--------- Excellent. Thank you, Leah. Um, so we'll call the meeting to order uh as the new chair and u welcome you all this evening. So um I somehow it's Thursday again. It happens so quickly.
Um and we were saying earlier thanks to Leah for pulling everything together. Bob mentioned the questions but also um just getting us organized. um having not done this before herself, she's really
shining. So, I appreciate that. >> I was I was like five steps behind her this week. So, um we probably um we don't have minutes um in advance of this meeting. That's um that will happen at a
future date, but we do need someone to take minutes for this meeting if somebody would volunteer. Bob, thank you. It's great. Appreciate that. Um, so I think we can move on to public
comment if we have anyone else. I don't see anybody in the anyone besides the panelists. Do you? >> No, I don't. Okay, we could it's 6:05. We could wait a
minute or so um for public comment and see if anybody shows up, but I don't see anyone there. So, if everyone's okay with moving on, um it is good to do a roll call of
who's here of the panelists. We could do that while we're waiting and just check and see if there's anyone comes on just to make sure we can hear each other. And for attendance sake, um, so I'll just say your name. You can
just say here, that would be great. Um, Ellen >> here. >> Tim >> here. >> Angus >> here. >> Um, Jason >> here. Jonas
who's driving is here. I will just assume Robin >> here. >> Thank you. Uh Bob >> here. >> Great.
Thank you. So missing Dave at the moment. All right. So, seeing no other public uh attendees, we'll move on um to um hearing presentations, which is we're a little bit early. So, I did want to ask
folks um the to sort of uh confirm that our approach to this to hearing presentations is as follows. And if you wanted to make any adjustments or had any questions in advance, um what we try to do is have the proposal and the
option for answering questions ahead of time help us be as efficient as possible. Um so the idea is to have a very minimal presentation since the proposal is really um the written proposal is what we use
primarily. Um but it gives us a sense of um what folks are doing and the enthusiasm and then it gives us a chance to also ask questions. Um and I will be the timekeeper just to keep us on track. Um we basically say that everybody has
20 minutes. So 5 to 10 minutes for presentation. Sometimes they sometimes people are very brief and do it in three minutes. Sometimes they're a little bit longer. And then um if I will at the end of say the 20 minutes I will ask the committee if if you all
have more burning questions that you know you absolutely need to have answered before you can make your decision then we we could continue on but the we'll decide as a group about that. Does that make sense? >> I'm seeing some nods. Okay. Anybody have
any any alterations to offer or a different approach or um or questions? >> I think we told Oh, yeah. Angus, go ahead. >> It's not about the process. That That all sounds great for the process. Um
it's uh about something different, but I don't know if this is >> No, feel free. This is great. You know, we told the uh folks to that presentations would start around 6:30, which is always a challenge um because public comment usually doesn't take too
long. Um we sometimes have a budget review, which we did the last meeting. Um so we do have time, so feel free. >> Well, it's actually about budget. I was wondering if it might be possible to get
a um breakdown on one sheet of paper or something or or one Excel spreadsheet of all the requests and maybe even uh tagged according to the three categories um or four depending on whether open space and
recreation is separated. Do do we have that on on one sheet? >> We we do. Go ahead, Leah. >> I'm sorry. Um we do. It's a section of the larger workbook. Um, did you just want to see it? Did you want it sent
out? Did you want it? How did you >> I just missed it somehow. So, I need to go back and look at that. >> I'm not sure I actually sent that piece of it out. It's tied to the spreadsheet that we do um when you guys all rate at the end. Um, so I can definitely send that out if you want. I can also attempt
to share again and see if that works. If you want >> Yeah, it would it would be it'd be helpful just for me as I'm thinking about the different projects. I know that we're not going to think about the total budget until the end, but it's it's helpful to get a sense of how things are breaking down. And right now, I have to go into each application separately to see the amounts requested
and that kind of thing. So, >> I can definitely put something together if you want. I can just do that and send it out if you want to do that. >> Or do you want to see it quickly? >> I don't need to see it right now. It would just be helpful to to have it sent out. Thank you. >> I think I think that rating sheet is
super. It's it already has it by category, Leah. And that >> that might be useful. Um it has the amounts. >> Yep. >> Yeah. So um I think if we all had that it could be a great tool. >> Okay.
>> It is to go back and forth. I it's I sort of set my own thing up Angus. So it's I I should have followed your lead of asking for what already exists. Um, any other questions about process?
>> When you guys want to just look at the calendar again real quick if that's something we should do right now for a few minutes or >> Yeah, because you there's a proposed public hearing on December 11th. >> Yeah.
>> Were there other changes to that? >> Um, nope. I just added in the two that we had talked about in January. >> January. Mhm. Um, so we'll see if this actually shares, but it's basically >> You got it. >> Oh, yay.
Um, so if you go to the very I don't know how it moved the very bottom. Basically, I just added the 15th and the 22nd of January just in case we need it. I didn't put as needed, but I did and I think that's what we decided that it would be. >> Yes. >> As needed. Exactly. And then Dave had he
might have some more feedback on it, but he suggested on the December 11th meeting, there are only three presentations that night. I'll some of them are might be longer, but there's three. But he suggested um starting the
meeting maybe at 5:30 to do public comment before that, the public hearing before the meeting starts at 6. Mhm. >> I don't know how people feel about that >> because that's pickle ball skate park and bath house. >> Bath house. Yeah.
>> Yeah. I I think that's a great idea. Those that's going to be a long evening. >> I'm fine with the time change as well. Um is it because you anticipate a lot a lot of public comment? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> I don't Yeah. I don't know. I don't know if Dave's here either. The public hearing um in my time has gone from like one person or two people. Sometimes the propos people who've submitted proposals will provide you know come back and
reiterate things but um then there have been times where there's been a very long um about one or two different proposals with a lot of um interest. So Dave, please feel free to add in.
>> Yeah, thanks Katie. Yeah, that was that was Lee and I spoken about that the other day and I thought doing the public hearing at the beginning because we don't if we don't want to hold anyone who wants to just make public comment during that hearing till the end of the
night and given the the three >> the three uh proposals that evening. Um, and I think this year, I think given the the total ask of of $6 million or so, some of the more complex projects like
the bath house, like uh town hall roof, like Jones Library and others, there there will be a lot of questions and people may want to comment um at that at that public hearing. So, I think starting 30 minutes early with the with
the uh public hearing would be good. And and if there's only 15 20 minutes, then then you're good to go. >> Yeah, >> sounds good to me. I appreciate that. If everyone's available for a 5:30 start
on the 11th, that would be great. Do we need to approve this or are we good? I don't feel like we have to have an approval process. Yeah. Okay, great. So I I'll make sure that I think all of the meetings have now been posted on the
portion of the website for CPA. So I'll make sure that that's changed so that people know in advance. >> We could do virtual we could do virtual pizza as well. You know >> you're bringing it, Dave. That's >> I volunteer to bring it to everybody's
house. >> That's a great idea. It's um low calorie. Um, so Leah, if you don't mind, stop sharing this. That would be great. And
um, it looks like we have one person um, attending and if that person would like to uh, make a public comment, we would welcome it at this time and then we'll
close public comment time. I think if I could, Gaty, the the person in uh the waiting room is actually uh the staff person, Walker Powell, who is going to do the presentation on the Civil War tablets. >> Oh, great. >> Oh, >> when you're ready.
>> Okay, Bob, did you have a question? >> No, I think that's great. It's him. Yep. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, >> I think I think we can move forward. >> Are we allowed to start early? Is that okay?
>> We're allowed to start early if the panelist is if the uh proposer is willing and able. Um, yeah, I think we should. Great. So,
Walker, welcome. >> Hello. Oh, great. we can see you and hear you. Thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it. We are starting early if this works for you. We we No problem. >> Welcome. Okay, great. Well, the floor is yours for your presentation and then
we'll we'll probably have a few questions for you. >> Okay. Um I'm going to share my screen because I do have a very short PowerPoint. >> Great. >> And everybody see that? Yes. >> Yes. >> Great.
>> So, the first project I'm talking about here is the proposal um to relocate and restore the Ammerst Civil War tablets. Um you probably I assume you all are aware of the tablets, but just a brief
overview of their importance. Um >> Walker, I don't mean to butt in. I just need to let Katie know. This is the part where this is a Jones related. So because of my relationship with MHC, I'm recusing myself from this particular presentation.
So I'll join you when it's done. Okay. All right. So the tablets were gifted to the town in 1893 by local Civil War veterans organization. Um and they memorialized the 300 plus Ammerst residents who served in the Civil War. So they're already important for that.
But I think the real thing to call out about the tablets and the significance that people have recognized with the tablets is they are the first monument in Ammerst that explicitly acknowledges black and Afroindigenous residents of Ammerst at the time um and reflects the
diversity of the residents at the time. so that it's not just history, it's uh a way of seeing history that's unique and we would like to bring that into the present. And I don't want to go too far
without mentioning that I'm coming into this project very recently. Um this has been a years'sl long project that many people have really invested a ton of time and effort into. in particular, Deborah Bridges and Anakah Lopez, I
know, have really put a huge amount of passion and effort into coming up with a vision for how the tablets can be displayed and how they can be um repurposed to help people learn more about Ammerst's history and the diversity of Ammerst's past. So, I I I'm
just hoping that this project can help bring their vision to fruition and will um you know, meet meet their expectations. And I'm I'm very indebted to them for all the work that they've put into this and many other people as well. I'm sure um I've not been here
long enough to have met everybody. So, um it was Deborah specifically, I believe, that led the um effort to get the tablets installed where they are currently at the bank center in a temporary installation so that they could actually be viewed by the public.
Um but this installation is just temporary and they need a more permanent location. So, what's been proposed is a room in the library once it's renovated in the basement in the special collection section, there is a room
specifically dedicated for the tablets. Um, as you can see on this plan, they've got it marked out. They've got amounts along the wall where the tablets can be located. And um I think they've got some
suggestions for where maybe a digital display and some signs can be located within the room. So within the special collections, the tablets will be protected. They will be permanently displayed and they'll be open to anyone who wishes to come and see them and
research them and learn more about them. Um so this is all great, but there is still some funding needed. The library budget did not include funding to get the tablets moved, which is an expense. They're very large. They're very heavy, and they are very fragile. And in
addition, there's some restoration work and design work for the room that's still going to be required. So, um, these these pictures just call out a few spots. The restoration was completed in 2010, but the report did
note that there are some chips and stains and small areas that are still going to need a final look over after they get moved to their permanent location in addition to any thing that might have occurred during transport. Hopefully, nothing will. Um, so that's
part of the budget. And then the transportation itself is part of the budget. It may involve like a crane. I don't really know how they get moved safely, but we will have a professional company that does that. And then we will also have a professional um preservationist to
assess the room and determine does it need humidity controls? What sort of do they need a protective glass covering? Are they left open to the air? What sort of environment does the room need to ensure that they last and um
remain visible and readable and usable for many years to come? So, we've requested $75,000. Um, this is a rough estimate. It is based on a rough estimate I got from a professional company that does do this
kind of work. Um, he just gave me sort of a back of the envelope numbers um to go by for now, but we would get a proper scope and a proper proposal done before we actually started spending the funds.
Um, I think that's all I had, but I'm happy to ask answer any questions. >> Great. Thanks so much, Walker. I appreciate it. Um, and that's I was just going to say, and the way that we do this is we raise our
little hands, our little Zoom hands, and uh, we'll take one question at a time for you. So, Ellen, you are up first in line here. >> Okay. Thank Thank you, Walker. That was really interesting. Um, I am a trained
museum professional. So, I'm wondering if you could share with me the name of uh the company that you plan to do the restoration and the company that you plan to use for the move. We don't have a company in mind yet. We will have to
actually um request bids for the scope of this project. So, um we can't we can't pre-seelelect a company. >> Okay. Um I I trust that you you will be using a fine art shipper or mover with lots of
experience in handling such a large. >> Yes, we will be sure to put in the scope that we require a company with experience in this this type of work. >> Okay. >> If I don't know if I'm allowed to do such things, but I can certainly
recommend places you could s you know to put out bids to as well as for the restoration. Yeah, that would be that would be great. >> I hope that's overstepping my my >> No, I'll take all the suggest that's fine. >> Okay, >> that was fine. >> Yep. Thanks, Ellen. Jason,
>> Jason or Jonas, sorry. >> Oh, >> I didn't see I didn't see you Jonas. I >> I won't cut off Jason then. Jason, go. >> Okay. Uh, thank you, Jonas. Thank you, Katie. Um, previously the Jones was awarded a
million dollars for, I believe, the design of the room and for something also related to these tablets. Can you clarify what that million dollars was for and how it's being how it's intended
to be used or has it already been used and how that differs from this request? So, I wasn't involved in the Jones budget, so I don't specifically know. I do know that this room will be um it
will be set up with the mounts that the tablets go on and some infrastructure already. So, that might be part of what it's going towards, but I'm not I'm not 100% sure what that money went towards. This is somewhat separate because the actual transport and restoration of the tablets is its own project separate from
the library. >> Yeah. different from the the previous grant. Uh Dave, did you want to clarify? >> Yeah, if I could. And I just wanted to also um I forgot to formally introduce Walker. Walker is a planner with the planning department. She's been with us
now over a year, Walker. A year and a half. >> Just over a year. Yeah. >> Yeah. She's doing terrific work with the historical commission and all sorts of planning and zoning uh uh work. So, we're we're really happy to have Walker with us. Um to to answer Jason's
question, um I would refer um Jason and any members of the committee back to the Jones Library proposal for the million dollars. Um that million dollars was for special collections within the Jones broadly. It was not for the Civil War
tablets. So, they might have included that in their proposal. This is actually a proposal by the town because we are the owners of the Civil War tablets and we are going to loan them to the Jones
in a a permanent um uh installation. So, um as Walker said, this is really for some minor um hopefully minor restoration and then the move itself. But that million, we'd have to look back. That was a year or two ago, but
that was broadly for special collections. >> I think it was 2020 or 2021. It was a long It was a long time ago. >> Couple of years ago, but I I'd have to myself look back on the website. They're all there and we could look back on that. But um the the tablets may have
been part of that, but they were a very small part of it. It was more broadly for special collections. Yeah, I think it was referred to that this was referred to as what would be in there but um was for the capital needs which
is different. Um so Jonas, did you have a question? I know it's hard to raise your hand when you're driving. >> Yes, I'm sorry and I'm not I am not driving but um and my apologies if it's if it's noisy but uh >> No, no worries. following along with with uh Jason. Um just wondering if
there's a way to break out how much of that is is the transport versus the room because I'm I am wondering like why would the million dollars not kind of cover some kind of accommodation of these
tablets in the room? And then also I'm wondering do you have since these tablets were presumably moved at some point to the bank center do you have those are are those people going to be involved again? Do you have a reference point of what it cost to do that
um to inform how much it will cost to now move them again? Thanks. >> Yeah. So again, I'm not sure about the million dollars or what that went to, and I'm not sure exactly how much the move is going to cost um versus the rest of it. I did include uh sort of a rough
breakdown of the budget in my application. Um and as far as the company that moved them before, I I don't know which company it was, but if I can find a record of that or find someone who does know which one it was, I'd be happy to include them in the bid process and see if they can do it again.
>> Great. Thank you. Thanks, Jonas. Um, Angus, >> yeah, I'm just curious. One of the questions I'll be asking a lot of presenters is what is the plan, I guess, if this funding doesn't materialize for the Civil War tablets.
>> Um, I mean, I don't I don't personally know how long they have to stay at the bank center. if they could stay another year and we could come back next year. Maybe if there's more urgency than that, um there might be other sources of funds that
could be used, maybe public fundraising or a historical grant, although those are pretty slim, but um there's no concrete backup plan that I'm aware of at this time. >> Thank you.
And just to clarify, when we approve a project like this, we're approving an up to amount, you know, so um once there's firm numbers, it might come in at 67,000 and then that would be the
amount of money that would be used. That was something I didn't understand early in the game here. And um so I think the the question comes up too is what if it's more than that? So I think um there you just have to come up with a
backup plan as Walker you're saying is one thing could be to wait another year and reapply or seek funds elsewhere. >> Yeah. Okay. Great. Ellen, >> um yes. I just wanted to speak to
Jonas's question because I uh put that in my questionnaire um that was sent and I'm not sure who responded but um it's in the questions uh document and it said a rough breakdown of costs is 35,000 for
moving and installing the tablets including installing custom mounts 15,000 for restoration as needed 22,000 for professional assessment and design of the room and 3,000 for documentation
of the restoration and installation. So, I hope that's helpful. >> Thank you so much, Ellen. Appreciate that. Tim, >> yes. So, this is not really a question, but an observation. Uh I know Robin has
recused herself but uh we are going to be seeking guidance from and get from the historical society their prioritization of all the projects that are history oriented. So we'll get some
guidance from them how this might relate this particular project might relate to the other requests in that particular category. So just as a reminder in the future we'll get that before we make our m our final decisions. >> Thank you. Yes, thanks Tim that the the
commissions often will weigh in with if there's as we have the circumstances this year which we have way you know far greater requests than we have uh resources. So the town does that as well for the town um requests helps
prioritize. Any other questions for Walker? Well, thank you so much, Walker. I really appreciate your work. I'm glad to meet you and appreciate you taking your time tonight and um providing this information, answering our questions. >> You're not done with me yet. I'm also
doing the next one. >> Awesome. >> Great. Well, should we shall we move into the next one then? Sure. >> We're doing the North and South Cemeteries. Is that what you're >> Yes. Okay, great.
>> Katie, could I ask a question? >> Yeah. >> Before we launch in. >> No, it's okay. It's it it's not really a question for Walker and it's more a question for the committee. >> Yes. Um uh I I've noticed um there are different people in town who who seem to
see CPA funds as town spending and are therefore concerned about the about CPA funds going towards any Jones Library related project >> because it's seen as increasing the town's contribution to Jones Library. And I'm just wanting to clarify CPA
funds are are are those town are they town funds or I mean it seems like they're raised separately and spent separately from any kind of town connection. But I just want to clarify um how we should be seeing these funds.
