as an issue of importance. Mandy, do you want to want me to speak a little bit further with Lynn? I think maybe she got held up in another meeting, but I could we could I could talk to her a bit more about the languaging for this. And then we can amend it or at least we have both of those in there. I like that. Yeah. Because now they can be different dates. Yeah. Yeah. Right. So I think there was another there was another. Oh, there's another whereas. Sorry. Yes. And that would be it for the result. Yep. I had a question on this. I is this, Pete, did you copy this from the one I sent you on the insurrection? It's exactly copied from it. Yeah. Perfect. OK. I just wanted to make sure that was the standard that we had already used. Does anyone have any questions about this one? The comments? I think this is something that we add to the end of. Yes, Jennifer, I think excuse me. The council meeting will vote on it. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I saw March. Never mind. It's the 21st day of March that we'll vote. Not the 22nd. Yeah. OK. Yeah, the two, two. Oh, there's too many twos in there. There's too many twos. I don't I haven't put the date in. OK, that's fine. I want to figure that out. That's great. I hate when it's going on an agenda. I don't know if I'm like, I know this is already gone out to the full council in terms of sponsorship. I just does the sponsorship list stand or there are other sponsors in this group that would like to be added. I would like to be added. Yes. OK, so I need that. And I would as well. Pat. Mandy. You can. Yes, go for it. We worked on this together. So it's one, two, three, four, five, six. Is it problems to have seven? Not that I'm aware of. Other than proclamations, where the entire council was on. And not a sponsor. Athena, would it be a problem on open meeting law to have seven council sponsors? Why was you not talking about it together outside of a meeting? I don't see a problem with that. This is an open meeting, right? Public meeting. This one's an open meeting, so it's not a problem that the whole GOL. I think I'm sorry. I think if there's additional review after the scholar review before it comes to the council, that you'll want to pick just one or two councillors to look at that before we bring it to the council. Perfect. OK. All right, Pete, thank you so much. We will keep you posted. Please email me the scholar information and make sure that happens. I also want to thank Kena. And yeah, this is really, really powerful and just very, very much grateful to you and Kena for bringing this forward. So thank you all. Thanks for your leadership and all you do for the town. You all have a great day. Yeah. Thank you too. Bye bye. Bye bye. It's so great being in a university town where you literally have the world scholars here that you can ask to review it. I know and that a community member would come forward with and I know many have over the years, but it just is it's it's a way to engage in my experience working with Pete and Kena on this is like this was a way to engage our community like Dr. Shabazz, coming for the basketball one, you know, and sometimes I get frustrated with all of these proclamations and resolutions that we do, but when they're being sort of used in this way, it's like really powerful. It's really powerful. And I really want to get with Pat at some point and see if we can talk to Lynn about finding a way to have a discussion in council about proclamations and resolutions and really, you know, like how we're engaging as counselors with them and sort of the conversation that the two of us had with some of my questions to you about sponsoring and things like that. Because like the child abuse, you know, I have very, very personal history, very personal history. Yeah, and I wanted to sponsor it, but I felt like I, you know, I don't want to just be putting my name on any old, not that that's any old thing, I'm just saying on everything, you know. So I don't know. Well, it's interesting because when it gets listed, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mandy, but the sponsor's names are removed and the resolution exists. I don't know when it's archived and stuff, is it? Tina might know. I'm sorry, Pat, are you asking? Are you asking? Yeah, it's like what happens when a resolution, we pass it, it's archived. Do the sponsor's names come off and because it just exists? No, I leave the sponsors on there. Okay, all right, then it is important. Yeah, yeah. Thank you, Athena. And, you know, for some reason, I had thought on the insurrection resolution that I shared with Pete to use as a template. I didn't see any sponsors I thought on the one that I found. So maybe that's what you were thinking about, Pat. I don't know what I found, but it didn't seem maybe in November I'm not wrong, but. So I would look to Pat and Mandy about the motion on this. Yes, Mandy. I haven't attempt at one. Okay, very great. Please. To declare the resolution supporting the people of Ukraine and their democratically elected government and condemning Russia's war against them, clear, consistent and actionable as amended with the possibility that revisions may be made after review by a scholar in the field. That works. Sounds good. I second that. Any further