Okay, we're recording. Please go ahead. >> Thanks so much. All right, everyone. Happy Tuesday. It is time yet again for another exciting and thrilling meeting of the Governance, Organization, and Legislation Committee. Uh, everyone's favorite Tuesday activity. Uh, I'm going
to call the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. I'm going to call on members of the committee to make sure that you can be heard and we can hear you and to mark you as present. Lynn Griezmer, >> present. >> Councelor Ryan, >> I'm here. Excellent. Councelor Lauren >> present.
>> And councelor Hannah Martin >> present. >> Perfect. All right. So, I welcome our guests. We are going to get to you in one moment, but as per our agenda, we're going to start with public comment. Um, so if there are any members of the public who would like to make public
comment, you can raise your hand in Zoom. We currently have one person calling in on the phone. Um, so if you'd like to make public comment, you can raise your Zoom hand now. Excellent. Uh, and Athena, do you want me to do Oh, you got it. Amazing. All right. Um, and you
will have three minutes to make your comment and go ahead when you're ready. Oh, you'll have to Oh, you got it. You got it. >> Okay. Um, so my name is Vincent Okconor. I live at 175 Summer Street in Ammerst.
Um I my public comment has to do with one just um urging the the committee to look again at the idea of having so many of
the town's meetings by Zoom um where you don't people don't have the chance to directly talk with you um and in my case have to participate by telephone and not by visual. So, so I I think it's just
really unnecessary to have so many meetings by Zoom and I would urge you to um consider terminating the authorization in the near future. Second, I have a letter to the Human
Rights Commission which I hope I can deliver to them at some point regarding referrals to the International Criminal Court which I think the Human Rights Commission is probably the best suited group to do it. Um and I would um again
I urge in the letter that the Human Rights Commission conduct um an examination both of domestic and international conduct by the United States and make the appropriate referrals. We have we hear a lot of speeches about
what's going on with regard to the conduct of the president administration but I think there is a process for referrals. I provided it to the council on the back of one of my um statements about the school budget and I just would
urge the um the committee to uh speak with the human rights commission and encourage them to be receptive. Um finally um uh
oh I do have a question um for the committee about whether you have followed the state legislation regarding the all the conduct of ICE. There is legislation in both houses of the legislature and I wonder if you have
followed it and have a comment on um h if you've taken uh you know the time to contact uh our legislators about this and um and what are your thoughts and hopes for the possibility of legislation
on this topic? And finally, I did submit to the charter review commission a written proposal uh in guarding regarding three items. Very simple. One is to widen the pro the number of people
involved in the process for declaring a state of emergency in the town. This is the modern era. People have cell phones and so forth. It is the idea that a single unelected person by themselves could declare a state of emergency is
something from the earliest early 20th century. >> Vince, I'll need you to wrap up in the next 10 seconds. Okay. >> Well, I just have two more items. one, I did make a written proposal that that under section 8.3C
that the that the charter commission review process in strip from the charter any possibility of something becoming law by simply by default. And uh finally, I would urge the
the um committee to consider allowing two members of the library trustees and two members of the school each school committee whose budget they're considering to to fully participate um in the process of considering their
budgets. >> Thank you, Vince. confining people to two or three minute statements I think is something is >> I understand >> but I appreciate I appreciate your willingness to go with >> and I did um and I have not received a
response either from the committee or from the group that and I I don't know how many people submitted written written proposals but >> thank you Vince we're going to need to end it there and I would encourage you to uh continue to attend the council meetings and speak to councel elers as
you have been at those meetings and um as a reminder we do not comment on items uh raised at public comment but I am sure that counselors would be happy to answer your questions individually if you are able to reach out to them and thank you for joining us. Yeah. So, I think that's a part of the problem with
committee meetings. I understand not responding to when they have the full council there, but I think the the committee process should be more interactive and I would urge you to consider um that both for this committee and for other committees.
>> Thank you for your insights and input. I appreciate it. All right, folks. We're going to move back to the remainder of our agenda. um for the day and um we're going to begin with discussion on the human
rights commission bylaw what is shifting to be the human rights commission charge. So I first want to welcome three guests with us today. Ronnie Parker who is the chair of current chair of the human rights commission Pamela Young who is our DEI director and Lauren Goldberg
who is from KP Law. So can we just make sure everybody can hear and be heard? Ronnie let's start with you. Um, yes, I hear everything. Thank you. >> Perfect. And Pamela, >> good evening everyone. >> Hello. Thank you. And Lauren,
>> good evening. Thanks for having me here tonight. >> Glad to have you. >> All right. So, we are um I'm going to share with you all our current status of this this charge and give you a little bit of background. So what was referred
to the to go was a substantive review of the proposed bylaw um proposed human rights by human rights commission bylaw. This has been something that has been in our bylaws since the creation of the HRC and uh my understanding was it was put
in the bylaws because that was the way for town meeting to establish the human rights commission. So that's sort of where it's lived. Um, again, I'm going to share the committee's understanding, my own understanding, and I I welcome any corrections to that record as it as it stands. So, my understanding is that
the HRC drafted a new bylaw. Uh, and it kind of went through several different iterations before coming to us. Uh, it was reviewed or comments were provided by our attorneys. Um and then when it came to us, the the go committee was
discussing how the HRC is similar to other commissions that we have. And those commissions are governed through charges, not bylaw. Well, everyone's governed by bylaws, but uh their their charge is is in a separate charge document, not in the bylaws themselves.
And putting this bylaw into a charge instead of it existing in the bylaws allows the committee to be on equal footing with other commissions we have such as the disability uh persons with disability commission for persons with disabilities um and other bodies that
are able to have a little bit more counselor lord I'm just going to mute you um have a little bit more control over um their their work in that way right they don't have to go through an entire bylaw change process to shift something about their their procedure.
So, what is in the packet tonight is a draft charge. I will share my screen and um I'm going to turn it to other counselors to see if they had any questions uh or any sorry, any additional comments before we kind of jump in with
questions. And I think that what might be helpful is to hear if if anyone if Pamela especially I think Ronnie's been able to join us at a few meetings. Um but Pamela or Lauren if you have any opening comments that you want to make about this or your involvement in the
process before we jump into questions we would welcome that now as well. So counselors or guests, if you've got any additional comments before we kind of go through it and look or questions. Councelor Hannah Martin,
>> um just because I did miss the last meeting, can you just clarify is this what the updated bylaw text was just kind of copy pasted into a charge or are there substantial differences? There are not massive substantial differences. Um, this is pulled from the
bylaw. There are some pieces that were a little bit repetitive and so we kind of tried to combine them a little. So, you can see like we've got two two chunks here. Um, this was from the mission and this was from the purpose and there similar. So, there's still a lot of work
to do here to combine. But I think the reason why we wanted Pamela and Ronnie and Lauren here today was to answer some questions that we had before we put too much more work into words smithing it. Um because that'll be the the decision-m point. Does that make sense? But there's
nothing go hasn't written text in. Um yeah. >> All right. So I'll start at the top. Sorry. Any other opening comments or questions? I think it might be helpful, committee members of youth, if this is not helpful to you, it might be helpful, Lauren and
Pamela especially, if you could give us kind of a quick how we got to this point from your perspective as well um or your experience in the process. I think um that was one of the questions we had is we weren't clear on what comments had
been made on the initial bylaw from legal or from the town. Um and we thought that that would be helpful to to know. >> Certainly. Um madam happy to >> Yeah. And you can This is more informal.
You're welcome to just call me Anna. That's totally fine. >> Okay. I will do that. >> If you can switch. If you don't, it's fine. >> No, that's all right. I want to do what what you guys do. Um so um so we have
been involved with the text of this for I think since its inception. Um and uh you know when it kind of transitioned from the uh regular town meeting bylaws to the um councils uh I mean to the to
the new kind of different set of bylaws um that the town now has. Um, you know, we raised issues about potential liability and that potential liability. And I I should just back up to say our job is not to pass judgment on
whether adoption of this is a good idea or a bad idea um or whether a bylaw is good or bad. And so I want to make sure that that's not uh the impression that anyone gets. I want to um clarify that. Instead, you know, when we look at this, we look at it um in a kind of
problem-solving manner to see are there potential areas where the town could um face exposure to liability. Um are there things that, you know, we've seen in other towns and cities that we think,
you know, we, you know, want to make sure that you're aware of. Um and typically we will just point those things out. There are times when we will um you know do a track changes or version and um I know you guys have probably all seen those before and you
know again I think especially in a place like Ammerst those are ideas for you to consider and we are not the police of of words. Um so uh we have made some comments in the past. We met um with the
human rights commission um and then we met with kind of a a subcommittee I believe um and uh or not a formal subcommittee actually just I think it was the chair and the vice chair and talked a bit about kind of what their goals were and thinking about a
revision. Um, so for this round, we saw an original proposed revision. We saw kind of an updated proposed revision. Um, and I think it's been in that pretty much in that form for a while and then now um we've seen this new charge. So
that's uh that's how we've been involved in in these discussions. >> Okay. Pamela, is there anything you would like to add? >> Sure. So, um I'd like to just say that the HRC has been working on a revision of the bylaw now for um really since for
the last three and a half years since um early on when I started. Um and as Lauren said, there's been many conversations between the commission and KP Law. the current uh version uh is a
compromise because there were many things that the commission wanted to do that um council advised us not to do and so we we reached a point where we had a document where I think both sides were you know fairly happy. Uh I think the
decision to move the the work from a bylaw to a charge makes sense. Um, I wasn't at the last meeting, but from conversations with Ronnie, it's my understanding that you the substance
of the of the bylaw would be in a charge and then the commission would be free to propose its um own procedures. Uh, I think in conversations that Ronnie and I have, we believe that we're at a good
place with the commission where there would be no, at least we would advise that there be no changes to the procedures that have been agreed upon between the commission and KP law. Um, so I don't see this as a major hurdle
from moving it forward. Everything seems to be in alignment um as far as the commission's uh stance is concerned. >> Great. Thank you, Ronnie. Anything that you'd like to add? >> No. Okay. Thank you all. That's that's
really helpful. Um counselors, please feel free throughout this to ask questions. I think that what how I'd like to approach this is we've been jotting down our questions as we go. Um, and I I know that what you're looking at is um because a charge is a simpler
document than a bylaw. Um, there were there are things right now that are repetitive. Uh, and we will be going through and kind of pairing this down so that it's not at the end, but we wanted to um get our questions now to decide which which which are the two versions, right? Um, for the things that we did
pull that are repetitive. So, if it's all right with everybody, I think I'm going to go kind of question by question here um as we as we've been noting them. And if something comes up, uh please feel free to raise a hand and and ask your question. So, the first thing that came up for the committee was when we
looked at the purpose uh thinking through the purpose of the commission is to protect the human rights of the town of town of Rammerst residents. uh and the committee members were discussing if this statement because it is a very broad statement um accidentally establishes liability or if it is
understandable that it is an aspiration. >> Um go ahead Lauren. >> So I yeah thank you. I think because it's in the purpose section it's not you know it doesn't provide any guarantees. It's just saying this is why we want to
do this. Um, so I I think that that's okay and I don't believe that there'd be liability specifically because you know the commission is here to further the rights of individuals. So I I don't have any particular problem with that
language. >> Great. Thank you, Councelor Ryan. So, um, that's why it's helpful to have Lauren hear it also, um, Ronnie and Pamela, because the kinds of suggestions that I know I'm going to make and I
assume my colleagues will make need to be vetted by them, um, both from a liability standpoint, but also from the the idea of making sure that what we're saying is what uh is the intent of the Human Rights Commission. So, here's a good example. I was going to propose the
language instead of protect to use the language promote. Um because I see that language used in other charges elsewhere. Um but again that's a question of whether that really captures the intention of the of the uh commission and also whether that raises
any liability questions. Um but I'm hearing it's not really a liability issue and so perhaps that particular suggestion of mine is moot. Um but one thought was in that first paragraph the purpose of the commission is to promote the human rights of etc. So I don't know
if there's any thoughts on that. People want to keep the word protect. Um that's my first comment. Second thing I just observe as we go along. There are um three paragraphs here um which pretty much to my mind say the same thing. And
so part of what I think we're going to try to do, I hope, is combine them into a single paragraph that both says what the commission wants it to say, but also is succinct and clear. So um two observations, second more general. The
first um protect versus promote. Any thoughts? >> Um I I prefer protect. uh I think they they while there's cross in my again my opinion while there is certainly crossover between protecting and
promoting one's human rights I believe that they are different enough to change the charge in a way that I don't know that we intend to um and I think I'm I feel better about this in knowing that you know a purpose
statement is not a binding promise um that it's something that is always what we aspire to do. That is what we're what we're here to do or what that group is here to do. Anyone else have any thoughts on this one on promote versus protect?