>> That is a great question, Angus. I was actually um I didn't make it happen this week, but was going to have a conversation with Dave about this very thing because um I think there's differences of opinions about this.
Um >> so if Dave has a quick answer to that, that would be great. Um or we can come back to you, but Dave's got his hand up, so we'll see. >> Sure. Very quickly. And we could, you know, the next time we have Sean Mangano with us, you know, we could certainly
probe this a little bit more as we get into the dollars later on in this process. But as Sean um explained at the last meeting, um I mean these are principally tax uh tax uh generated dollars. uh any property owner,
residential or commercial in Ammerst, pays a search charge on their uh property tax bill every year and and that money is then put into a fund. It is then uh matched to a degree by the state and Sean talked about that that
process as well. And then ultimately the town council your your process gets to a point where you recommend to the town council the spending for u your recommendations to them and ultimately the town council makes the decision. So
in essence they are town funds. The the town generates them through tax revenue and then the match from the state and then um then the town council ultimately has the decision on what to spend the funds on. Um that having said that you
know through the years the town has supported a broad range and you can go through the history of what we supported since the CPAC uh since the search charge was instituted. I think it was in 2003 uh two two three four right in there. Um we've we've uh the town has
supported a broad range of projects uh many of them private for private historical homes uh uh affordable housing that is now private but permanently uh affordable etc etc. Um I think different towns approach it in
different ways. I certainly think the leadership of the town, my myself included, Sean Mangano and Paul, think of these funds as a way to um to fund um town priorities in the
four categories for sure. So, um we certainly lead with that. Some towns have made it more explicit than that. for instance, saying we will only fund projects from private entities up to and including this amount. We've we've not
gone there, but that's something we may look at in the future. But um in essence, they are town funds, sound generated funds through the tax uh process. >> Thank you, Dave. Jason, did you have a question? Yeah, Dave, can you confirm
then um when these after we have made our recommendations and this goes to the town council for them to vote, they're not able are they able to increase the amounts or decrease the amounts that
have been, you know, essentially vetted out by the this committee? >> Um I we should get clarification on this, Jason. I think they they have pretty broad powers. They actually don't have
to go along with your recommendations, >> right? That's my understanding. >> They could lower your amount. I I presume they could raise your amount as well, but um um but they certainly do not have to,
you know, come in line with your recommendations. they could decide. Uh, and I think there have been a couple of instances where the council through the years, not many, but there have been some instances where the council has said we we are not in favor of funding something for various reasons
>> and they're in favor of funding something to a much higher dollar amount than what we have allocated, you know, through our process. >> Yeah, I'd have to think back. Um, there's a lot of projects through the years and I can't off the top of my head
think of projects where they changed the amount, but I'm sure there are some there are some I believe that they decided they would not want to fund. >> Yeah, that I mean that isn't the the dominant practice that it's usually
proved. But I think when it comes to um you know bonding something too that's that's something they definitely I've seen more conversation around that when we recommend that. Um but Angus
>> yeah thank you. Thank you Dave. That's really helpful and clarifying. And I I um maybe to flag for when we circle back to um discussing both the previous presentation um and then the the larger Jones Library project. I know there's
some members of the community who are concerned about the town contributing more dollars to the Jones Library um based on the memorandum of agreement. And I I guess it depends how you see CPA funds as additional grants to supplement or as additional town funding. But it
may be something that we'll we'll have to kind of weigh and discuss when we're weighing the projects. So, I just want to flag that. >> And I I do think based on the town council's ability to accept,
decline, or adjust, you know, their previous agreements, they have to adhere to or adjust them. So, it's really their responsibility to do that. um is is the way I'm thinking about it, but happy to have
more conversation. Robin, you're next. >> Yeah. Um Oh, I just recalled that uh that my understanding was that our recommendations um they could be approved, rejected, or
reduced, but they couldn't be increased. And if AI is right, then I'm right. But that was my recollection that the town could reject or reduce the amounts but they couldn't increase an amount. So if
we if we reject something the town can't go ahead and improve it. So um I'll try to see if I can find the link here in the AI answer that actually >> we can well we agreed that we'll verify that for the whole committee. >> Yeah. And make sure
>> Yep. That sounds great. And Tim, >> yeah, I was just going to I would echo Robin's understanding. I believe the uh the town council cannot increase our award. They could decrease it, but not
increase it. But that's not my question. My question is my understanding on and where when we get to the library project that's going to be the important nugget here is that my understanding is the CPA funds would be used outside of what the
town committed. uh the milliondoll request the CPA had made a few years ago was considered in the library budget at coming out of their fundraising component, not out of
the town component. So I think any CPA funds are on are in addition to what the town has committed in their uh proposal for the library. But we I think we do need to clarify, but that's my understanding. I'll I'll put that on my
list to >> along with the confirmation of approved, rejected, or reduced versus um and Dave. >> Yeah, just >> the last word. >> Sure. I I think there will be plenty of
time to um hear more about the Jones Library proposal and I I just encourage everybody not to get too far ahead of ourselves in in in that regard. But um if need be, we could certainly get more information from uh the town manager,
the finance director, and also um our town attorney if needed as to what that is considered. I also wanted to just go back to um I think it was Angus' question about what are these funds considered and I I will say that once
the joint um the JCPC uh the committee that considers capital gets going and they are beginning to get going uh through the years the JCPC will often ask staff so have you gone to the CPA committee to try to get funding
for that eligible X whatever that is and oftentimes this committee will say, "Hey, have you gone to the joint to JCPC to to try to get matching funds?" So, I suspect some of that conversation will be going on in this committee and also
with JCPC over the next month or two as you deliberate and they begin their process because many of these things fall, you know, the I don't know the war memorial bath house. Well, that could be funded with CPA funds, grants, or or
capital, or a combination of all three. So, that'll be a conversation for the future. >> Thank you. So, I I'll pledge to circle back with town folks on on those two items so that we can have some
additional clarity hopefully at the next meeting. But I agree with Dave not to get too far ahead of ourselves since um we can now focus on cemetery headstone restoration. Um thanks for all the great questions
and Walker, I can't see you, but I'm assuming you're still there. >> I am still here. Yes. >> Awesome. There you are. Okay. Um well, the floor is yours. >> Great. So this is the second um historical project put forward by the
town and this is a sort of an ongoing thing. We've been doing headstone restoration at the various cemeteries since at least 2021 um beginning with West Cemetery. And this is important because it's sort
of an ongoing maintenance thing. Obviously the headstones are getting older. Some of them are very old. um they do degrade over time and get damaged. So, um the sooner we can get to them, the better before they get to the point where they've fallen down or become unsalvageable.
Um we got West Cemetery has pretty much been restored to the point where everything's stable and um we're we're fine with that for a few years, but North and South Cemetery still have some work that needs to be done. Um, a lot of
work was done this year, particularly in South Cemetery, but also some in North Cemetery, and it's looking great. They're starting with the stones in the front that you can see, and we've had a lot of positive comments from neighbors and people passing by and visiting the cemetery at how much better it looks,
but there's lots more to do. Um, the ground, the frost heaves cause the ground to go up and down and the fall, the stones to lean and fall over. So, um this is sort of just continuing funds to continue this project so that we don't get behind and so that um the more
pressing projects can get done and the more important stones can get fixed. And in addition, if a stone falls over and lands in the grass, um it can get staining on it from the grass that's actually almost impossible to remove. Um compared to the weathering and the dirt and whatever else gets on it, the
staining from the grass is far worse. I was informed by the people who are doing the restoration right now. So, the stones that have fallen down are definitely the highest priority for that and because they make maintenance difficult and they're a hazard to people who are visiting the cemetery.
So, this is pretty basic. We've requested 100,000 um which is enough to complete restoration on approximately 200 headstones. The cost is averages about 450 per headstone. And this includes an assessment, the restoration
work itself, and then a report that details the work done on each individual headstone with a picture and information about the materials used, etc. You could see an example of a page that was done this year over here. Um,
so this would get us well into completing all of the really important um, and more degraded stones in these cemeteries and would really put us on a good firm footing for just keeping up with maintenance moving forward. Um, but
I can say I'll say the budget is flexible. Um because we're paying per headstone, we can certainly do more or less depending on the availability of funds and um some of them are more urgent than others. Um and the the idea was to split
the funds between the two cemeteries evenly. So that's basically all I've got for that. It's pretty it's a pretty straightforward project. Um and it's just it's this is a valuable part of Ammerst history. like you can learn so
much about the history just going into the cemetery and looking at the names and the dates and the relationships and um I think a lot of people value it and value visiting the cemetery. And I just wanted to add cuz there was a comment at the last um in the last presentation, these two both have been
run by the historical commission. They did um review both of these projects and they did rank the Civil War tablets as a high priority project and they ranked this one as a moderate priority project. >> Great. Well, thank you, Walker.
Appreciate that. Um Leah, is it possible to um stop sh or maybe Walker you're sharing if we stop? Yeah, that'd be great. Just so we could see each other a little better. Okay, great. >> Um thank you so much. Uh, it looks like
Ellen, were you up first? >> Thank you. Sorry. Um, yeah, I was just curious and Walker, you may not be able to answer this question. Perhaps Dave can. Um, but I in my research, I noticed um that there was a CPA proposal for this exact same project back in fiscal
year 25, which was submitted in September of 2023. Um was that not um approved or did it not happen? >> That that did happen. It actually funded the work that we got done this year. Um so >> in West Cemetery,
>> some of West Cemetery and some of North and South Cemetery. Um okay. >> Primarily North and South Cemetery for this one. It's just a it's a big project. There's more headstones than can be done in a single year. >> Right. Right. Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thanks, Helen. Robin. Um, hi
Walker. Um, can the town I was I'm glad that you spoke to um kind of whether this funding could be broken up. I know there's always an argument to be made for cough savings when you do a project all at once, but it would probably given all the asks that we've gotten, it would probably be helpful to have a low
figure. Um, like particularly when you're talking about those stones that are already lying on the grass, I would think like, you know, if we had a a baseline for the the high priority stones in both cemeteries, you know, to work forward from, that might be helpful. >> Yeah, there's been no formal assessment
of how many stones are left that are high priority, but it might not be hard to take a quick look and at least have a rough estimate. >> Okay, that would be great. Thanks. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. Um Bob.
>> Yes. Hi Walker. Good to hear from you and these are great uh projects. Um on the cemeteries with the upgrade in the town signage that's sort of ongoing. It gets funded every year. Is there going
to be an upgrade of the signage for the cemeteries? I realize that might be unrelated or maybe it is related to this funding proposal. just tell me a little bit about that. >> It's unrelated, but I actually am working right now with Seth Gregory, who
has done the graphic design for the rest of the signs, too. We're starting with West Cemetery because we had some funds for signage in West Cemetery already. Um, but yeah, the plan is to update the signs for the cemetery as well, >> but not out of this not this funding is
just for restoration. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Different funding. >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Bob. Jonas. Yes. Hi. Hi, Walker. Um, wondering how you would prioritize down to like from one tombstone to
another. And then also, this may sound seem heretical, but is there a point where if it can't be salvaged, you would consider just a new marker? It still has the his it still marks it and gives the historical information. Obviously, not as impressive as a 200, 300 year old
stone, though. So for the prioritization, we would start with stones that have already fallen or are cracked or actively leaning and in danger of falling. Those would be the highest priority. And after that would be stones that maybe have smaller cracks or aren't leaning as much
but will get worse in the next couple of years. And then the lowest priority are stones that are perhaps il illeible because they're covered with lyken or dirt or um just need a good cleaning, but they're not in danger structurally. So, that's how you would prioritize
that. And I'm not sure the answer to replacing it with a new headstone. I imagine that if there were any descendants of the person that that would be their decision, but aside from that, I I don't think that's something the town would do because we wouldn't be
in our funding to pay for someone's headstone, I don't think. Um, but I don't know. Someone else might have a better idea than me on that one. especially then raises the question of and I'm I'm sorry I'm not familiar with um the age of the headstones and uh but
the like the question of whether whether the private party whether the descendants do any are expected to do any upkeep of the headstones versus town of Ammerst how do you decide that it's I mean obviously it's I think it's in the interest of Ammerst to step in if a they
can't find descendants or the descendants don't have the wherewithal to do it themselves But I don't know that could get I guess it gets tricky about deciding. >> Yeah, my understanding is that cemeteries are considered public space and that the town does the maintenance.
People can come maintain their stones if they choose to do so, but it's not a requirement. Many of these stones are from the late 1700s or early 1800s, and it's very unlikely that there is still a descendant >> that lives in Ammerst and knows that the stone um that they might have a
relationship to the stone's owner. So, it becomes public property and public maintenance responsibility, >> but I'm active there. There there's I imagine they're not active. There are no new um it's at capacity now. >> Not quite. Um there's still a few spots
left um in North and South Cemeteries. I believe West Cemetery is full though. >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Jonas. Um Robin, >> um excuse me. um an answer to the question about
recreating a stone that would so if we're looking at preservation um preservation historic preservation preservation is the key word so a recreation of a stone wouldn't be fundable under CPA for that reason um I think uh Walker touched on the fact that
abandoned headstones essentially become a town's property and then I just wanted to throw in that um headstones uh are an amazing source for research searchers. Um there's a a a website called Find a Grave um that where you can research
ancestry all over and when you're doing um research for u his buildings um there it's just incredible uh it's an incredibly rich um uh database for people and um that's
that's so along with it along with the headstones being legible locally it also has this kind of larger um larger use for historical research. So, just wanted to put that out. >> Thank you. Yeah, thanks for I remember you mentioning that the LA and when we
reviewed this before and I appreciate that. Um and the and the part about the preservation that we fund preservation projects. Um Jason, I think you're up. >> Thank you. Um
>> yeah, >> I know that Robin just mentioned there uh the headstones value as a research source for for information and research. Are there any other efforts included in
this to like is there a digital map of the cemeteries and who's buried in each plot and the information? Is any of this being digitized in any way or preserved in any other way other than just
um uh restoring the headstones? And then also and so in the application it mentioned that burials began in the 1810s and I just want to confirm so there are still some plots that are open
and will people be >> Mhm. So this these are still active cemeteries. >> Mhm. >> And they're owned by a town. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And for the digitization part, um, currently you can go on the town website
and search for a headstone by name. If you know the name of the person you're looking for, it will tell you which cemetery they're in and which plot they're in. And I and you can also go to the GIS map on the town website, click on a plot, and it will give you a list
of who's buried there. And I am working on trying to add more information to that and link it with other resources. Um, as Robin said, so it can be more effectively used for research. Um, because right now if you're looking, you could look for a person, but you can't
like look search by any other criteria other than a name. And so there's there's information to be added. >> It would be amazing if there was a website where you could just go and click on a plot and it pulled up the person and then like any potential historically significant things that
that per or even not historical because at this point almost everything that you're going to find is going to be interesting at the very least I think >> for somebody willing to go and look for it. >> That is an ongoing project I am working on in the background. Right. Okay.
>> Thank you. Thanks so much. I appreciate that. Um I don't know if Jonas has his hand up again. Is or did >> is that you Jonas? >> No, sorry. Thanks. >> That's okay. Great. Okay. I just I didn't want to skip over you if you did have that. So, uh Ellen,
>> um yes, I completely concur with Robin about the historical importance of these headstones. Um but I'm curious as um the cemeteries are considered town property. Um, can you share with me what the annual budget is? Um, what is allocated
toward their maintenance every year? And I'd also like to know, is there an endowment for perpetual care of these uh properties? And if not, has that ever been discussed? >> I do not know the cemetery budget.
That's uh through DPW. Dave might know um more about that. Did was there a reason, Ellen, that you wanted that information? >> I think I'm just curious how the town, you know, if this is town property and
open to the public. Um, I'm curious how that is funded every year. Is it just through burials or I I guess >> Okay, I see. it not in relation necessarily to are you I guess my question is are you relating it to this
proposal or is it a separate sort of in you know question >> I think it's related to this proposal and is this going to be a ongoing proposal every two three years >> I think what what I have found is that
that is likely the case that many of these items don't fit into We can find out, we certainly can find out from the DPW the what was spent on cemeteries. And I'm I'm imagining it's it's on uh you know
mowing and that that kind of uh work sometimes repairing fences. We've had requests for fence um restoration. Um but we will get these repeated requests at CPA um just because there
isn't funding for it. But would that be helpful to you? Oh, Dave, are you raising your hand? >> Yes, I >> Okay. So, sorry. I thought I I saw a little bit. >> Absolutely. Yeah, these are going to be rec recurring asks through the years.
There there is no endowment that I'm aware of for either one of the any of the three cemeteries, west, >> north, or south. Um we it's going to be very difficult to impossible to probably pull out the
annual um expenses. Yeah, this is the the maintenance for the cemeteries falls under the DPW trees and grounds division. They are the same division. Allan Snow oversees that for DPW is the same division that takes care of all of
our commons, parks, downtown sidewalks, and many of our fields at our uh recreation facilities. They take care of our pools. It is a massive job that they undertake every year. And the cemeteries clearly there are no funds for uh
maintenance or restoration of headstones. And you know, I think a lot of communities who have CPA, um, as Walker said, try to they're we're playing catch-up. And if we can catch up, at least we can, uh, try to be more
kind of uh, at a place where we're not going back hundreds of headstones. Um, and it's been very successful. As Walker said, we're doing really well in West Cemetery. We just need to spend more funding in north and south to get caught up on some of the
>> Yeah, I that's a really good point, Dave. Um, Ellen, that this is a catchup. Um, and so the actual cost of doing this each year go and the go forward scenario wouldn't be the same amount, you know,
once it's hopefully fewer are falling each year. But um I can't remember when the when this was proposed last year or the year before how long it had been since there had been funding for Headstone repair, but it had been a while.