discussion about that? Thank you, Mandy for thinking that through. Athena, do you need me to read that clause again? Thank you, I got it. Okay. Wow. All right. So let's start with Pat. Hi. Jennifer. Anika. Hi. Mandy. And I'm an I. So great job, but that was really good review. All right. So I do not see any attendees in the audience which means we do not have to do public comment. I have a question about that though. Like right now there are no attendees and I'm determining that this is our public comment period. But if an attendee came five minutes from now, public comments over, right? Like I don't have to, I mean, I know it's at the discretion, right? Like we knew someone wanted to speak but is there any thought on that? It's technically at your discretion. Okay. We get very few. You've noticed. We're getting, we've got a little, we're getting a little better, but if people only knew how much this fun we're having. Yes. I love it. I love it when people attend and we get into the meeting and we're running through something and they leave. Exactly. But we don't take it personally. This is not what I'm interested in. Another opportunity through proclamations because especially with community partnership and would have the opportunity to spread the word to people and who are interested. Let them know, there can be fun and proclamations. Just have to show our first meeting, you know? Well, I'll tell you, I know Dr. Shabazz is going to put that basketball one all over social media. He's really good at social engagement. And so, and we could all be doing that when it's appropriate is to let people know. I think there are probably so many people who have no idea about these things. Right. Yeah. I'll be right back. Are we headed back to the rules, Michelle? Yes, we are. Yes, perfect. So the idea would be that we can finish this so that we can hand this off to Lynn. So we are very close, I believe. Where, okay, where are we here? So we're on rule eight. I wanna come back to 8.1. I need to look up the general bylaws. But Paul in his recent memo on water regulations had suggested removing that section of the legislative process rule. Cause for water and sewer regulations, that section is what requires us to potentially pass bylaws instead of just adopting the regulations. I wanted to look up a general bylaw first. So can we come back to that and move on to 8.2? Yeah, absolutely. Also, Mandy, we had a note that we were going to revise the liaison. I'm not sure if we passed that to make sure it includes committee for what was it? That's down here. I just added it to this list in the right order. Okay, perfect. So we won't miss it. All right, so now we are then, we are moving on to 8.2. Yes, and I just need to see that list of recommendations. No, that's okay. 8.2 B is that I forgot my whole screen's being shared. 8.2 B, is this a reasonable timeline? Right. We're just trying to pull up the general bylaws. Okay, 8.2 B, let me see. I can't see 8.2. I'm going to, give me a second. Take your time. Sorry. Okay, 8.2, that was my comment. So I want to speak to a council committee to report back on any measure referred to it. I'm sorry, 45 days. Oh, yeah, that was really just like a question based on people, two people who had experience. Is that a reasonable timeline to get things back? I feel like it's a reasonable timeline. Extending it too far makes me uncomfortable because it takes often so long to do anything. But it also, when you report back, you can say, well, we're reporting back that we need an extension. So I don't think it's problematic, Mandy. I don't think it's problematic. I think it sets a, you know, rules are both to be followed but also to set an expectation, right? It is one that sets that expectation of we're trying not to take too long on any one referral. And if it is taking a while, don't let it get lost in the thing in sort of the group, tell the council why. Right. Okay, all right, great. So I actually, even though it's not on this one, I have a question about 8.2 that also relates to 8.4 which is the one I did put on here. The automatic referral of measures. So something technically like the student, the Amherst Swimming Resolution. No, not that one. Something like the Cress appointment that we just dealt with where we waved 8.4 was technically still in TSO at the time we voted it because of this automatic referral. So in theory, if we were truly following the rules of Robert's rules, we would have also not only had the wave 8.4 removed the referral to TSO. We haven't been doing that. The automatic referrals are nice, but when we're waving 8.4, or if we get rid of 8.4 for some things like I'm going to push for and ask for in a few minutes, we've still got this automatic referral. And so I wonder if instead of setting some of these out, it's particularly the appointments and the resolutions and proclamations because those are where we tend to wave the review of by a committee most often, whether we want to move those items into the president may refer or into G somehow. And it may just be too complicated and my rules issue of like, we've been waving these but they're still technically in the committee when we're already voting without voting them out of committee or removing them from committee that maybe