Okay. Council Ryan, are you comfortable keeping it as is then based on your >> I just want to hear what people think. Um I >> I agree. >> I think there's um you know arguments on both sides. Um ultimately what protects individuals
rights um is are the laws of the land and their access to the courts. Um that's where your protection actually takes place. Um but I have no problem with protect. Um and uh so that's but
that's just my thought that um ultimately your protection is the ability of you to get a hearing in a court of law and to have the laws there to protect you. Um we can help you get to that point. We can advise you. Um we can certainly speak on your behalf but
in the end protection lies I think elsewhere is my initial thought. >> I think it can lie elsewhere. Whether it always does is a question. Yeah. Linda. Yeah, that's another issue entirely, right? >> Um to me the difference between protect
and promote is at the crux of the very issue that concerns me with um the Human Rights Commission. And that is that it it almost feels like it's an overpromise when we say protect because we are not
in fact the courts and um we can you know do whatever we can to advise people but ultimately the human rights commission isn't able to actually protect somebody based on the law.
So promote is is more like what I think we're trying to do. But I can understand why people want the word protect Ryan.
>> Oh, okay. Councelor K Martin. >> Yeah, I think I'm I'm leaning towards protect. I might say like the purpose of the commission is to help protect in addition to all those other, you know, the courts and the laws and so forth. Um because there's kind of a helper sort of, you know, function um to help people
get the resources that they need. So, >> okay, >> Councelor Lord, >> thank you. And sorry about that unmuting earlier. >> You're fine. I I feel like protect many
of us won't think of it in the legal terms. We'll think of it as um standing up, making resolutions, making food for the person we held in in sanctuary in a church. So, I really like the idea of protect even though yeah, you can't protect us from, you know, a
nuclear bomb or uh certain other things. And I, you know, just as the the the regular old person walking around Amoris, I think protect isn't necessarily collect connected to um a legal. It's only through this organization that I'm this um committee
that I'm learning there's like a legal not always but in terms of Mercury retrograde. I also like >> different. >> Sorry, you broke up for a second.
>> Are you able Can you try >> You sound a little bit like >> It's It's still a little bit like tea pain in the 2000s. Um it's a little uh autotuny. Okay. And I live with six. Oh, wait.
You're back. You're back. Okay. >> I should have better reception. >> You're fine. Go. Um, we can better. >> I was just saying like to I think most of us residents won't think of promote. I mean, pro protect in the legal way.
>> And there's different ways to protect in my opinion that the HRC does show up just listening and hearing and giving resources. Um, and there's like protect. You can't. Yeah. Anyway, I don't know where I got cut off, but then I was saying I do like the idea of promote because I know the HRC also does promote
um through the different um activities and events they have. So, I don't know if we could have both, but I do think protect feels important. >> Thanks. >> Thank you, Lauren. Um, I was actually going to to um
suggest that that that could be a way to address both of these things to say promote and protect or promote and help help protect. Um I do think there is a legal framework and people will ultimately be um you know need to find
protection there but um you know the commission is looking to raise consciousness about these things and to make sure that um you know that people's rights are being recognized. So I I think I think just a plain English reading of the word is okay and not
necessarily has to be interpreted as the legal aspect. >> Great. Thank you, Lynn. And then I'd like to move on to the next comment. >> You're muted. >> I liked Amber's suggestion of saying
help protect uh just because it gives it a sense that we're in this with other people. So, promote and help protect seems like a good way to get us past this one. >> It sounds weird to me to say promote and help protect. For some reason, I feel
like to help promote and protect feels better, but that's my brain a little bit. Councelor Ryan, >> I was going to suggest something very similar. I I was going to suggest something similar. Um, the order doesn't matter to me too much, but I like bringing in the notion of promotion, but
I also want to respect the stronger notion of help. to help promote and protect. Um, sounds fine to me. >> Ronnie, >> um, I just need a question of clarification about the procedures. When you ask for questions, you're really
talking to the committee, right? And you will call on us when you want us to speak or how does this happen? >> If you have questions, you are welcome to ask them as well. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Yes, of course. Um, councelor Ryan.
Yeah, I think one thing that very much I'm concerned about is that if we are making suggestions of changes of language um and a commissioner has concern, they should speak up if they feel the language is not appropriate or they have concerns about it and they shouldn't be shy about that. Um because
we're trying to capture the intent. Um but I have to admit I'm also trying to get this um to be as concise and as clear as possible, but sometimes that can cause harm elsewhere. So um I urge uh Ronnie and anyone else to speak up if they feel our language is is we're
losing something important. >> Absolutely. Thank you for stating that Ronnie. >> Yeah. So I feel pretty strongly about protect because it gives you this feelings of warmth and it can be help protect but I think promote is a whole other thing and it is part of our education of our agenda to educate and
so on. We have that fleshed out but at the purpose level um I feel protected is stronger. It's warmer. It makes people feel like this is something that's theirs. I know how mushy that sounds, but I'm more comfortable with protect at
this stage at the opening statement. >> Ronnie, how do you feel about both of them? >> I think prefer just one. Yeah, but I don't mind help protect because as Lynn pointed out that just says that we're part of a bigger Ammerst
community wanting to protect human rights. So that's fine with me. But when you put promote in with protect, it mucks it up in my mind. >> Councelor Ryan. So Ronnie's right to point out that promotion is very much
emphasized in uh the letter later part of this document under the charge. So perhaps the answer is to uh to strike promote and simply say the purpose of the commission is to help protect the human rights of
town of Amoris residents. >> Okay, >> my thought. >> All right, 20 minutes in. We got through the first comment. Good job everybody. Um, we're on a roll. Okay, I'm not cutting off discussion. Are
there any other thoughts about help? Adding help here, but we've landed on that. Okay. All right. So, we have resolved our first comment here. Next up, similar question and it could be a similar answer. Um, there were concerns expressed by committee members
that this scope may not be possible and definitions may may need to be provided. I think that we've covered a little bit the scope question. Um, we have not covered the definitions question. Uh, but really the concern here was that the language might be unclear or overly
broad. Um, and I think that we're when just to be very clear, we're kind of referring to this last sentence here. Council Ryan. So, I'm going to make a suggestion and just to see get things started and see
what people think. Um I found these three paragraphs um there's issues with language and so on and we could spend a lot of time discussing some of the language choices and maybe we will end up doing that and that's fine but I felt that um if we
could take the opening to the first sentence is fine the second sentence I think we've just agreed to and then go to the >> I'm sorry >> I apologize the second sentence is really long >> I'm sorry yeah the sentence reads The
purpose of the commission is to we agreed help protect the human rights of the town of of town of Ammeris residents and then stop there. >> Okay. >> And then I'm going to suggest and I'm just suggesting it that we look to the
third paragraph which begins with the human rights commission shall act to promote the town of Ammeris human rights policy and I found the language there. Um, so, uh, to ensure that no person shall be denied any rights guaranteed
pursuant to local, state, and or federal law on the basis of race or color, etc., etc. I felt if we could connect that sentence or part of it to what we just went through. Um, that would be a place to at least start. Um, >> right,
>> that's my suggestion. So that's just a a thought, but I felt that the other that the language in the other paragraphs are broadly saying the same thing. And we could spend a whole lot of time arguing about particular words. I'd like to see if we can capture the essence here. And
I think that third paragraph captures it. Um, at least comes close and that would Yes. Go ahead. >> I'm so sorry. I just want to clarify. So you're saying these two paragraphs and remove the other two. Is that correct? >> Yeah. So, just I'm just going to do it here so folks can see what it would look like.
