We're recording. Please go ahead. >> Thank you. Good evening. Seeing a presence of a quorum, I am calling the March 9th, 2026 special meeting public forum of the town council to order at 6:31 p.m. Please be
advised that this meeting is being held in person and that the remote access option for members of the public is provided as a courtesy only. In the event of technology issues with the remote connection, the meeting will continue in person as scheduled as long as there is a quorum of the council present in the town room or through
technological means. Chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extended through June 30th, 2027, the ability of public body bodies to meet without a quorum of the council physically present at the meeting location, although a quorum is present in the town room. The meeting is being
recorded and is accessible in real time via Zoom, by phone, and as a live broadcast on Ammeris Media CH channel 9 and at Ammerismedia.org. At this time, I'm going to call upon each counselor by the name they have indicated that they would like to be addressed. This will indicate that we can hear you and you can hear us.
Councelor Brevik >> here. >> Councelor Keno Martin has not arrived yet. Um, we'll come back. Andy Churchill >> here. Anna De Gothier >> present. >> Lyn Greimemer >> present. >> Mandy Johannicki is present. Councelor
Lord. >> Okay, >> we can barely hear you, Councelor Lord. So, we did hear you, but next time maybe speak closer to the mic. Um, Sam Mloud, >> present. >> Pam Marine, >> I'm here. >> Council Ryan, >> present. >> Kathy Shane,
>> I'm here. >> Jennifer Tob, >> I'm here. and councelor Walker >> here. Um, as councelor Cano Martin has not showed up yet. Okay. Um, and so
let me just get this here. Um, if counselors have technical issues, please let the council clerk know or call a point of personal privilege during the public forum. We will hear this soon but there is public comment only on the
items subject to the public forum. When the public forum is adjourned we will move to the regular meeting and general public comment will occur during that meeting. Um it can be confusing when we have these two meetings in an evening. So we're going to try something at this
time. Um, as I promised when I was elected president, we're going to let Vice President Walker uh preside over the public forum portion of this meeting um as we try and get experience for all
leadership. So, I'm going to pass the gavl to Vice President Walker at this time for the public forum. Um, okay, great. So, we will start the public uh forum off with a presentation. The town manager has a short presentation available and we will move
to public comment on any of the financial orders thereafter. Thank you Paul. >> Thank you. Actually it would be Shaman Gun or our finance director making the presentation. >> Thank you. Um is it possible just to put the the listing of the orders up? I was just going to speak to each of them. I
think there's memos in the packet that explain more behind each one. So I was just going to um use that as the guide. >> Yep. Go ahead. I'll get those up. >> Okay. So, the the numbering could be a little confusing based on if you're looking at the packet, there were a
couple um conflicting order numbers. So, I'll try to be really clear with the the order or the lettering to each order. So, the first or there's six orders that uh we're holding the hearing on tonight. Um the first order is letter A uh 2020
is FY2612A and that is to uh transfer the excess over 10% in our general stabilization fund to our capital stabilization fund. So there's a financial policy that looks at the percentage of our general
stabilization fund relative to our operating budget and when it exceeds 10% we shift the excess to capital stabilization. So the excess at the end of FY25 was 335,144. So the proposal uh or the order is to
transfer that amount from general stabilization to capital stabilization which will give us a new uh total in capital stabilization of 12.9 million currently >> and I should just keep running through all these orders. Correct.
>> Yes, please. >> Okay. All right. So the second order is letter B 202612B and that is to appropriate um the amount of money that we received in FY25
in cannabis excise tax. Uh one of our other financial policies is that we will appropriate that the following year uh to the reparation stabilization fund if the town is in good financial position and um per the town manager the town is in a good financial condition. Uh so the
proposal is to transfer that money which in FY25 totaled 56,440 uh to the reparation stabilization fund which will give a new balance in that fund of 66 663,861. Here's where it gets tricky. So the next
one is letter C and this uh 2026 12C and this is for uh roads and sidewalks. This was the order that has changed. So, the the new order is to appropriate $2.7 million uh towards roads and sidewalks.
Um that would be part of our our capital improvement program moving forward. The next order is 12D, which is to appropriate from free cash uh for field maintenance of the new track and field. So with the uh we've been having conversations with the regional schools
around how to best maintain uh the the the field within the track and the new fields around the track and uh we kind of mutually agreed that at least for this next year or two to appropriate some additional funds to contract out um for the care of those fields. And so the
estimate for two years or really to get us through the end of calendar year um 27 is $150,000. Um this is one where we are also seeking approval of an intermunicipal agreement.
Correct. Yes. Uh we're also seeking approval to enter into an intermunicipal agreement to outline how these funds will be spent. Um at this point we're sort of leaning towards these funds would be given to the regional school district as well to allow them to enter into a contract with um a landscaper or
someone who specializes in this. uh they best know the conditions of their fields um and the schedule for their fields and so would be the best one to manage that contract. Um and so therefore we would enter into this special agreement uh to do that.
The next one is 12E and this is for opioid settlement funds. So each year we receive a dispersement from the state from there's about five different opioid settlements with different um distributors of of opioids over the
years. And the town will be receiving those until 2039. And so when they come in, they go into our free cash fund and then we put them into a special revenue fund where they uh can be tracked because there's they can only be used on opioid mitigation
strategies that our public health department and others um I know our EMS team and some others um are working or either have developed or are close to finalizing a plan for how those funds will be spent. Um they have done some community outreach to get feedback on that plan as well. Uh so this would move
the amount of opiates opioid settlement money that we received in FY25 into that special revenue fund. And then the last order which is uh 2612F is to appropriate $1.6 million
uh for the replacement of the middle school auditorium roof. And that was based on figures provided to us from the regional school district and uh through conversation with the finance committee. And so this order would also require an intermunicipal agreement uh to outline
how those funds would be dispersed uh to the regional schools. Um should it be approved, it would outline the mechanics for how invoices would get paid and how uh you know that portion of the roof replacement would be tracked and how we'd get those funds to the regional schools. So those are the the six orders
that are under consideration. >> Thank you Sean. Um, anyone wishing to comment or ask a question specific to these financial orders related to this public forum who is attending remotely, please raise your hand in the Zoom
application. Um, if you are present in the town room and have not signed up with the council clerk, please do so now. Uh, residents are welcome to comment or ask a question specific to the financial orders related to this public forum. This is not a general
public comment period. That period will take place um in the regular town council meeting that will begin after this public forum adjourns. Are you all right? >> Sorry. >> Okay. Just making sure. >> A little technical assistance that
>> Yes. Um it can be. Um okay. Thank you. And public forum comments or questions are not reflective of the opinions of the town council because this is a public forum. If questions are asked about the financial orders, there is potential for
them to be answered. Um, so let's >> councelor Ko Martin has joined. >> Oh. Um, councelor Ko Martin, um, will you please let us know that you can hear and be heard? >> Yes, I can. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Yes. And just if you speak again, just speak up a little bit. It was just a little bit hard to hear you. Thank you. Um, okay. At this time, we don't have anyone on Zoom with a hand raised. Uh,
Athena, do we have anyone in the town room? Okay. Um, so I will allow everyone to have three minutes to speak during public comment. There will be a timer, so just please be mindful of that when you're giving comment. And Athena, if you don't mind uh calling the first
name. Vince Okconor. That's one up. >> Thank you, Vince. Um, please state your name and make your public comment. U Vinc Conor, 175 Summer Street, apartment 12. Um I think it would be
helpful um if in your presentations you listed and I I don't know what the number is. I I asked a couple of of counselors and they didn't happen to know um how what the surplus was that uh
that was revealed on when the books were all organized on July by July 15th or so. And so that would be helpful in being able for both the public and I think people interested parties in being
able to understand how it is that we are dispersing this money and uh and so forth u because we've had surpluses for many years um and and and I think
so that that's that's one comment justformational Um um the second thing is um I think that given the uh fact that
the residents of the town and the town council was told for a number of years when surpluses in five to7 million were were generated. Um but we're told in the spring there was no money for schools and the school budgets were reduced
uh in my opinion unnecessarily. Um I think that this this would be an appropriate time for some of the surplus to be allocated to both the school districts to compensate them for the um
for the failure of of all concerned to uh to appropriate the approp appropriate the the the money that should have gone to them had uh um
inaccurate comments about the ser the availability of town funds not be made. Finally, my concern is that um we we take out of the about to be, you
know, discussed operating budget. We we supplement that with money from the capital improvement uh uh fund and thereby um may free up
some money from this year for um for schools. Um, I think that the the roads and the department in general have been underfunded and I really think that now is the time despite the fact that we
have these giant building projects on the table. The roads in this town are terrible. I drive 25 to 30,000 miles mostly in this town. Um, and I I don't
understand how the council can tolerate the condition of these roads and the surplus fund should be used to increase the amount beyond that which is in the proposal tonight. >> Thank you, Vince. Um, Sean, did you want
to speak to that comment? >> Yeah, I was going to quickly respond. Athena, I don't know if I can do it if you want to share. Give me sharing ability or if you want to share the table that's okay. All right. So hopefully you can see this on my screen. This is the table that was
in the memo. And this is the updated table that has the order for the um auditorium roof. So the certified free cash balance at the end of FY25 was 10.2 million. This shows the um appropriation orders that are in front of you coming
out of that. So 89,000 for opioid settlements, 56,000 for the reparation stabilization fund, $2.7 million for roads, and the 1.6 uh 1.6 for the roof, and then the $150,000 for the fields at the high school. And then uh there are additional funds within free cash that
are earmarked for youth empowerment. And that leaves us with our 5% sort of uh carry a level that we keep our free cash at. So I think to the point from public the gentleman making public comment that this is sort of the inflow and outflow of resources from pre-cache um so that
you can the public has a better understanding of it. >> Thank you Sean. >> Um okay let's see um is there anyone else who would like to make a public comment at this time? Athena, do we have anyone else on the
list for the no form? Okay. Okay. Um, and then Mandy Joe, I don't know if you want to adjourn. >> Yeah, >> we we a point of order. We do need to keep the public forum open for about five more minutes. >> Okay. Thank you.
So I have uh 652 as our >> Okay. Yeah. I think generally we are required to leave the public um hearing open just as long as the presentation took. That is correct. the the charter requires
that the public forum um give at least half the meeting time to public comment. So, we just leave the rest of the meeting for public comment until we've met that 50%. >> Thank you, Athena. Okay. Okay. Like a couple of minutes.