doesn't matter, but do we want to just essentially turn them into the president refers resolutions, proclamations and commemorations and citations and town manager appointments when appropriate to the right, to the committee, such that if we're going to either wave review by that committee or remove that section from the chart from these rules, we don't have to have this weird situation where they're still sitting in committee technically because of this rule. And I'm happy for Pat to tell me I'm crazy. Well, I'm thinking that you're crazy, but I need to, what you're looking at is the president may refer a measure to the appropriate but not a town upon receipt if that measure is, so I'm not sure I... Pat, sit with that for a second because Athena has her hand up, so let's see what Athena has to say. I'm just curious about this because I really, I thought when we were, when we waved 8.6, that that was waving the automatic referral or for example the... It's not waving the referral, it's waving the, I mean, this is the does it do that, right? 8.6 is two thirds of may waive the requirement for an appointment to be reviewed by TSO before voting. That doesn't necessarily or technically say it's not, maybe we could just add language to 8.6 somehow or I'm trying to get rid of some of 8.6, but maybe there's some language that could be added that waiver of this rule also removes the automatic referral or something like that. Oh, I see what you're saying. Because it's technically still in the committee. Right. By 8.2, maybe we can discuss it as it relates to 8.6 when we get to 8.6. Okay, let's do that. So that means we're on, are we on, oh, so no, then 8.4. Sorry, yep. Was this your comment, Mandi? This one's mine. Okay. We waive or I don't know whether we call it waiver or what, but we vote in consent very many times to not follow this rule. Nearly every meeting has at least one vote to not follow this rule. We have an ability to, anyone counselor has an ability to force a second reading on anything, bylaws, this rule can't, this rule doesn't apply to bylaws because bylaws are the charter. So you can't waive two readings on the, on any bylaw because the charter requires it. And so I think the extra time to waive this rule on so many things when there are other ways to get a second reading, if the council through a majority believes a second reading is necessary, or even if one counselor does, makes me believe that we should just delete this rule and make it easier on ourselves of not so many motions and not trying to track for Athena and Lynn and Anna, have, has there technically been a first reading? Has there been this or not? You know, it becomes a lot of discussion for something that I think could be handled much easier for those measures that for anyone counselor, it's really important for. Yeah, I wanna support you in this. I do think that it takes a lot of time to unnecessary time to waive that every time. I don't even think, I didn't even know what we were waiving at first, but now I get it. And so to me, if there is a way that a second reading can happen and that for bylaws, they already have to happen for the charter, I see no reason to keep this. But Jennifer. Yeah, no, I agree. I think it's for bylaws, you know, that it's most important. And since that's, you know, that has to happen anyway, I would be comfortable with that. I agree as well. I don't. You may know better because you've been on the council longer. So what do you think? Well, and I'm also older than everybody. It doesn't count for crap. My feeling is, you know, that one of the highlights of the charter was that we would discuss things two times. And this is sort of saying, gee, now we don't have to. And so I'm a little uncomfortable with that. I really don't think it takes that much time to vote to dismiss this. But I don't know, there's something about reducing, because this can reduce everything, almost every discussion to one time only. And I don't think that's always productive. So that's where I differ. Let me just make sure I understand. So this, so I don't think I've seen a time, well, actually, how often has it happened that there's not been a positive vote to waive the second meeting? Is that come up frequently? I haven't seen it. I think other than what happened at Monday's meeting that I caused, I think in the last council, every time the council was asked to waive this rule, it was waived. There were times the council was not asked and the second reading was held and the expectation was we're doing a second reading. Sometimes that was the expectation and the council made a motion to waive the rule and vote at the first reading, even if not expected to. But I don't think anytime, even in those instances, I'm not sure there was a single time where when the motion was on the floor to waive this rule that it was not waived. I guess I'm feeling like I hear a lot of councillors going, I'm gonna postpone, I wanna postpone. And somehow or other, that feels, that feels very like a erratic kind of behavior. And we're not by saying that we're gonna vote to dismiss this, that feels more structured and I'm surprised I'm in that place, but I don't know. But I'll go with them, I won't vote for it but I will not stop anybody from suggesting it or going