>> Um, George, if you could just confirm that I've got that. >> So, human rights commission shall act remote promote the town of I'm sorry. Um, >> from from here. Yeah. >> To help protect human rights of the town of Ammeris residents
and then strike. So, that second paragraph strike the human rights commission shall all that get stricken to get to insure. So the commission shall is to help promote the human rights of the town of Ammerst residents
to ensure that no person >> and that that's just just and then that language to the end. >> So once track changes is figure figured out this will be up here. >> That's what I would like.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um thoughts on this change? Uh Pamela? So I like that suggestion and I do um I guess this is a question um for go. In the past the protections have been
offered not only to Ammeris residents but to individuals who happened to be in Ammeris for a you know an if I'm a visitor to a business and the business did something to that was discriminatory or
um so it's been broader than that. Um, so it hasn't been limited to residents in the past. And it might be your intention to just limit it to residents, but that doesn't take into account that um that businesses or individuals uh
could experience or individuals could experience discrimination that um are not residents of Ammeris, but the act occurred in Ammerst. >> Exactly. It's not my intention to do that and I acknowledge that that in the past it's been the way you just
described and I have no problem with that being included. I think it's a question of finding that language. It may even be here but I hear you and I think that again it's back to Ronnie and the commission um as to their intent. My guess is they do intend that but I agree
with you Pamela that that language like that would be appropriate here if we can find it. >> Yeah, I agree. I I don't know that um we certainly didn't remove it. So I we'll have to look to see if it's elsewhere in the document. Councelor Ko Martin. >> Um yes. So I just want to request that
we compare the language in the that's crossed off on the top of page two because I think it includes some groups that are not included in the current language at the top. So we don't have um do we have military veteran, ex-offender,
uh marital or familial? Well, I think there's some things that are missing. So, I just want to see if we make sure that we include everybody. >> And then, um, so my other, uh, piece of language that I don't want us to lose, I think, would be, um, on that second
paragraph, um, not second, sorry, the second crossed off paragraph on page one, >> says, "We strive to ensure that all persons enjoy equal opportunity to participate in local affairs." And I think that is something that we should make sure we include as well because I think the paragraph that we're keeping
is like denying any rights but then in addition to that promoting people's opportunity to participate is is additional and I think it's important too. So I just want to make sure we don't lose that. >> I'm going to make a comment um here to come back to that because I think that
I'm happy to keep discussing it. I just my formatting is getting all funky. Um, so >> how does it >> cross check protected glasses and add in uh the second piece you said was to add in um
>> um equal opportunity to participate in local affairs. >> Thank you. >> Access. Yeah. >> All right. Um just if folks are okay coming back to add that in. Um, just because again I want to avoid super
super word smithing while we've got uh Lauren and Pamela and Ronnie here. Um, council Ryan, >> I want to come back to it, but let's let's hold off on that. >> Okay. >> Can we find language for including people other than just the residents?
>> I just threw in in visitors and then the other which we can absolutely change. And then the other piece is down here. All persons coming within the town of Ammerst is in here already. >> That's that's the lang. Thank you. That's the language I was looking for. Something like that is >> Lynn.
>> Um yeah. Okay. I'm on mute. I'm not on mute. Um my concern goes back to the words insure. See, I I think of ensuring this being like absolutely no question we will
um you know make sure that we do everything that we possibly can. I mean is can we really ensure something? >> I guess I'll raise my hand. Oh, sorry. When you're done. >> That's all. My understanding of what
Lauren just said was the purpose statement is kind of the why we're here. It's not a promise or a guarantee of the work that will always get done to 100%. It's sort of the reason for existence. Um, and so that's my uh Lauren, please
correct me, but that that was my understanding of how you framed that is a purpose statement is is what we aspire to do. Um, and at the end of the day, this this commission does aspire to ensure that. uh and and I think if it were in the charge then it would be a different story. Um I I don't think that
we can say ensure in the charge portion of this charge if that makes sense. But I think purpose is a broader um a broader statement of why this commission exists. That's my that's my argument for keeping it in there.
>> Okay. And you you you understand I'm I'm the I'm the one that gets concerned about liability. >> I understand. I'm just I'm I'm just that's why our lawyer's here, Lauren. >> Um so I Ronnie's heard me say this and
Pamela as well. Um so to them I apologize. Um, you know, I think whenever you are talking about creating um a process that doesn't exist in the
law, um, you know, you automatically take on a little bit of liability. And when you talk about something that's addressing human rights, bigotry, discrimination, you know, every every
word that that you use um is is is giving more than the town. And again, it typically would. I mean, you have an obligation to do these things, not to discriminate, not to whatever. when we when we write it up and we put
it in things, we're kind of underscoring attention um you know to these to these matters. So I, you know, if you, if you sent this to me all written up, I probably would have Wordsmith comments like, you know, changing ensure to
strive to ensure or to protect, to help protect exactly like you did um here. And that mitigates against the argument that anyone might have that this commission and its existence is meant to guarantee them something. But at the
same time, and you know, I I'm obviously a stickler and you know, concerned about liability. At the same time, I don't know that it's possible for you guys to put forward a purpose statement that is
as careful as would probably be, you know, my choice if I was to be the drafter. Um, and I'm not the drafter. So, you know, I think ultimately anytime you guys are doing something like this and and you know, I can think of any
number of similar bylaws that you have adopted. This isn't a bylaw now, but where I've said, "Have you thought about this? What about this? What about this?" And how you choose to resolve it is a policy decision. So, you know, depending
on what the committee thinks is right. um you know at that point I think I can go through and say you know do do I think this is too much too much risk versus benefit um but if you're going to make broad statements
the purpose section is the place to do it in my opinion um the the charge will be more specific about what this commission is authorized to do um so again
if it's me that gets to choose. I might be more specific um and less broad. You know, the I think there was like the words microaggression and acroaggression like things like that. I immediately think, well, what does that mean? Um and
so, you know, again, you know, we can we can deal with it a few different ways. We could say as a general policy statement, you know, the purpose for this bylaw is as follows. or you know there's other ways we can pull back a little to make clear
that we can't guarantee this. I mean if we could we would be all of us I'm sure very very happy. Um it's not something we can actually guarantee. So, um, I I can, you know, once you decide how you
think that should read, I can look at it and see if there's any ways to kind of meet the concerns about liability balanced again, you know, what Ronnie described as that feeling of, you know, warmth and and being inclusive and, you
know, un to explain to people that, you know, this is the town's position. This is why the town wants this. So, um, that, you know, I I don't think it's a one-sizefits-all on it, which, you know, when you said like this is what I said, I did say that, but I do think it's kind
of a case by case, looking at the whole thing in its totality, and then deciding, are there parts of this that need clarification, that need a caveat, um, versus, you know, just, um,
kind of taking it whole cloth. So um you know again I think the the purpose is the place to do it. Um but even then you do want to make sure that it's clear this is what we want to provide. This is what we want to do. Um as compared to
this is what we are going to do or can do. >> Thank you. And we can Lyn, I was going to propose some possible language if the committee would like me to, but let me go to councelor Ryan first.
So, as much as is possible, I'd like to preserve the aspirational quality of this document in the purpose section. That's my first thought. Second thing I'd point out is that this aspirational statement to ensure that no
person shall be denied any rights guaranteed pursuant to local, state, and/or federal law. So this is rooted in our laws. >> So I have a fair amount of confidence that I would stand firm that we're trying to ensure something that someone
has a legal right to. Second, third thing, words smmithing or just public or private. I'm a very private person, but I guess given my current situation, I'm actually a public person. But I don't
know what public or private means here. Why doesn't it just mean to ensure that no person shall be denied any rights guaranteed pursuant? Is there some reason why we have public or private? And if there is, could somebody explain the difference? I think that's going to be a I'm looking
to the we have two lawyers in the room today. I'm going to look to both of them for that definition. Um but uh George, you brought up something that I wanted to raise my little hand for, which is also some of this wording might be slightly
different if I'm as familiar as I think I am with the way that our protected classes are written. And I think that if we continue to add items, we will move beyond what the protected classes are in the state of Massachusetts. Um, and so I think that is something that we need to consider is um I think you know the
suggestion to add in I think veteran status is absolutely um a protected class but right yeah, um there are others that I think might be mentioned or have been mentioned that might not be. Um, and so I think that'll be a discussion this committee needs to have
uh if we expand that paragraph beyond the letter of the of state law. In terms of your second question, I will ask Lauren to weigh in on on that p or your first question um about public or private persons. Um yeah, Lauren, do you have
>> I'm not sure what that means either to be to be fair. Um and I don't know that you need it. Um, but one of the ways that you could deal with the scope of this and I I understand like some of this and we should go back and look what's already in the bylaw so that if
we just drop it into the charge, you know, is it create it won't create any different issues. But you could um say including but not limited to pursuant to local, state or federal law including but not limited to race, color, gender,
something like that. So that you're you're not you're not limiting it. Um, but you don't have to list every thing. Um, obviously you want to list the things that are the most important to the committee, um, and to the commission, but if you left something
out, um, you know, you would have you'd be able to fall back on that. I don't think I grammatically got this right, but >> we might have to Yeah, you might have to wordsmith in a few. But >> I was just about to say to be very clear, Lauren, you will see this again
uh at some point I'm sure um to get a final check on it. Anna just strike on the basis of >> and I think you got it >> race or color, gender, physical, etc., etc., right?
>> I don't know. I think we might need it somewhere. Okay, we can word smith that part later. Um, knowing that we might make this sound slightly prettier and possibly add in some other items uh in further
discussion, are folks generally comfortable with deleting the other paragraphs? I'm seeing nods and sticking with this. I got a couple nods. Okay, so Oh, Ronnie, sorry.
Oh, you're muted. >> Sorry. Did we agree that we're going to include this part part about uh civic participation? >> Yeah, I'm gonna um I'm trying to >> but >> yeah, we didn't word smith it quite yet,
but I do have a note to make sure we add it in. Um that equal opportunity to participate in an access. Yes, absolutely. >> Thank you. >> Um all right, so going down here is the next piece. This is the last paragraph. George, were you saying to remove this
one as well if I missed? >> Uh, my suggestion is that the next that paragraph that is not stricken yet >> is taken up in a charge. And so I'm not sure why it's here is my initial thought. I could be mistaken.