>> Yeah, it's a lesser amount. The in uh fiscal year 25 it was I think 150,000 requests. So um >> that would be >> and unfortunately there is the wild card too that sometimes vandalism happens in these cemeteries. So we can do the very
best we can. We hope for no vandalism. We hope for, you know, even even something like a major um snowstorm or or windstorm knocks down a tree and that could hit 7 to 10 headstones and boom, there's as Walker said, I think it was
$500 to $600 per headstone and there you have it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Is that helpful, Ellen? Did >> Yes. >> Get your Okay, great. Um, so I'm just checking time. We're at 17 minutes, so we'll get to Angus. Oh, Le Leah, did you
have something specific? I I don't want to >> I just wanted to follow up with what Dave said and what Ellen was asking about. There is a portion of the plot fee that gets paid when somebody buys a plot and a portion of that is moved into an account that covers some of the cemetery costs, but again, that's a
one-time purchase. Um, and then once it's full, there are no more plots for sale. Um there is a fortune that coming in from residents who purchase them that goes towards the upkeep. >> Thank you. I appreciate we This is one thing I love about CPA. You learn so
much about how how things operate, how things work. Um thank you, Angus. >> Yeah, it makes me feel like I need to get my plot before they're all gone. Um >> Exactly. >> But uh and I I'll just note this website's really cool. I just found
there's four clouds buried in um the South Ammerst Cemetery, so I want to visit them. >> Um uh my question is is kind of an extension of Ellen's, which is just has the town done any work with the historical society or ancestral bridges
or any of the kind kinds of heritage groups to try and get volunteers to do some of this. Um I know I was in Philadelphia before moving to Amorist and there were a lot of um volunteer groups that did headstone cleaning. They couldn't you know do like rebuilding or
anything like that but they but they did a lot of cleaning work. So I guess I'm just wondering if there's any been any effort around that. >> I'm not sure if so it happened before I started but I have only been here a year. Um, I do think that Ancestral Bridges was involved in some of the West
Cemetery work, specifically the African-American plots, um, that portion of the cemetery, but yeah, I'm not sure. I know other towns around do the volunteer cleaning, and that might be a good option once we have the high priority stones taken care of to kind of
lessen the burden on the maintenance otherwise. >> Thank you, Bob. >> Um, no, I'm my question was answered. I would just say that the restoration that I've seen so far is really outstanding.
It's beautiful. >> Oh, great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Excellent. Well, 19 minutes and 54 seconds. Well done, committee. Um, we are staying on time.
But no, any other questions for Walker before Okay, thank you so much. So, Walker, do we are you now finished? or are you going to do the next presentation? >> That's all I got. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Really
appreciate all your uh expertise. Thank you. Um you guys are awesome with your questions. This is so good. I'm learning so much. Um so Simeon Strong I think was up next and I
don't Do you see? >> Yeah. Um, Liz Larson and also I believe uh Gigi is a director I think she said. Um, so I think both of them wanted access to speak if possible. >> Okay, great. >> Okay, should I let them in? >> Yeah, that'd be that'd be great. Thank
you. >> Katie, could I ask a question? >> Yes, thank you. Go ahead. >> Sorry. Um, if we need to make disclosures, is there do we do that at the beginning of the presentation? >> Um, mostly be around discussion and
voting, but you you're welcome to do it before the presentation if there's something we'd >> Oh, okay. Yeah. Um, I'm just I teach a class and we're work this my students are working with um the Amoris History Center, but that's all and I I don't
think there's a reason to recuse myself from anything. I just wanted to discuss. >> No financial no financial gain from that uh uh relationship. Okay, great. Well, so thank you for that. Oh, Tim, did you have something?
>> Oh, you're muted. You're muted. >> Yeah. in past projects. I am a former trustee of the Simeon Strong uh museum a number of years ago just for clarification and disclosure. >> Thank you. Appreciate that.
Oh, Ellen, did you want to >> Well, I guess if we're if we're we're doing this, I should just reiterate that um chair of the public shade tree committee and work very closely with Alan Stone and the DPW on the tree and grounds.
>> Okay. Yes. Thank you. That's appreciate that. >> Um well, Liz and Gigi are welcome. I can't see you, but I hope we can hear you at least. Um welcome to the CPA. >> Um thank thank you. Yes, I actually have
a um presentation I would like to share. >> Great. Okay, >> that would be >> I can do that. I don't I don't have uh permissions to do that at the moment. I think we can we'll work out that piece and I I think you both have
presented before. We'll >> welcome you and um look forward to it. Uh >> good. Here we go. >> Asking a few questions after. Let's see. Oh, there's Gigi. Great. >> Hi. Yeah, it just came through. Um
>> Liz, there she goes. >> Y there's there's Liz. Great. All right. So, all right. I'm going to share my screen. Sorry, just a moment. I'm I'm powerful here. >> Don't worry. >> Okay, we all can take a breather.
>> No, I can't share my screen. >> Is there Let's see. >> No, I'm >> Is that something I need to do, Liz? >> This is user. This is user error. There should be a menu at the bottom >> there. Do you have it? Do you see my
screen? >> Not yet. >> Take your time. >> Um, yeah. I'm sorry. I really I do not know how to share a presentation a PowerPoint presentation that is already running. Um
well, if it's um it's on your do do you have down below at the very bottom of your window the share um the green share arrow? Uhhuh.
All right. I'm afraid you're just going to have to look at this on my desktop um instead of in the full share view. So, there we go. >> There you go. >> You see that? >> That's fine. >> All right. I apologize. All right.
>> No, it's all good. >> So, good evening. My name is Liz Larson. I am the executive director of the Ammeris Historical Society. I have a brief presentation to provide background and context for our request for funding for repair work at the Strong House. As
you no doubt know, the Strong House is one of the oldest buildings in Ammerst, dating back to the mid 1750s. It has been the home of the Ammeris Historical Society since 1916 and the location for our public exhibits and programs as well as collection storage and administrative
offices. However, in the spring of this year, we were forced to move operations offsite due to the structural needs of the building. How did we get to this point? In the summer of 2022, a CPA funded structural engineering study was
completed by Jacob Smith Engineering. Originally done to establish a baseline for any impacts on the building from the Jones Library construction project. Nothing was identified of immediate concern. Jake did identify some weaknesses in the
attic beams and in addition he identified issues with the foundation on the north side noting these indicate the rot of general structural elements in this location and that future exploration will be needed.
Moving ahead to the summer of 2024, our region experienced severe several intense wa weather weather events, including torrential rains. In the fall of that year, work on the CPA funded accessibility study began. That study was to result in renovation plans,
including cost estimations for making the strong house ADA accessible to the public, as well as address needed mechanical updates. In October of 2024, a crack was noted in the northwest corner of the dining room in the interior of the house and a noticeable
drop in the floor of the northeast corner of the building. Jake Smith came in to look at it and initially felt that it was not unusual for the house. He suggested contacting Thiago Construction for a quote to look under the floorboards in the northeast corner of
the first floor entrance hall. In January 2025, we had a site visit from Thiagno Construction in Jake Smith. After reviewing both the interior and exterior, it was suggested that water from the north side of the roof has been flowing down under between the L's and
under the house towards Amity Street, eroding the soil underneath and causing the rot of existing timber supports and shifting fieldstone foundation. Opening up the floor would later confirm this. At the time, both Thiagno and Smith felt
the repair work could wait until spring. In February, Jake Smith produced draft drawings of recommendations for the repair of the foundation under the northeast side. This plan was shared with Kunal Architects for accessibility planning and Thiagno for cost
estimation. Based on those plans, the historical society received a bid proposal in March of 238,000 for the full repair work on the northeast wall and reinforcement of the roof. However, in further conversations, both Thiagno Construction
and Jake Smith recommended that the house not be open to the public until the repair work was done. The board made the decision in April not to welcome the public into the strong house for the foreseeable future. In late April, because of the immediate need to address
the stability of the wall and its impact on the overall house structure, the board asked for a temporary stabilization plan to allow more time to finish the accessibility planning and secure funding for any repair and renovation work.
Work began in May and by June 2025, Thiagno had completed work on temporary stabilization for the northeast side of the building with a new footing and engineered loadbearing beam on the first and second floor. This is a temporary repair.
Uh this is a temporary repair meant to buy time for planning and funding a more permanent solution. How does this grant request fit into the longerterm vision for the strong house? After receiving the final report and plans for accessibility with a cost estimation of
$2.7 million for a relatively conservative renovation to make the first and second floors of the house accessible, the board decided that at this time that particular project is not feasible for this community to support. We are now looking at a much more modest
approach using landscaping to create access to the first floor and eliminating the elevator to the second. However, we will still be using cost estimations on muchneeded mechanical upgrades to move forward with planning a capital campaign in the next few years.
Our current CPA application is for the foundation repair on the northeast side of the house, including earth work to redirect water away from the foundation and for roof reinforcement for the entire building, excluding the L uh additions as originally proposed by
Jacob Smith and Thiagno Construction in March of this year. The rest of the foundation was repaired and reinforced in 1988 with concrete and steel beams and continues to be solid.
It is the area on the east side of the building that rests on a crawl space of field stone and centuries old timber that needs addressing. This work needs to be done to preserve the strong house and create a solid foundation quite literally for future work to provide public access accessibility to the
building. The original budget from March 2025 for the full project was 200 uh 238,000. Our request to the CPA includes allowances recommended by the contractor for rising prices due to tariffs and inflation. And of course, we would only
be putting in for expenses that were actually incurred. Thank you. And I apologize again for my poor screen sharing. >> It's okay. No, we could see everything. Thank you very much. Appreciate your putting that
together for us. Thank you. Um, so Liz and Gigi, I don't We're going to launch into questions for you if that's unless um unless GI if you had anything else that you wanted to add. >> No. Um, Liz presented all of the
information that I have clearly. So, >> okay. Thank you. Anyone have questions on this proposal? Start with Robin. >> Hi there. Hi G. Hi Liz. Pardon my uh
froggy voice. Um um really excited uh to see this project before us. Uh certainly very needed. My question um is just a followup to the question I asked and the
questions to the applicants regarding um MHC's MPPF grants. Um to be clear, I don't work in that division. I'm actually familiar just familiar with the program since um uh before I became employed there and I was uh getting my
degree and learning about different funding mechanisms. And in your answer to my question, you expressed some cautiousness about applying to MPPF. I think um concerning preservation restrictions and future needs to make
the building accessible and I wanted to still encourage you in that direction both because there's the potential that given this project is a stabilization issue um might be eligible for emergency stabilization funds which
are not grant cycle dependent that's the first thing and then the second thing is sort of um the I believe the CPA funds and um MPPPF preservation restrictions are pretty similar in terms of what they cover. But
what I wanted to emphasize a little bit more even beyond that is that um issues around accessibility are definitely um at the forefront of the National Park Service in terms of applying the
Secretary of the Interior standards. Um, for my members of the committee who aren't familiar with this, which is probably most of you, the Secretary of Interior standards are a requirement for CPA funding. They're really simple. I think there's 12 of them. They say
things like like material must be replaced. It must be repaired and if not repairable must be replaced with like material. Um, there's a lot of strictness around that. Um, but there's also a lot of understanding within the
preservation community that flexibility around things like accessibility, around things like climate resilience, around things like energy modifications is really um coming into the four. So I don't think I'm hoping or encouraging
that that would not be um an impediment for you to explore that funding mechanism just because it's so substantial that project is before the CPA if it gets CPA funding you'd have a match in hand and um it also just um I
think it provides a really solid framework for for these kind of projects. Um years ago before I got my degree I worked um at uh in Lennox uh that a place called Ventford Hall that was going undergoing all sorts of stuff
like for 20 years. They've been undergoing um um rehabilitation of the building and um it was there that I started to learn all these different funding arms and kind of how they can be used in place. So that's basically my
pitch. Um uh I I'm so pleased that you guys are looking for funding uh to augment the CPA this year is a really great example of why that's helpful because we have so much uh in terms of asks before us and um I just want to make that little pitch there. I also can
send along some just some links to national preservation materials that talk about you know how the standards are interpreted in cases of building codes uh and how you know how that can be part of the project and it can actually be a better approach because if
you're working with the right organization um you're going to have a much more historically you you have the potential to have a much more historically sensitive um alteration of the Thank you. >> Thank you. Great. Thanks, Robin.
Appreciate that, Bob. >> Yeah, I'm I'm maybe not able to do the math here, but the 238 is obviously to shore up the the foundation, the bones of the building and basement. And when
you go back and estimate the full project cost of the um scaled down project without the second floor elevator, do you have an estimate or is that contingent upon getting these funds, fixing it up, and then going back
out to market to find out what that will cost? We right now have a working number that we believe based on the cost estimations for the uh mechanical upgrades to the house plus the roof repairs and then
this foundation work um and then kind of guesstimating what the landscape architecture uh would involve. We have a number our our working is about 1.5. We believe that we given all of the
funding opportunities that Robin was just mentioning and other uh the the mass cultural cultural facilities grant as well as local donors that that is a much more attainable number for us. Um that number does at this moment include
the money that we are requesting for the foundation repair. We did include that in our our overall this is what we need to make the house stand up for for another 20 uh you know uh not 25 but 7500 years or more. So
>> great. Thank you Ellen. >> Um yes thank you Liz for your um application. I have two questions. Um, will this project, this specific one for the foundation repair and roof reinforcement, will that um allow you to
reopen the house to the public? >> Yes. Yes, it will. >> Okay, great. Thank you. And uh my second question is um your uh applications to the 7072 foundation and mass cultural
council are they contingent on I don't know about the timing but there are they contingent on receiving CPA money. Um yes, we expect that by the beginning of this
year um or the next of 2026, we'll have an idea from the CPA committee on the status of our application. Um at that time, we can then begin pursuing well the 1772 has a is a November 2026 letter of
interest. uh mass the mass preservation um MPPPF is a March 2026 and then the cultural facilities would be next next fall for for 2026 as well. All of those are funds that require matches and if we
we made a decision not to go after them this grant cycle because if we do not receive the CPA funding, we did not want to be in a position of having money that we do not yet have a secured grant uh match for. And so because the CPA funds
can be have a three-year um life to them, we felt that there was additional there would be time for us to pursue these other grants that are a much more tighter time frame. >> Thank you. That was very helpful. >> Yeah, that was great detail. Thanks.
Thanks, Ellen. Um Angus, >> yeah, thank you for the presentation. Um, I guess my question is is extending what what Ellen was just asking about, which is the those three other funding sources that require matching grants. Those are to fund the larger $ 1.5
million project. I would expect that we would go for matching grants to fund this project so that we would be able to um as we did in our our past uh the accessibility
project, we got uh money from the cultural facilities fund from uh Mass Cultural to that was matched by the CPA and because of that we are going to be able to once we complete all the paperwork with the CPA uh with Mass
Cultural we will be able to um give back not not we haven't received but we will be able to um return a portion of the uh CPA from fiscal year 25 to the town because we did receive that other
funding from the from the state and we would be hopeful that we would be able to do the same thing uh by receiving money from these other organizations. >> Gotcha. Thank you. >> Yeah, thanks for mentioning that, Liz. That was something I It took me a little while to understand how that worked with
the So I appreciate that. Um Jason, uh thank you. It was Sorry. So you say that um you so is your you said that you would use grant funding for this project. So then
is your intention to get potentially receive assuming you receive let's just say you receive the full $275,148. >> Mhm. then you're going to use that
um as leverage or whatever. I don't know what the terminology is to try to get as as matching funds for the grant and then you'll use a combination of the grant money and this money to complete the project and then money that's left from
the CPA will go back to the CPA. So, um let me just go back to the um previous grant, the one that is currently active, the the accessibility planning. Um when we uh presented that to the CPA committee two years ago, I believe it
was. Um it was suggested that we pursue a mass cultural uh cultural facilities grant with the understanding that if we were to get that um it would be used for the same grant that we were applying for the CPA. Um in the end the committee
fully funded that grant uh our grant request for that and in addition we did receive 30,000 from Mass Cultural. So, I would expect that for the same situation, um I'm assuming that the
committee would recommend that we pursue these funds again. And if we were to be fully funded um by the CPA committee then and to receive the grants as we did this time then it would be the same thing where we would say thank you very
much CPA but because the the state came through we're able to return some of the money to the town or to tell the town that we don't need it. So, >> okay. And the the emergency stabilization fund that Robin had mentioned
is >> I have looked at that and I still can't find any definitive um resources on that fund like how one accesses it. Um
and as I said, it's also because we want to do accessibility and we We want to make sure that any funds that we pursue that we fully understand all
of um any limitations and and any way they might impact how we can make the house accessible to our public. So, we weren't able we we haven't fully explored this emergency stabilization, but mainly because I can't find where to
explore it. >> Yeah. Um I looked around for emergency stabilization funds and if I found any from the historical commission. Um it
was for you know true n natural disasters. Um you know like if the roof blew off in a hurricane um there might be access to emergency funds. But something like this
which is planned and can work out. I'm not so sure there's anything out there. I I like Liz. I haven't found any but >> well I'm sure if um Robin has a
suggestion she'll send it on to you. >> Please do send them along. I know >> that's why we applied to the cultural facilities fund was communication from Robin. >> Surprisingly successful.
>> Yay. Yeah, the the MPPF website has changed and I don't I know that I had seen it referenced there even before I started working there. So, um whatever I can find out for you, I'll let you know. >> Great. >> Thank you. And it's um it is a it's to
me it's such a great process to be able to um to do both, you know, for you all to do both because um you know, you get the benefit of both both options. Um and the chances are if they if the state does fund you that
that some of the money can be returned and and be used elsewhere. So that's >> a bonus. All right, I think we're at time, but is there any are any other questions for Liz or Gi?
Terrific. Thank you so much both of you for the work you're doing and for being here tonight and for your presentation answering all our many questions. I really appreciate that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Have a good night. >> Thanks. >> Bye. >> Bye.
All right. So, we're on to the slate roof and I'm not sure who from the town is presenting for >> Looks like Jeremiah is in the waiting. >> Oh, great. Thank you. >> Are you ready for him? >> I think we are.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Thanks, Leah. I also have a presentation if if you could um help me so that I would be able to show that >> be great.