ahead with it. What it makes sense if it was, if we kind of looked at the categories that are in here, so that we have resolutions, proclamations, commemoration, citations, appointments, referrals and emergency measures. So I'm wondering like for appointments, for example, or are there any of these that feel like it should have a more sort of spacious process to it whereas like do resolutions, proclamations, you know? I mean, maybe instead of the accept, maybe it should be the council, the council shall discuss regulations and policies measures. There's so much that's included in, that's not accepted from this, right? So much. And maybe a better thing would be to specifically say, what we believe in addition to bylaws needs to discussions. The water regulations, you know, regulations we're enacting that are similar to bylaws but not formal bylaws. Policies like when we do formal policies, you know, comprehensive housing policy and the climate action goals is technically a policy. Maybe that's what we need to say the positive. Here's where we expect two readings and that rule can still be waived if people think it falls in it and we don't need a second reading, but instead of the trying to identify what doesn't need two readings, maybe it would be better to identify what does need two readings. Yes, I think, I agree. It's 1051 and I know that Athena usually has to move to another meeting at 11. I'm not sure what everybody else's timeline is today but we still have to do the rest of the review plus the values because there were two value recommendations. So Mandy, is this something that needs more thought or in order for us to really determine which? I guess the question would be, I know we're running out of time. It makes me think we're not gonna get rid of next week's meeting, which saddens me. I would really like to if we can. I have to say Jennifer and I are both traveling next week. There's no 11 o'clock pinch for me today. I was just gonna ask you Athena. So could everyone stay an additional 10 or 15 or could people stay an additional 10 or 15 minutes? I have a hard stop but not to 11.30. I'm fine to 11.30. So let's see what we can get done to 11.30. So what I was gonna say is- One second Mandy, how about you Anika? What is your schedule? 11.30 might be pushing it but I will do my best if we could maybe a 11.15 would be easier but I will try. I might just have to excuse myself for a moment. Okay, Jennifer, does that work for you? Yeah, 11.20 would be a hard stop for me. Because we're getting over to red barn, right? Right. Okay. Right. All right, let's do it, go ahead. So my proposal here is what does the committee prefer? Deleting this completely or an attempt to rewrite to state the measures that should have two readings? The latter I would say. Yeah, I think the latter. I do too. I agree. So while I'm working on that, I'll just say what my 8.6 issue was which is again, this we have to have a vote to not have a opinion from a recommendation from TSO on appointments and GOL on resolutions that adds more votes. And so I was not looking at getting rid of all of 8.6. I was looking at essentially removing appointments and resolutions from 8.6, those two paragraphs so that we don't have to waive rule 8.6 in these issues where a resolution, like we saw for the Crest Director where you don't want it sitting there and maybe it's just not a big deal, but I was looking at ways to streamline our meetings and have less votes. Yeah. Well, okay, why don't you work on that and then let's continue, although this will be a little bit challenging. Let's see here. Okay. If we were to move to section 10.1, I see that I said to review matters referred to them by the counselor, this is easy. Should this say by the counsel? Was there, okay, all right. So that we can change. And then potential draft language to be added to rule 10.5, I think, what is, I'm forgetting what that, is that one of yours, Mandy? Yes, that was the, what parts of these rules apply to committees? And so I suggested this change to 10.5 I to indicate which parts of the rules. We might have already done it. I haven't moved to that. So here's my potential rewrite for 8.4. Great. So in your mind, when you say proposed regulations and policies, what does that include? That includes things like the water regulations that we adopted or will hopefully we'll be adopting soon, right? When they come back from TSO, I think is where they are, that we don't vote on them at the very first meeting they come back, we get to have another discussion just like we would with bylaws. Policies would be something like the comprehensive housing policy. It could also include our policy on the delegation for public ways and stuff like that and things like that. So more formalized actions that are intended, we do a lot of stuff, right? But I guess things similar to bylaws or that we do as the chief policy setters because we are the chief policy making body of the town or the policy setting, that's what I'm referring. Would you, what about putting those two examples? So after regulations, put the water and then after policies, put the housing just to give people a way to go to something they can, because for some that might just be, I know these aren't really for the public, right? These