>> We'll discuss it at the gender setting. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I did too. We didn't have any. Oh, wait. Oh. Okay. Um, we do actually have another
hand on Zoom of someone who would like to public comment. Um, so Tyler, if you can unmute yourself and state your name and make your comment. >> Yes, my name is Tyler Deson. Can you hear me? >> Yes, I can. >> Okay. Um, I've never attended one of
these before, so apologies if I'm if I run um ary of how to do this, but I just kind of wanted to echo what the last gentleman commented on um in terms of the capital investment for roads and pavement. Um, you know, I um I'm sure
many people can attest that that is a concern for a lot of people. And um I'm just thinking about the little bit of research that I have been doing on um expenditures in the last several years by the town of Ammerst for those things. Um and so just trying to put into
context of what this proposed investment how that compares to previous years. Um also thinking about inflation and um just general cost increases year-on-year. So, I personally am concerned that this investment is not
enough to really be adequate for the dire need of repair from many of the streets in the town. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Tyler. We are at 651.
Okay, great. Um, so I am going to make a motion to adjourn, seeing that we don't have anyone else who would wish to make a public comment at this time. Um, so I move to adjourn the public forum at 6:51
p.m. Do I have a second? Uh, thank you, Lynn. And I will just do a roll call. Councelor Breck, >> yes. >> Councelor Kel Martin, >> yes. Um, Anna Develthier, >> yes.
>> Andy Churchill, >> yes. >> Kathy Shoen, >> yes. >> Counselor Ryan, >> hi. >> Jennifer Ta, >> yes. >> Lynn Griezmer, >> yes. >> Uh, Mandy Joe Hanicki, >> Pam Rooney, >> yes.
>> Sam McClod, >> I. >> Um, and Councelor Walker is an I. >> Thank you, Councelor Walker. We are going to move on to the regular town council meeting. Um,
let me this. So, I am calling the regular town council meeting uh for March 9th, 2026 to order at 6:52 p.m. I'm not going to go through all the
other preliminary stuff because we just did all of that, although this still is being recorded and is accessible by Zoom and everything. Um and so we will then move on to our agenda. Uh
the announcements were in the on the agenda itself. Um there are no hearings which means we are going to move on to general public comment at this time. Anyone wishing to make general public comment who is attending remotely please
raise your hand in the Zoom application. If you are present in the town room and have not signed up with the council clerk, ble please do so now. Residents are welcome to make public comments on matters within the jurisdiction of the town council. The council will not engage in a dialogue or comment on a
matter raised during general public comment. Public comments are not reflective of the opinions of the town council. The first amendment broadly protects individuals rights to address the government, to speak, and to express themselves, including their right to say hateful and offensive things. I am
generally unable to shut those commenters down under the first amendment to the US Constitution unless their level of speech falls within an exception articulated by the courts such as fighting words, true threats to a particular individual, harassment of a
particular individual, or incitement of imminent lawless activity. If a question exists as to whether a particular speaker is engaging in unprotected speech, I must defer to the principle of freedom of speech. Um, at this time
there are no hands raised on Zoom of people who wish to make public comment. Athena says there are three um people in the town room who have signed up for public comment. Therefore, each comment commenter will have three minutes to make their public comment. Uh, who is
our first commenter? Athena? >> Andrew Brace. >> Andrew, please come on up. Um, state your name, where you live, and make your public comment. All right. Hey, my name is Andrew Brace. I'm the president of the DPW Association. Uh, I also live in town,
but I'm here today as the president of the DPW Association. Um, we're here tonight because we would like to provide some updates to the town council and to the public. Um, last week on Tuesday, March 3rd, we met with the town manager for the first time during this
negotiation process. Um, we clearly communicated with the town manager what we were expecting in order to settle the contract. We conveyed that what we were asking for is a step in the right direction, but it doesn't go far enough in addressing many long-standing
historical inadequacies that will still need to be addressed in the future. At a minimum, what we are asking will help prevent these inadequacies from getting worse and start moving us toward where we need to be to retain essential personnel and be competitive in the
marketplace. Our hope is that the town takes a respectful and proactive approach in addressing this contract and in future negotiations. We are meeting with the town manager again this week on Wednesday, March 11th and hope that we can resolve this contract for the association and more importantly for the
benefit and safety of the community we serve. Thank you. >> Thank you for coming tonight, Andrew. And thank you for your comments. >> Michael Brown. >> Michael, please come on up, state your name where you live and make your comment.
>> Sorry. I'm Michael Brown. I live on Station Road. >> Can you make sure you speak closer to the mic? Thanks. >> I am Michael Brown. >> How's that? I live on Station Road. I've lived here since 1972.
Um, Andrew's comments last week about fairness, comparing us to other towns. I won't repeat any of that. It's all available on our phones in about 3 seconds. What resonated with me and why I'm here again is that this is not who we are. We
don't exploit people that work in this town. And it feels like we're exploiting them. That doesn't sit well with me as a resident. It shouldn't sit well with you as the people that are elected to represent us. And frankly, I hope it doesn't sit well
with you. These people, sorry, these men and women work in this town. They come at all hours to protect us, to make our town safe, to keep the town looking beautiful the
way we want it. And we are like fifth to last in the state in how we compensate them. I've never worked in the public sector. I don't know how the public sector works. I don't know how to negotiate these contracts, but I've been in the private sector my whole life.
I've negotiated a lot salaries, jobs, etc. And the way that's done is you look left and right, not because you want to be the lowest, but because you want to retain the best. And you got to figure out how to do that. And part of that is how you
compensate people and how you treat them. You heard last week, we're not retaining people. We're training them and sending them off to other towns. How how is that okay? But not just I'm not talking just fiscally. How is that okay with us as
people? I hope we do better. I really do. I hope next week or whenever this, you know, reconvenes on this topic and I'm sitting here in the audience that I'm going to be proud of being an Ammeris resident and proud of all of you.
Thanks. >> Thank you, Michael, for coming tonight. >> Vince Okconor. Vince, come on up. State your name, where you live, and make your comment. >> Oh, Vincent Okconor, 175 Summer Street,
apartment 12. So, and have a written statement, but I'm going to summarize it and make some observations. I listened to three council members say they have no knowledge of a town government plan to deal with an ice surge in Ammerst. So, I
wrote one up, one that takes account of the Minnesota experiences and the Hampshire Franklin District Attorney's publicly stated willingness to prosecute ICE wrongdoing.
It may not be a better the best plan or even a good one, but it is a plan which is better than no plan, which is what those who attended the District 1 council meeting um DOMA
um yesterday had questions. What is the plan? What is going to happen when I call 911 because a neighbor's US citizen child uh is being taken by armed masked
individuals or a house next or is having its door broken in by people. So, um I think uh we need to have some reasonable questions of this nature about uh a $5
billion department who has yet to inform the citizens of what they're going to do if some of these things happen. My plan is simple. Get as many people off the streets as possible. find um temporary homes for people who might be on ISIS
hit list generated by um the uh getting all the public information. Um have have classes conducted by Zoom for everybody, not just for um black, Latino, and kids who didn't whose
English is not their first language. and utilize mutual aid and in a clear field in which ICE wrong wrongdoing can be uh effectively uh stopped.
Um I if the council had a public safety committee rather than a let's make deals committees, I would have brought this before such a committee. hopefully one that had a real interactive process rather than you can talk for three minutes and then be quiet and listen for
two for two hours. Um I there is going to be public liability for the town if people call 911 and there is no plan in place and no plan has been developed and the public has
not been informed about what is going to happen if they're going to be on their own. against a group of armed masked individuals breaking down their doors. Are we going to have an appropriate police response? And
you know, it can't be up just up to the manager to do that. That's your job. And please every place you go, people will ask you what what is the plan because no plan is a bad plan.
>> Thank you, Vince, for coming tonight. We have one hand raised on Zoom. So Pat O, please unmute yourself, state your name and where you live and make your comment. >> Good evening. >> Can people hear me? >> Yes, we can.
>> Oh, okay. Patano, 40 year resident, um the president for Black Business Association of Amst area. I didn't plan to speak tonight, but just want to remind you guys that uh Dr. Am Shabbaz
submitted a public comment last night and I just want to stress that it's been multiple years now that BBAA did not receive upper funds. Some of the money were put back to cash reserve. We have
millions of dollars extra money and during this budget season I am asking the town council to do the right thing and put aside some money for BBAA
members that this particular body gave $300,000 to Drake nightclub and my group did not get anything except
for two members. Do the right thing. If you pride yourself as a welcoming community, you have to do whatever you do through equity lens. Do the right thing and discuss and put
aside money for my group. Thank you. >> Thank you for coming tonight, Pat. That concludes public comment at this time. Um, which means we will move on to the consent agenda.
Thank you for coming. The following items were selected because they were considered to be routine and it was reasonable to expect they would pass with no controversy. to remove an item from the consent agenda for discussion later in the meeting. Ask that it be removed when the president
lists the consent agenda items. The request to remove an item from the consent agenda does not require a second. Uh so the motion would be and and we'll make it formally after I read the items on the list is to move the following items and the printed motions there under and approve those items as a
single unit. 6A adoption of child abuse awareness and prevention month proclamation. 8A3, approval of council order FY2612A, an order appropriating from the general stabilization fund to the capital
stabilization fund. 8 A4, approval of council order FY2612B, an order appropriating from free cash to the reparation stabilization fund. 8A5, approval of council order FY2612D,
an order appropriating from free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst capital program. 8A6, approval of council order FY2612E, an order appropriating from free cash to the opioid settlement special revenue
fund. Item 8 C, adoption of the bylaw review committee charge and designation of special municipal employee status. Item 8E, referral of the financial order for Aaron property purchase for water protection.
9A1, approval of town manager appointments to the transportation and parking commission. And 11 A and B, approval of minutes for February 23rd, 2026's regular meeting and March 2nd, 2026's special meeting.