And I do not think this is the place for us to try to define human rights. So, I would um urge I would suggest striking all of the remainder as well. >> I'll raise my hand. Um I agree with
striking this because it is more of the charge piece. This was in here, I believe, to be more consistent with our other bylaws. I don't think that it's necessary in this particular charge anymore. Um and this I believe we've already covered. So, I agree with George's suggestion. Is there any uh
concern or further? Yeah, Ronnie. >> So, the definition of human rights um I think this the definition statement came from KP Law and we all found it to be really really helpful. So, we have to find a place for it. That's what I'm
saying. I'm not sure where it goes, but um it would be good to keep it somewhere so we know what we're talking about when we say human rights. So this is very similar to what we say up here. I wonder if there's a way to
kind of combine that, right? To say um to to you know seeks to ensure the human rights of everybody as defined by XYZ. I will figure out the actual way to say that. But I'm wondering if there's a way to because we
do say those different protected classes here. um without getting into the definition. Right. So, >> I can see the definition. >> I know. I'm going to move it. I'm going to move it so that we can see it at the same time. >> Right.
>> Yeah. I I don't think they're the same thing. This is one of the things that we discussed in the human rights commission and the those of us who worked on it at different times. Um, yes, some of the classes are here that these rights, but it doesn't say
that these rights are inherent. And the fundamental thing about human rights is that everybody has them. And this definition says that, but nowhere else does it come up. I'm not saying you couldn't incorporate it into the beginning if you want. Um, >> it could be a footnote saying human
rights. I don't know. Lauren may have more ideas. >> Yeah, Lauren. >> Yeah. I mean, one of the things that I was thinking is I wonder if you lead with that. You know, human rights are rights people have as human beings and then you move into, you know, um there's
an establish an advisory committee to be known to, you know, and and kind of move in there and and yes, I agree there's still more words smithing to do, but I think that might put out put it out there right away. This is what we're talking about and this is why. >> Okay. How do other committee members
feel about this? So we start off with we don't need it in italics but we start off with just this piece um minus that once okay just just stop okay um I think that's exactly the right way to
start it starts with a direct clear statement we may have to words smmith it a bit we may have to you know but I think and then we go into the you know given this claim this is what we're going to establish and this is why we're establishing it.
>> Okay. Um Lauren, is it residual hand or Oh, no, you're fine. Councelor Ko Martin. >> Oh, I was just raising my hand that I agree. >> Okay, perfect. Uh it's my favorite kind of raised hand. Okay. Um
All right. So, we've got sort of a skeleton here. Well, it's more of a skeleton. It's a it's a Frankenstein. And we'll try to kind of make it better um as we as we continue to go forward. Um, but this will be kind of the order, right? We start off with the definition, then we get into the overview. I think
I'll have questions as we get into the word smithing about whether this repetitiveness is confusing or not. Um, but Lauren's saying it's not confusing, so I should just deal with that. Um, >> I'm sorry, Anna. I was saying I think I think you can not say it twice. I think
you'll be able to get it done without it, but it is gonna take some wordsmithing. May I may a small suggestion just to keep the thought here. >> Yes. >> Um you have this statement. We may have to this first paragraph but I would suggest in the second paragraph um
something to the effect of therefore or as a result of this there shall be established. So therefore something just connect we need to connect the first paragraph with the second. Um, and maybe that's not the quite I had a better word for it, but there something
to that effect. Just so there's a logic here. Uh, we we assert the existence of inherent human rights and um, again, I was thinking we could say in order to promote these rights, but anyway, something to that effect, there shall be established an advisory committee,
right? And the purpose of this will be to help protect um, yeah, something to that effect. >> Yeah. Um, one of the questions of here, Amber, I think this was we talked about this, I think, in the meeting that you were were not here from. I I I also was wondering
if this was pulled from the UN universal declaration um or not. Does it matter that they're not grant like when I was reading this with my pickiest hat on? I was like, who does grant them then, right? Uh and and maybe that is just an ambiguity that is okay to leave
ambiguous. Um but that was one of the questions that came up. It might have been mine. I don't remember. Ronnie, >> I um >> I think I'm sorry. Is that >> Go ahead, Lauren. >> I think it says the rights are inherent to all people and so they're not granted
to anyone or by anyone. They're just inherent um you know to all people. >> All right. >> So, and I do think this language um Devon developed and she is a constitutional scholar. Um, so I I'm
assuming that she did take it from there and maybe play with it a little bit, but I can definitely follow up with her and just find out if there was anything, you know, particular that she was trying to capture. >> Yeah. And and we probably won't push back on the Constitution at this point in our committee charges.
>> Um, thank you Ronnie. Your hand was up earlier, I think, and then >> Yeah. I what I wanted to say was that we all really liked it and in fact we had put forward a definition from the UN UNHCR I think that I pulled out and stuck in there but then uh the KP law
expert changed it and we all liked the change so we're very supportive of what there is there. >> Um that's great thank you councelor Ryan. There is a very deep and unsolvable philosophical problem lying here, but I
am on the side of those. It sounds like I'm on the side of the Human Rights Commission that claims that there are certain basic moral fundamental rights and they are inherent. Um, and so we're simply making that claim, but someone could challenge it, I suppose. Um, but I don't think anyone in this body is going
to challenge it. >> I love a deep and philosophical debate and conversation. I'm not here. I I will I do not love them over Zoom. So, I will stop there. Okay. Um, all right. So, we have our purpose. It's rough. We'll keep working on it, but we have a an outline
of our purpose here. So, here's where we're if that was you thought that was hard. Um, here we get into the charge. So, right now we've got two pieces because obviously the bylaw did not have this
framed as a charge. So, um, we've got kind of counselors had talked about comparing the current bylaw to the proposed bylaw. Um, and and of the big question here is how much actually needs to be in the charge versus how much can
be the committee's internal policies and practices. So if it's in the charge that means that the uh believe the council because we are creating wait yeah council because we are technically creating this committee would be the one that would need to vote to revise the
charge. So the the discussion is how can we kind of cut back a little bit on how dictatorial is that the right word the charge is in terms of process. Um, so we we kind I included the old one because
it's so much more vague. Uh, because we may go more in that direction. Council Ryan, >> would you kindly scroll back up just for a second? I want to >> Are you going to take us back? >> Uh, >> oh, this piece >> that you wanted to cut.
>> I believe that should also be stricken. >> You were right. We had talked about that and I missed it. >> And Okay, thank you. Sorry. >> No, you're fine. I appreciate. Good catch. Uh Lauren. Oh, you're muted. >> Couldn't get there fast enough. Um, so I
just wanted to um, again, I'm sorry to to uh, repeat myself to Ronnie and to Pamela, but one of the biggest concerns that we had in terms of liability with regard to the existing bylaw and the original kind of revised version that the commission was working on was this
idea of the community of the commission providing these mediation services. Um and the risk there that essentially you know especially in this age where HR people are so highly trained and you
know use so many resources to be able to deal with um investigations and and resolutions that um you know there was there was concern on our part and it's not just in Ammerst. I've I've said this in um in many municipalities that are
looking at this of you know and I think someone used the word overpromise but that's kind of you know where I would say there is a legal concern to be aware of and that you know how much how much
um are individuals going to be responding to complaints individuals on the committee um you know the there's the open meeting law and the public records law. Um, and so those those laws apply to the committee to the commission um and to any records that are created
by the commission um or received by the commission. So um that's that was really and and Ronnie can I'm sure expound on that, but that was really the kind of crux of what we were concerned about. Um, and I don't know that there's a
perfect way to write it or a perfect way to do it that eliminates risk, but you know, I just for for the committee's um, you know, benefit, I just wanted you to know that that's where we kind of, you know, said, hey, this is something that
you guys really need to think through. >> Thank you, Pamela. >> Yeah. So, I think um for background, it's important to know that in the past, the um the town's human resources
director served as the human rights commission director and there was overlap between those roles. Um uh with the creation of the DEI department, the human rights director role has become
the responsibility of the DEI director. Um, and so there's no longer overlap with the human resources director as far as the
provision of mediation or um re you know to investigate is too strong of a word but you know the review of complaints or the attempt to sort of resolve complaint issues. Um
so and I will you know personally um and this is an area that's of great concern to me because uh Philip and I find that there we really don't have the authority to do a lot of things that are asked of us
>> and so it's it does it it does provide a drain on on resources. Um, >> thank you, Councelor Hannah Martin. >> Um, can you just tell me which number is
the one that I can't seem to find the word mediation and maybe my eyes are not killing me right now. Where is where's the mediation part? >> Right. I don't see it either. >> Um, >> it's in the first It's in the If you go back up >> um right there.
>> Yeah, that's why that part needs to go away. >> It's in the current one, not the proposed one. Yes, I think we should be looking at the the current one. I'm sorry. We should be looking at the the specific items and leave one, two, one, two, three, and four have all kinds of issues. I think they're very broad. They
refer to things that don't exist anymore. At least there's no longer bylaw, human rights policy bylaw. It has mediation in it, but it's not in the remaining parts of the document. It's not defined. I would suggest or urge that we focus even though there's more
detail I focus on the second uh piece here and leave this one uh unless somebody feels strongly that these four items um I think they're just too broad and too vague and I'd like to look at specific things and also there's no mediation mentioned in the second set um
it's only mentioned in the first one so >> absolutely um and and that's really where our focus had been. I think I stuck it in here for the uh purposes of comparison when we were going through in the last discussion, but as you can see, our questions really were here um
generally. >> So, yeah, if that's the case, I'm sorry, Anna, but if that's the case, >> No, that's fine. >> This is for Pamela as well and for the and and for Ronnie. Um it would seem that at least in this second version that we're looking at what it is is
you're providing a forum for people to come and talk and based on that you may choose to make referrals but you don't present yourself at least in the second set of items as a mediation body. Is that is that what you intend? Is that
because that's how I read it. Whereas in the first four items, this mediation idea is mentioned, but in the second, there's nothing of that sort. It's a forum for discussion and then based on what you hear, you may choose to make referrals.