>> Why can't I >> Welcome Jeremiah. Thank you for being here. >> Yes. Thank you for having me. >> Okay, it should work now. So turn on my video. There you are. Great. It's working.
It wants to go full screen too. There we go. My fancy laser pointer. I'm going to get make all the cats in the in the crowd excited. Thank you. I love it.
>> Well, my name is Jeremiah La Plant. I'm the facilities and maintenance manager. Um and and I have uh submitted my application for uh a town hall slate uh restoration project. So, this is to
essentially um uh bring bring the the town hall um down to its plank roof deck and uh salvage as much material as as possible. slate, um, metal flashing, um,
and and any other, uh, historical, uh, architectural details that we can, um, and salvage them or restore them and then have, uh, a full, uh, roof put back on the building, uh, with, uh, the same
beautiful red slate that we see up there right now. So, here is all of the information that that was in the application. Um, and essentially just trying to express the urgency of uh get getting
the uh roof taken care of. Um, the the building is uh over 130 years old. Um and and the last time we the the roof has had any significant uh repairs uh
was back in the 199697 uh renovation. So it has been quite a long time. Uh so the majority of that roof is original. Um the amount requested is $1 million.
And I wanted to start off. So, uh, in my presentation, I I I brought a lot of photos. I took a couple hundred photos and I tried to whittle those down to my my 5 to 10 minutes of of talking. But,
but I think that they they're they're images of the roof from all sides, every every different slope. Um, and I and you will really get a a sense of it. So, here's that beautiful iconic building.
And this is what we see. This is what we see when we walk by. This is what we see uh at the North Common. And now, if we get a little bit closer, this is what we're actually have up there. So, as you can see in in this image, we have
missing tiles. We have tiles that are cracked and chipped. Um we have, you know, some more vertical. There's some cocking here. Several several other missing tiles chips.
We have delamination that's happening. Lots more chipping. Lots more missing. So, these are just some some more of the roof slopes. So, here's on the gable ends. Again,
just more cracks, more missing tiles. We have loose tiles. Uh we have some underllayment coming through. This is a big chip and some delamination there. These are uh uh some
areas where either the the uh slate nails have pushed through this this uh face or there could have been an insensitive repair where they just drilled through this slate, put the
nails in, and then use some sealant to to help uh keep it watertight. Uh, another one right here. You can see how they've chipped away some of the tile, and that's to help replace this one down here. So, again, it's it's not not the
the right way uh to take care of it. Um, some areas of where we have snow retention, the snow fence. Um, this this one I think is a good good one to show. So, my intent is to add a lot more snow fence. And this really helps with all of
the pedestrians walking on those uh public rightways around the building uh and all those entryways. Um by adding it though, we also help distribute the the load of that snow across the full uh structure of the roof assembly. So here
we have uh the base plate and directly below it uh is a broken tile and it's that's quite common if there's not enough snow fence. So you that this one particular fence has been carrying a lot of that that snow load and then cracks
and crushes the tiles below. So again more more of the same unfortunately. Um, yeah. And you know, some more. You could see, I mean, this is this is a a galvanized pipe and it's bending. That's
that's a a significant amount of weight. Tiles that are loose, lifting, shifting, cracks. Again, a little bit of underllayment coming through. This is the backside of the tower. An areas you just don't see.
Um there's some tiles, some big pieces of tile that are sitting um on the back side of the tower. Um this is uh really it's a a fading green, so it's
probably like a Vermont green. And and I I have some real closeups and you could see some um oxidation. So it's uh some oxidized iron pyite in some of these tiles. And again, it's just a it's a
lowquality tile. Aside from it not being a true red slate, it's it's also a low quality. Uh, and this this is the this is the part of the roof that probably breaks my heart the most. Um, there's a a the
conicle uh area of roof um just to the left of the the big front door. Uh, and you could see that this has had uh quite a bit of um water issue in the
past. And what they did is they put cocking in between each of the tiles to try to try to make it so it it doesn't leak anymore. Um, the image on the on
the right, this is directly below it. And you can you can actually see that the the underllayment the or the um the plank decking or whatever that that um structure is is starting to cavitate a
little bit. So this is on the back side of the building. Uh, so again, more lots of lifting, loose tiles, some more of that face nailing, cracking
throughout, more delamination, uh, more missing on the on some of the different gables. Um, again, snow fencing and all of the tiles around it show significant wear. More broken tiles. And we are sort we
are traveling around this building. So please please bear with me. But I I want to I really wanted to illustrate that that the entire roof is in in a similar um
uh showing this similar wear. Okay. So you can see so th this is just a small piece of copper flashing. And what they'll do, and is is unfortunate, but what they'll do is is they've had to to
maybe repair this piece or down here, and they'll just slide a small piece of flashing up in there to help try to keep it watertight. So rather than loosen up all of the tiles around it and make that repair and then bringing it all back
down, they'll just make a more localized repair and then adding a little bit of flashing to help help keep it watertight. So not really the the the right way to do it. Lots more cracking. These pieces I could see these are would be probably some of
the next culprits to to be coming down. But again, you have sealant here, so they probably gl glued it down. And I have found other tiles that were glued down. Um, so here I I wanted to show you this.
So you could see at some point they did some repairs on these upper two courses of of slate roof tile. On this third course, we could see a shadow line going across it. Essentially what's happened is they the installer has
revealed a lot more of the face of this tile and basically has reduced the headlap of these tiles. So what we have up here what what that'll do is is it it exposes that this section for water
penetration. you know, the the tile is supposed to every tile is supposed to lay over the la the the lower tile a certain amount of inches, and we've lost an inch and a half um of that that that
headlap in that that repair. So, again, I would just call it a little bit of an insensitive repair. More damage, more delamination, lots of cracking. So again, more of the same. And now this
is what we see from underneath. So I went up into the attic and walked across uh uh all of the areas that I could. And we we got to see what it looked like from the outside. And now now we get to look underneath and see what's happening
to our framing. So all of that staining is was essentially water damage. the the third image. This image, this was this wood is actually saturated. We had a heavy heavy storm this spring and
uh there was a significant amount of water that was uh coming into the building through this area. So, this is this is all water damage. So, we can see what the outside looks like, the inside looks like. Again, more
just taking some photos of all that. You can see all the plank decking and all that water damage. And then we're inside and this is some of the the the damage that we're seeing on the interior of the
building. So, we have some water collection uh in these few areas uh to help uh lessen the damage to our interior furnishes and finishes. And then, oh, so this is also a fun one.
So right here, if you look all along the valleys, you can see how the tile looks a little bit different. It's a little bit darker. This is all the work that was done in the 1990s. So you can you can almost see the shape
of how they laid it in. Now, the image on the right is a a thermal. It's I I have um a drone and that has thermals for roof in so I can do roof inspection. So I I
went up and took some images of the roof and now you can see all those areas that were repaired. You can follow it almost exactly on both sides where all where it was all done. So you have the 1996 repairs in these areas and
then you have all of this other area where you have these hot spots coming through. This is all that the heat from inside the building that's that's able to make its way through that the insulation layers and then through the roof. So there is some energy impacts to
having a deteriorating roof. Okay. So, you know, you see these big bright bite areas and then you go over here and you can you can see that the tile is is is degrading. It's lifting. Um, so just wanted to illustrate the
energy impacts uh to to having an an aged roof. Um, and really to go further with that is when we have water that penetrates the building, uh, it it does make its way onto that
insulation. The insulation gets wet, it's less efficient, all that moisture starts affecting the air quality within the building. Uh, and those are all concerns. So, I'm going to
stop my share and come back to you. >> Great. >> Yeah, it's really important that that we we get this this roof taken care of. And I if we can get this whole roof done, we're going to get another hundred plus
years out of it. And that's that's the goal is is this is this isn't going to be um uh a project that we're going to have to come back and we will have to do maintenance uh small bits of maintenance but essentially we'll be getting another
100 plus years. >> Thanks Jeremiah. Appreciate the presentation and the walk across the roof. Um, I also just wanted to comment that I didn't know we were going to hear about oxidized iron pyate tonight and I
really appreciate that you uh >> Sorry. >> And no, I mean it is this is why I'm saying this is a such a great committee to be a part of. You learned so much and I really appreciate your thoroughess and um for me it was super helpful um to see
it all up close. So, we'll launch into questions with uh Jason. >> Thank you. Thank you, Jeremiah, for the presentation. Um, I especially like that last image there with the heat, the thermal
um imaging. It's really cool. Um, I have a number of questions. The first being, is it a requirement that the roof is repaired with red slate? And then is there
what is the cost difference between that red slate versus like a blue or a gray slate? >> Honestly, I couldn't imagine it be anything but. There is so few of buildings uh really and it's probably I'll say in
New England that have a full red slate roof. Uh it would it would be hard to see it be anything but. um at the same time is red that that red unfaded slate is essentially sourced in
one area in the United States and that that is in the Washington between the Washington County of New York and Rutland County, Vermont. That that's it. >> Yeah, >> that's it. So sourcing it is it would be
a challenge. Uh but but they it it's slow uh obviously because the the stone is much more rare. I I I just I don't know. It it's incredibly expensive or considerably more expensive than
other color slate, but I would I would be hard it would be hard to see the building. It would be change it dramatically. Yeah, I think >> but there's no but right now there's there's no requirement for it to actually be
>> I I'll have Rob and this historic preservation I'm sure requires >> Yeah. So the again the CPA funding for historic preservation projects is a requirement >> that um projects adhere to the secretary
of the interior standards for rehabilitation. And it's funny because the one standard that I threw out there was you replace light with like if it ever if at all possible. So yes, it absolutely is a requirement that uh under the guidelines of this funding it
connection to the secretary of the interior standards that's what we would expect to see. Um just as a I don't know a little explainer um there is a phrase that says that these standards should be
applied when technically and economically feasible. That's the wiggle. But um that's that's that's a question for later. But the first question here would be if that the slate is sourcable and it
can be replaced then yes it's technologically feasible and I guess we're here because we want to make it economically feasible >> right okay >> yeah the intention is always to for historic preservation projects under those standards is to create as to
maintain as much of the historic fabric as possible >> right thank you Ramen appreciate that Jason you said you had a couple of questions. >> Yeah. So then Jeremiah, this um
past repairs look pretty bad. One, you know, what is going to what guarantees that this repair is going to be any different than those past repairs? And then will this million dollars is this meant
to cover the entirety of the roof or is there going to be phases? Is the project meant to be phased? Yeah. So the the first question is is you know um and I would I would say when
when you're working with slate um as I was uh mentioning when when you're when we were looking at a lot of those images is they they need to fish underneath and loosen up a lot of of the tiles around that one that needs to be replaced. So,
by doing that, you're sort of loosening up a lot of the the um slate nails. um by removing it all uh and then fitting them all back in together, it it's just you're in you're ensuring that everyone
is being installed with the what what the the National Slate uh roofers association or or the National Parks uh historic preservation are saying you're you're putting X amount of nails in into
each uh each slate tile. um all the spacing is appropriate um rather than trying to find a slate or cut a slate down that that will fit into uh where where an old one was broken. So
I think in in that respect it's it's just a lot easier because you would be working, you know, you're you're putting you're putting one tile on at a time and you can you can ensure that it's being fastened properly. And um the second piece I what was what was
it real quick? >> Uh phasing is this meant to just be done all at once? I know in the proposal it said but if I guess the the the implication that I'm trying to make is if the full million dollars isn't funded through CPA or you don't get an
additional grant or other sources. Have you identified areas like that one that's letting in a ton of water where the wall was saturated to phase this where potentially you can come back next year, two years, whatever to get more it
the goal would be to try to save as much money for the town as possible and the best way to do that would be to do it in a single phase. Um, if we think about the the mobilization costs, um, just staging all of this roof, uh, if we were
we were to do it, it would if we had to phase it in multiple phases, I it it could be it could be done in two phases, but my best guess is if we did it in two phases, it would probably increase the cost between $300 and $400,000 overall
easily. uh just just with all of the division one costs with permitting with scaffolding you you know the mobilization all the scaff I already said that scaffolding and breaking it in in
demobilizing this so again it's just try the the goal is to to get it done but also get it done um without spending any additional funding. >> Great. Thank you, Jeremiah. Um, Bob.
>> Yeah. Um, thanks for that part about the scaffolding. That was one of my questions. Once you set that up, you sort of want to get the job done. U, my other question is, have the ghosts of your predecessors come back and apologize to you and your dreams
for all those sloppy? My god, >> I'm still waiting. Uh so slate contractors are in sort of short supply. Are there enough regionally to get competitive bids on this kind of job?
>> I I think so. Um if if you look just within the state, I would say you're probably looking at three to four more premier slate roofing company contractors. you might have a few more that that
could do the do the work. Um, but I think something like this would would get a lot of attention and we would likely see uh slers come from probably all New England bidding on it.
>> Great. >> Thank you, Ellen. >> Oh, thanks Jeremiah for your presentation. Um the photos are so great, really helpful. Um it it's obvious that the building has
suffered um significant water damage. Um but I'm hoping you can help me understand the um the wooden roof deck. Um one question I have is is there worry or concern about wood rot or mold or
termite infestation? And second, is are the slate tiles applied directly to that water damaged wood decking? And if yes, then doesn't that need to be replaced as well?
>> Okay. So first answer or answer to the your first question is is it is a concern uh when you see that roof decking and typically what you would do uh for a project like this is you would in the the project spec specifications
you would want the contractor to carry so much money for uh potential uh deck replacement. So whatever that figure ends up being um that would be working with the the AE firms so the architectural engineers uh
to come up with with a what seems reasonable. Um hopefully when the when all the slate comes off there isn't much damage. So then that that would be money that wouldn't end up getting paid out and and
it's kind it's kind of like showing a savings there. Um, as far as how the the roof is constructed, as far as I I know, because I haven't seen enough of it opened up, as far as I know, this the slate is is nailed right
to that plank decking. Uh, so you are right. If there if if there if we're seeing a lot of water penetration, you know, what what is the integrity of that that plank uh below? Well, we don't know. And I think that's
that's what also kind of creates this sense of urgency is to get all that slate off. Um whatever um what little uh underllayment that might be left, have that removed, make any necessary repairs
to the the plank, the wooden plank decking, then get a full membrane on it. So that's that's where we bring in our technology that where we don't see it. We we put a full membrane on the on that
decking and then we slate over that um as part and and I to go a little bit further. So, when I'm working on getting uh an architecture engineer firm right now and I've met with some this week and
one of the things that I've I've asked for is that when they are looking at this roof to not only look at the the obvious pieces but all adjoining uh structure. So, we would we would start to look at the rafters. We would
look at the masonry where those rafters sit on the wall because we we c we can't we can't just focus on the roof itself. We really do need to have a full assessment of of the uh that roof and structure.
>> Yeah, I I agree. Um I understand the limitations with the slate currently on the roof. Um, I guess my my concern is it's not in the budget to replace the roof decking. Correct.
>> It so in in that proposal that I or that the cost estimate, it has repair but not not a full replace of that decking. >> Okay. I'm just concerned knowing that the wood is compromised and assuming the
slate roof is extremely heavy that compromised wood and again this is for somebody else the architectural engineer to figure out you know that it wouldn't be um you know sufficient to to hold the weight and especially when there's snow
on it and and all of that. But um I guess I guess that's just a concern is will there be possibly the added cost of replacing all or a partial portion of the the the
damaged wood. So Jeremiah, it sounds to me like there is some in the estimation there is some um money for replacing for repair of some but until you do the full um
engineering review, you won't know if how much of it would be need to be replaced. >> Right. And and then and then you won't know until the slate's removed, >> right? Until you actually see it, right? Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks, Ellen. I'm just looking at 8 o'clock and I think we have two more questions at least. So, Jonas, you're up. >> Yeah. Hi, Jeremiah. Thanks for the presentation. Um, looking at this from like as I'm a homeowner, if I if I own a home in a historic district, I know that
the I guess probably the town of Ammerst dictates that if I have to repair my roof, I'm going to do it with like materials. What's telling the town of Ammeris that they have to replace this with slate? Is that is that because you
are coming at the CPA through the historic preservation angle and therefore or if if we to play devil's advocate you did a metal red roof lighter obviously a lot less expensive
why would why could that not be contemplated? I I think there might be other individuals that could answer that question best. Um >> I I I mean I I would I would just say,
you know, it's the the building is it's it's like the, you know, the cornerstone of the the town center. and uh to see it um be represented differently and losing
that that architectural detail. Um I I think that aside from myself, there'll probably be a lot of people that would have a a hard time with that. Well, I think it's I mean, you know, obviously it's it's Robin mentioned economically
feasible if we have um all these all these presentations in front of us. I think so. I guess also it's I don't know what it's a little bit objective. Yes, I would say slate is is more obviously
more historic, more attractive than than a metal roof, but what's the difference? And and if I'm walking around now, am I going to lament and say, "Oh, what an ugly red metal roof?" I don't know that I
would. There's also a question of which ones which which facads are visible from the street. Um, are we are we fixing are we making cosmetic fixes that won't even be seen? You know what I mean? So I'm just putting out that as
justation of I assume what some other people'sions would be and I'm again I'm coming at from the simplest um which is being a homeowner and wondering what am I going to do with my roof um and you know obviously the weight onore you know for
maintenance for sustainab you know it would point to a different roof material than slate. So, thanks. >> Thanks, Jonas. >> Um, I think Robin, you were up next and
I don't know if you want to speak again to the historic preservation piece and sort of >> the like materials. >> I can start with that. I mean um I mean I would say first of all the what's guiding us is um uh with the placing of
the slate with the same slate pulled from the same area is um the purpose of the CPA that the whole point of the funding of this uh area of historic preservation is that these things are challenges but it's the historic
integrity of the building. The design of the slate roof is a part of its creation. It was it was chosen on purpose to fit with all the other elements of the building. It represents a certain style to move to a metal roof.