Are there I see no hands at this time for people wanting to remove anything from consent. So I will make that motion um to move those items as read. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Oh, councelor Kenno Martin. Was that
going to be a second? >> No. I just wanted to ask if there would be a moment to speak to this motion before we vote on it. >> Um consent motions can be spoken to and debated before we vote. So yes, if you Um, so Lynn seconded it. Um, so
councelor Kennel Martin, did you have something you wanted to say? >> Yeah, I I did just want to speak to this motion. um you know because um I have noticed that you know in accordance what was commented by Amilar Shabbaz that we
received as a public comment and as well as Miss Pat who just spoke um that there has not been any money included um for black businesses and I do think there was inequity in the process of how that was handled um you know back when the ARPA funds um were first given to the
town. So, I just wanted to express that I am interested in finding a way that we can allocate some funding um for growing our black businesses in Ammerst. I'm not sure what that mechanism is yet, but I just wanted to um let both Miss Pat and
um Amilar Shabbaz know that you're heard and I I think that we need to find a way to do this. I think this is really valuable and it's really important. So, um yeah, I just it's not in it's not in the motion. I wish that it was. >> Thank you. Um remember we are voting on
our consent motion that includes about eight items. So it should be any debate should be spoken and reference the consent items. Seeing no other hands we will move to a vote. Uh we start with councelor Cano Martin.
>> Yes. >> Andy Churchill. >> Yes. >> Anna Deon Gothier. >> Hi. >> Um Lynn Greamer. I >> Mandy Johani is an I. Councelor Lord. >> I >> uh Sam Mloud. >> Hi.
>> Uh Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> Hi. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> And councelor Brevik. >> Yes. >> That is unanimous for consent.
Okay. Um, Lynn, would you like to read the now Therefore clause of the proclamation? >> Sure. Now, therefore, we, the Emertown Council, do hereby proclaim the month of April 2026 to be child abuse awareness
and prevention month. and further recognize this proclamation by raising the child abuse prevention flag from April 3rd to April 30th, 2026 to help cultivate awareness for all residents of Ammerst with a flag raising ceremony to
be held on April 3rd, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in front of Ammerst Town Hall. >> Thank you. Um, we are moving right along. We have no so that takes care of resolutions and proclamations. We have no presentations
and discussions tonight. We move to action items under the financial orders three, four, five, and six were just approved under consent. We will start with number one and number two. Um
I they were also unanimous votes of the finance committee. um if Kathy would like to speak to them. We're going to start with number one, which is well item 8A1, which is council order FY2612F,
an order appropriating from free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst capital program replacement of the middle school auditorium roof. Kathy, would you like to give the finance committee report on that? Uh the finance committee recommended
unanimously that we do this as worded which it it's a gift to the region without any strings attached and we have a um description. There was a discussion of the intermunicipal agreement that the town would have with the region that
should the cost come in under the 1.6 6 million the money would the that difference would be returned to Ammerst and we were assured by the finance director and the town management that would be the case. We had a long
discussion about this, including we did get information about the current reserves and excess and deficiency amounts, many of which the region plans to use for the coming year operating budget. And we viewed this as urgent and
timely because the rest of the roof is going out to bid and we wanted to make sure that this part of the roof was done at the same time as the rest of the roof. Um, as I think everyone on the council knows, we got a fair amount of documentation um about the condition of the roof. It
is actively leaking into the wall and into the ceiling and onto the stage. And one thing that I'm not sure I captured in the um finance committee report that we sent to the council is we had a discussion of what appeared to us to be
quite irrational on the part of MSBA that you're they're willing to fund almost all of the roof but one part because of the age of the roof that it makes more sense to do it all and not and to do it in context. And there was a remark that in Holio they did all the
windows but one section of the window in a similar way. And so there's a need I think to talk to MSBA that it basically doesn't make any sense to make people come back um or not do it all at once that it um it doesn't make financial
sense and it doesn't make um the accelerator repair. So there was a bit of discussion on how long it would take to get back into the cycle. We don't have a good estimate of how much costs have escalated or will escalate if we
had to wait three or four more years. We do know it's actively leaking in in the middle of the school. And we do know that the original amount appropriated from the roof didn't come close to covering the cost today although CO affected the escalation in costs. So we
had quite a bit of discussion on a gift or not gift um and came down on the same side as where the council had originally done is not to attach strings. The other thing there was a a fair amount we use the building the town of Ammeris um and
we um our understanding is that we're not charged rent to use the building. So it is a resource. The the pool is a resource. the auditorium as a resource and if it was an active working order the region could hope to get rent when
other groups use it for theater and other performances. So this is an asset that is good for all of us. So basically that was the discussion and we did talk about the roads and sidewalks um on the other side of it because what this is
doing is reducing roads and sidewalks from the original proposed 4.2 to down to 2.7 million. And I want to note just to the person who made a comment at the earlier forum, this is not the only money that the town is putting into it. We have a substantial amount of money
coming to the state. We've budgeted for this fiscal year another $750,000 of the town's capital program in FY this this current fiscal year. So we are reducing the amount but this was going to be extra amount and the estimate on
what does that do to the index is we are our roads are in such a state of disrepair that this is at the margin rather than gutting it. Um uh so that was the discussion and the context was we need to think about both of them and I think I'll stop there but if any
finance committee member would like to add to my comments because we had a good hourong discussion on this. >> Thank you. Um we need to make a motion first. So I forgot to do that before I recognized you. So, um the motion is
having held a public forum on March 9th, 2026 with a recommendation by the finance committee on March 3rd, 2026 to adopt appropriation and transfer order FY2612F, an order appropriating from free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst capital program, replacement of middle
school auditorium roof, as shown on page 11 of the motion sheet. Is there a second? >> Second, Din Gothier. >> Thank you. Um, I have my hand raised, but I'm I have a different motion to make. So, I will let the three counselors that have raised their hand
speak before I make that motion. So, councelor Ryan. >> So, in in your by the way, I always enjoy reading the finance committee's reports. Um, and uh they're quite detailed and helpful. And in reading that report and also reading the
manager's memo, um it became pretty clear to me, I think, that and to others that this did not really follow the usual process, the regular process, this this uh uh process of getting money for the roof. Um and that in fiscal year 25, for some reason, it quote unquote fell
through the cracks. So, I'm wondering if you got a sense from the regional school committee officials and the regional school committee that they will be a little bit more attentive to their responsibilities in terms of uh making requests in a timely manner. So, we're
not constantly getting this at the last minute. Um, I think you're right. I agree with the decision that the committee made that this is something we have to do, but I'd feel a lot better about it if it were done in a in according to the normal process and we had some sort of advanced notice. Um
this is not a surprise. Um this has been known for some time. So it's not a criticism of what you decided or of the report, but my impression is that um there was less than good attention paid. Uh maybe there are reasons for that. Um
but we end up once again uh offering a substantial gift uh to the regional school committee. Um, and I would really wish that in the future um they would be more uh shall we say follow the regular processes and be more attentive to their capital needs.
>> Thank you, Kathy. >> Um, we unfortunately we we weren't able to have the finance director for the schools with us. Um, so I don't have a direct response on that, but I have had a more informal back and forth from some of the school committee members and they
would there's a general agreement there needs to be a focus on planning and and capital. You know, that that that tends to be at the end of a long discussion about the operating budget, but there needs to be a focus on short and long term with a lot of attention to what
level of urgency. So, I think there was a recognition that not just this slip, but there's some big ticket items coming up. Um, the high school roof is on the list and everyone looks at the number and says, "Oh dear." But that there there needs to be more of a active
approach. And and so this was raised in our discussion, but we weren't having a discussion directly with the region. It's just what I want to say that, you know, this was just among our finance committee. Um, and they're in the middle of a budget cycle, so taking time out
right now, but we can um I don't know how many people watched the finance committee, but we are putting together a set of questions that are in advance of the budget, but there are more general and we can ask that question specifically under our charter authority
um investigative about planning and getting better information. The other towns also felt this way too, George. you know, like last minute changes didn't sit well with anyone. >> Thank you, Anna. >> This is just a followup from Cathy's
finance committee report, something that I've been working on and uh if anyone would like to help me on it, you're welcome. is a letter to bring to the council to send to the MSBA just to encourage them to add in a bit of a bit of flexibility for context uh into the
uh rapid oh wait my accelerated repair program. um they're very rigid in terms of timing and that was part of what set this challenge in front of us initially is because this part of the roof didn't was like one year off or two years off if I'm remembering correctly from the
deadline from the requirement for the rest of the for the program that's funding the rest of the roof. So um I know that other communities have been hit by this as well where 99% of their project uh was covered but a little bit wasn't and then it was a a painful funding process for them. So, I'm
working on a draft of that now and uh hope to have it to the council soon. But just to let folks know that we're not letting it just lie that this program is causing us some challenges because they're not looking at the full picture. >> Thank you. Um Andy.
>> Yeah, I was trying to um the finance committee report, but um the I guess the question I have is we're uh gifting 1.6 million and if it comes in under that, we'll get some money back. If it comes in over that, is there a provision for what happens?
>> Um, I think if it comes in over that, um, that's the only amount of money that we have on the table. So, we didn't get a clear answer. I don't know. But Paul or Sean, I mean, my impression, we've got the same thing for the rest of the roof. You know, if it comes in over the
amount of available, there's an amount available. Um, so I I do not know what happens whether I I literally don't know what happens, you know, if it comes in $50,000 over, you know, or so we didn't get an answer on
that and I don't whether no Paul whether Sean is still available on um so far. Uh >> yeah. >> Yeah. >> Uh Paul then Sean. >> So if to that question if Sean do you want to address that question? I have a different
>> Sure. Um yeah. So, like any project, if it comes in over, there would have to be a conversation at the regional school committee level with um with their staff about how much it came in over, what funding sources are available. Um, and then if their intention was to request
more money from the town, they would have to request more money from the town. Um, but I I don't think nothing in this appropriation order, what has been discussed so far, provides any additional funding beyond the 1.6. Paul, >> thank you. So, I need to advocate for uh
the roads in the town. I recognize what the finance committee has voted. I recognize the need for the middle school roof. Um, no one from the school committee or school district um attended the finance committee meeting to discuss the needs at the school district. Um,
but I can attest to you, and you're going to hear this over the next months over the condition of our roads. Failing to invest in our roads now with these funds is going to put us farther behind uh the condition of our roads and we need to put that money into our roads.
And so I would encourage you to stick with the original request from the town manager to go with the higher amount for the roads and put this into the normal process or at least look for a repair funding um where all four towns can contribute.