>> Do I understand? Oh, sorry. >> Yes. Exactly. Exactly. Um, we talked quite a bit about mediation partly because I'm a big believer in mediation, >> but decided um I mean that just wasn't the way to go and really just the conversations we
found at least on the commission side we found to be powerful. I have to tell you that we the members of the commission do not get involved in these conversations around complaints at all. We don't even know what they are. Um it's the DEI
office that does all of that and pretty much um Pamela's legal knowledge and DEI knowledge and facilitation skills are what come into play. So there's no there's no risk from us because we don't
get involved in that. Although there were two exceptions during my tenure. Uh but um you know I think people are always afraid that we don't know what we're doing. this is the commission members and then we expose the town to some kind
of risk but we don't get involved it's mostly Pamela who does that and of course it's a big work burden for them as they've noted >> councelor >> so again for clarification when these forums are held or they're called forums
here I don't know what word you use um but in these sessions or forums you guys are not present it's simply Yeah. >> No, we're not present. >> Does that Okay. Well, yeah, >> it's it's argued that that's for confidentiality.
>> Okay. Panel, your thoughts on this? Yeah. >> Yeah. Go ahead, Pamela. >> You're muted. >> Yeah. Sorry, >> you got it. >> Um, so I just want want to provide a little bit more background. Um and maybe
just walking you through what uh would be a typical case if um so under the current bylaw and individuals have the ability to call the office, use an online submission form or write to the
office with an allegation or complaint. And our the procedure has been that then um uh the human rights director which is me wearing two hats and Philip to assist me would contact the person filing the
complaint. Um have a conversation with them about the process that we use. um they understand that we don't have authority to compel anyone to to have a conversation or mediation with us and then they make a decision about whether
they would like us to reach out to the other party. We reach out to the other party. We explain to the other party about the town's bylaw. we um inform them that it's participation is voluntary and then they have a decision
to make about whether they want to continue in the process and have a conversation. In the um four years that I've been in this role, uh there there have been interactions where the I'm going to use legal terms
where the complainant and the respondent have both talked to the DEI department, but we have not had a situation where the complainant and the respondent have been in the same room, have had you know what would look like a mediation or a
discussion together. Most of the respondents choose not to go beyond the initial conversation that they might have with a DEI department. Um, and the reason we've sort of kept it
separate and apart from the commission is to provide as much confidentiality as we can. Generally um the members of the DEI department will inform the commission and a public meeting that
we've received a complaint. We might describe it in very general broad terms but not not provide hopefully any identifiers but they are kept a breast of of of the number of complaints um through that mechanism. At the end of
the year when they write their report to for town council, we provide them with a list of the complaints that we have. And again it's without any um identifiers just a broad summary of a com a
complaint was made by a town resident against a business or an indiv you know a visitor against you know a depart town department with some sort of a short summary very short summary like generally I would say two to three
sentences um so we've tried to keep that separation um and all of the parties know that if they were to come to an HRC meeting that their their comments and any
documentation that they uh provide as well as documents that are provided to us are subject to um public record requests and open meeting law. So we try to be very clear about that. >> Thank you, >> Council Ryan. So this is my ignorance,
but what we're going through today will not change or remove this process. This process is governed by a separate bylaw and it's going to continue or are we considering are you considering is the commission considering getting rid of
this complaint process entirely? So the the oh yeah the complaint process was not um previously documented in any I would say
detail or specific form um for many years this has been the policy and the procedure that the town has uh followed and with discussions with KP law and I don't see this I think it's uh in one of your attachments in the packet
there was uh discussions about how the commission would move forward on complaints um going forward. So we KP law helped the commission uh specifically outline a procedure that
they would use and that would be documented and it's my understanding that so that the go would you know create the charge and then the procedure part of that would be left to the human rights commission and the commission
would follow the advice that would be given by KP law and an example might be in my first year here we had an individual will come and file a complaint with the um you know with the human rights commission or with me as
the director. and the um the allegation had taken place many years before under the current proposal that um KP Law has advised for the commission um if in order for a person to bring forth an
actual complaint and I'm putting complaint in quotes um it would have to take place within 6 months of the allegation and the the effort was sorted to align the practices of the commission with current state law so that
individuals c can be directed to resources in a timely manner. So many of the complaints that come to us might have other state agencies that would have the authority to actually adjudicate the cases. So referring
someone to the mass commission against discrimination but that has to happen within a within a specific time frame. And so we've tried to align what would be the written procedures with that time frame. And um Lauren, please, you know,
weigh in and if I've misdescribed. Um >> no, that is that that's that was our discussion. Certainly. Thank you. >> That was really helpful and thorough. Thank you. Go ahead, George. >> Yeah. So, I guess I'm trying to connect the forum aspect of what's in the
document we're looking at with what's being described. Then it sounds like these are two totally different animals. Uh the forum >> go ahead. >> Um I don't recall the use of the word forum but that might I mean that
>> item seven serve as a forum for right. Yeah. >> Right. So, it's been um the the commission very strongly uh wanted to have a a place where individuals could express
um their feelings about a situation where they would give voice to a complaint >> um regardless of what the time limit um of the legal time limit. And so, I think that's the purpose of having the form.
And Ronnie, you should weigh in as well. >> Ronnie, any thoughts? >> I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't catch the word forum at all. I've sort of stopped looking at this after a few years, but yeah, there was a lot of
debate within the commission about the six-month period. And we felt, many of us felt that we shouldn't be tied to the six months because often times when your rights are violated, it takes a long time to be able to come forward and speak. And that while it's fine to be
able to refer people somewhere else, we felt there was value in just having a place where you could go and tell your story. And you know there's even if there's no resolution or solution. So if you feel you've been violated in some
way um and it takes you a year to tell your story. We sort of felt like you ought to have that year you ought to be able to come and you shouldn't feel like you cannot go anywhere because your six months are up. So when we drafted it, we said two years and that part I was
involved in and I know people had strong feelings about it. Of course, you know, the commission itself has changed so many times since these things were written. Um I mean it's a question of what is the remedy that we're offering. So on the one hand it might be an actual
remedy like you know we send you to this place in the state and they actually help you you know they do something legal that gives you a solution or there's also the part where you just need to tell your story. So we were trying to accommodate
both and maybe the forum idea was that that it's a place to go and talk rather than a public forum as we think of the word forum. I that I see clearly. It just seems like there and I'm I'm saying this is there are two separate paths here
that someone can choose to follow. One would eventually involve uh Pamela and Phillip and uh right and then there's another where they would go to the commission and tell their story and both of these are going to continue and what we're doing today uh does not impact the
the process that that's happening with Panamel and Phillip and and the sort of right there um you know process is that correct and there's just there two ways that can go and what we're working on here doesn't involve uh the the first one. It's just this idea of a at least
at the moment the notion there's a place you can come to talk about your your your concerns and we may or may not then choose to make a referral but it's not at all the same of what's happening um with uh with Pamelan Phillip. Is that is that do I have that right? I I'm just confused.
I believe that what you're describing is correct because what's happening with Pamelan Phillip is an internal town process not necessarily one run through the HRC >> governed by what governed by >> the state of Massachusetts the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the
>> right okay >> not no Lauren we're not we're not weighing in on that and we're not >> so I'm sorry I don't mean to interrupt >> no it's okay I'm I was just I was just throwing it out there it's something other than this charge. Um but Lauren,
go ahead. >> Yeah, I mean there is no provision for that in state law. Um and that's why there was discussion about whether you know the town um you know and it was through the commission um should be
involved in taking complaints relative to discrimination at all. Um, you know, it kind of brings us full circle back to what Council Ryan >> um started off with, which is there are there are laws and the laws, you know, are are
there to protect people. They don't always do that job, but that's what they're there for. And so, um, what what you guys have been doing is in addition to, um, so it's not required by law that
the town take complaints. listen to complaints, try to resolve complaints. That's that's purely a decision that the town has made to engage in and you know that's that's okay. It's just not from
not from state law. >> Thank you, Council Ryan. Any follow-up questions to that? >> No, I think I've got it. I think Yeah, thank you. >> So, just to regground us here because it's 10 of 10 of eight. Um and and just for
the committee's benefit, um as I look at our agenda, I'm comfortable waiting on the other items a little bit um to spend more time on this to try to get through it. Um be anyway, I'll I'll tell you why as we get there, but we haven't had any
applicants for the for the committee that we're talking about later. So um let's focus our time here while we have our guests with us. So I'd like to just go through one by one now that we kind of have the big picture understanding and as we are looking at this we're thinking about is this appropriate for a
charge or would it be uh do we recommend that this be taken out of the charge and it's something the committee would handle as part of their own procedures um or other questions that arise as I'm sure we will always find. So um
recommend programs and initiatives uh the question was to whom um do they do they recommend them uh to promote human rights diversity inclusion awareness and anti-discrimination laws? This is more a question for I think Pamela or Ronnie. Um
who who is the HRC recommending to? And I think this came up, I'll just I'll just be clear. This came up because I think that in the past sometimes committees aren't sure who to send their information to, right? And so we want to make sure that we're giving clear direction. >> We we do an annual report to the town
council. >> Um I don't and and we state what our plan of action is if you're talking about programs and initiatives. And uh I don't I honestly don't see anyone
listening to us or I mean I know that people are happy that we're there. Um those of us who are somewhat activists, you know, we get our voice out there, but I'm not sure we have never been consulted by town authorities on human rights
uh policy or decisions or invited to meetings where rights issues are being discussed. Um, so I don't see us recommending that. I don't I mean I don't want to just toss this out.
Um, it would be nice to have a pathway for us to communicate to the town council on an annual basis like we do and if an emergency comes up to be able to communicate that. Um, I don't know. Pamela and Lauren, I'm
looking to you for this because >> sort of came to me. Yeah. >> Can I clarify something because I think what you said is it was really interesting to me because it wasn't how I was reading this paragraph. Um, and so I I appreciated your your thoughts because when I when I read this
paragraph, I read it as a recommendation to say, "Hey, we should do a, you know, the the um global village festival type event or something like that was how I interpreted this paragraph." Um, versus
like we should adopt a new policy. Um, I mean, I I can absolutely see how both could be something that you're referring to, but I I definitely read this differently. Um, and so I that that was where my question came up, but I I'm going to I'm going to mull what you're
thinking. And I just want to say just this is stricken. Um, we just moved it, so you would still absolutely be giving the the report. Um, it's it's just before anyone thinks I'm striking it. So the global village is a good example because when we give our report we state
what we're proposing to do in the future and I didn't think we'll do the global village instead of we'll support the global village instead of 13 other things we were doing that had the same goal of cross-cultural
learning and exchange and so on. Um, yeah. So, I don't think of that as a recommendation. I just think of that as our work plan. >> Uh, councelor Ken. >> Oh, sorry. I'm sorry, Ronnie. Go ahead.