If if we can imagine a situation where red slate wasn't available or it was so economically infeasible because you know we are going to get to a point we're going to run out of slate roofers at some point in my lifetime. um then you would probably go to something like um
an artificial red slate where you would still be keeping that same aesthetic aspect of the building. But um the reason that we don't just pick something else is because of that whole aesthetic design of the building and that the purpose of the funds are to help us
maintain that image. I sometimes like to talk about historic preservation as like a curation of the buildings around town. So, in the same way that, you know, you would repair a painting, you wouldn't just, you know, go to Michaels and get,
you know, have somebody who wasn't very well trained color in an area. It's the same thing with our buildings. You want to keep that that uh sense of the history um on all aspects of it. Um my
questions were, excuse me, hold on. Um I hope that answers your question, Jonas. Is that clear? >> Uh yeah. I mean it also I just wonder Yeah. I mean that the fact that it's coming through CPA because of the
historic but it just makes me wonder you know the DBW wouldn't I mean just I guess to take it a little further like the the common looks great now right? What was the choice between brick versus you know cement you know? So it's it's a
little bit subjective and um it's not my area of specialty but >> you know >> yeah it's the I mean it's really it's really we really look back at the history of something and um you know and we don't need to belabor that point too
much but um but ours I mean our the the nature of the funding our hands are tied in certain ways so you you know you go down a path of what's possible and then you know what's feasible and and from there. But um my questions were
um for the town. Um it occurred to me as we were talking about the some of the insensitive repairs. Um I don't know that we've ever had a discussion about you and I've brought up the Secretary of the Interior standards and from the time that I started on this committee to now
I've, you know, I've I've learned about them, but I don't really have any experience of applying them in the field. So I'm curious if the procurement process for this will include language around that uh particular aspect. And
then I'm also curious if the town has has or is going to develop a process that reviews the scope of work. So say this project leads to three bids from three different contractors. Would we have a process where a professional
familiar with applying the standards could review the scope of work to assure and this is a pretty straightforward project right it's the flight it's not that complicated but nonetheless I mean I don't know anything on I don't know anything on on the construction and the
rehabilitation side of preservation um so I'm curious about that you know we have these we have this requirement we have these very specific standards and then how do we assure that the work that's done um is actually going to meet
that requirement. >> Yeah. Uh to to answer that, Robin, um when I put together the specifications or or the the packet for our RFQ, so looking for that architectural and
engineering firm. Um, I specifically mentioned uh those uh standards um because you know the the historic w with the historic nature of the building um you you want to ensure that whoever I
work with from the beginning those designers uh have that experience um with this this these type of preservation projects. Um, and then that will then get communicated down to the contractors.
Um, so it is it is something that that I've already uh have in there from the beginning. >> Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Um, I think we're over time here. Jonas, I'm not sure if you had another question or
>> No, that's from Okay, great. Um, well, thanks Jeremiah. really appreciate you and appreciate your presentation. Love all the photos and answering our questions. We're glad you're um >> leading the way here. >> Thank you.
>> Yeah, thanks so much. Wow. Well, we've gone through a lot of I mean from the Civil War to uh and beyond. Um the next item on the agenda is topics the chair did not reasonably anticipate
40 hour 48 hours before the meeting. I don't have anything unless there is a topic that a member of the committee wishes to raise or a member of town staff needs to raise then
I would take a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> I'll second >> and a second. Thank you. All those in favor? >> I. >> All right. Great. Well, thanks so much. And I I have a couple of to-dos for next
week and so Leah and Dave, I'll be in touch with you all. And >> okay, >> Bob, thanks for the minutes and >> and good sharing to you, Katie. Nice job. >> Thank you. Thanks, Bob. Appreciate you. All right, we'll see you all next Thursday. >> Thanks, everybody.
>> Thank you. All right. Bye. Thanks. Part: 2
Please go ahead. >> Excellent. Um, hi everyone. Welcome to the November 13th uh meeting of the Charter Review Committee. Um, we'll start by calling everyone to order.
>> Um, I see we have six folks here currently. Um, Bernie has to leave at 7:30, he's informed us. So, we will still be able to continue so long as we have a quorum,
which it looks like we will. Um, I will go down the list. I'm present. Bernie >> here. >> Ken, >> present. >> Me >> here. >> Raphael >> here. >> Um,
Erica >> here. >> Excellent. Um, >> and Andy is here. >> Andy is here. Great. Hi, Andy. Hi, Harris. Great. Excellent. Um, so we have seven people, so we should be all set then. Um, >> just FYI, I'll be joining off camera
tonight. Just make it a little easier. >> No problem. Um, so do I have a motion to approve the October 30th minutes? Thank you for writing those, Bernie. >> So moved. >> Excellent. Second. Um,
I'll go around. Andy? >> Yes. >> Erica. Uh, I'll abstain because I wasn't at that meeting. >> Okay. Um, Raphael, >> yes. >> Me? >> Yes. >> Ken? >> Yes.
>> Myself? I'm an I. Bernie. >> Yes. >> Excellent. I believe that's everyone. Uh, now move on to public comment. Um, please raise your hand. >> Could you indicate who's doing the minutes this time? >> Yes. Thank you. The minutes for this
time is Raphael. Great. Thanks. >> All righty. Um, thanks, Meg. Uh, public comment. Any public comment? Raise your hand if you'd like to make a comment. Okay. Don't see anything. Um,
we will have outreach subcommittee. Uh, Erica, have you all met recently? >> Uh, we have not met. We've been communicating by email just to keep our process moving forward and we've been engaging in our outreach that we promised to do after the initial report
and we've been sending out emails with language attached telling people how they can engage with the initial report, where to find it, how to find the public comment form. Um, and this approach has involved reaching out to specifically a list of organizations and groups to kind
of help uh solicit them to send out the same information and the same report to their mailing lists if possible to expand our reach. And I don't know if Meg or Raphael want to add to that, but that's been our primary focus. >> Thank you.
>> I'll add a little bit. Is that okay, Raphael? like Julian, would you take down the agenda >> so we can see each other, please? Thank you. Um uh two things. It's extremely obvious
that when you reach out to individuals to engage their network or their organization uh or their neighborhood that you get a much better response than when you send blasts to a whole bunch of websites. And uh it's amazing how many personal notes
I've gotten back uh some short and some long just thanking me and asking questions and um and the big question I'm getting is what's the deadline for giving feedback to the initial report? Um
do we do we just what how do I answer that question? uh that we haven't really discussed a deadline like a specific deadline for feedback as a committee. We've sort of been open um or tried to be as open as possible with it, but I'm open to
considering a deadline. Would you mind um maybe I'll communicate with you offline about this, Meg? I have two other uh groups that it might be worth um forwarding that email. >> Sure. Any just send us more and more. I mean, we we don't have any email
connections to the apartment buildings. It seems quite impossible. There's no incentive for somebody who manages an email list to apartment renters. They have no incentive to want to get them involved in town government. It seems uh it's a task that's just
undoable in my opinion. I'm going to tell people the timing as as soon as possible, but within two weeks and there'll be another opportunity when the preliminary report comes out. Is that an adequate? I don't want to not respond. >> No, that's great. Yep. Um Ken,
>> yeah, I was going to say like two weeks, but in general, we're it's still a rolling it's a rolling, you know, feedback situation. >> So, I don't want to I don't want to I don't want to discuss deadlines necessarily because it does this doesn't apply to us. to to to give some sense of urgency.
Absolutely. Two weeks. It sounds great. Um >> I'm gonna say it's a rolling deadline. Two weeks would be great and there'll be a second opportunity with the preliminary report. >> Yeah. >> Great. >> Um sorry, another real quick. Another thing, um I don't know how the public
feedback form works, the website form. Is it possible to gather up the email addresses that sent in comments and use that as an outreach list to say thank you for your participation?
>> Great idea. >> I I don't know if that's possible or not. So that that's just an idea and I'm guessing Sam would have to be a part of that. >> It's a great idea. >> Great idea. >> Um if if I can jump in on that question please. Yeah, go right ahead.
>> Um, so part of the acknowledgement in that online comment form is that your email address won't be made public. So if you can reach out to folks without sharing their email addresses publicly, so you'd have to do like a BCC or or I could help you send out an email list um
to make sure that their information isn't shared. >> Good point. >> Is that is it still Sam that needs to be the person to contact Athena to get that list of emails? No, I can get the list for you. Just uh shoot me an email.
>> I can follow up with you, Zena, about getting that together. >> Okay, super. Thank you. >> Excellent. Thanks, Andy. And then Raphael. >> Yeah, I I was just going to sort of pigg you back on the idea that we have the we had talked about people giving feedback more on the preliminary report because
we'd have more language and stuff in there, but um I think the idea of rolling feedback and encouraging them to look at both this one and the preliminary is good. Raphael, >> I was going to say it's great that we're shifting to getting some additional
feedback. Um, I don't know if other members of the committee want to reach out to their networks as well, but um, it would be great for us to share the list of folks we've contacted with this group and see if there others you want to add. Um I think we should be clear
though about how additional input would be used. Um Meg's question about timeline important one. Are we addressing additional input for the preliminary report for the final? Where
are we with like addressing additional input from the community? >> Good question. >> Like what part will it play in this process? I would say feedback received now at this point would be probably end up drafted either as in the form of an
amendment to the preliminary report or would end up in the final report. I don't see it making any edits to the um to the like entire structure of the preliminary report at this point. >> The the preliminary report has not been
drafted yet. >> Correct. Yes. So let's be clear as a whole group. You've proposed something like what are the thoughts about additional feedback coming in? >> Yeah. >> Should it be used?
When should it be looked at? And I'm not saying we need to figure out this now, but it would be good to be clear about how will that additional feedback play a role and not only in sort of in terms of the crafting of a report, but will it
play a role in shaping what's in the report? So, it's just questions to consider as a group, a whole group. >> Andy, >> I think Erica's had her hand up for a while, but >> yeah, >> I'm sorry, I didn't see you. Go ahead.
>> And Ken and myself. >> Yes. My my um response to this issue that that Raphael and others are raising is that I don't see a need to close the door to public comment certainly before the public forum. Um but I think as
we've handled public comment uh through the forum as on a rolling basis can keep rolling on and impact this is my point of view the final report at this point there's a lot of uh and tension and
energy needed to dedicate to the structure and design of the preliminary right now and that those comments can keep coming in and then we need to set a deadline for when to synthesize and incorporate all that into a final report. Um,
and I did have a question, uh, it's probably for Athena about the, um, periodic updates to the public, uh, the public comments that have been received have seem to have been paused and I wasn't sure is that was that was a technicality.
>> Oh, I'll check on that. They should be updated, but >> Okay, thank you. >> Great. Um, we'll go Ken, then Andy, then Meg. >> So, putting myself in the audience who
would see this initial report, maybe I would send a feedback and say, "Hey, how about this about the charter?" I'd also say I I I would give us feedback on the report itself saying, "I don't think it was written well or I think this should be added or yada yada
yada." So when we call it feedback, let's not necessarily think it's just going to be charter feedback per se. It could be just report feedback. So we may not be dealing with a whole lot. I mean, I have no crystal ball, but if I did, I would think that a lot of comments will
just be about the report itself and not necessarily about the charter as much as we're going to get we're going to want those things for the preliminary report. So, so to to to to Raphael's sort of suggestion, I mean, there absolutely has to be a cut off date for feedback and
it's got to be, you know, after the preliminary report is released and we get the we get the feedback, you know, this this public forum or whatever, we have to we have to draw a line in the sand and say no more. Um, but I don't expect, sorry, I'm I'm I'm
thinking ahead in the future and I probably shouldn't, but I I don't expect a lot of charter feedback from this to be honest. The initial report that is, >> yeah, I I I thought I was remembering from our last meeting that we were saying that we would you that that we would be I guess
we're going to have the public forum after the preliminary report comes out. So that gives us time to take the language stuff that's come from the Collins Center and come up with more specific suggestions in the preliminary that that gives us deliberation time to
to get the what we have now is sort of a list of ideas that we haven't ruled in or out yet. for for the preliminary I would think we would have actual language and we would have made decisions based on some of the you know input that we've gotten on whether we
should keep some things in or out and that would then be something that we could take feedback and and uh edit the final report. So, it it seems like I'm not sure we have time between now and the preliminary to be both deliberating on the input we've gotten from the
Collins Center and um collecting additional adding additional editing on into the preliminary. But if we're having a forum after that, then that would be the right time, I think, to have the input uh affect the content of the report.
May >> um I I think Andy might have said what I was going to say, which is in writing the preliminary report, we should the most probably the most important thing we have to do at this meeting tonight is plan the timing of the preliminary report, the schedule and the public
forum and so on. We should get clear on what we've Andy just said in terms of the timing. How to what extent are we going to take in new feedback before we write the preliminary report which could slow us down which we can't
afford to do? >> Raphael >> sort of agreeing with Andy. >> I'll pass. >> Okay, >> I'll pass. >> Great. Um other comments on outreach subcommittee may >> um I scheduled the public forum for uh
at the only place we can afford because it's free which is at bangs for December 8th and if we can't it's bangs is extremely in demand. So if we can't I'm wondering perhaps I
should schedule another date as a backup. We can always cancel in case we are not ready by the ETH. But if we're not ready by the ETH, we're getting >> I think the ETH is a fine date to be ready by >> But but at the end of this meeting after
we've discussed the timeline, let's reflect on that question. Okay. >> It's very it's free to book another night. Uh um and then cancel it. But >> that on the other hand, any later than that starting to get a little scary, >> Erica? Yeah, that's all I was going to
say is like let's have the conversation about the report work and then decide about the date. I don't think it's a bad idea to have a backup, but let's have the conversation first. >> Yeah. >> Other comments? Nope. Great. Um feedback subcommittee, have you guys met at all?
>> We have not met. Um I did produce for Erica the um or for the purposes of the ultimate report we had that five tab excel sheet which will not be accepted by the website. So I took the five tabs and translated them into
word a word docu one word document that's a chart and then that became a PDF which can be posted. So all of the things that were in the excel are now in that one sheet. So that that's something that once Erica looks at and I guess uh
I can send to all of you and and we can have that as input. But I think as far as the feedback subcommittee, we haven't we haven't met since our last meeting. >> Great. >> Um comments, questions?
>> Thank you for doing that, Andy. It's heroic. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, I'm just looking here. Uh, it says preliminary report plan and timeline and preliminary report group and plan.
Basically the same thing. I'm going to lump those into our next agenda item and we'll discuss that. Um, and we sort of touched on timeline and feedback um, in what was said. So, I'm basically just
going to move us along to the preliminary report group and plan and then um once we've discussed the preliminary report, we'll spend the rest of the evening or most of the rest of the evening discussing the feedback that we received from Colin Center um this
afternoon. Uh, so I guess I'll start us off. First off, do I have any interested or eager volunteers who would like to write or help write the uh preliminary report
considering that more than three is a subcommittee? More than three is a subcommittee. >> Correct. But we have subcommittees of three >> or three or more. Sorry, wrong bad wording. Three or more. So basically, do
we have two volunteers who would be interested? >> Andy, >> can can we have a subcommittee to do it? >> Yeah, >> I guess we could. It's possible. I just think
I worry about us now having three subcommittees. >> We can just we can disband the feedback one if we want. I mean although I guess we could we will be getting more feedback, but >> I mean I guess I would just worry if we
have three subcommittees, we're sort of I don't know. I don't want it to artificially prolong the process to >> require more posted meetings and so on and so forth. If it can be done sort of like the initial report can um just for
efficiency sake if we weren't >> under the gun in terms of time. I think that might be a good idea. >> Well, I'm happy to help, but I'm not sure that I can be one of two people. So, happy to be a third if that doesn't slow things down. Mhm. >> Yeah. I think um we talked about Ken and
Athena did a heavy not Athena Erica heavy lift initially. >> So there are few of us left. I think if you look at what needs to be done um I think they've created the bones of something that will make it perhaps not
as challenging. I think if I jump in I need help with proposed language elements. Some of us have met with Collins more than others and have engaged in that a little more. If one of those individuals in the is in the mix, that would be helpful. I still think
even though you might not be for it, Julian, like two primary architects sort of putting together proposed language, rationale, some of that stuff is there. And someone to do like final editing could be helpful. >> Yeah, that makes sense. That makes a lot
of sense. Um, and I I don't mind being in a mix in some way. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you. >> That makes a lot of sense. Thank you, Raphael. Uh, I guess so. I'm hearing that Raphael would be willing, Andy has
some ability, but doesn't want to overcommit, so to speak. Um, >> I I actually think Julian, since you've met with Collins, >> Yeah. >> think it would be great if you were in the mix as well. >> Okay. Sure. >> Okay. I'm I'm open to that. Um I was I
was debating whether I would be either be involved in the preliminary report or the final report. Um I think I would not like to be involved in both. I'd rather be involved in one or the other if that
makes any sense. Um but I'm I'm open to being this one. Um, if folks are interested in final report, >> I I wouldn't rule out anyone's um anyone's participation in any phase here
because we've got some folks who are very strong writers. Um, we've got some people have some good ideas. So, I I I wouldn't want to take anybody out of the mix. uh depending on what people are seeing as the preliminary report. I mean
I can I can offer some um my thought was I would take the uh the laundry list if you will that we have with all the uh that we've discussed and discussed and that is part of the information or the
the initial report. I'd take that and I I would be I would edit it down and then provide it my thoughts to whomever is shaping the the preliminary report as a way of of contributing to that because I
think um I would would hope that that would be helpful. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um I'll just chime in that like I'll have the capacity to help with one report but not both. So, I'm just trying to figure out where my time
would be most valuable, if that makes any sense. Um, Andy, >> yeah, I mean, I I think if we make a decision as a group on which of the Collins Center uh um input we want to
accept and in the cases where they provide language, which language we want to accept, then it's a pretty simple cut and paste. At that point, we're moving from abstract to concrete. And so that seems like it's a task that any one of
us could probably do and hand it off to, you know, another group, you know, or other people to edit or whatever. So, or any two of us. So, >> Andy, do you want me and Raphael to work on the preliminary report and you sort of
be a proofreader? How would that feel to the committee? Fine. >> Fine. >> Good. >> Great. >> That's fine. Yeah, that's two people is a very nimble it's a very very nimble
>> uh crew to do that in in ter uh reflecting on my time with Erica. um >> yeah that >> things move back and forth very fast but it's nice to have a third >> and I think it'll be it'll be useful especially if if you have sort of a
sense from the body from all of us about which parts we're accepting and which parts we're not then it's it's pretty s you know it's fairly straightforward >> so that's good with you Rafael and Andy >> great um that's good with me I'll probably limit my involvement in the
final report but um that is good with me >> do we want to think about writing a an essay about the things that aren't related to the charter that we've discussed so many times that we're going to somehow try to address, but that
whole other category. >> You know, Magg, I wouldn't mind working with you on that. >> Okay. Is that >> I've been thinking about this a little bit. >> Wait, is that who said that? Andy. >> Yeah, >> that I'd love. Great. I and I I think we've said it so many times and it's
come up from the public. >> Do you guys want to work on that? Um and would you prefer working on it to attach to the final report or to the initial or to the excuse me preliminary report? >> Well, let's see how >> far you get. >> What do you think, Andy?