>> Thank you. Um Sam, you took your hand down or >> Thank you, Mandy. Uh in the finance committee, we talked about this thoroughly and it was a uh I am very much an advocate for putting funds into
the roads. Uh but given the urgency and the timing that this is going out to bid, I felt it was a uh a no-win situation. We had two things that needed to get done. And it was uh disappointing that this uh request came in short order
before the finance committee, but it is the school. Lots of kids there and it's leaking. Uh it's I I supported it, but it doesn't detract from uh what I hope we will proceed with for the roads. I'm
hearing this from many constituents uh uh regularly every week and I understand the town manager's concerns. Uh he put together uh a good investment in this and then we kind of had a surprise but I felt it was
kind of a no-win scenario. The car is broken and the kids got to go to the dentist with an abscess tooth. You got to do both. And I look at the uh roof as an abscess tooth that needs to be repaired. Thank you. Thank you. Um, councelor Brevik.
>> Yeah, I just want to add similar sentiment, I suppose, but that I am also a big advocate for the roads. It's very clear, especially right in this current moment, how bad the roads are. Uh, I I just don't I don't think it makes sense
to take money from another emergency situation and put it to this emergency situation with the roads. I think there are, excuse me, other other ways we could think about how to fund our roads ver, you know, that are not letting
another emergency or crisis situation escalate like we have with the middle school roof. So, I mean, I to me it it just it really it feels like a no-brainer. And and again, I think that we do as a council need to think about the what is the root of this issue with
the roads? what do we need to do in the future and how do we solve this going forward? It's not an easy thing, but I I just don't think this this was the place to pull money, >> Jennifer. Um I guess I'm really echoing what councelor Breivik just said. My concern
about putting some money I mean we have to do roads are urgent and we h we have to do roads and we have to do the middle school roof. I just don't see where the middle school roof is an option. And if we put money into repairing it, it reminds me of what we did with the DPW a
couple of years ago. I think they were given not quite sure how the money was spent. I don't know that the council circled back on that, but they were given $100,000 to do some immediate repairs, but the building it
the um employees continue to work in unsafe and unhealthy conditions, although we did appropriate some money for, you know, the most urgent repairs. And I wouldn't want to see us going down that road with the middle school roof
where we'll make some, you know, we'll do some patching as we can, but it's still going to be um, you know, really an unhealthy um environment for students and others who attend events in the middle school auditorium to be there. So, I just don't see how we have a
choice but to um seize the moment when the whole roof is being replaced and for economies of scale to see that the middle school roof is replaced and not just hatched. So, I prefaceed that I was going to let people speak before I make a motion and
I'm going to make a motion to postpone this vote to March 23rd, 2026. I hope there will be a second so I can explain why I would like to postpone it. Second. >> Thank you, Lynn. Um, on March 20th,
the bids for this project will be open. The bids for the MSBA project will be open, which includes an alt ad for the middle school roof. The regional school district has indicated that they wish to sign a contract by April 1. We have a meeting on March 23rd. If we wait until March 23rd to vote on this financial
order, we will be able to vote the exact amount. We will know what the exact amount is. Further, if the bid of the low contractor for the MSBA project comes in 1 under 1.6 million, waiting would allow us to add any difference between the bid amount and the 1.6
million that is currently in this financial order to the road paving financial order um immediately without having to wait for another financial order to be proposed and then needing to hold another public forum.
And if the bid for the auditorium roof is higher than 1.6 million for the low contract bid on the MSBA project, then we would be able to actually discuss the consequences of that bid and our votes, including whether we vote it at all or
revert to the manager's original road paving financial order. We might even have information then from the schools regarding that. In other words, waiting doesn't harm this project, but it does give us the additional information to make a more informed
decision and more efficient handling of the road paving financial order um that is on to be considered after this financial order. So, I would ask that the council consider postponing this until March 23rd and after the bids are opened.
So, there'll be discussion now on the motion to postpone. Kathy, >> I'm I'm more than a little surprised. Um, so I have to think about it. Uh, when we talked about this in January and we were told not to worry that we could
get this voted out by March 9th, which would be more than enough time before the bids were open. So, are you proposing that we postpone 12F and 12 C? Both of them? >> I if the postponement for 12F passes, I
would make a similar motion on 12C. >> So, I think what you just said, um I just need to hear the timeline again that you're you're hedging the bet on what the price tag will be by waiting until the bids come in. and we don't need to
have confirmed that we have the money available. I thought we had to have the money available by a vote. That was what I understood when we had this discussion in January that we needed to have a positive vote that this money was on the
table um to honor uh the fact that we intended on doing it if the bids came in. And I think it sends a a a signal to to the contractors who are bidding that the money is there. So I I just
don't understand why we wouldn't want to have it here. And revising if it came in at 1.3. Revising financial orders are not is not difficult. We've done that in the past where we've just said we don't need that amount of money. So, it's not the
council has to do something and the finance department has to do something, but it's not um it's not a forever. And in terms of the larger project, it has a substantial contingency built into it and they won't close that whole project
out till the end um after all the construction is done. So, I'm not sure we'll know what the total amount actually spent on the project is. We will know what the bids are. So, I I'm just not understanding the notion of postponing and not saying the money is
on the table. >> Council Ryan, >> well, I guess I'd like an answer to that. Uh if you can give it, um my initial thought is if it's not going to harm uh the the the bid process and
we'll have more information when we finally vote. Those are two strong reasons for waiting. But I'm also now hearing the thought that there seems to be some importance that we sort of make a gesture now or we say the money's on the table now right now and waiting
until the next meeting would have some kind of potential bad impact on the bidding process. Is is that a real concern? If it's if it if it is a concern, then I assume we should go ahead. But and maybe we can't tell, but um if it's just a matter of waiting
another two weeks where we have more information to make a better decision, then I'm all for it. But if we do wait and that could harm the bidding process, then that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. So, can you help me with that or is that am I misunderstanding this? So,
the best I can do is the school district indicated they wanted to sign a contract by April 1 and that all financing in order they that they cannot sign a contract until all financing is secured. Um, they don't have to have all the financing secured when the bids are
opened. That's my understanding. Which means waiting till March 23rd would not harm the ability to sign a contract because they only wanted to sign by April 1. That's my understanding. We don't obviously have the school
district available and they did not come to finance to answer any questions about any of that either. Um Pam, uh I'm I'm sympathetic to both of these sides of the question. I wonder if uh if Sean
could give us a little bit of insight uh from his perspective from the school, previous school and the town uh financing if if um having money in hand is in fact something that needs to happen sooner
rather than at the last minute. >> Sean, >> I'd love to. Um, so I can't speak for the regional schools, so I don't want to um, you know, I didn't I'm not part of the procurement that they did. I don't know all the decisions they made, their
timelines exactly. Um, so I just want to be clear. My understanding is that the bid is out and that they need the funding the funding approved before they can sign a contract. Um, so they're going to get bids, they're going to review what those amounts are. Um, and then they can't sign something without
an appropriation. um which for this piece of the bid um which my understanding is they did it as an alternate meaning a separate from everything else they bid out um they would need the funding approved by the council first so delaying it um I think
is everything that you all said it might if the funding is not in place maybe there's some general contractors that would not bid because there's no funding in place I don't you know I don't I don't know how general contractors interpret that information um But to the other point, I think as long as the
funding is there before they need to sign the contract, then they would have the option to sign for that um after they open up bids. So again, that's my perspective, but I just want to be clear again, I don't know their exact timeline or or how they're doing it.
>> Thank you. U Pam for a followup. >> Thanks. Um, I wonder if it would give the school committee some sense of security though knowing that the council had voted it and that it was in fact tangible.
>> Uh, councelor Brevik, >> sorry, Sean put his hand back up. Did you want to >> Yeah. Can I just say one more followup? Um I I think the point councelor Shane mentioned earlier is uh is correct that I don't know just once we open up bids
or once they open up bids I don't know that we will know the exact amount at that time. Um so the money that we will give them will cover the construction contract which will be the biggest portion of it. Um but there will also be a portion for design work associated with it. Um there could be change orders
or things that are unanticipated that pop up during the replacement of the roof. So I I I don't know if we will know the exact amount. Um when we were thinking about what an intermunicipal agreement would be, uh we were thinking about how to create some allowances for that. Basically, you know, knowing that we won't know final project costs until,
you know, as councelor Shane mentioned, months after the project is done. Um so I think that is a point to consider that we won't have an exact we'll know the exact construction number, but again, if there's any change orders or unanticipated conditions, that number could change.
>> Thank you, Councelor Bevik. Yeah. Well, I understand the desire to do this and having it be nice and clean. I think that that is appealing if it's just a matter of waiting a little longer and we can have it be a nice clean process. But I just I don't think I think that the motion is based on too
much guesswork at this point in the game for us to make that kind of a decision that if it could then in the end jeopardize this really important project or in some way derail it or you know as Sean said maybe it means that there's a great contractor that won't go for this
in this case. I just think there's too many questions. There's too many unknowns. This this was really well thought out and I think Kathy made a really strong case. um and our our report made a strong case for going forward with this and if it is not that out of the
ordinary to make changes after the fact and and maybe Kathy you could speak just a little bit quickly to what that would look like if it comes up under. Um, if that's not that big of a deal to navigate that, if that's something that we have navigated before, I don't think
that that's enough of a I don't think this is enough of a reason to potentially derail the work. >> Thank you, Sam. >> Uh, thank you, Mandy. I'm not sure if I heard you correctly when you were explaining the rationale for your uh
motion. Uh, I unders I understood what you indicated about trying to get the correct amount if it came in under. I thought I heard you reference something if the larger project came in lower than had been anticipated. Uh, I may have not heard that correctly. So, my question
is, is there a another reason other than trying to get the correct amount if it's lower uh for your motion? Uh I asked I asked this because in the way the finance committee made the recommendation and the way it's written
is if the amount comes in less than the award, it's going to be returned to uh the town anyway. So, I'm wondering is there a separate reason other than that getting that right amount or uh making
the motion for less because I think it's apt to be equivalent either way. Unless I missed something and I might have. Thank you. >> I'll try to explain. So, we had an original 12C order for roads and sidewalks that was 4.3
million I think. Um that if we vote tonight on a middle school roof at 1.6 six and then a roads and sidewalk at 2.7. Uh we cannot increase that 2.7 if the middle school roof comes in say at 1 million and 400,000 is freed up. Um we
can't move that there. But if we waited 2 weeks and we knew we only needed to vote a middle school roof at say a million. I'm just at this point making numbers up right for example purposes. we could potentially vote the road and sidewalk at 3.1 million instead of 2.7
million because the original financial order was at 4.3 million. Um, which would allow us to put more money into roads and sidewalks immediately instead of having to wait to see what sort of that max would be on the roof repair.