>> I'm just asking for help from others because I'm not really >> I'm not either. I'm also I'm hoping other folks will ra their hand with a magical answer for us. Councelor Ka Martin, >> I'm gonna seed to Pamela because she might answer my question anyway. So, >> sounds good. Pamela.
All right. So, you should probably ask the question in order for me to to answer it. >> Well, no, I was gonna ask you your thoughts on it because I I think that like having this commission could really be helpful in sort of like, you know, advising and like, you know, not
certainly not directing, but like giving, you know, input to the DEI office. um and certainly not you won't have the capacity to do every single thing that they might recommend but I think like that relationship seems like it would be really important and and so I like leaving it there but I would
defer to you obviously >> right so I would um so I think that's what's actually happening the recommendations are coming uh to the DEI department um we serve as a staff liaison to the human rights commission
so Philip is a person who attends all of their meetings um and they have in the last two years had two initiatives that were conceived of um by the commission. They created a video which um explains
the complaint process and they created um new cards that could be given out to individuals that would explain the um and those initiatives came from the commission through and were brought to our office as a staff liaison to support
them and help them get them to fruition. Um I I think um that this wording is is meant to be um I guess uh proposed interaction between both the commission and the DEI
department and the town manager's office through that you know that that if there's a suggestion then um that it goes from our office to the town manager and that relationship exists. I I do have one question. Um in the the packet
that you have tonight, you have as attachment B the proposed human rights bylaw that the commission um uh set forth. And in that document, um, many of the things that that we've
discussed were laid out in a specific way because originally the commission thought that they were writing a document that would become a bylaw because that was the process that was set forth. uh the the items that you
are are about to re to review I think in the proposed commission bylaw become um probably don't need to be to answer your question don't need to be in the charge and become the procedures of the
commission. >> Yes. Thank you. And and that is exactly what I'm trying to flag today is what can we take out that is more appropriate for the for the procedures. Um because you are you are spot on with that um that
take. Amber, did you get your question answer? I >> guess I'm not clear. So is this would this stay in this then or would that be more procedures? >> I think my opinion is this part is is more of a a charge. It's an overarching
item. I think that there are um some pieces here that like when we get into I don't know I guess as we go through Pamela I'll I'll um look to you to kind of highlight but um there are some levels of there's some level of
specificity to some of the items that may not be appropriate for a charge or maybe better suited for uh procedures if that makes sense. Um, Ronnie. >> Yeah. I guess the one piece that I think
we can do that's overarching that's not to me procedural that we haven't done enough of is actually recommend um and advise and consult with the town council on immigration um on human rights because right now
with regard to immigration and all the issues coming up from it, people on the commission know a lot about what's going on. And I really think the town council would benefit from talking to us somehow. Um, and so I like the idea of
saying recommend. Uh, maybe it's not programs and initiatives, which sounds like actions, but something there about advising being a resource to the town council in policies related to human rights. So if we look at number three here, we
have that um that item here is serve as a resource upon the request of the town council, town manager, and human rights director with respect to issues that challenge any individual or group's enjoyment of their basic human rights in the town. Um, and >> I wonder if it Yeah, I just wonder if it could be more mutual instead of upon the
request of like we're sitting and waiting for somebody to ask us and in fact were aware just in the last year of something that happened that you know we could have contributed but nobody asked us. So I I I think my what I feel
compelled to represent is the actual expertise that now exists in the human rights commission. It's really significant. not talking of just me, I'm talking about the members of the commission. Um, so I think it would be unfortunate if the town didn't have
access to or we didn't have ways to talk to each other. >> Thank you, Lauren. Yeah, I I was going to say um I think the difference and the reason that that was written like that in the bylaw is that
that essentially I don't think there's anything that prohibits the human rights commission from going to the town council and asking to be on an agenda ever. You know that the commission can do that. It can make that request on its own. This was I think coming more from the other direction. you know that the
council might be seeking out advice from the commission rather than the commission reaching out to the council which it can do you know all the time. I think the idea here was if the council asks for something that the commission
would provide it. So, you know, I I don't know how specific you want to be, but I don't think that has to be said, Ronnie. It doesn't mean it can't be, of course, but that's that's where I think that came from. I think one of the other challen I'm
happy to defer to Lauren's suggestion about how this should be written. >> Okay. Thank you. So, um All right. So, if we're is does number one now feel clarified that we we're saying the program Okay. Uh number two, promote an
understanding of the human rights within the town. >> George, I'm already on number two. You missed your Go ahead. Ah, >> my fans aren't fast enough. It's getting late. Um, we have the word awareness. Is that still >> Yeah, we had >> no idea. Awareness. So, I think I don't
know what that means. Right now, it says recommend programs, initiatives to promote human rights, diversity, inclusion, awareness. >> Yes, that was a >> unless there's something very specific we have in mind, probably that should come out. But if it is specific, someone
should make it specific. Awareness. I believe I believe the committee meant general awareness of human rights, but it does not make sense the way that it's written in the sentence. Um, so we'll want to >> I think if they are promoting human rights, does that inherently mean
awareness of them? Um, I would argue so and I think that this could be deleted without changing the meaning. Any objection to that? Come to G. We will look at every single word. Okay. um
to get it right. We will rightly look at every single word just to be clear. All right. Now, are we going to go to number two? Um okay. Promote an understanding of human rights issues within the town and surrounding areas by working I've already read this. So, uh question from the committee. Where does this extend
to? Seems broad. Um what is our when we say surrounding areas um if we're promoting an understanding within the town and surrounding areas can we just say promote an understanding
okay so sorry let me let me let me reframe this is promoting an understanding of human rights issues and so my understanding of this or the way this is written is that it might be a human rights issue in the surrounding area but the commission would still like to promote an understanding of it. Am I
reading that right? Okay. Do we need a geographical distance, Pamela? Okay. So, the perfect example of this is that there was an incident in a neighboring community that um involved a
former Ammerst business and the commission issued a statement in support of that individual and condemning the incident that occurred. It didn't occur in Ammerst, but it did occur um uh and
it did involve a former Ammerst business owner and they felt um you know that they should make a stance. So I mean you could uh I think you could uh eliminate um surrounding areas or you could
replace it within the region or within the nation or you know but the commission regularly issues statements that are both um national and international in scope. and then in this
most recent case um spoke about um an incident that occurred in a neighboring community. I >> think my only concern is that we I don't want to obligate the committee to promote an understanding of every human rights issue within the surrounding
area. Um, but I absolutely see your your end of the spectrum. And if the read on this is that it is not an obligation to get every single one, um, then I think that it's it's okay. I'm I'm okay with that level of ambiguity. Council Ryan,
is your hand left over or new? >> So, this has to do with pro education and outreach. >> Is that correct? >> Yes. And the first one has to do with um specifically recommending programs and initiatives to promote. I mean, you
could argue that's also outreach. >> Well, this is internal because it's just to the DEI department. >> Number one. >> Yeah, >> it'd be good if it said that. >> Well, it does to the DD DEI department. >> Uh we've changed it and I just don't see it. Okay.
>> Yes. Sorry, it's up on >> No, it's right in front of me. I'm sorry. Okay. Go ahead. I'm done. Okay. I like when we uh pre-solve your pre-solve your questions, Lynn. >> Um well, I understand um the example that Pamela used. This is a part of the
phrase that part of the thing that concerned me because we have no jurisdiction in any other community. Uh and I don't understand why we want to open ourselves up. At the same time, I'm just going to put it out
there. We're we're a member of a um regional um secondary school with four towns and something might happen in one of those schools that's related to somebody that works there. They would be quote
visiting maybe maybe they would be outside. The other thing is we are also um part of various mutual aid agreements and human rights violations could happen within that. And yet the way this is stated, it sounds like somehow or
another we're taking on the whole region. So I'm just looking for words that might help um temper it. Thank you, >> Councelor Ryan. >> So Pamela, if I heard it rightly, has just said that the uh commission has
historically uh spread its net very wide. It doesn't limit itself just to Ammerst. It even speaks on national and international issues. So I would suggest going the other direction and simply saying promote an understanding of human rights
issues through da da da da. I would go the other way. >> Councelor Ryan is proposing this wording >> because we're told that in fact that is what they do and I don't think they're going to stop doing it. Um and this simply asserts that. The only other
wording question I have to do, why is it specific to working with non-governmental human rights organizations? I it just seems like this is a general statement that the that the charge is to promote an understanding of human rights issues in the following ways and you can work with whomever you
like or whomever you don't like. >> Thank you, councelor. Uh let me see if Pamela's responding to George and then I'll come to you councelor Kennart Martin if that's okay. Pamela. >> So I um I agree. I I think that the practice of the commission is um is very
broad and um and I would agree with your edit of eliminating within the town and surrounding areas and um you could say working with organizations um and leave it very broadly and that would that broad scope would encompass
what the commission is actually doing, what their practices are. >> Okay. So, you're saying >> I I agree with councelor Ryan with his edits. Yeah. >> Do we have to do you think we need to keep by working with organizations
or is it just >> or human rights organizations? >> Well, there Oh, go ahead, Ronnie. I would keep it open because it's it's really what we sometimes we work with organizations but more often than not to
do something to take action but more often than not we're issuing statements of all sorts. I mean I don't think we should specify through what do we need to specify through our I mean is that
too weak if we just say promote an understanding of human rights it's already there isn't it like I don't know what this is adding to be honest except that our the focus of our work is
within Ammeris like when we do education these cards that we give out and the video, but it's not limited to Ammerst. Not even that. >> I'm going to just move this one up because I think it's very similar and I want to um have it nearby as we're talking.