are for us, but it's still. Yeah, but the public should, you know, if they do read it, they should understand it. So that's a good, not what we're, it's a good suggestion. And I just got rid of regular so that we don't have to worry about that. Not that I expect them to come back at a special, but. Who knows? Who knows, right? Yeah, again, more flexibility. So do we have consensus on this? Yes. Yes. Great, all right. I didn't ask you. What's that? That hasn't answered. She's not a fucking consensus, but. Do you know, but are you comfortable with it? Say more about it? Yeah, no, no, I don't need to say more about it. OK, and we already did 10.5 on. OK, great. So then we are on to 10.1 just needed a small change, Mandy. Yeah, I made that one. So 8.6, what are people's thoughts on 8.6? And right that versus two and automatic referrals and how they relate to each other. Am I just making a big mountain out of a molehill? Well, you want to take out resolutions and you want to take out what was the other one you wanted to take out to we waive this rule most for our appointments and resolutions. I don't think we've ever waived it for a bylaw and I don't think we've ever waived it for a financial measure. But again, I could just be making like in trying to streamline it might just not be worth it. Well, I think it's important like, for example, this basketball, you know, or something that comes up, like, does it have to go to GOL or can it? I mean, I would worry that it could be a slippery slope in that case. That resolutions. You know, right, you know, 8.2 says they're automatically referred to GOL. 8.6 says we can't vote on them unless GOL has considered it. So they're almost like two sides of the same coin in a weird sense, which is why I get to the way it's still technically sitting in TSO, even though the council voted to waive 8.6 because of 8.2 is automatic referral that goes to TSO for the Crest Director, for example. That's the easiest one to refer to right now. And so maybe it's just a and I would get rid of regular here because it's not always a regular meeting. We're voting these things on. But maybe it's just two thirds of the full council may vote to waive the following requirements. You know, can you add following requirements and associated automatic referral? Yeah, yeah. Thank you, Athena. Thanks for letting me butt in, Michelle. Oh, any time, please. I just want to make sure I'm understanding what this means. So this doesn't mean that I can write a resolution tonight and ask Lynn to put it on the agenda for the 21st to be voted on before it's been reviewed by GOL. Is that right? If we waive this rule, you can. So I think this part here is just as I'm OK with that. And then maybe that's enough for now. OK, so it doesn't it's not really changing it. Too much. It gets rid of my weird thing on both of them. OK, all right, I think we need to get rid of your weird thing on both of them. And I certainly agree with streamlining. I had just, I guess, and maybe it was a long night. I just am not as clear as to like what exactly this takes away or not. But I don't want to take from the limited time too much of a limited time that we have. And I know that we need to try. I'm OK with ignoring it for now. Once these changes are in. Thank you. That's great. Thank you, Mandy. Great. 10.8 C. That was yours, I think. That's my liaison. C is they shall not participate remotely. I would just get rid of it based on. Right. Yeah, times have changed. Yeah. Um, and then back to the the eight point one or whatever. Pardon me while I go through. Did did my I don't think my bylaws. That's the yeah, no, hold on. I need to pull up the bylaws. Which one was this the eight point one. And so let let me get it. It's the one that says that any council action that provides for the imposition of a finer penalty shall be in the form of a proposed bylaw. And so I wanted to look at two point two here. Just make sure is that the noncriminal disposition? I wanted to see how we worded it. If a government agency, including board committee or department is named. So that still has to be within a bylaw. The non use for violations of any rule or regulation. OK, so so we could if we delete this section. We would not need to enact the bylaw that says we can that that came with that regulation proposal for water and sewer. And what will be coming with the sewer one, the bylaw that basically said the council can enact a regulation that includes fines. We wouldn't need to enact that bylaw. We would just be able to enact the regulation. And the regulation includes the fines and penalty and the regulation would include the fines. Yes, it's this this this one sentence that's requiring us to add to the bylaws. And I don't know whether that's good or bad, but we're allowing many other people and committees, the Board of License Committee, the Board of Health, other places you know, to enact regulations that include noncriminal fines. But yet we don't allow ourselves to do so without the creation of a bylaw. We allow them to do so without the creation of a bylaw, but not us right now. And this is Paul's suggestion and so Paul Paul noticed this and that's why he proposed the bylaw to one solution is to get rid of this sentence. That seems like the easiest and