>> I think we could do it pretty pretty expeditiously. >> Yeah, we're not talking a tome. Yeah, >> it's like a few points, >> a list of themes, >> acknowledging some things that >> we've heard, >> mayor transparency, blah blah blah, you know. >> Yeah, I'm thinking we we could have a
fairly in each of the upcoming reports. >> The narrative will be fairly sparse. It will be that three column recommendation sheet, right? It will have all the detail in the language and it'll it'll
be whatever um that that those recommendations will be framed by the narrative and you know having another having a a short narrative or even bullet points as to what we've heard. Um that's not
>> in addition to the charter. I I mean there's some real um real emphasis needs to be given on uh to people's understanding of of how the uh the council operates of communication of access to council members
>> that all um the fairness uh um you know the notification issue all that stuff needs to be pointed out and um >> right >> and accounted for. >> Good. So Andy and I will get together and we'll let you know that when we think we could do that a draft.
>> Great. >> Again, it's it's not long. It's just acknowledgement of what a large number of people have mentioned. >> I think that's a great idea, Erica, and then Raphael. Yeah, I wanted to um actually uh as as far as we're writing,
you know, an appendix or some sort of these things that we're talking about as extra items, extra extra to the charter, um I'd like to be part of that conversation. >> Oh, great. And just in general, e even though I think we can probably write something expeditiously,
um I would propose that we give ourselves the time to think that list through and and um bring it for you know revision discussion in this in this large group and aim for the final for inclusion. >> Great. >> Even if it starts now.
>> Yeah. If it's not a formal subcommittee, three of us are not a quorum. We could just meet, >> right? Andy, Erica, >> I think that's I think that's right. >> We don't have to be a subcommittee. We're just a group that's bringing something to the whole group.
>> Athena, could you clarify for us? I'm not completely sure, quite frankly. >> A subcommittee is a group of members who are designated by the full committee to take on some work for the full committee.
So if you designate three members to accomplish something for the committee and then bring it back for the committee to approve or to move forward, then you've created a subcommittee whether you call it that or not. >> How about we just agree to do it without being asked
trying here trying >> have we broken some rule by pairing off to write portions of the report? >> No, because it's just two members. Um, no, it's three. >> If it's more than one, then you get into subcommittee territory. If the full
committee has designated more than one member to do something on its behalf, >> then you've created a subcommittee, whether you call it that or not. >> Okay, got it. you authorize one member y >> to do something and then that one member maybe reaches out to other members for a
proofread or for input. Um, as long as you're not going around and around with a quorum of the committee outside of an open meeting, then you're good. >> Okay, I will reach out to Raphael for input. >> I think Athena just said that single people could be rogue members and do
anything they want to. Is that correct, Athena? >> Just kidding. I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. >> But that's what you said. >> I said all of you go off individually and do whatever you want.
>> Don't make Athena cry. >> No. >> No. Thankfully, I'm not the open meeting law police. I glad this is I'm not the enforcing authority here. I feel like at the end of the process, we should should give Athena a present of a little like
construction vest that says, "OML, please." No. >> Um, anyway, so that sounds good. Meg and Andy, uh, I guess are Raphael. Sorry, I didn't see your hand there. >> Yeah, I I think, um, I I think we could
move pretty swiftly with a preliminary report. Um, but I wanted to keep on people's radar like the final report there's an ask about reasons for recommendation. So folks should keep that in mind as we progress.
>> So the final report requires that. >> Excellent. Um, >> and I was just going to sort of add one thing which is now that we have the group, we'd like to draft it. Um, and pretty soon here we'll start considering
the Collins feedback and sort of voting up or down to whether to include it or not. When would the committee prefer that me and Raphael come back to you all with the preliminary report? And do we
want Meg's and Andy's time or addendum attached to that preliminary report or do we want to hold off to the final? I heard Erica talk about sort of giving that extra time to hold off to the final, which I'm totally open to. Um, but I just wanted
to hear the rest of the committee's thoughts on that. Um, Raphael, is your hand still up? >> Oh, my bad. >> Okay, Bernie. Yeah, I I am I'm agre agreeing with uh Erica's suggestion that we uh we focus now on my preference
would be we focus now on the uh preliminary report and then have that um addendum running in the background so that u it can be refined a little bit more um and and we can ensure that it's
inclusive. I think holding off on the addendum to the final report is fine. Um >> right. I mean the other the other piece I think is we want to focus um the discussion around the um preliminary
report on the content of the uh charter >> as opposed to those issues which are important but not that can be impacted by the charter. Um, I guess Andy and Meg, if you guys just want to check in with the committee
in early December at sort of our first December meeting and then we can go from there, but uh hopefully the the final report to have that attached is fine. Um, I'm gonna propose, and I don't know
how folks feel about this, that me, myself and Raphael get the committee the initial report or the excuse me, preliminary report by December 1st. Does that seem reasonable? >> Is that for a final or a or a or a
discussion in committee? >> Um, my hope would be that we are able to vote it by that time. So, do we get to see it? How far ahead will we get to see it at? probably at the week at the meeting beforehand. So, Ken, do you want to go ahead? I'll give you the date on
that, Meg. >> Um, yeah, I was um based on Meg's um scheduling, I think, of December 8th for the for the bank center. >> I think I think to discuss the preliminary report, we absolutely can't
do it December 1st. We have to do it much earlier, do we not? >> Am I Am I following this right? >> Because people won't have read it. Yeah. Um I mean two two weeks is been like sort of my what I felt like enough time for people
to to digest something that we've we've thrown out there. Um I don't think we have two weeks. >> Two weeks is Thanksgiving Day. So >> yeah. >> Um >> the number of meetings we have.
>> Yeah. We have next the 20th >> have a meeting on the 20th and the 4th >> and the 4th and then if we if we approved it on the 4th we could have a form on the 8th but we'd have to walk people through it. So
when would we want the report to the committee by? I guess if we want it approved on the 4th it would have to come to the committee by next week. >> Wow. which seems fast. >> We need to go through all the
recommendations. >> Exactly. Which we probably won't finish doing tonight realistically. >> No. >> Yikes. >> We might make it through half of them. >> So, we need next week's meeting to get through all the recommendations. >> Exactly. So I guess the best way to put
it is we can have the preliminary report to the committee to review by the December 4th meeting. And if it takes
longer than that and we could hopefully approve it at that meeting and if we can't we would approve it after the feedback >> on it. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I have a quick thing. I'm sorry to interrupt. Marcus just just emailed me to say he's in the
waiting room. >> Oh, excellent in attendees. >> Um, >> thanks, Ken. >> Me. Thank you, Ken. Let me try to bump him up. Athena, can you bump him up? >> Yep, I'm doing that now.
>> Thank you. Um Bernie and then Erica. >> I I was just gonna say there's um if we could have a date when the draft
report would be posted to the committee's page on the website. that would give us plenty of time to read it so that when we landed on the fourth uh we could have a substantive
discussion and come up with um come up with final language. Um and and if the report goes through um a second draft again to post that to the committee's website so that we're not you know we we
we're opening it up to everybody. Um, I think that would that would work for me. I don't know if it works for everybody else. >> Okay. Um, Erica, >> sorry, before I make my comment, uh, Bernie, I just wanted to understand what specific date you were pinning as the
date that we posted on the website. >> Um, we could post it on the post it on the 26th or post it on the 1st. The 26th would be would be preferable. Um I think
Athena, are we all is the office closed on the 28th? >> We're closed Thanksgiving on Thursday and the Friday after Thursday. >> So the the 26th would be a good day. It gives you it gives everybody because
I'm I'm sure some of us are going to send comments. Um uh >> but if I'm understanding that would be two weeks from tonight. Um >> that would where a a report would be submitted. >> Yeah,
>> it it would be available to the committee and then we would have it to finalize on the 4th. >> I think we're going to need this meeting and the next one to get the contents for that report. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So maybe the December 1st would be
accurate would be appropriate and then that then we could discuss it on December 4th. >> Okay. Do we are we meeting the week of the 24th? Are we meeting Thanksgiving week? >> Thanksgiving >> 10. We're not meeting Thanksgiving week. >> Okay. So So um sorry
>> that's good. >> Um can I make my comment? So, I I was thinking that um we it would be useful to sort of work backwards from our potential public forum date. >> Seeming like from the where this conversation is, December 8th seems like
it might be soon. >> Yeah. >> Because we probably want at least a week between the time that the report is uh publicly available and has been submitted to council um and the time that we hold a public forum. just even
for the sake of promoting it. So, um wondering if we need to move a public forum to the week of December 15th and use those uh first two weeks of first two meetings of December for true draft review and
revision um to complete that preliminary report. Um, I had a comment. Uh, and Raphael, chime in. I know you're you're going to be working with me on this as well as Andy.
I think we spend some of tonight, hopefully the next hour, going through and voting up or down on the Holland Center feedback. We continue and finish doing that at our meeting on the 20th. Then
in between the time of today and the meeting on the 20th, I can hopefully get you all sort of a cover page to the initial report similar to like to the preliminary report similar to what Ken did. Um and then after our meeting on
the 20th, me and Raphael can work on uh on basically copy pasting the language and preparing an actual document with the committee's voted recommendations um and hopefully get that to the
committee by December 1st. That way we have some time to work on it. We aren't really sacrificing our time with family because we have time on the 29th, the 30th, as well as the weekend of the 22nd and 23rd to work on that. Um, we get it
to the committee on the 4th, on the 1st. The committee has three days there to review it. Um, and then we would vote it on the 4th and have feedback on it on the ETH and then be able to move on with
the final report. That is my thoughts for how this on not necessarily how it should go. I'm open to I'm definitely open to changing it. That's >> and um Jul >> just a question when when in that plan
is the report final and submitted to council and posted to the website. >> That report would be finalized and submitted to council posted to the website on the 4th. But we're voting on the fourth in in the description you just gave.
>> Yes. Correct. So once it's voted, I would submit it to council the next day similar to how we did last time where once it was voted the next morning, I submitted it off to the town council. So we would >> Right. But that but I think what you
were saying is that the first the first look that the committee would have at the at the preliminary report would be the first and so the first opportunity to discuss it would be the fourth. So if we had any amendments or revisions that we were requesting
>> they would have to be made on the spot. Correct. Ming. >> Um, this seems like wishful thinking and even if we were to approve it on the 4th, which is a Thursday, holding a public forum
Monday, which includes a weekend. So, I'm happy to hope for that, but I'm going to go ahead and book something the following week as a fallback. None of this is advertised, but I think we need to have a date the week of December 15th
in case that I just think voting on something on a Thursday night, getting it posted sometime on a Friday, how do we even let people know it's there? Uh, I'm going to just go ahead and book something anyway. >> Yeah, I hear what you're saying. The
other my other thought is, and this might sort of change the way we're doing it, is follow the same schedule up until the 1st. On the 1st, me and Raphael will send something out to the committee. On the 4th, we can make amendments to it,
discuss it, and not vote on it, and then have our public forum on the 8th and meet again on the uh meet again on the 11th of December. And on the 11th of December, we would vote
to approve it. >> They're approved. They're discussing something that hasn't been approved. >> No, Meg. on the 11th of December, we would vote to approve it. So that would allow the public to have their input into the initial report and then we
could make additional changes based on what the public says on the report. It's it's a different way of doing it, but I don't see anything wrong with having sort of almost a not an editing session, but a time where the public can make
have some say in the report more than just we don't like what happened, but we don't like this here. We could theoretically change it. We have a few days where we could change it. I think that might >> I'm just proposing that in order to end this discussion and move on to discussing the Colin Center that we just
book that other date so that we have it and see how it goes and hope that you're right that we can >> you know if I I just think >> if you want to book that's fine that's >> I think it would raise cynicism to say here's a report we're going to have a public form in two days uh I just okay
I'm going to do it unless somebody says >> both dates That's fine. Um, yeah. And that way, whatever happens, we have two dates available and we can choose which one is best for us. But either way, I'll have a report to
you all hopefully by the 4th. Does that seem appropriate? >> Erica and Marcus have their >> Sorry. Thank you. Um, Erica and then Marcus. Um to to be clear, our charge is
that the the public forum is to be held to discuss the preliminary report in response to so it definitely needs to come after that in the timeline. Um and if we're meeting on the 4th to have our first discussion of it, then I think
we would need to have it a few days before in hand. >> So we're talking December 1st to have it in hand. December 4th, we would discuss it. >> I I think that's where we're what we're looking at here. >> And then we would vote on it December
11th and have the form on the 18th on the 15th >> in the week of the 15th is what I is what it looks like to me. >> So we you guys get the form from me and Raphael December 1st. We discuss it the
4th. Edits are made. Then we vote on it the 11th and we have the I believe the 15th is the first day of Hanukkah, but um we would have the form on the 15th. Um
and then then after that form, we would move on with drafting the final report. Starting on the 18th, we would have a group drafting the final report in hopes that they would be able to get that done
sometime over the holiday. >> I don't I don't see a way to accelerate it very much, >> Mang. >> Oh, I just didn't lower my hand. Sorry. >> Okay, >> there it goes. Yeah, thanks. I was just going to um
agree with uh Meg's point to make sure we booked two nights. >> Mhm. >> You never know. It's always best to have a backup plan. >> Yeah, I agree. >> Great. So all me and Raphael can have the committee
a preliminary report in hand by December 1st so long as we vote some of the Collins Center recommendations tonight and some and the rest of them and finish them off on the 20th. Does that seem appropriate to everyone? Sort of a thumb
check. Great. Um, okay. Any other comments, questions on this? No. Okay. Um, we will now spend the next hour or so, maybe hour and 10 minutes,
discussing the Colin Center feedback. It is my goal to be able to vote whether the Colin Center feedback constitutes an official recommendation of our committee or not. And that means
whether it goes that language or that thing item goes in the initial report or it doesn't. Um and it's sort of our final check on it. Uh, some folks might not be comfortable with this, but that's
how I'm hoping to proceed. Um, do you have any questions? I'm going to screen share. >> When you say goals and initial report, do you mean preliminary report? >> Preliminary report. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Um, I'm actually going to start with the
first memo that they gave us uh and go from there. >> Is there a copy of the U initial report table somewhere? Where would where would I find that? Was that emailed to us? >> Yes, that was emailed. Um, and it's also
in the packet for from the last meeting. >> From the last meeting. Yeah. >> Um, can folks see this? Okay. >> Excellent. Um, me figure out a way to scroll here. Uh,
okay. So, um, how do folks feel about my suggestion that we basically vote finally whether to include this in the preliminary report or not and we just go basically article subsection by article subsection.
Is that all right? Great. Um, I am going to get my computer charger and I will be right back. Uh, we will start with section um 1.6. Six. My document starts with 2.3.
>> Yeah. Wind does too. >> Uh you mean the the Colin Center document? >> Yeah. >> There was there was there were two of them that were sent. the f this is the first one that was in last uh >> well the one from October 30th starts with
2.3 and the one from today starts with 2.10 >> starting >> with the one from 1.6 six. Uh that was sent on the 1st of October
because that is the full charter. Um they sent it in memo one and memo two. It I believe you were on both email chains. Um and this was posted in the packet on for our meeting um for all of our October meetings. Actually,
>> there was a third one that talked about just employee pay or employee participation or something, but that was >> Yes, but that was just one wording. So, I'll pull that up. That was in the packet for tonight when we discussed that. Um, I believe it was the last one
in memo one. >> Are you all able to find that? >> Great. Okay. So, I'm going to get us started with 1.6. Um, and I do believe just out of formality, I know it may take a little bit longer, I'll call on
everybody for yes, no, yes, no. And I will first call on folks for comment. So we'll go 1.6. Does anybody have any comments on 1.6? >> Okay. I don't see any. Um would we like
to vote whether to include this as our recommendation in the preliminary report? Um, and just if you would like to include it, say hi or yes. If you do not want to include it, say no. Andy,
>> um, this this recommendation is to not include it. So, are we does a yes mean we agree with the Collins Center or does a yes mean we want to include the idea of requiring? Um,
>> good good point. A yes. I guess a yes will mean we agree with the Collins Center. That is a that is an important clarification. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Um okay. Uh >> some of these some of these it seems
like there's a need for us to discuss them a little. >> Yeah, we will. If you want to discuss I just said raise your hand. >> I'd like to discuss this one. >> Okay, go ahead. Well, >> what are what are people's reasons for voting? Yes.
Andy, can you raise your hand just so I can see in the future, Meg? Because you're in a little little box on my screen. >> Yeah. Okay. And I don't know how to do that if I don't I'm in a little I'm in a no box. Oh, there it is. Okay.