Um Oh my god, the the track changes. The track changes. Okay, so Councelor Kam. Yeah, I like George's edit on number two and I do think there is it's useful um to list the types of organiza or types
of uh events and activities that you will engage in but maybe just say through these activities but not limited to you know so that you have other kind if you think of something else it's not on there you can still do it you know >> I think that's where this last phrasing
comes in and other community actions. >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh so when we look at these two items, promote an understanding of and then examine and provide comments. Um a lot of the examples that were given
for number two were about providing comments. And so I want to just make sure that these are different enough to warrant two separate items or uh propose removing this one because I believe that promoting an understanding in my mind includes providing comments or could
include providing comment. So I would propose deleting number three. Is there an opposition and and a disagreement with that? Okay, seeing none. Okay, >> Anna, would you also look at six for a second? Um because I think
>> that was six. I moved it. >> Yeah, that seems very close to what we're just doing here as well. >> Yep. I just moved it up. Sorry. Because it was so similar, but so we've deleted that one now. Okay. Um we uh serve as a resource upon we
already talked about that one. Uh let me just Oh, the question here was need to clarify who this is. Um so the bylaw was very specific about who the human rights director is um in terms
of kind of who is appointed to that role. Can we keep this as a human rights director as a position that will always be part like that will always be someone some something that someone can look up right um or do we need to clarify that it is the DEI director or do we need to
say the individual serving as I think this was kind of a a language question Pamela >> so I think it's best to say the individual serving as because it's appointment it's an appointment that uh the town manager makes and you know Um,
it happens to be me, but it could be someone else, you know, it could be the it could go back to the human resources director. >> Perfect. >> Thank you. Okay. Um,
we moved, just to be clear, we still want a report. We just moved this to the reports section of the charge. So, we'll get to that in a second. Next one. recommend resolutions or policy statements on human rights issues in the town, state, nation, or world for adoption by the town council.
Um, we were not clear, the committee was not clear on what policy statements were. Are we talking about measures, bylaws? Uh, measures including bylaws. Um, I guess measures technically could include resolutions as well. So what
what are what are policy statements >> um >> in this context I understand >> go ahead. >> The way I understand it you know recently we you know the human um what do they call they brought to our
attention a problem of torture in Sudan. Um, in fact, this person had some connections to Ammerst. But then we issued a statement about that saying that this was against the UN convention
against torture which has been ratified by the US. So that was a policy statement that we made. That's one kind of statement. I don't Yeah, resolutions. I would be satisfied with resolutions and getting rid of
policy statements because it just adds it makes it more confusing because I think what we do is a resolution. >> Um I spell proclamations wrong every time. So I I might just expand it to say >> recommend resolutions, proclamations or citations
um on human rights issues because those are the three options that the council really has for for issuing that kind of statement. So I think I think that clarifies it for me. Is everyone okay with that? Okay, great. Hey, we're zipping right through. Um, we moved this
one and already discussed it. Okay. Encourage attendance at panel discussions, meetings, conferences, etc. The committee comment was that this felt very similar and already encompassed in um one of the other items here of promoting an understanding of human rights. So, we thought that we could remove this from the from the charge
with the understanding that it's kind of already covered. Um, moving through until I see a hand. Okay. Uh, serving as a forum for residents to make a report about concerns, complaints or questions of discrimination or
unequal treatment of an individual or any activities which threaten the realization of human rights in Amoris or tell their stories so that victims and witnesses can feel safe and heard and so that the appropriate town, state or federal officials can investigate such reports, concerns, complaints or questions. Um this was one where the
committee was concerned about aspirations versus promises. Um feeling safe and heard is a huge thing to put in a to to say that we can offer. Um we absolutely want that and that's that can be tricky. Um that was the committee
discussion last time. Councelor Ryan. So one suggestion it's a suggestion would be to strict strike everything after the word amorest so it ends or any activities which
threaten the realization of human rights in Ammerst and everything else comes out. >> Yeah, >> I think that is a little more in keeping with other charges which are pretty cut and dry. Councelor Caner Martin.
>> Yeah. Um, so what about the part that says so that the appropriate town, state or federal officials can investigate such reports, concerns, complaints? Don't we want to keep that though? >> I don't know. Oh, sorry. >> Yeah, I think it's in eight. >> I was going to say, yeah, maybe it goes
into the next bullet point or the next number. >> Yeah, I I think it's covered there. And I also don't know that we want the forum the that forum to be the catalyst of a federal, state, or local investigation. we would want a referral, right? Like
that would be a separate >> Yeah. >> process. >> So, if we go to number whatever number it is now, um this next one where appropriate. Oh, I'm sorry. Councelor Cameron, did that answer your question?
>> Yeah, I uh sure. I think so because I think it's covered in I just want to make sure that we're not losing anything important by >> Yeah. >> Let's keep going. Okay. So, where appropriate, make referrals concerning complaints, questions of discrimination, and equal treatment.
Um, we didn't have any notes on this one. Uh, but now we do. Councelor Ryan, >> we certainly do. Um, why not connect eight with seven through a simple word change? We don't have to, but I assume eight is premised on seven.
So where appropriate make referrals to appropriate bodies concerning such concerns, complaints or questions of discrimination, unequal treatment or human rights violations which is exactly the language I think it's exactly the language of seven above. So I would just suggest changing any to such so that
it's clear that um what aid says is that you know it's up to that the uh commission may in fact if it chooses refer what it is heard uh to any one of the following bodies. >> Yeah. Okay. So you said delete from
>> I was thinking about it in a different order. So go you you say that again please if you don't mind. Uh so you have seven right and then >> yeah my numbers are all >> numbers are different right so where appropriate make referrals to appropriate bodies concerning such
concerns >> ah >> yeah change any to such just change any just the word >> that okay >> just any >> all right all right all right all right all right all right all right all right all right all right all right all right >> that's the suggestion the idea is that seven whatever number it is and the one above it
>> are connected >> yep >> it's not hang out there in space. It's not like somehow out of the blue um complaints, questions of discrimination, unequal treatment, or human rights are just going to suddenly appear. They're going to result as they're going to come
from this forum that um can be held. That was my understanding of this. >> I think you're right. I had thought about splicing it differently. uh Pamela. >> So um actually the opposite was um the thinking of the commission.
>> The former number seven that said serve as a forum was meant to be a reference to um to the informal process where individuals would have an opportunity to bring their concerns to the commission.
Mhm. >> And number eight, the referrals was meant to be um to be more of a have more of a connection to the formal process. Although, you know, there would be if someone informally brought a complaint
or issue to the commission and they were within the time frame, it's likely uh Philip or I might refer them to the appropriate, but they really in the commission's mind, those two things had two separate purposes. I do like
>> the idea of connecting them. Although I will say that um uh a a large part of the commission felt very strongly about having that having individuals have an opportunity to voice
their concerns and I you know form might not be the right word. I'm not sure um in the in the remainder of the document I think the references to an informal complaint process where people could um
yeah other cons other procedures for raising a concern. Right. So, um, it says outside of the formal complaint resolution process described ab above, particularly if the complaintant
resolution process is unavailable to an individual, um, any person claiming to be agreved by, and again, this was written for the bylaw, um, could tell their stories or raise um their concern at the commission
meeting by public comment. So, you know, we were trying to, you know, thread the needle between the the legal advice of KP Law and what the commission really sought to do. Um, and that's,
you know, it's not an easy task. I do like the idea of combining um farmer number seven with number eight, but that was not the way in which the commission uh envisioned uh their work.
>> I'm going to raise my hand here. I actually I I think I prefer keeping them separate. Um, and we did not move over this section to the charge because it felt so clearly like that was referring like Pamela just said to the internal
kind of practices. So that this part is not is not explicitly stated in the charge. Um, I think that and I guess this is a separate thought and I think keeping these as two separate items is appropriate because we
also don't want people to think that they have to go through the forum or go through a forum, however that whatever that looks like, in order to get a referral to an appropriate body. Um, I think I'm I'm not articulating this very
well, but I I think I actually might prefer them separate, especially also just not for nothing, it's getting it's it's long and we don't want to lose the differentiation of these two by having them joined into one big thing cuz they I guess I'm I'm hearing how
Pamela is explaining how they're different. And >> I I don't want to join them into one big thing. Um, but I'm perfectly willing to to to set this aside. My thought initially was that they're meant to be connected, but apparently the answer is
no, they weren't. And so um perhaps we just go back to the original wording and they stand uh independent. It's possible that as a result of a forum uh the commission may proceed with a referral, but this is referring to a much broader
set of possibilities than what's specified in uh whatever number that is uh seven I guess it is whatever. So maybe we just go back to the original language and that's that. Um
okay Ronnie >> I suggest definitely keeping them separate um because they're separate processes but they are connected in the sense that you you have to come through a process you have to file your complaint
>> somewhere >> and I think we were trying and then you go through this whole process of you know do you go to um do you do you go to the AP PD or do you go to the state commission against discrimination or whatever?
>> Uh yeah, but I I guess the bottom line is I would like to keep them separate. >> Keep them as they are. >> Okay, great. So we are we've got 10 minutes left in our meeting, folks, and I would really love to continue to move through. So um let's let's just to if
it's a smaller thing the committee can handle, let's um let's keep it for now and then we'll we'll keep plugging through. Um, Ronnie. Oh, leftover. Okay. Um, we did just generally have a question. I don't know that it's it's necessary to state it,
but um, are these bodies obligated to act on a referral from the HRC? Ours or any? I didn't think so. Okay, great. Uh, maybe that's just kind of inherently understood. Um,
okay. This felt repetitive to the committee. The town manager is and I think Pamela clarified this when we talked above about um recommendations to the DEI team who then would recommend to the town manager. So I think that we can delete this because uh we talked about
how it's included in the item above. Is that okay? All right. Great. Um okay. Yeah. So while the commission may report, refer and recommend. We're on new number somehow seven. I don't know how. Report, refer, and render
recommendations on certain issues, including concerns set forth in the complaint resolution process. The comm the commission does not have the authority to subpoena when this is just kind of a I'm going to guess this was a maybe a Lauren ad. Um maybe Pamela ad. I don't
know. All right, George. Councelor Ryan, excuse me. So what is the complaint resolution procedure of this charge? >> So it would we would delete that part because there is not a complaint resolution procedure in this bylaw. I
think it would just say I would say of the commission. >> Right. >> Would that make sense? >> Something. Yes. Yes. Okay. >> I'm just going to say complete resolution procedures. uh
resolution procedures established by the commission. I know that's repetitive, but it is what it is. Um thank you, George. Good catch. All right. Reports. We have not less than
twice per year. Uh the director shall inform the commission of activities and the commission shall provide input or other matters. We do kind of cover this. This is not a report in my mind. The this is um so I would propose deleting
that piece. Uh this is the report. Um so we've got and now it's repetitive. We've got two items here. So I think we can delete one. But the commission shall annually prepare and submit to the town manager and town council a report on the state of human rights in Ammerst with recommendations it deems appropriate
concerning matters within its charge. Uh the commission shall furthermore as part of its review functions submit reports and recommendations to the town manager civil rights agencies outside of Ammerst as it may deem appropriate. The reports shall take reasonable precautions to protect the privacy interests. Um which
means I think this is now we can delete. Right. Okay. All right. Um, so councelor I >> I had a question of of something we talked about a long time ago and we can
if you want to take it up now or we can come back to it. It's a very simple question. Current membership is it's a question about membership. The number of members >> why is it nine? Um what if it were seven? Who are you posing this question to?