quickest thing to do. Yeah, so we get with that or. Jen Jen, for your muted. I'm sorry, do Paul suggest that we delete this or just that we address it? Well, address it somehow that could be deleting or something else. OK, putting a different wording in here that says the council may enact regulations that impose fines and penalties. You know, like if we wanted in the form of regulations, we could say something like any council action that provides for the imposition of a fine or penalty shall be in the form of a proposed bylaw or regulation. We could add that language to which might actually be clear. I yeah, I like that. I like that so that it doesn't just get out of our, you know, consciousness. It's still there, but we have more clarity with it. Does that work for everyone? Yeah, OK. OK. Great. And I say, right, what's that? Appendix A. Yes, values. So there are two. And I am so sorry. I thought I went in. So I asked Alicia after the retreat to if she wanted to include the value of grace to propose, including the value of grace. And if she had specific language that she would like to use. And she did provide me language and I thought I had popped it in here, but I hadn't. So I'm just going to find it quickly. And bear with me. There is also. If you scroll down, I added and I just wanted to speak to this for a moment. So I added tolerance and I just want to say that what I'm trying to get across here is that we learn better or that it's a value for us to tolerate different perspectives that are. Yeah. And so I just wanted to differentiate that between tolerating behavior that is oppressive, discriminatory race. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about tolerating different points of view. Yeah. Yes. So different opinions as different points of view, not right or wrong. Yes, exactly. Not having a binary thinking framework on that. So let me just. I want to get back to grace because as a clunky working class person, I'm not sure I like grace. So OK, I know what I mean. Let me pull up. So this was I don't know if you remember, Pat, during the retreat, Alicia had inserted a value that wasn't on the list of the facilitator gave us and it was grace. And so and she spoke very beautifully and eloquently and meaningfully about that. And so she provided for some reason, my Internet isn't working. Some language. And I think I'm going to have to read it to you because my Internet isn't. Here we go. All right. So I don't know, Mandy, if you can kind of type this in as I'm talking. So she had three bullets. The first is allowing someone, the space to be human, semi colon, to make mistakes, comma, to learn and grow from those mistakes and to experience adverse situations without thinking of them as lesser than period. The second bullet was allowing. Can you read the first one again? Sure. Allowing someone the space to be human, semi colon. To make mistakes, comma, to learn and grow from those mistakes and to experience adverse situations without thinking of them as lesser than. So we might have to just, you know, decide on gram, grammatically how that would look, but there are two other bullets. And so we might want to find and she was totally fine with us finding a more succinct way to say this, allowing people to exist within the meeting space in whichever way suits them best. And then the last one is a combination of kindness, compassion and mindfulness. And I see Amika's hand is up. Yes, two things. I'm sorry, I do have my virtual appointment banging on my virtual door. So I will have to leave us. I just wanted to add I love tolerance, I love grace, but I think maybe I don't know if it can be put in a word wording that we acknowledge or that maybe it's an interpretation because I think with certain words, people go to the literal definitions of them, you know, and which will be quite different or a bit different in ways. So, yeah. Like if you Googled grace, what would you? Yeah, I'm just, you know, I just as, you know, so many like you have like biblical donations and, you know, you so it's like we're being clear so it doesn't come across like etiquette. You know what I mean? So yeah, because yeah. Yeah, this I can support the idea of graceful etiquette or anything like that is what I didn't want. Yeah. Yeah. But I think I think thank you. Thank you guys so much. Thank you. Bye bye. Thank you. Bye. OK, you're you're fine. Spring break. Victoria. Yeah. So for grace, do we it's it's longer than, you know, in terms of consistency, it's it's it's longer than our other values here. But I really appreciate Alicia's language. I'm wondering if we can find a way to. Just maybe do we want to tighten it up a little bit or just leave it as is? Oh, yeah, I think the third one. The combination of kindness, compassion and mindfulness is could be added into this respect. Already talked about a culture of compassion and respect for different points of view, experience and knowledge. So, you know, we could say kind, you know, kindness works with that. Mindfulness is not quite that mindfulness could be taken out altogether as far as I'm concerned and agree to a culture of kindness, compassion and respect for different points of view, experience and knowledge. And that's implicit, right? And put it in a way that there's