Um, I think what you were referencing also was that Kathy Shane was saying something about the MSBA portion of the project coming in under. Um, but I I don't know I she would have to speak to that. I don't know what the rules are given the votes on the borrowing as to
whether any of that if the non middle school the non- auditorium roof park comes in under the original estimated amount whether the school committee could still borrow the full amount and include the roof the auditorium roof
within that borrowing. I don't know that answer and I I think Kathy Shane I don't know whether you know that answer or what you've been speaking to about that. I I can speak to it just from the elementary school building um experience. Our bids did come in below
our estimate, but we've held it in contingency and MSBA agreed to that because until it closes down, we don't know what the full cost is. So, the authorization will probably still stand until it's all closed out. And at that
point, MSBA gets 60% of it and the other 40ish% of it or 64% of it and the other 36% of it gets divvied up based on our scares. But we won't know that until the summer and I just, you know, on the
notion that we can't do certain kinds of things. We can, I mean, we actually have JCPC process going on. if suddenly there was more money, we could put money into capital if we needed to for roads. Um so
the my understanding is these bids go out in the summertime and so we already have um we get chapter 90. So I I just don't think ever and Sean chose his words extremely carefully when he was
asking is there any risk to waiting? Um the answer is there is I think there is some risk and if we are ready to vote on this I don't see a reason to postpone it and and people contractors do look at
what we have said we think the project will cost the that's what sets up the competitive bidding in the bidding we put you know budgeted up to so I think it's important to have the money vote be voted on and voted on tonight And I
won't say more, but I don't think inserting risk into it is worth it because I think we could if if it came in a lot lower, which I don't think it will. If it comes in a lot lower, we do have the ability to move the money
around because it creates excess cash. It puts it back into free cash. Andy, >> I want to get the roof done, but um I I I'm just trying to figure out if if the bids come in and the roof part is $2 million,
I don't I don't know what happens. Does would would would waiting two weeks address that at all or or not really because we still won't know what the change orders are and the you know the the the auxiliary costs. But it seems like it it would give us a sense of
scale whether in the ballpark or not. I I just don't know whether saying the money is available would put a dampening effect on competitive bidding or if if the money is not yet available if that would restrain um the cost that people would be bidding. I I I don't know how to how
to game that out. So just how how complicated my my one worry is that the bid comes in higher and and um and we don't know what we would do then. So if we vote tonight 1.6 six and it comes in higher, then we'd have to have a
conversation with the schools about what their reserves are and think about whether we want to up our gift or is that is that what the situation we would be in and would that be changed at all by this by this motion? >> Um, I think Sean is the best person to
potentially answer some of those questions. Yeah. Again, at the risk of being proven very wrong in a couple weeks, um my experience and what I've heard about this number is that these figures include a lot of contingency. And so in Holio, we did a bunch of roof
projects. They came in quite a bit under budget when we actually received bids on those projects. Um and my understanding of this 1.6 is the same that it includes quite a bit of contingency. So, is there always the potential that it could come in higher? Yes. Um, but I I would say I
feel like it's less likely that it'll come in higher than it will come in lower. Um, and the other piece to remember about the risk of delay and and general contractors looking at this, keep in mind this is an add-on to a much bigger project, right? So, general
contractors are lining up for the for the main project, which is to replace the other sections of the roof, which is a 5 to10 million project, and that this is uh being attached to that. So, if this was a standalone project, I I think there would be much greater risk of
general contractors being concerned about whether the funds were appropriated. Um, but because this is really just a piece of it, you know, a relatively small piece of it, I I think that risk is not as great. Thank you. Uh Lynn,
>> thank you. Uh I just want to clarify you cannot talk about the MSBA project and this project in a way that any of the money left over from the MSBA project can be used for this project. That is that was all voted in for a specific project, not this, and would even have
to go back to the respective town meetings. So it's not a bundle of cash if they save something. Uh, having said that, um, I I want to just say that I think Mandy Joe's trying very hard to I don't want to put words in her mouth,
but to make sure that we give as much to our roads as possible and um I I find it an interesting idea. I haven't figured out which way I would vote, but thank you for making the option there. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jennifer.
>> Yeah. I just want to um be clear if Speak closer. >> I'm sorry. If it comes in lower and we have more money that we can get give to roads, why can't we just give it to roads? We'll have if we vote tonight, we'll have already voted them. So, we'll
need another financial order and that and who knows whether or if Paul would do that and when. So, ask Paul. Okay. I don't see why we wouldn't do that. I mean, it seems like we're creating a bureaucracy. >> We can't on our own. Okay. I would have confidence
in it. Thank you. >> Um, Anna, >> I at this point I'm not clear that the pros of delaying it outweigh the the possible cons. Um it's if possibly and hopefully that bid comes in lower uh it
might slow additional funds going to road roads. But if this has a chance to show biders that funding is secured and support the competitive bidding process even more that outweighs uh for me that outweighs an immediate higher financial order or no sorry also delayed financial
order for for roads. Right. So, like you said, we can amend or add additional upon request of the fi of the town manager financial orders. And I would rather do and request from the town manager an additional or amended financial order for roads unless somehow
we're planning to spend all of this in the next two weeks um if we approved that that money, which I I don't think we are. So, I still think we can give as much to our roads as possible um and vote this tonight. Um,
Sean, >> sorry, hand left up from before. >> Oh, okay. Andy, your hand is still up. Sam, >> thank you, Mandy. Um, in hearing the discussion, a thought entered my mind. I don't think it's something we can do, but uh
we indicated in the motion that if it comes in lower that uh the money would be returned to the town of Ammerst. Uh could that could we say returned and allocated or intended to be allocated for roads or is
that just too many apples and oranges? In other words, if we took the motion as it's existing and said if it came in less that we would in fact allocate that differential to roads, which if possible would accomplish your objective, I
believe. >> Um Sean, >> so generally we don't do contingent orders. I I don't think that would be a legal order because um it would sort of be like an eitheror type of situation.
Um, so if the council really wanted to look into that, we could look into it, but I don't think that's something we would uh propose. We would just bring the order if, you know, if the town manager wanted to, we would just reissue, resubmit the order. >> Kathy,
I'd like to call the question and bring this to a vote. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Calling the question requires twothirds to vote in favor. The call the question is to end debate on the motion to postpone. So you will be voting on whether you want to stop debate. Um that
is not debatable. So we move right to a vote. Andy Churchill >> I. >> Uh Anna Delin Gothier >> I. >> Uh Lyn Greimemer >> I. >> Uh Mandy Johani is an I. Uh councelor Lord >> I. >> Uh Sam Mloud
>> I. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan >> I. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Alicia Walk. Councelor Walker. >> Yes. Uh, councelor Brevik, >> yes. >> Councelor Keno Martin, >> yes.
>> Calling the question was unanimous. We immediately move to No. Councelor Breick, you voted I. Correct. >> Correct. >> Yeah, it was it was unanimous. We move directly to the motion to vote on the motion to postpone and I would postpone
the vote on the main motion. A nay or no would not postpone a vote on the motion. We a yes on the motion to postpone moves the vote on the financial order to March 23rd. A no does not move it to March
23rd. We start with Anna Delin Gothier. >> No. >> Lynn Greimer, >> no. >> Mandy Johanni is an I. Councelor Lord. >> Nay. >> Uh Sam Mloud. No >> Pam Rooney.
>> No >> councelor Ryan. >> No >> Kathy Shane. >> No >> Jennifer Tob. >> No councelor Walker. >> No. >> Councelor Breick. >> No. >> Councelor Kenna Martin. >> No. >> Andy Churchill. >> No. >> That is one in favor. 12 opposed. The
motion to postpone fails. Uh any further discussion on the financial order 12F? Seeing no further discussion, we will move to a vote on the motion to adopt appropriation and transfer order FY2612F,
free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst Capital Program replacement of the middle school auditorium roof. >> Shane seconds. >> It was already made. We just have to vote it. Um, we start with
Lynn Greamer. >> I'm tempted to vote no so that I have an option to bring it back two weeks from now, but I'm going to vote I. >> Mandy Johanni is a no. Councelor Lord >> I.
>> Sam Mloud. >> Hi. >> Thank you. Uh, Peony, >> yes. >> Councelor Ryan, >> hi. Kathy Shane, >> yes. >> Jennifer Tob, >> yes. >> Councelor Walker, >> yes. >> Councelor Brevik, >> yes. >> Councelor Ko Martin, >> yes. >> Andy Churchill,
>> yes. >> And Anna Devongthier, >> I. >> That is 12 in favor, one opposed. The financial order 2612-12F passes. We move on to Oops. I make my notes.
Uh councelor uh council order 26-12C an order appropriating from free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst capital program roads and sidewalk repairs motion. I move having held a public forum on March 9th, 2026 with a recommendation by the finance committee
on March 3rd, 2026 to adopt appropriation and transfer order 12 FY2612c an order appropriating from free cash for a portion of the town of Ammerst capital program road and sidewalk repairs as shown on page 12 of the motion sheet. Is there a second?
>> Second, Griezmer, >> is there discussion? Did you want to give a a brief brief finance report on this one? What was the finance vote? >> Finance vote was unanimous for 2.7 >> and that is what is shown on the motion sheet I believe on page 12
>> that says shown on the motion sheet. Yes. >> Yes. >> And we did ask um and this is also in JCPC. It would be great to see an accounting over the last several years including chapter 90 because we have been voting money out of free cash every
year toward roads. Just how much have we been spending would be something we'd like to see. That's not not related to this motion. I'm in favor of this motion and we all were. >> Thank you. Um,
Council Ryan. >> So, I voted for the previous motion and I supported it, but not with a great deal of joy. Um, it was mentioned earlier that or suggested earlier, at least if I was listening correctly, that
the roads are an emergency situation. The roads are not an emergency situation. Okay, we've known about this for years. Last year, not this council, but the previous iteration, I was asked to put a million dollars into the road and it voted roads and it voted it down.