>> To the universe at large. Okay. But particularly to the members of the commission um in their experience of you know gathering a quorum finding membership. Um is there something sacred about the number nine? When I look at other commissions and uh committees
around the state, this is extremely large. Um there may be a good reason for it and fine. Um but we're not that anyway. So, it was just we didn't really talk about it last time. Maybe people had no thought about it, but I just wondered why nine instead of seven.
>> I think it was one of the things we said, let's let's kick down because it'll be at least a lesser less an easier discussion possibly. Ronnie, >> well, I gave it some I gave it some thought because I'd heard it mentioned here and suddenly it opened up doors of
joy for me because getting we're never full. We never have the full contingent of nine and then getting the quorum is nearly impossible. So right now the way the situation is every single person has
to be there to have a quorum. So um yeah seven >> the seven feel better for folks? >> Yes. >> I feel small just because then it's hard to kind of do sub work but seven maybe >> I think seven's fine. I mean, even five
I could live with, but that's only me. No, I think seven is good. >> We'll say seven. And Ronnie, if you if at your next HRC meeting you want to ask if folks have strong opinions, please. >> I was thinking that. Yeah, I was actually thinking that because, you
know, we're we're good. I mean, when we've got people who really know their stuff, we can do things, but we need the poor. And then you know who who knows when anybody will be appointed. So >> it's tough to get applicants for a lot
of the things right now. Councelor Ryan. Oh nope. Okay. So uh it's 8:26. First off, I want to thank you all for a lot of really good focused work. Um we definitely still have some more to do, but I think we're at a point where I want to clean this up and accept our edits. And um I want to give Ronnie a
chance to take this back to the to the HRC. We're gonna want Lauren to look it over. Um, again, and I know we've got a little bit of wording. Um, the only thing that the only, I guess, wording thing that we had talked about and hadn't quite figured out yet was this
this paragraph here of adding in other groups um, and adding in the equal opportunity to participate in access local affairs. If we can just write that in right now, um then I think that we can accept changes and we'll be
15 minutes away from approving this uh at our at one of our following meetings. So folks are okay. Let's in the next two minutes. Um Amber, can you take a look to see what what groups might be missing? >> Okay. >> Right off the bat, I can tell you ex
offenders. Um >> okay, let me just go to my copy of it. I'm just going to put it somewhere random, I guess. >> Okay. So, we have um >> and remember we have including two. So, we have that
>> that proviso, but yes. >> Right. >> Um >> Oh, wait. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> I lost the original language. Oh, no. Here I have a copy. Okay. >> I think is marital or familial status. >> Thank you.
>> Yes. And I would like to add children. >> Is that not covered in age? >> Oh, is there age there? I didn't see age. Okay, that's fine. >> I think it is. >> That's fine. >> Age, religion, disability, marital.
>> I see it. Thank you. >> Oh, so I'm just reading everything. >> Socioeconomic status. >> Got it. >> National origin. >> Got it. Question mark. Yes. Got it. >> Ancestry. We have ethnic or national origin. Does that cover ancestry? I
>> would seem to do it. Yes. >> Uh I think so. >> I think so. >> Yes. >> I guess we've got the expert here who who would tell us. >> Yeah. It's >> multiple. >> I think the original says national origin and ancestry, but it's up to you
guys. >> Okay. And then uh I'm present. How do we add in this piece about part equal opportunity to participate in and access local affairs?
>> I actually have a concern about that. I don't know if we want to discuss it now. Again, it seems to be promising something that I'm not sure we I mean, does that mean if you can't serve on a committee? Is that a violation of your human rights? >> I'm not sure what it means. >> This is officially more than our two
minutes. So, I will I will take that. >> Yeah. I just think >> No, it's okay. It's valid. It's super It's a valid valid question. Um, Lauren, did you have a a quick thought on that? I thought you unmuted, but I could be wrong. Sorry.
>> Am I? No. Um, on on Council Ryan's question. >> Yeah, I thought you had started saying something, but it might have been someone else. My apologies. >> Yeah, I don't know. >> I think she was thinking something like, "Wait, please shut up so we can go home."
I do think once you guys get this in the format that you like, we can all I mean everybody will be able to go through and just make sure that all the different pieces are there. And um you know I think I I do think that that kind of
tightening up that purpose section is going to make the charge look you know more direct and more clear what what's uh what the council is looking for. So um >> I I think you know in term and I I will
ask Devon once you tell me all the things that you want to put in to the definition I can run it by Devon again to see I mean I I might um give it to her anyway just to take a look at and see if there's anything that left that that we left out that she thinks should go in and then I can pass that along.
>> Okay, great. So it is 8:31 and I do want to be respectful of everyone's time tonight. So, what I'm going to do is I will clean up the the track changes that we've discussed. Just a reminder, I know that this is in SharePoint and that you can get into it and um and edit and comment. Please do not do that uh as
soon as this meeting ends or or at all after this meeting um because we run into open meeting law violations when folks put in uh edits and comments and certainly don't want to do that especially cuz our lawyer's on the call and will yell at me. So, we are going to um please email any comments or feedback
directly to me um and I will prep that for our next meeting. But I'm going to clean this up in the um and it will go into the folder for this meeting um so that you can review it what the plan will be. I will also send it to Lauren
and Pamela and Ronnie um to review. I want to just take 30 seconds. I know we're over time. First off, I want to thank Lauren, Pamela, and Ronnie. Is there anything else that you need from us after we send you an updated or a cleaned up, not really updated, cleaned up version for your review? Um, and you
can provide us with any other comments that you might have. Is there anything else that you would need from this committee? >> Okay, great. >> No, thank you. >> Thank you all so so much for coming. This was incredibly helpful. We were uh floundering a bit without you, so thank you. Thank you. I really appreciate
that. Um Joel, I'm going to rush us through a couple last things. Really just specifically the last two items here, which is upcoming agenda items. Um and uh minutes that we can approve now. So um upcoming agenda items. The reason
why I was okay with Oh, bye Lauren. Bye Pamela. Sorry. I thought I was like, "Thank you. Thank you. I thought you would immediately have jumped off, but thank you so much and have a great night." Um the in your packets for tonight were a list of a Google sheet uh not a Google sheet because we don't use
that a online Excel document of all of the charter review recommendations referred to go at our at one of our upcoming meetings. I'm going to be reviewing this with the committee um and we will be kind of figuring out sort of a plan of attack on those. Um, I also
included our drafts of the bylaw review committee selection guidance and interview questions. We have received no ca no calfs for this yet. So, I'm not feeling a sense of urgency to move forward with those to bump other things from our agenda. Um, I think once I see
them coming in, we will make sure to to prioritize that timing to finish those up. We need to get this HRC charge done and I would like to start us on RO at our next meeting. So, um, the I believe and I would like to hear the
committee's thoughts. I believe that within a half an hour we could finish the HRC charge once we accept those those changes. Does anyone disagree and think it's going to take us longer than that? No. Okay. So, what I will propose
um we were supposed to get a proclamation for this meeting. We did not. So, it may just go straight to council for with a waiver of go review. um it may come to us at our next meeting. Uh it will likely just go straight to council and we will take a half an hour of the two hours to do to
finish the HRC charge to get that back to the council. We'll take about 15ish minutes to 15 to half an hour depending on on what we're thinking for the um charter review charge and then we'll spend an hour diving into RO um and
getting famili familiarized with that. These are these are estimates of timing as I see Athena getting nervous or I can sense Athena getting nervous about me promising exact timing. These are estimates of timing. Nothing is guaranteed, but that's kind of my hope for our next meeting which is on the
28th. 28th. Yeah. Questions about that plan. Does that sound okay? All right. Great. Um, we have one set of minutes to approve which is from March 24th. Is there a motion to approve the
minutes of March 24th, 2026? >> I move to approve the minutes of March 24th, 2026. >> Lord, >> thank you. Wait, I lost my report and I have to write it down. Okay. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. I know. I know. I
know. Approvements. Okay. Lynn made the motion. I'll second it. Thank you so much. Um, any discussion on that? All right. Going to go to a vote. Councelor Ko Martin. >> I'm gonna abstain because I wasn't there. >> Okay. Um Lynn
>> I. >> Councelor Ryan >> I. >> I am an I. Councelor Lord >> I. >> And the motion passes. Four in favor. Zero opposed one abstension. Um. All right. And then with that I believe that
all we have is a motion to adjurnn. >> I move to adjurnn. >> Excellent. Is there a second? >> Lord second. >> Excellent. All right. Any debate on that? Okay. All right. Uh, councelor Ryan >> I. >> I am an I. Councelor Kenna Martin.
>> I. >> Uh, uh, Lynn. >> Hi. >> Councelor Lord. >> I. >> All right. Everybody is in favor of leaving us tonight. Thank you all so much. The meeting is adjourned at 8:36. I'm sorry for keeping you late. Have a wonderful evening.
>> Thanks everyone. Good night. Thank you so much, Athena.