Um basically they're saying that currently we have um the in that this section in the charter now says that the town may you know collaborate in any way it wants to on regional services and um
this recommendation was that we mandate that they do so whenever it's reasonable. um they're saying that may be too prescriptive, but that we could consider recommending a committee to study and report back on regionalization opportunities um either by putting in
the transition section or recommending it in the report. >> So there's two things that they're saying. One is, you know, don't mandate is basically what they're saying because the language we have allows regionalization, but it's complicated. And then they're saying, but you might want to >> highlight the idea that, you know,
region studying regionalization opportunities would be a good thing. >> So, >> I'm glad you're on the council and I'm not. >> In my mind, a no vote here would say we do want it mandated. A yes vote would
say we take the advice of Collins and we will recommend that it not be mandated and that instead We recommend to the council a committee to study regionalization. Um Bernie,
>> yeah, I I'm not sure why we would even consider um make including a mandate. I mean, this was intended to give the council and the the city the opportunity to do u regionalization when it when it
made sense. And so making a recommendation that you must look at it whenever it's reasonable is too fuzzy and it's just going to slow town government down. It's just gonna cause problems. I would think that one or
another of the council's committees could take a look at regionalization and regionalization opportunities. And I know that those opportunities occur on a um on a they they emerge. they're not necessarily something that you can plan
on. So right now, I mean, we're doing regional I'm on the part of the Fort River group and right now we're doing regional collaboration about replacing culverts in flood control and that
wasn't found anywhere. We were able to we were able to uh because of this permissive language in the charter, the city was able to go ahead and apply for grants and we do outreach to the towns around us because watersheds don't obey
political boundaries and we're moving forward. uh you know I I I just this this is asking for too much time and too many disturbances in the way people operate. So my thing would be is you know I agree with the Collins center
no reason for it and if uh one of the one of the uh council committees or if the council wants to form a committee to study regionalization that's fine but I don't think we should be recommending a mandate. Marcus.
>> Oh, thank you. Yeah, I was just going to say I agree with the, you know, let's put this to the um come up with the recommendation to, you know, form a committee to look for these opportunities and get the language that way. I do agree that a mandate is not really the best way to go forward.
Um, so I think what Collins is saying is great and let's uh use that. >> I think I Yeah. Um, okay. >> Thank you for this discussion, >> Erica. Erica has her hand. >> Erica, sorry. Sorry, >> Erica. Go ahead.
>> Um, this this discussion brings up a point which is this even though we are going to have a yes or no up or down vote. What we're sounds like what's one possibility that we are going to land on is that we agree that it should not be mandated. However, we recommend that it
could be that regionalization could be studied. That's just an example. We could phrase it however we want to phrase it. point is where does that go? Where does where are we writing that down and how is it going to be incorporated or included in the preliminary? >> I turned off my camera.
>> What? >> Um >> I'm sorry I heard somebody say something. Um >> sorry that was never mind. So anyway, my point is even if um we decide that the original suggestion which said ma it
should be mandated, we're taking Collins feedback perhaps we haven't voted yet and saying we don't agree it should be mandated but we feel a certain way about the idea of regionalization that just needs to be documented
somewhere as we go through and vote even though it slows things down because otherwise we'll have to go through this again. Andy and then Marcus. >> Yeah. So, I mean I I guess my thinking is that we that I I would vote that we
accept the recommendation to not change the language in the charter. Um and that we that we add this notion of regional of studying regionalization um in the sections of other things that
came up that we're not necessarily requiring. I mean we could we could put something in the transition section to say you must report back on regionalization, but to me it seems like it might go better in a list of things that came up like the things we were talking about earlier. And one of those
would be, you know, a recommendation that that there be a study of regionalization opportunities. >> Marcus, let's we're on our first one. I understand we want some discussion. I think that's that's healthy. >> Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, I was just trying to be quick and say I mean, this doesn't really say,
>> you know, we there's no mandate called out. It's just saying let's go study it. So that study may come out with a mandate. It may not, but I I'm down for putting it in a group, whether we put it in the transition section or in a list. That's further later. >> I think I think it's a great idea to
study it personally. Um, Raphael, >> I guess connected to Erica's point, like who's tracking this process right now? >> That was the main thrust of what I was trying to say. >> Who is detailing like the decision? So,
if folks go ahead with yes, we should study Who in this process right now is charged with tracking this? Is it you, Julian, or is someone else? >> So when me and Raphael when we make the initial report or the preliminary
report, excuse me, we will add this if it's voted yes and we will add a recommend recommendation that it be put to a study rather than into the charter. >> Let me say it another way, Julia. Maybe your memory is great, but who's tracking
this in the moment? >> So, oh, in the moment. Um, >> I think it's the Erica and Andy and me, the committee that's going to write that. >> No, but somebody needs >> Who's tracking our decision currently? >> I would think it would appear in the
minutes. >> It's going to appear in the minutes and it's going to appear on a recording that gets posted to YouTube tomorrow. >> Yeah. and that's what I'll watch to be able to write this.
>> Okay, I'm gonna stop taking questions at this point. Um, and vote on this. Uh, so let's move forward. Um, >> I'm sorry, Julian. >> I'll start. Yes, >> just a question on the on the vote.
>> Can we vote on first of all whether we want to make this a mandate or not? you know, accept the idea that we don't want to make it a mandate or not and then have a vote on whether we include it as a requirement in the transition section or whether we recommend it in the
committee's report. >> Sure. Yeah. I'll move to um to accept the Colin Center recommendation and uh not have it as a mandate in the
charter. >> Second. Great. Uh, Raphael, >> yes. >> Your hand's still up, just so you know. >> Oh, my bad. >> Uh, no problem. Myself, I am an I. Bernie. >> Hi, >> Erica. >> Hi, >> Ken. >> Hi,
>> Meg. >> Hi. >> Um, and am I miss Marcus? >> I have an I. >> And And Andy? Yes. Great. Um, now I will move. >> Is can I ask a question?
>> Sure. Is this so something that'll go in the thing that Andy and I are going to write and Erica about >> to decide. >> Okay, I see what you're saying. >> Yep. Uh, so >> sorry. I'll move that this goes in both
the tr that a co that that we recommend a committee to study and report back on regionalization in both the transition section and in the addendum provided by Andy and Meg. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Great. Um Bernie >> a no. >> Uh myself I'm an I. Raphael, >> I'm a no. >> Andy, >> no. >> Ken, >> uh, yes.
>> Marcus, >> no. >> Meg? >> Yes. >> Raphael? >> I already voted no. >> Okay. Um, >> I did not vote and I vote yes. >> Thank you. >> Um, I can't see any everyone on the
screen here. I apologize. Um, so that fails just barely. Um, and we I guess will now consider Does someone want to make a motion to do something else with the committee to study?
>> Can I move that we recommend it in the committee's report? in the committees >> meaning in the you know in the in the list of things of other things that we >> in your addendum >> in the addendum >> rather than in the transition section. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Second. >> Um Bernie. >> Yes. >> Uh Raphael. >> Yes. >> Erica. >> Yes. >> Marcus. >> Yes. Yes.
>> Pen. >> Yes. >> Andy. Yes. >> Um Meg. >> Yes. >> Um myself, I'm an I. So that passes.
>> Um okay. So now we will move on to item 1.7B uh public form. So I'm just going to continue scrolling so folks can read this.
You you've gone too far now. >> Gone too fast. There's two two paragraphs that um the Collins is Collins Center is suggesting as changes and I would think we would want to accept those changes and make these as
recommendations. >> Yeah. And >> I Yeah, I'm in agreement, Andy. >> Yeah. Basically the the concern was that these things became sort of stilted because it was a mathematical thing about you needed to give exact same time to people in the public or people
providing input providing context from uh you know the the committees. And so this is just uh rededicating this to uh having two-way communication but not having that rigid um time for each which if you
only have a few people showing up people are just sort of sitting around and waiting. So >> great. Um I will move to accept this uh from the Collins Center for both the town council and school committee public forums. Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> Second. Okay. Um, I'll take that as Andy. Bernie, >> yes. >> Raphael, >> yes. >> Erica, >> yes. >> Uh, myself, I'm an I. Andy, >> yes. >> Ken,
>> yes. >> Meg, >> yes. >> And Marcus, >> yes. >> Excellent. Um so now we will move on to uh 1.7 multiple member bodies.
>> Wait, what about the school committee? >> That was included. >> Oh, okay. >> Got it. >> Um okay. Do we want to accept their wording regarding multiple member bodies?
>> I would move that. >> I'll second um comments. Okay. Um Andy, >> yes. >> Raphael. Raphael. >> Yes. myself. I'm an I. Bernie. >> Yes. >> Ken,
>> yes. >> Erica, >> yes. >> Meg, >> yes. >> Marcus, >> yes. >> Great. Um D measure. Um
the committee. Okay. Um this is saying that measure should not be do we should not be clarified that there's not really a need. >> What they actually said was they don't doesn't have enough information to opine
>> stuff. What sorry I can't hear you. What it actually says is that they don't have enough information to opine on the definition. Sorry. Um, okay. Just trying to read that. Uh
do we have a decision as to whether we want to include more on the defining the term measure or just move along with it as is? >> Uh I did is there some stuff that comes
up later on that that they say just deal with it in the discussions of you know of for each body? I'm just not sure. I'm not sure. I would just
honestly it's such a small detail. >> Yeah. >> I mean, >> can we get a sense from Athena like what the issue is here? >> I think this is more of Nandy's suggestions. It was one of the very >> Yeah. But I mean, it comes up in in in the council. So maybe Athena has a sense
of >> Athena had to leave. >> Oh, she did. Okay. >> Not on the meeting. Bernard. Okay. >> Can I go ahead? >> Go ahead. >> I just wanted to acknowledge that in >> in the initial report is included one of the discussion notes from when we
originally talked about this item. And the note is it has not been the council's practice to treat all matters adopted by the council as measures nor are procedural motions treated as measures. Clarification would be beneficial. So even though the Collins Center is not making a specific
uh clarification suggestion um from one of our previous discussions on this item, we did have the sense that some clarification would be helpful. >> I realize we're only voting on Colin stuff right now, but that is that's the
case for this item. Bernie. >> Um, I went ahead and looked at as many definitions of measure that I could find and the one that we have in the charter is about as broad as you can get.
So, it means virtually I I think you you're you're going to this is like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If the um um if the the council does anything, it can be a measure considered a measure. Whether they want to call it that or not
is another matter. But it basically says is the black letter says any bylaw, order, resolution or other vote or proceed adopt it or that the town council might adopt. So it's it's as broad a measure. It's as broad as broad
a definition as you can get. And and I'm not again I'm not sure how much benefit there is to um narrowing it down. >> I think this is honestly I think it's fine as is. It hasn't really been a
problem to my knowledge >> and it seems like a relatively minute detail. I'd rather that we use our time wisely on um on sort of bigger issues in the charter, if you will. So, should we
have a motion to not change the language about a measure? >> Yes. I move that we keep the language as is. >> Um, or recommend no change on a measure. Do I have a second? >> Second. Second.
>> Great. Um, any comments? No. Uh, Bernie, >> I vote yes. >> That's all I'm Raphael. >> Yes. >> Andy, >> yes. Ken, >> yes. >> Um,
Meg, >> yes. >> Marcus, >> yes. >> And Erica, >> yes. >> Great. Um, okay. This is another slightly more important but also small
clarification. um definition. I'm also going to move that we not make changes. I see how some lack of clarity could come about here or has came about, but I think we can sort
of just leave it as is. We have a second. >> Second. >> Um okay. >> Should we discuss? Yeah, sure. >> Um I I think the issue here is basically that um
if you declare emergency then it h it has to do with um being able to accelerate decision- making. And if the question is if there's a if you're going to miss a grant deadline or
something like that, does that constitute an emergency which would allow you to have accelerated decision-m? Um, I'm still not clear that that's been a a real problem, but I just thought I would mention that that I think the reason for
this is that you could say it's an emergency that we get this that we, you know, have a vote before this grant deadline expires or you could say they should have had the grant to us sooner and, you know, that's not an emergency. So, that's the
context as far as I understand it. Rafael, >> they also note they also have a recommendation at the end about consulting council and town manager. Just bringing it to our attention. >> Oh yeah, >> Bernie. >> Yeah, I was just going to point that
out. And um I mean there are emergencies and there are emergencies and the the fire over the weekend was one example. >> Yeah. So, um I I think they um they recommend not making any changes
without consulting the town's attorney. Um I think we can um allow this the definition is emergency term of emergency as it is in the charter.
>> Um and then if if the council wants to put take it further then they're welcome to um talk to the talk to town's attorneys, but I I don't think we uh I don't think we need to make any changes right now.
>> I'm in agreement. Um Andy, >> yeah, they do say that this language, you know, is nearly identical to most other council manager charters and it's been defined by courts and vetted by the attorney general's office in the Massachusetts legislature. So, we're
probably okay leaving the >> I can see how it could be confusing to residents um just from a like definitional perspective, but uh I don't see it um as
being something that is that big of an issue to define >> it. It doesn't allow us to add tariffs to uh our neighboring communities. Can I move that we uh not make a change? >> I I'll second. Bernie, >> uh yes.
>> Uh I'm an I. Andy, >> yes. >> Raphael, >> yes. >> Ken, >> yes. >> Meg, >> yes. >> Marcus, >> yes. >> And Erica, >> yes. >> Great. Uh full council, >> what about addendum recommendation at
the end? No or yes? If you look at what the project team recommended, are we including that anywhere or moving forward? >> My my sense is that we're saying don't change it. They're saying consult about any potential changes.
>> I think we're moving forward. We're not changing it at this point. Um, >> Raphael, were you making a motion or just >> I just meant like they they're saying should we recommend a consultation with regarding this issue?
Yes or no? Thanks, Erica. >> How would that happen? Would we just send a a like a note to >> We have >> We have some things in our addendum on some additional things to consider.
>> Wondering if that should be in play. >> So considering consider adding it to the addendum where we say this is came up. >> Yeah. >> I mean I don't see why not. Uh is that all right with you Andy? Sure. >> Great. Um,
>> is it okay with everybody? >> Yeah. Is it >> some thumbs? >> Okay. Um, I'm considering that. Okay. No objections. Uh, just for the sake of time, this is taking um fair amount of
time. the issue of full counsel. >> Basically, they're saying rather just rather than change the language, they're saying delete this definition in article one and define it where it's referenced in article two and I think they provide
that >> those definitions in article two. I support um I'll make the motion to approve the >> Can you repeat that, Andy, please? >> There's a definition for full counsel here which then gets applied later on.
And what they're saying is rather than defining it here, just define what it takes for a vote in article two for the council and in article four for the school committee and so on. >> Right.
I would I would support. Um so I'll make the motion to approve this. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Great. Um Bernie, >> yes. >> Raphael, >> yes. >> Pen,
>> yes. >> Andy, >> yes. >> Myself, I'm an I. Meg. >> Yes. >> Marcus, >> yes. >> And Erica, >> yes. >> Great. Um, on to article two. Uh,
I just wanted to reference this that the Collins Center provided us exact language on this issue later and it is in the packet. Do folks want me to screen share that or do they have have folks read over that and feel ready to
vote as to accept or not accept their proposed language? What does this one say? >> This is their advice regarding it and some information about it. However, they ended up
providing us language later on that is in the packet that I can screen share if we want. >> Yeah, I think that's relevant. >> Yeah, I will screen share the language because that is probably officially what we would be voting to adopt.
Um, >> we have still going on, huh? >> Can you all see this? >> Oh, they >> No. >> Yeah, they just >> Ken, you have a hot mic. Thank you.
>> Um, yeah, we're still seeing the other one. I think you have to unshare that one before you now. Is that better? >> Yep. >> Great. >> Um, their recommendation is in red. >> So, there's no precedent for this in
other charters. >> Here's some sample language that should be reviewed with the town's attorneys before adoption. So, we would have to review this with our attorneys before it's adopted officially. So, that would be something that would have to be done
pre-final report. But to include this in the preliminary report, I'm going to make a motion that we do include their recommendation of the language in red in the preliminary report. Do I have a second? >> Can we can we discuss this? Yeah, but we
have >> language from the from the other one first again because I think that laid out some >> I think folks should read the if you have you should just spend some time with reading what is noted in this document the first one. >> Yeah.
>> Before the language you should really pay attention to what they're asking. >> Yeah. >> Um let me figure out do you all want me to screen share the other document again? Could you? >> Sure. But I'm not going to move back to
this one. So, this is I'm going to screen share the other document and stay on the other document. Um, >> there's a conflict of interest. You should read. You should make sure you read.