Then I brought it back the next meeting for 750 and that passed unanimously. So, it's been a history of sort of diddling around and once again uh for reasons that we've gone through already at great length, we're going to dd around some more. uh in the finance committee report
u excellent as I said earlier um it was suggested that somehow this won't have that it'll be a marginal impact now maybe that was a staff member trying to uh to appease the committee or maybe that was someone on the committee I don't know who said it but it's not a marginal impact it's a sizable amount of
money um it's also true that we have to put about $5 million a year into the road account to even begin to just get ourselves caught up and of course this amount the original proposed amount that the manager paid wasn't 5 million, but it was close. Now it's far far far away
from 5 million and we'll be doing this again next year. So hopefully memory will not completely dissipate with this body um as they speak so highly of how they want to do something about the roads with one voice and then they will take the money away with the other. So u
this is not an emergent situation. This is a longstanding situation that has an answer to it and the answer is money. Um yes, we should look at other sources. we should see what we can get from the state, but everybody else is doing the same thing. We either going to have to make a commitment to our capital fund to
address this problem. Um, and trust me, in a couple of weeks, a month or so, you'll see the roads and they're going to be a mess. Um, so let's try in the future to keep to the commitment that so many of you have been saying you are making to actually fund this serious
need of the town, which is longstanding and not a surprise and not an emergency. Thank you, Andy. >> Yeah, I guess um I' I'd like to hear again from um Councelor Shane about, you
know, the what the what other sources we're we're adding to this so we have a sense of, you know, what what the lump sum is that we're sort of putting toward roads because, as she said, we have chapter 90 money, we have JCPC money, and we have this financial order. So,
what what does that add up to? Kathy, would you like to respond? >> Um, it depends what which year of JCPCI ad. So, if I do FY26, which is the year we're in, it was 750. We um chapter 90. Sean, you can correct
me, but the chapter 90 for this year is in the 1.2 if we take the two pieces. Am am I in the right range there? >> I think it's 1.4 this year because of the supplemental >> 1.4. So if we take the current year, it's 1.4 plus this amount would be the
amount we could go out with. I mean, this isn't this is this is a gift from ARP ARPA money to us to even have this amount of money. But so that those are the numbers I was adding up, Andy, that would be in this fiscal year. If we're
looking at the next fiscal year, roads is dropping right now in what we're looking at to 500,000 a year. So, I think one of the questions is can we get it higher? Um, and and 500 from town, not from chapter 90 is in there as well. And then there's a separate amount for
sidewalks, but just the road number. So we were at one point several years ago at a million out of the capital budget the cash flow and it was before the building started to come online and before the ladder truck you know so some
of it is the scrunch that's coming by taking on debt for various big projects. Is that answered council? Yeah, I think we have a lot to learn. I mean, I agree with what others have said that there's a lot we can learn here and
take away from this debate. I, you know, I think being somewhat new to the council, it was helpful to hear all of the, you know, it was a lot of discussion around this issue and and I think it was really helpful. Um, I think one thing that I'm really taking away is
it it feels like this is what will happen when we keep pitting the schools against the roads. Like if it's an if it's a decision point between a really urgent and maybe emergency is maybe not the right word, but critical need, ongoing critical need that hasn't been
addressed appropriately in the past. I think we're seeing those types of things with the schools and with the roads. And so I think it's what what I'm taking away from this is really where where else can we look? Can we look at police? Can we look in other areas that haven't
been, you know, as thoroughly investigated in terms of where we can move money from to address this issue. I think that this is where we're going to wind up when we have multiple competing critical needs that are, you know,
safety issues, equity issues. I see the roads as an equity issue. when I it's I'm incurring costs, you know, wear and tear on my car to drive home to my house at this point. Um, things like that and and and that the
middle school roof being a a safety hazard and a health hazard to students. I mean, I think we're looking at things in this that same kind of category. And so where where can we look outside of critical
pressing dangerous needs to find funding for our roads? >> Yeah, Jennifer, >> that's exactly what I was going to say. Um our UMass and Ammerst College, um we we're, you know, down to what 14,000
yearround residents. Um it's just not uh doable that we can support um roads and sidewalks, but especially roads for a town of 40,000 and the majority of drivers in town are affiliated um you
know with the University of Massachusetts. So, um I you know I I I say this often, but I don't see how we, you know, square the financing without um Ammeris College and UMass stepping up
in this critical part of our infrastructure. I just I think that should be a priority in our conversations with um those partners. Sam. >> Um, if the roads aren't an emergency, they're certainly an urgent situation.
Uh, I've I've received many emails from folks and we've all experienced it. So, I'll support any funding for roads. Uh, and whatever we give won't be enough. We all know that there's going to be a long-term plan associated with this. And, uh, this won't go away in a year.
I'm just hoping we can uh we'll see what what is presented to us, but I'm hoping that we can address the most urgent deep what I refer to as axle breaking potholes to start. Uh it's a tough task for uh town staff and others, especially
this time of year, but uh I'll support any money for it. >> Councelor Kendall Martin, >> I think Andy Churchill was before me. >> Uh he has already spoken. So we get the we recognize those who haven't spoken first.
>> Yeah. Oh, okay. No, I just wanted to say I mean I do support this money for the roads wholeheartedly. I know, you know, been hearing about this from constituents um for a really long time and both times I ran for office. Um you know, it's a huge concern and people do expect to have better roads considering
the high property taxes that they pay. But I do I do also feel frustrated coming in as a new counselor to this situation that we have around our infrastructure um with all the needs that we have right and the you know we need a fire station. We heard last week about the DPW building. The roads are
crumbling and so I really just hope that going forward that we can prioritize these things in a way that makes sense and that we're not pinning things against each other. Um, you know, I think that, you know, we we did commit a large sum of money to the library and I'm really frustrated because that's
something that there's no changing that like we can't shuffle around and say, "Wait, we meant the roads with a priority. Oh, no, wait, we meant the DP." Like, it's that's done. So, I I wish that I could do more. Um, and I I wish that we had thought about this differently. Um, but that being said, I I obviously support this money for the
roads and I understand how badly needed it is. So, thank you, >> Andy. Uh yeah, I just um I think we're going to be put in this position of pitting things, you know, various parts of the uh community services against each other
as long as we um you know, don't have revenues that that match what what the needs are. And so I think going forward um I hope that we can um you know request and support you know setting some fiscal goals identifying what our
structural deficit is you know figuring out what it's going to take to to close that from various sources and whether it's whether it's pilot whether it's UMass whether it's uh economic development housing property taxes um I
think it'd be great if we could be forward looking on the revenue side as well as um trying to figure out ever more creative ways of um dividing up what we have currently. >> Lynn, >> thank you. Um Sean, I'm going to sound a
little like a broken record. I'm sorry. uh but I really think that one of the reasons why some of us are sitting here with this larger picture is because of the financial model where we looked initially at the four major capital
projects and understood what it meant to have certain amounts of money for this that or the other thing. I I know it's a very tough thing to go back to that financial model. Uh and clearly the roads would be an additional
piece to it and there may be others but I really would like to see us do an update and make sure that counselors have a chance to understand the full picture of the financial demands that we are faced with in this town. Thank you
>> Kathy. Um I just building on Andy's thinking into the future a bit. One issue in the district one meeting yesterday, someone who's lived in North Ammeris for 30 years noted that every it feels like every UMass student comes to
school with a car and that that didn't used to be the case. Those cars are not registered in Ammerst and they don't pay an excise tax to Ammerst. If we worked, and I was going to suggest this as part of our agreement, if UMass agreed that they couldn't park in their parking
lots, if they're going to park for a semester for a year without registering the car in Ammerst, we would get excise tax money. And perhaps with that extra excise tax money, we could allocate some of it to our roads. I mean, if you look
at the intersection up by us where there are about 2,000 students living in the apartments, you can see it's not just their cars, it's the delivery trucks that are coming down as well. So, I'm thinking maybe there's something shorter term than getting the state to recognize
the wear and tear on our roads and getting the pilot change, which should be recognizing this. Um, and I don't know how hard that would be. legally they're supposed to register their car if they're if it's not dosiled in their
homes wherever their home is and it's a substantial amount of money if they registered it. So it it's just a thinking of is there a way we could get at that issue of the Florida license but I'm not even talking about other parts of Massachusetts. I'm talking about lots
of other states that are driving around on our roads and not paying excess taxes. Seeing no other hands, we will move to a vote on this uh motion, which is to adopt appropriation transfer order FY2612C.
Uh roads and sidewalk repairs. Uh we start with Mandy. Mandy is an I. Councelor Lord. >> I >> Sam Mloud. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> I Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Todd. >> Yes.
>> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Councelor Bravik. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ko Martin. Yes. >> Andy Churchill. >> Yes. >> Anna Devongier. >> Hi. >> And Lyn Gryomemer. >> I. >> That is 130 unanimous. Uh that motion passes. We will now take a 10-minut
break. We will resume at 8:15. >> We have >> the charter review committee reports. That's it. just charter. If it was just reports, I would have moved on. But the charter review, >> it might take a little while. >> Might take a little day. >> I don't know.
>> It looks like I might be able to say and not get out of here tonight, but >> that we'll see you back online. >> Thank you. like my first day back at like work in real life cuz it's just like a really lovely day.
>> Yeah. Sounds good. Thank you for bringing up the Um those in the prevailing party can bring it up. Non-pervailing needs additional information. >> So prevailing can always >> Yeah. So you you could do it either I I
could do it with a no with additional information, but anyone with a yes >> um I think the yeses are at the permit meeting or the next immediate meeting and the nos are only at the next meeting with so anyone can anyone can
>> anyone What? >> Just push it in. >> Just push it in. >> I'm not using it. I'm just trying to find a document. >> Trying to find a document I want up like where did I put it?
And you know, No rest. Sorry. >> They sent this via email. >> Thank you for what you do. Jennifer is that one. >> Yes.
>> Kathy's this one and Alicia. Alicia left. So tomorrow she'll rejoin it. >> Andy for Valley CDC took a while to get to us. January 26.
If you want to do the organizing for it, you can. >> I haven't submitted the form yet to Angela, so I figured I'd wait till at least it passed before submitting the form. Yeah.