mindfulness there. So that's I think that's good. Yeah. And are you going to keep them numbered like that just for? No, that was why I'm not creating different bullet points. Yeah. We value allowing someone's face to be human and to experience adverse situations without. I think I think what I heard in the retreat that Alicia meant by that is that we're not. Valuing people. We're not we're not what saying value. We're not placing judgment around like valuing people in different ways based on their lived experiences. But I wouldn't want these are for a word. So you're allowing people the space to be human, to make mistakes and to learn. To have to have experienced adverse situations while thinking of lesser of them. Yeah, I think that that, yeah, because that, yeah. I guess in that one, I looked at the the the present tense as essentially similar to the making mistakes of potentially saying things that as they're growing in their, you know, in their beliefs or stretching their understanding of specific areas, especially as we govern that comment statements and those ideas that are expressed will not result in people thinking lesser of them. So I did see it as more of a present tense. Yeah, I see what I see what you're saying. And that makes sense. I wonder if this to have to express ideas without thinking lesser of them to experience adverse situations without thinking of themselves or others as lesser than I don't know, because there's something and maybe this is too personal and it's not needed. But I feel like there are ways that I have judged myself because of adverse things I've experienced and that gets in my way of working. So it isn't just that I'm worried about you judging me, but I'm judging and I don't know if that needs to be in there or not. But yeah, I actually like what that does. What do you think, Mandy and Jennifer? I think that works. I'm muted. I'm sorry. I without I think that is likely what Alicia was speaking about, that people feel comfortable themselves, like you said, are judging themselves so they can feel comfortable in the meeting and also that others in the meeting not judge them. I do think which is good, this is getting at for anyone in the community feel comfortable coming and participating and being part of the governance. Yeah, I'm struggling with the third one, the exist in a meeting space in whichever way suits them best. Could I be muted? Both in what it means, right? What's intended and how that could be perceived or result in things, right? You know, like, yeah, I'm struggling with it. Does the word authenticity come to mind or resonate around this at all? Like, that's what it felt like to me is that it was a call to allow people to be their true selves, their authentic selves, you know. And I think, Pat, I hope it's OK if I say this, I really think that you have modeled that at times and you've sort of also beat yourself up about it when you have, like, you know, like you say something that you really feel and then you say, I'm not supposed to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway, which is good, you know. And so to me, that's that's your authenticity that arrives when that happens. So I don't know if that. And maybe I'm I'm really kind of feeling like. I don't know how we would do this in emotion if we can complete these today, but if we can just sort of say that we want this to have Alicia's blessing, because I do think we've made some assumptions potentially. And I want to make sure that. Yeah, I think that's true. Yeah. Well, we could make the motion that it's that we recommend after review by Councillor Walker. For the right, like we did for the previous proclamation, exactly. Yeah. Because of the proclamation, we're having the Ukraine. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. So this one, if we get to a motion, we could add that possibility of revision of the grace. Right after review by Councillor Walker, something like that. That would be great. That's really good. Because are we able to move to tolerance or? Yes, I think so. I just want to say one thing about this. You know, I do think Anika's point is really important that, you know, we were incorporating a value from a specific counsellor that means something to that counsellor and that they've interpreted in a certain way. It's not necessarily a value that you would see on any list of values that you might Google or look up. And so I think we just want to be like aware of that and that we're just not in a bad or a good way, just being aware of that. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Tolerance. So I had written we honor the beliefs and opinions of others, even when I don't know if honor is is the right wording here. I'm totally open to suggestions on this. But just my bigger point was that I really want us to value different perspectives. Pat, were you did you have something? No. OK. We value the beliefs and the values, even when we don't. I was going to get snarky, but I'm not going to. We don't. Well, yeah, tolerance is a real step when our opinions are right. Which mine always are. I just turned it into one sentence. Yeah, which is very good. That's good, Mandy. That works for me. And I will figure out a way to get this all onto one page again. The only thing I might say is can we. Sorry, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I was just going to say we value the expression of beliefs and opinion of the beliefs and opinions of others, even when we don't agree with them. Yeah, that is right. Yeah, I also might take out beliefs and opinions and just put we value the expression of points of view of others, you know, or perspectives of others because beliefs and opinions, that's I don't know. To me, I think perspectives we value the expression. You just say we value the perspective of others. I think it's the expression like the tolerance is. I think that point is there are certain types of opinions and beliefs that we don't want to say we're going to value there. Right. No matter what. But hey, anyone can express that opinion, right, right, you're right. Yeah. Thank you, Mandy. However, I do think by taking out beliefs and opinions and having perspectives that's already implied in a way like that. But maybe not. I think it's good to be clear. I think it would we change this one to perspectives, too. Yeah. Yeah, the expression of perspectives by others. I think it should be by others, not of others by ourselves and others. By our. We value the expression of perspectives. All we value the expression of diverse perspectives. Even. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, that's good. Even when we don't write even when we know they're idiots. Right. Again, trouble one of these days. I'm always in trouble. OK, well. I just don't like to take myself too seriously so that when serious things have to be discussed there. Yeah, it's 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 11, 23. Yeah. So are we ready to make a motion on this? I can try one. OK, Mandy, great. And I'm going to. Caution this with when these come to the council, they probably need potential for separating out potential. There will be some sort of splitting of potential emotions at the council for adoption, potentially is what I am. We'll have to we'll have to listen to this perspective of. But I'm going to make one motion, even though at the council, the vote may be like six or seven votes, which is I move to recommend the council adopt amendments to the town council rules of procedure. As. Presented as presented. And by GOL on March 9th, 2022, with. The request that Councilor Walker review. The. Where is it? The council statement of values. Great grace, pertaining to grace prior to presentation to the council. Second. Hey, Jennifer, seconds. Can we vote? Yes. Yes, Mandy. I. I'm an eye. Jennifer. I. Me. I mean, I. There's a troublemaker too. Okay. I did Michelle is an eye and I am so I am so happy. We can. Meeting Michelle. Can I also say, as someone who's sat on GOL for three years, this was one of the most. Respectful is not the right word. Calm review of rules of procedure. Yep. Do we have a meeting next week? Women. Yeah. No, if it's possible, I would like us not to, but let me just make sure that that. So that would mean that our next meeting isn't until March 30th. For our calendar. Because we'd be skipping the 23rd, you know, if we had had our meeting on the 16th, and I want to get us off schedule. So. With what we have. Coming in the pipeline here. We still have to complete our review of the standing committee. Structure. And then we have. The equity lens that we wanted to work on. And let me just make sure there's nothing. We should adopt minutes now. And then I have a request for an agenda item. Okay. Do you, Jennifer, do you feel like you have time to adopt minutes? No, I don't. I don't have time. I don't have time. I don't have time. I don't have time to adopt minutes. I know we're kind of pressing up against it here to be there. We can still vote without her. Yeah. Without her. And. My agenda. I can wait five minutes. I just have to get. Yeah. So the agenda items that Jennifer can hear it is we have to be aware that by mid June, we have to be aware that we have to be aware that we have to be aware that we have to be aware that we have to be aware of the non resident members of the finance committee. I think there's at least one member whose term is expiring. So that should start showing up on the GOL agenda. Okay. Thank you. Board notice and all sorts of things like that. So. I might check in with you about that offline, but that's good. Okay. All right. So Jennifer, I think it sounds like if you need to, I do need to go to, but let's, if we wanted quickly do. Okay. So we have two sets of minutes to adopt. We'll begin with the February 16th minutes. They were both in your packet. I don't know. I think you can combine them. I don't think that. Okay, great. So then we have February 16th and March 2nd. Okay. So I moved to adopt the February 16th, 2022 and the March 2nd, 2022 minutes of the GOL committee. Is there a second. Second. Okay. Any discussion. Okay. Great. Pat. Hi. Jennifer. Hi. Mandy. Michelle's and I. So those paths unanimously. I think that's good. I think that's good. Great. So. Are we meeting or are we not meeting? Cause it sounds like maybe we should. I don't think we need to. Okay. I'm ready for no. I can't meet next week. So yeah. So March 30th, we'll be our next meeting. And have a wonderful day. I'm adjourning at 11, 29 AM. Okay. I lost me in the, okay. Bye.