So before we discuss the motion either needs to be seconded or someone can put forward a different motion. >> Well, I'll second it for the discussion. >> So they're saying that this is mass general law on
on conflict of interest, right? Correct. This is And then the other thing that I just screen shared was the >> language to substitute. >> You you you scrolled through that. >> Sorry. >> A little too quickly. Um and I'm trying
to get two words in before I I have to go. >> Okay. Um, I don't see a problem with >> someone if if Yeah, it's fine. If if someone is a town employee and or a school employee and there was this case
just recently in Holio and I'm trying to remember how it turned out. Um I think this is something we need to set aside and have a longer discussion on uh and maybe get some feedback from from the the town attorney. Bottom line is is you
can't take you can't draw two salaries u from the the from the town for uh for any given reason. So, if you if you're a member of the of of the if you're employed by the schools, even as a
janitor or custodian or or a bus driver, um uh you you have to make a decision as to whether you're going to accept your salary from your job or your salary or your your stipen as a member of the
council. So what this basically means is is that if if you um u you can't be compensated for more than one office. Um so if you want to be if you're a school custodian and you manage to run for for
council and get elected, you can't collect your council salary and collect your your your your uh your count your council stipen and and you'd have to give that up. So basically, if you're willing to serve on the council for free,
then that's a choice you make. Um, but I I really think we need to um uh then you have you also have the the whole thing about recusal uh as well. to given uh the importance of school
budgets, having a school employee serving on the council would uh would take them out of the discussion and voting on a significant some significant matters, but I I think we need to give some more some more thought to this. I'm
I'm not I don't have a problem with excluding public employees or or town employees from running for council. I don't have a problem with that. I think that's um you know I've seen that the kind of
stuff abused in in smaller communities. Um, and I'm I would uh uh you know, I don't, like I said, I don't have a problem with with preventing the conflict of interest to begin with and making sure that anybody who's serving on the council
um is is free of ties to the town um with their work and their economic interests. uh which is not to say that you can't have your spouse or your your significant other uh employed by the
community and have conflicts that way. Um, but I I would I would be very careful about allowing um giving permission for anyone who's a town employee to to be uh to to run for
the council and be part of >> Andy. I guess the one thing that I'm I would highlight from what Bernie just said is that they would they would have to recuse themselves from voting on the budget um from voting on matters involving their department. Um
so um is that enough of a handicap? I you know I don't know. >> Plus plus not not receiving your stipen for being council the council. I mean, that's a choice, but >> I mean, I would think that would be sufficient to deter people, but saying
that you you you can't have a conflict of interest to begin with is is okay by me. And with that, I'm going to have to take my leave. I'm sorry. Uh this is a great discussion. Um so, good luck to everybody. I'll catch up uh
I'll catch this up on the on the replay. >> All right. Have a great night, Bernie. >> Thank you, Bernie. >> Bye, Bernie. >> Um, I have a comment on this. I think I support the Colin Center's language. I agree that it's appropriate to before we
have the final report have this uh discussed with KP Law and make sure that it's legal. We did see a case like Bernie mentioned in Holio. I forget what the exact outcome of that case was, but realistically
the town council president, many town counselors donate their salary already or don't use it. Um, and in my mind, even on the lower end of the
town pay scales, someone making $45, $50,000 a year is still going to obviously choose their town official salary over their $5,000, $10,000 council stipen if
they're so motivated to run. I think that's a personal choice that we can let people make. Obviously, if they're voting on their job specifically or their department's budget or rule in their department, uh it makes sense that
they would recuse themselves. They can follow conflict of interest law just like the rest of us. Um honestly, I don't The council votes on many measures regarding the town. The council votes on many measures regarding Ammerst College in UMass. We don't have a provision saying that UMass professors
can't serve on town council. Um the town also does allow like we have town employees who pull multiple compensations from multiple different budgets across town. If a
say town employee works in one department and does a side gig in another department, they get compensated through that other department budget as well. So, I don't really see any problem with this with allowing people to serve. And
I think broadening the pot is a good idea, especially when we're not even really talking about we have a limited amount of people who run for town council already and school committee and library trustees. Library
trustees was completely unopposed. Um, and it just doesn't to me make sense to say no to people who are interested. Like I mean I see a very specific
situation where the town manager or someone in the town manager's office that might be an issue but realistically I mean aside from where they collect their paycheck I don't really see how much a school teacher or a DPW employee
or a firefighter really has to do with the town council itself. I mean, they seem like pretty distinct things. And in my mind, if we're saying no to them, we should be
exploring who else we say no to due to different conflicts of interest that come up in this town frequently. Ken, and then Andy. >> Um, yeah, my my point is somewhat similar to yours, um, Julian, that this
is personal choice. Give give people the option to do this. leave it up to them to decide whether they're going to take salary from here or there. Um, let them figure that calculus out. Um, but allow this to be a possibility
um of folks to to to both be um employed and to serve. >> I would also point out it cuts folks off at supervisory level. So like a department head wouldn't be able to serve. Um
Andy and then Raphael. >> Yeah. I guess I just um I just want to point out that the um I was looking at the what what they said in in the other memo that where they had the language and it says there's no precedent for this in other charters as 11 of the other TW other council manager charters
preclude council members from being employed. But here here's the you know here's the um the language and the language includes the conflict of interest uh law language which says all council members must adhere to the
general laws relating to conflict of interest. No member of town council may vote or act on any matter which is within the purview of the town agency by which the member is employed etc. So, um I guess it would be a matter of personal choice whether they want to
uh forego their stipend and then it would be a matter of the voters's choice where they want to elect somebody who's not going to be able to vote on things uh reflecting, you know, that that affect their department. Raphael, >> I also appreciate their note not not
about the money matter but the perception of conflict and I I think that's crucially important. Uh so just want to name that. >> Ken, do you still have a comment or is
your hand just Okay. Um I guess we're >> Sorry, what? >> Erica has her hand up. Oh, thank you, Erica. >> Um, I also think that the issue of while I understand the wanting to open up the pool um of eligible people to run and I
understand the giving people a rational choice in terms of compensation makes sense to me, but the recusal piece is complicated. >> Yeah. Um because the recusal is never a kind of clear black and white issue when we're talking about
um town agencies, departments, committees, u measures of all kinds that might be might be in a gray area and it the it would want to overstipulate uh what any given person might need to
recuse themselves from. Um, but you run the, you know, it's it's just it's just fuzzy. It's quite gray what a person, depending on where where they sit in their second position, would have to would have to reasonably recuse themselves from. And it might actually
disempower them quite a bit. >> Um, if you take the interpretation of recusal broadly that they'd have to recuse from quite a lot. And that that is a deficit for whoever is there representing, not just for them.
>> Raphael, do you still have your hand up? >> Yeah. Yeah. And I also think the recommendation about consulting with town council to perhaps learn more before making any changes is important to consider. >> Yeah. I'll just say that I don't think
it's a how do I put this? I don't think that broadening like I see what Andy was saying about where we're we would be basically the only council manager form of
municipality to do this. We have a charter review every 10 years. um or every so often where we can reconsider these types of decisions. I mean, in my mind, I don't think when
it comes to being a first in terms of including people and broadening the democratic process and bringing more workers perspectives to the table, I don't think it's bad to be a first necessarily. I think that might be a good thing.
Raphael, >> I just think the conflict of interest laws as they note are complex and they're no I don't know maybe there's some checking in with council is crucial. I think um just I think just more to
think about when it comes to that conflict of interest. >> May >> wasn't a a high school custodian on the school committee at one point. >> I believe so. Um I also believe that uh
Doug Slaughter served on the select board. >> Yeah. um for and he's definit was definitely in a supervisory role. So, it's happened before. Um I know my social studies teacher was on the charter commission. That's also was an
elected role. Um >> who was that? >> Tom, >> it's not the same. >> Uh Annie. >> Um yeah, this this this item just talks
about the council. Um and uh but yes, I mean we have had um town sta you know or whatever uh municipal or town staff on the school committee and on the select board, but
the charter currently says that they can't couldn't be on the council. Um, and I I guess it's just it's just that question about um, you know, the how how many things are they going to have to rec recuse
themselves from? And so what's the value that they bring if they can't vote on things that I mean they they could bring a perspective and they could talk, but they could not vote. So, I mean, I I guess if you if you're looking for a
motion, my motion would be or do we have a motion already? >> We have a motion already. I would also entertain just sort of pushing this off if we want to have more discussion on it. >> Um, I was say, let's table this one and
and get an opinion from >> Yeah, >> I agree with that. >> Yeah, I'm I'm happy to table it. I mean, Andy, to to sort of address your concern, it's like this is this this is in the hands of the voters for them to
like see somebody who could be totally um restricted in their their ability to make a decision. This is not it's not our it's not our decision to to to curtail those people. >> It's up to the voters to decide that, hey, this person's gonna gonna have to recuse themselves from a bunch of
things. That's that's their decision in in my in my book. It's not our decision to make that that to let people do this >> and let the chips fall. Um >> I would just point out that like the way it's structured, we don't allow
a teacher or a library employee or a school custodian or whatever to serve on town council, but we do allow them to serve on library trustees or school committee. So, like to me that's
just antithetical to say you can't serve on town council, but you can serve on the committee that's basically directly governing your role um and the policies that you have to
follow in your job and the more minute details of how your job gets funded etc. I mean, when you look at what the school committee votes on, sometimes the way they're voting budget line items or gift
funds or whatever, someone could accidentally vote to give themselves a raise in a way that could probably never happen on town council um if that same person was advocating on the council level. Uh, so it just I think as is
really doesn't make sense to me. >> Andy, >> I think Marcus was first. >> Sorry, Marcus. Go ahead. >> Yeah, thank you. I was just going to kind of reiterate Ken's point, right? It's up to the voters. They can decide if that person's going to be able to vote or not enough that should be the
topic of the discussion then. But at the same time, your point about the, you know, someone being on the school committee, they can vote themselves a raise. They can suggest a raise, right? But the money still has to come from the council. So
there is a difference there and I think it's a very valid one. But yeah, I'm still just up let it up to the voters. >> Andy, >> yeah, in the end we're we're passing things on that we think the council should consider. So, um, to me,
um, I think Julian points out an inconsistency that that we do have with the school committee and library trustees. So, um, I guess I would be okay. You know, I I I I see the point of that and I think passing this on with
the language that the, uh, Collins Center has proposed is a defensible position. And I think it, it broadens the discussion. and it doesn't close it off. So, I I think I'd be okay with it. >> Yep. Um so, I guess currently any other
comments, questions on this, >> Andy, what were you okay with in the end? >> Um saying yes to the the language that the Collins Center uh proposes. >> I see. >> Because, you know, it gives the council the opportunity to consider this.
And Andy, is that school committee um someone is that accurate? Um in terms of who has served on school committee, >> we had a custodian who was the chair of the school the the school committee I believe and he had to recuse himself
from voting on the budget for the school committee >> and he eventually moved up to being like a foreman even. So >> that was Ben Harrington. >> Yeah. He had some supervisory roles too while he was chair of school committee. Um
>> so I mean I never saw a problem with it personally watching the school committee. I actually thought he brought some pretty good perspective. >> I mean we've we've had people on the committee who had relatives there and they even then they had to recuse themselves from voting on the budget that would pay their relatives. So >> okay.
So where are we going with this? I I'm thinking that we basically we have two options here. So, we can either vote on this now because I put a motion on the table and it was seconded by Meg. So, we
can vote on the motion or we can table this to our next meeting, which it looks like we're already going to have a lot of stuff at given that it's 7:44 and we haven't made our way really even through memo one. So, just in the sake of time,
I'm in favor of voting this now. So, uh do does anybody have an objection to voting this now? I'm going to vote no, but I I'll wait I'll wait for other people to share. >> Okay, Meg,
>> could you remind us what the motion was? >> The motion is to adopt the Collins Center language and to pass that on in the preliminary report. >> So, and that that language includes the recommendation to go to the to the lawyers with it, right, too?
>> Yes. Correct. Yes. if we choose to include it. >> The language is just the language that they gave us which doesn't have anything about going to the lawyers. >> Correct. >> Well, don't didn't it say isn't adopting
their recommendation include their recommendation to go through KP law? I thought we were just going to adopt the language to to to say we suggest that you include this language and then we can always on the side ask people what they what they feel if it's in the preliminary and and
>> I mean in my mind we're adopting the entire recommendation as a whole but >> the language again Julian >> yeah can we see the language this. Um, okay. I think I'm I'm going to call that
we vote on this now just because I've screen shared everything back and forth a few times now. So I think I'd like I'd like folks to feel comfortable voting at this point. Um has everybody seen that? I'm going to
begin us with voting. Um, myself, I'm an I. Ken. >> Hi, >> Andy. >> Hi, >> Marcus. >> Hi, >> Meg. You're muted.
>> Um, I Sorry. >> No problem. Um, Erica, >> no. >> Raphael, >> I'm a no. >> Okay. Um, and I'm trying to think. Is that it?
Yep. Cuz Bernie's absent. So, that is uh two against um and five in favor. So, that passes. Uh and obviously in the report it will be noted that two members opposed it. So
I Andy >> um just a note that this will be in the preliminary report and then and we can we might get a bunch of feedback at that point that says here's new stuff that you might not have thought of and we can always change it in the final if we if we decide to but the idea would be this would go in the preliminary.
>> Correct. Um so I am going to stop sharing and move back to our other tab here. Uh okay. So majority vote. Um,
so our next issue >> I don't believe that Collins provided actual revision language. Yes. >> No, they did not. >> We the project team can draft language for these options when the committee
makes a recommendation. So the we have to decide um what recommendation we want to advise them to draft language for. >> I would ask that we p this till next
week so we can consider >> um that's fine. I guess we'll move on to the bylaws then. Um 210 So basically this is saying the the
quest. I'm sorry Julian. >> Sorry. Yeah. I'm just trying to find the pages here. I believe that this is it. This is the end, right? >> Yeah. Memo. >> Yes. >> It's right here. Yeah. >> Yep.
So basically there that we got some input that people weren't sure whether re read at two meetings meant voting twice or or just reading it the first time and voting the second time. Um they felt like it was pretty clear that it would be read at two separate council meetings. It can't be passed in the same
meeting where it's introduced in order to get full notice and time for deliberation. So they feel like it's clear on its face, but they could add this alternative language. No ordinance will be passed finally on the date it is introduced except in the case of emergency measures as provided in
section 2.10b. >> I'm I'm all in favor of clarification here. Marcus. >> Yeah, I would agree with that too. I think it's worth those extra words. Yeah. >> Okay. I'm going to move that we accept
this additional wording. Uh Marcus >> second. >> Okay. Um, comments. No, >> they're beautiful words. >> Um, myself. I'm an I. Andy. >> Yes. >> Marcus.
>> Yes. >> Raphael. >> Yes. >> Meg. Meg. Um, I'll go back to you, Erica. >> Yes. >> Yes. No. I'm here. Yes. I'm a Yes. I could >> I got you. Um.
That's fine. Um, okay. This is adopted. Uh, >> did we lose Ken? >> We did lose Ken. Yes. >> Wow. >> Do we have a >> We didn't get Raphael. >> Raphael. Sorry. >> I I said yes.
>> Um, we do still have a quorum though. >> So, I think we'll just this last one. Uh, majority vote. How do folks feel about this one issue? In my opinion, we
should ask them for language for both options and decide which we prefer at our next meeting when we vote on their the memo that they gave to us today. >> Um they're they're basically there aren't two options though. They're saying we should consider whether the
current requirements relating to an affirmative majority interfere substantially such that a change is warranted and whether the committee recommends a change to permit passage of all measures uh by an affirmative vote of a majority of members present at a meeting.
So there's not really two options. >> I don't understand this. >> What's that? >> I I just don't completely understand this quite honestly. >> Yeah. I mean, in the in the council right now or in the charter right now, it says that you have to if you're going
to pass by laws. >> Um, they have to be passed by a majority of the full council. So, by at least seven people, >> if not all 13 people are there, the proposal would be to pass by a majority
of the people there. Um, so they're basically saying, is there a problem? Are most people showing up anyway or and are you talking about all measures? Are you bylaws and otherwise by an affirmative vote of a majority of members present?
>> I mean, everybody pretty much always shows up. Maybe one member sometimes isn't there, but usually. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm not sure we can necessarily, you know, rely on that going forward, right? I agree with you. Most of the time everybody's there, but
we should be cognizant of the times when they aren't. >> So there's they do say notably none of the council manager charters limits council members. I'm looking at I don't know if you're looking at the same thing I'm looking at, but I'm looking at the >> Yep. Yeah. >> It says one community allows all
measures to be passed by a majority of members present in voting, which removes abstensions from the total present for purposes of counting majority. This however can create the situation where there's less than a quorum of members counted in the total vote. So it's not a recommended definition.
Uh near >> Nearly all council me man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man manager communities like Ammeris have a hybrid system requiring the affirmative vote of a majority of a full council to pass specific measures such as appropriations or bylaws while allowing a majority of those present to pass other measures.
Erica Yeah, that's the real that's the real hair to be split which is in under what conditions or for what issues or you know I don't see a good I don't personally don't see a good reason to
change something to majority of the members present unless there's a specific definition of what those conditions would be. Could we request uh
clarifi like >> we also have a meeting with them on Monday. >> Correct. I I >> this one's important. >> Yeah, >> I guess I think I'm more leaning towards keeping it as is, but why don't we ask
for some clarification on Monday? Good. >> Who's in that meeting? You and Erica. Julian. >> Yes. And Andy asked it. And you're welcome to come if you want. I mean, >> anyone who wants
>> that sounds like a good idea. I think let's kind of table this until we get that clarification because >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm kind of with you on the >> it's fine as it is, but I would like to, you know, understand their nuance.
>> Yeah. we let's table it. I think we're leaning towards keeping it as is, but let's let's just discuss a little bit more with Collins just so we can have a bit of a better understanding. At least for myself personally, I I want to
understand this better before I can have a good opinion on it. Um, so at our next meeting, we will be taking up the memo that was sent to us today that is in the packet and has been sent to all of you. Please review it
before the next meeting and be prepared to vote on all of the issues in it as to whether they will be included in the uh preliminary report. Um, we will not be going back to any issues in here with exception of the majority vote issue.
Every other issue in here we're not going to be going back to. And I probably just because of how long this is taking and that that memo is quite a bit longer than this memo, >> right? >> Going to ask that everyone only comment
once when we have discussions. So as and by that I mean per issue like not that you can only speak once in the meeting that's draconian. Um but like per issue when we're on section 2.10 10 one comment per person. Let's try to keep it
to that just for the sake of time. Nothing against what anyone's saying. Uh other comments, questions. Um that'll probably take the entire meeting. So, uh I don't see anything else on the agenda, but we are meeting next week at six
o'clock. So, we're on a weekly schedule. Andy, >> just uh noting that now that we've voted these items, the uh the writing committee could start putting those into the into the form. >> Um it depends on how much homework I have this weekend, but if I don't have
much, I will start this weekend. Um other comments, questions? Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Second. >> Great. Um Raphael, >> yes. Erica, >> yes. >> Meg, >> yes.
>> Ken, welcome back. >> Thank you. Yes. >> Um, >> can you delete the screen? Oh, never mind. >> Yep. Sorry. Uh, Meg. Yes. Um, >> so we can see everybody. Good night, everybody. >> I'm a Yes. I believe that's everyone correct.
>> Yeah, I'm a yes too, but I'm >> Thank you. Oh, you moved. Great. Okay. Have a great night, everybody. Byebye. >> See you guys.