>> Yeah. This one we basically just need a mic. Yeah. Okay. >> That's to bet nine. I didn't Uh there's a >> I have
I think that's the elementary hearing. We should all be coming back. It's 8:15. For those that are online, please turn on your video so that we know you are here. And for counselors that are in the town room, please rejoin
your seat. Okay, we have a quorum that are ready to go. So, we're going to go. We have we will reereach out to councelor Walker when she rejoins on Zoom. Um,
the intermunicipal agreement item 8B was determined to not be needed. So, we are pulling it off the agenda. And I'm going to say why. It was included. The authorization was included in the financial order that just passed. So, we do not have to vote it a second time.
So, it's not that we're not voting it. We just didn't realize when we put it on the agenda that it was included in the financial order. So it was sort of a redundant thing that we've pulled off the agenda for that reason. The bylaw review committee charge was passed on consent. The dissolution of the transportation advisory committee was
pulled off the agenda because it is not a committee. It was not a committee that was a created by the council. It was created by the manager. So So um we thank the transportation advisory committee for their service. Um the manager will be
doing that himself too and probably speaking to that in his report but that is why that has been pulled off it. It was not in our role to do anything with it. Um Aaron property was done on consent which leaves us with the only other item of business tonight and then
we move to reports is the charter review committee recommendation first read. So in your packet it was not labeled necessarily well. There was a proposed motion. It was labeled 20263-05 TC
um I don't know what the whole title was TC discussion on charter review committee report. The very first page of it was a proposed motion to act and then the next page included just the quick summary from the final review final report of what each item what the
numbers refer to 1 2 3 all the way to 22. And then the last um pages 3 to 8 were a chart that describes what the proposed language change for action would be um and what the action is
according to the current proposed motion and what the straw poll results were. This is still colorcoded um for red being what the charter review committee proposed, blue being an
addition or deletion to that proposal or a change to that proposal. Uh green being also what they proposed. One red is deletions, green is additions, blue is non-charter review committee proposals that were discussed and
potentially agreed upon or partially agreed upon in straw polls. So things like what the what's on there on the screen right now is the addition of the word soul that KP law recommended in number two. So so the way this chart
works in a sense is um the proposed motion is to act on the recommendations through those five potential five bullet points with consideration given to the attached review discussion report which is that chart. They will not be at they'll be in
different parts on the motion sheet eventually, but that chart gives us the ability to say, "Hey, if this is going to KP Law, this is sort of the language we're looking at so that they know what language to come back, especially if it wasn't part of the final review committee, for example, um in the final
report, the the number four about president and vice president terms. The council in its straw polls did not like four, which is what the final report proposed. They liked three years. And so what would get
sent to KP law if the motion as proposed passes um would be three, not four, because we kind of already had that discussion. It's kind of hard to understand, I know. Um, but the goal is
for tonight to look at those five bullet points on the first page that say where are these recommendations going? What's the final intent? Um, you'll see that one of those bullet points is empty.
So, uh, which is the 43B process. So, we never really as a council talked about if we're going to amend the charter, are we going to do it through a special act process or through the 43b process? So, I put them all in the special act process for this discussion
purposes tonight. Um, we should discuss it as a council. Which process do we want to use? the vote of a council then directly to the people which is the 43b process or a special act which is a vote of the council then going to the legislature um who then may or may not
request a vote of the people um the third bullet point is sending to go for discussion recommendation that discussion and recommendation is has a lot of leeway in it at least that's the intention of this motion some things
were discussed of in straw polling were we kind of like to change it but we don't like the language from the final report. We need a discussion on language. Other straw polling was we really think this should be maybe a rule change not a charter change. So all of them are grouped lumped into this third
bullet point of send to go for go to come back. Uh the fourth bullet point is finance committee for substantive discussion. Um the two that are included in that were the two that were recommendations
that were financial section article items. Um and then the last one was to table the following recommendation. That's essentially the equivalent of taking no action. Um, tonight's discussion is
number one for those that we have two things to do tonight before we vote on a potential motion in two weeks. Maybe three things. The first is special act or 43b or both. We could choose some to
go one way or some to go the other. And then the second one is does anyone want to move anything from one bullet point to another bullet point? That's the big one here is we're trying to airport this various ways in
the act. Anything within the special actor or 43b process would come back to the council after hopefully the manager asked KP law to prepare the final motion. Um and then we would vote the final change at that point with the final language. Although the chart gives
a preview of what that language might look like. Um, anything sent to go or finance would come back to the council for potential action or no action based on what those recommendations were, which could then be another special act or 43b process or a rule change or or
all of that. And then tableabling is is what it means is tableabling. Um, same with if it was sent to finance committee. So, we're going to start with if we're going to ask that the charter be changed and vote to change the charter, which process do people want to
use or both. Um, if that's too hard to discuss on its own without talking about specific recommendations, we can literally just go through any of the numbers and say, "Where do we want these numbers in this motion?" Feel free to also comment on
the language of the motion. This is an attempt and it truly is an attempt which is why this is a first read to try and get next meetings much more easily digestible. Um so we will start with Cathy. Hopefully everyone sort of understood that
opening. >> Okay. Um I as people might remember at the last council meeting I was not here for the part when you discussed these. So I'm not sure I completely understand the difference on the two things you said which route we're going. Um, you
know, I'd be happy if we got language that we all agreed on, whatever is the easiest route to go to get this done. So, the difference between going through special legislation or going through 3B, which is uh
I don't understand that. That's my first comment. And my second comment is when I look at the list in your first bullet and I know you want to take comments on that later Mandy but I just want to say I would want to remove one alto together. It's number four on term
limits. I didn't get a chance to express myself on that. Um but I am in agreement with the list of one two three all those other numbers that you've got there. So I don't know how you're going to frame the two on a how are we packaging the
changes. Um, and that's your question of which route do we go and then how do we get to what's on that? We definitely want to do this list. And I'm fine, by the way, with the refer to go and the refer to finance. So, I have literally
just a question on number four, which is term limits. I'll make the note on number four as we get to them. Maybe um councelor Kennel Martin. >> Um yes, I just wanted to request that um
recommendation 11 not be tabled and that it be added to one of the first three bullet points. >> Okay. Um I'll make a note of that as we get through. Uh Jennifer Um yes I just wanted to say the section
I think it was maybe 2.6 on measures it's really the quantum of votes. >> Yes I don't understand any of it. It is so there's got to be a way we can make the language more streamlined. I if somebody asked me what the quantum was for different measure I could not based
on that tell them >> it is right now slated into go to go for further discussion um which would leave it with go to figure out the best way forward on that and come back with something that might be understandable by everyone and easily I had one other
question though it says or that it would either be by this it would be according to the charter or the state. So yes, we can't have a a quantum of vote that is inconsistent or
conflicts with state law, but if it's in are we changing in the charter? It sometimes says as per we could change it, but then it may be different in the charter, but aren't we changing the charter to be it almost sounded like we could agree on a quantum of vote, but it
might conflict with the charter. I was confused and I'm probably not I'm probably it's probably saying very confused how I'm asking the question but >> yeah um it said it can't it said according we have to abide by state law or the charter. >> Yeah. So so okay now I now I get your
question. So the your your the phrase except in the event a higher quantum of vote is required by general laws or this charter and then KP law recommended provided that a quorum is present the affirmative vote a majority of members present is required to adopt any measure. So, state law has sometimes a
two-thirds requirement on various things, but so does the charter. There's a section in the charter that requires 10 votes to I think that's about some sort of counselor taking a position in the town after being a counselor or something. So, sometimes there's 10
votes required. The sometimes there's two/3s in the charter required. Sometimes there's >> changing the charter. >> Uh not those sections. So, so this is a this this section would say if the charter somewhere else says that particular vote needs a higher quantum
that's the quantum that prevails. Everything else where there's no mention of a quantum this is what the quantum is. That's that's what 2.6 means. But the question is how simplified is that? And that's what would be being sent to
go basically trying to simplify cuz right now >> but that's the recommendation at this point. Um councelor Ryan. >> So just first a clarification and then um a question that I think all of us are
thinking about and and I'm we'll try to pose and see if it gets anywhere. But the clarification understand that that bullets three and four come back to us because they go to a committee and they come back to us for for action. Bullet one also eventually comes back to us um
after it goes to the attorney comes back to us and do we actually vote on each individual item um or what happens to bullet one once the lawyers are done if assuming well if we send anything to the lawyers um and it comes back to us what
happens then? So it would come back to a vote of the council for the specific language um and the request of say if it's bullet one the special act and request to send to the legislature. So it would look similar to what we've done with rank choice voting and all of that
that has specific language that would become the special act. >> Um that might mean that some of these are grouped into one special act and another set is grouped into a second special act um depending on how it would be. And then the council would vote that
special act sort of request for special act. And at that point we could request 12 different special acts or we could request one. If we requested one, we might take the vote as separate paragraphs to begin with and then a full
thing. There's a different ways that vote can happen. Things can be divided out. Things can it there's many different ways it could happen. if the council wants to vote every single recommendation separately um and see where they are and then maybe
vote a full whatever passes that way into a special act that could be done. But the actual this would not actually vote to change the charter at this time. >> This is just saying hey
we're we're leaning towards and we support changing the charter in these ways at this time. give us the language on how we do it. >> It would be interesting. So this is to my question then or to the issue of special act versus MGL chapter 43b how we're going to frame that discussion
which way we want to go and right can I raise that now just because I'm absolutely clueless I have no idea I in the end I'm thinking well yeah what are the pros what are the cons um I'm thinking of the poor voters I mean
it would also be helpful to me if I had any sense of how this has played out in other comm communities. Have they really sent 22 separate items to the voters and on a ballot and the voters had to go through each 22? Have they really sent like groups of of three or four things
glommed together and the voters voted on each little group? Um it just sounds terrifying to me, but maybe it happens all the time. Um but we have so many items here. um whether it goes to the the state or whether it goes to the
voter um whether it goes in groups or all 22 items all piled together um how does anyone envision anyone voting on this finally if they're either the state andor the voters here in Ammerst we can do it I can see we could work our way
through 22 items we've already started that process but when it finally gets to the voters what do people envision this looking like >> I'll I'll try to summarize what KP Law summarized the work session going. The chapter 43b process requires
a twothirds vote of the council to pass the amendment and then it goes to the next regular town election which for us is in 2027 in November of 2027. So we could vote
the language in May, say, of 2026, and the voters would see it in November of 2027, and it would require sending every voting household a summary of the language. There's it's set forth in state law, but but the basics are 2/3
for chapter 43b, 2/3 vote approval at the council, vote of the people at a regular town election in November 2027. In the middle of that, it goes to the attorney general. They do something with it. KP Law
explained it a lot better. They talk about it and review it and come back to us with something. Um, special act majority vote of the council request for our representative Dom to
file a special act a an act bill in the House of Representatives. It goes to hearing at the House of Representatives. It gets reported out, it potentially gets voted on, then the Senate votes on it, then it's signed just like any other bill.
KP Law said that normally takes about a year. We're at the end of the session or getting close to the end of the session, so who knows whether that might be faster than November of 2027, a vote of the people. Um, but but majority vote then it gets
filed as a bill and it goes through the bill process at the state house. That's the special act process. So those are our two options. KP law said that if you do the special act process, it is possible for some items that the legislature might say we'll
only pass this if the vote of the pe if you send it to the people at an election and they also pass it. Uh so it might not avoid a vote of the people for some of the items. Um KP law did at the work session identify the ones they thought
the legislature might bulk at passing a special act without a vote of the people. Um so you might want to look at the KP law memo for that. But those that's sort of the difference between the two. Special act may be quicker
does not require most of the time a vote of the people can be done in however many special acts you want in terms of bills. vote of the people. Many towns group KP Law said many towns group them
as sort of the more basic ones that are very much ministerial into one big group and then if there's a couple more that they thought that that people think are a little more major and I put major in quotes um uh bigger that that
might be more contentious or controversial or less supportive to get the ministerial ones through without running into problems with the others. They might sometimes split out one or two and so you wouldn't necessarily have 22 or 15, you might have five or four.
Um, but the council would be able to decide how to group them. And that might be if if we use the 43b process, part of what KP law recommends when they come back with language, we recommend these be grouped together and we recommend these go separate with
language. Does that help? Okay, Pam. And I was just going to confirm that whether we send something to go or fin, they end up coming back as recommendations and discussions to us before we even take the vote. It's not like they're it's not
like they're going to vote and we don't have to. No, they would make a recommendation to the council like any typical referral to go, but they would be having substantive discussions, not just a clarity, consistency, and actionability discussion. >> Point of information, all of them would
come back to the council for for action, not just the ones that are referred, but the ones that go to the attorneys for language would come back for the council to act. Councelor Brevik. >> And just a quick clarifying question on our acting,
what has to be done by that 90-day deadline? So, did these have to go particularly for the first one? Let's say if they if they go out to KP Law and do they have to come back to us and we vote on them by that 90-day deadline or what what exactly do we have to do by
that deadline? So our goal with this motion is to set a precedent that you'll notice it says in accordance with charter section 9.6 to act on the recommendations as follows essentially. So our goal is to say this is our action
on them. We're going this way with one p one group this way with another group this way with another group and then we'll come back with the language or the modified language and all. So, so our goal with this motion is this motion would satisfy the charter 90-day
requirement voted if we vote it by March 20 or April 5 or whatever, but at the next meeting >> Andy. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that we are going to take when when each of these come back to us, we would take
each of them in turn and vote up or down on on them whether to put them forward. Correct. >> Or group them. >> I mean I mean we could we will take each of the suggestions and say yes, we want to put that forward or no, we don't.
Right. >> Are you meaning within this motion or if this motion passes? If this motion passes, we're we're going we're going to go to number one and we're going to say yes or no. And then we're going to go to number
two and say yes or no. And then we're going to say how do we want to do it? >> I'm still confused. So this motion has them grouped and we would vote one vote on this motion. >> Um that's what I'm trying to figure. We're not voting on the individual
pieces. Correct. What we're trying to vote here is how to get them considered and in a in a form that we can finally vote on them, right? Yes. >> So, they will all come back to us. >> They would and it's possible that they would be potentially voted on as various
groups or individually, >> but we could pull them out. >> We could pull them out in motions to divide easily. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> So, we won't be just passing these on without seeing them again and saying as a group whether we support them or not. >> No. Okay,
>> Lynn, >> may may I may I ask >> Athena? >> Um, Councelor Churchill, I councelor Churchill, I think the the intent is to indicate at this point if you're supportive or not of one of them so that
we don't go through the process of asking an attorney for language or asking GO to spend time considering one of them that you know at this point you don't support. If you know at this point you don't support one of them, then the discussion ought to be to table what
that recommendation that's not supported. Yeah. >> But when they come back, all of them will come back >> and then you'll have another opportunity to take that final action to >> um adopt a special act or do the 43b process or whatever. >> That that's a good explanation. We're
trying to get the general consensus so that the attorney, for example, if it's going to an attorney, attorney isn't spending time on something that doesn't have a chance of passing the council. That doesn't mean it would automatically pass when it comes back. But if there are 12 counselors that would say never
vote for it in the charter, it shouldn't be in bullet one or two. It should be someone should try and put it into table say >> or So, so this this set of numbers here is
based on the straw poles. That doesn't mean the straw poles are accurate because they were just straw poles and people have thought about things. But but this placement here other than moving between special act and 43B, I threw them on special act is based on
straw pulse. Okay, Lynn, I want to go through each of the scenarios kind of worst case, best case, okay,
and make sure that we understand um so suppose we vote on the ones for special acts. Okay, the worst case is they don't get to it in this session, which I think is a question. it goes
into next session and we would pray that they would act and let us know so that we could get it on the ballot by 2027. But it's possible that if they don't
act, it wouldn't go until the ballot of 2029. >> Unless we chose to just vote in spring of 2027 to >> right go the 43. That's the special act issue. >> The 43B
>> process. >> We we need to um formulate what's going to go on the ballot. Yes. The attorney general does some magic with it. Um and that would go on the ballot for 2027. >> Yes.
>> Okay. And there is no legislative process involved. >> Correct. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure people understood what could happen timewise with 43B versus with the legislative
action. >> Yeah. >> And I just to be clear, we have three special acts that they've never acted on. So, >> uh Sam, >> uh thank you, Mandy. Uh in looking through the list, it's certainly a
complicated document. I envision it would be a challenge for the uh community to understand all the details of all this in a single voting experience or even grouped. Um as I look at this list and my understanding is that you're hoping that we would come up
with three recommendations today to send them to different uh locations for review. Uh is am I correct that an assumption and a precursor to this is that the uh edits in the language language are
assumed because my understanding was that as we were discussing in the uh lean towards straw votes that it was just something that would be discussed again. Uh, and one of the items, number six, was uh, particularly uncertain for
a number of folks that were in the audience in in the town council, myself being one of them. Uh, number four, I don't know about, but those are two items that, uh, um, I put a star next to, and if I understand correctly, we're seeking
to move them towards review in the current edited form as opposed to discussing it further. and then it would come back as something we would look at in a recommended final form. So for
those going to go g or finance the sort of column with the language is based on discussion but particularly for number six the adoption of measures the second column that says refer to go says
C memo that was written that has all those options that that sort of says here's what happens if you do it this way this way this way here's what the rules look like and and the voting quantums look like because that clearly at the work session was a discussion that did not have time and needed more
time. So the language that is in the chart for that one in particular is is really just what was presented by the final report. But G would be my assumption is G would
begin its discussion with where we ended our discussion of what's going on. um for number four which is the term limits and for those that are proposed for the special act or the 40 well there's nothing for 43b right now but for the
special act for the charter change the assumption at at this point is that the attorney would base their return of the language to adopt on this chart. So including all language that is in this.
So for say number four, if that stays in sending to attorney for a special act, it would be based on a three consecutive one-year term, not a four consecutive one-year term. And I did that based on the straw polls. Again, we could discuss it tonight. We could discuss to change
it. We could discuss language changes. We can take sort of again a I would call them straw polls again because of and and in sort of trying to move things from one item to another. we would pull again because we're not doing formal motions to amend at this point. So, when
we get to Kathy's request, uh, Councelor Kennel Martin's request, I have a couple I'd love to talk about moving. Um, we'll do it as a straw poll. Where do people want it? Which bullet point do they want it? Um, or if there's requests to redis,
particularly with the ones that would be being sent to KP Law, we should discuss the language for those. But what's shown in the chart is sort of the language that KP Law the intention is that that's the language KP Law would base their
motion language that they'd returned to us on. >> Yes, Sam. >> Uh thank you. So, um, yeah, my my impression at the last meeting that was number six was not a clear, uh, vote of
the council, and I'm not suggesting that the vote wouldn't come out the same as the straw polls indicated, but it seemed to me that a number of folks are saying, "Hey, I want more information." And what I see it now is being put in a form uh
to be considered going forward. And I think it might be beneficial to have further discussion on that for understanding purposes. Uh not just for myself but just in general. >> Um so I would advocate for that just for
uh a a common understanding of what in fact is uh what what the existing situation is and what is being proposed uh via this uh recommendation. So, if I'm understanding you, you would propose for that one
I I'm not sure what the motion inclusion would be, but a further more in-depth discussion prior to referring to go. Is that that what you're suggesting? >> Yeah, it seems to me that that's in order from my perspective. I'm just one individual because I saw uh significant
uncertainty not in terms of how individuals might vote but in terms of actual understanding and uh rather than rush to move it since it is I believe a significant motion uh dealing with the needed uh totals for votes. I think I
understand what it says, but I think it would be helpful to clarify where we are currently and where this will take us under the proposed uh language as presented here. >> Okay. >> So, so I would like to see that happen.
I do if I would. >> Okay. Let's hold off on any motion at this time. Um I we have to get back to 4116. Um, I have a couple, but councelor Ryan, >> so I'm inclined to sort of start at the
end of this whole process, which is like it looks like the earliest this would be would be November 2027. And then so that seems the earliest that this could actually be formally acted on and enacted. >> No.
>> Well, so let me So I'm trying to think out and maybe this is not the time to do it. Maybe we should look at individual items first, but I'm I'm just thinking from the end of it, I'd like to make the case for following chapter 43b as an option as opposed to the special act. Do people want to have that
discussion now or not? Or do you want to wait? >> So, so let let's take it this way. Um, hold on. So, we have to act on every single item by two weeks from tonight, >> right?
So the end is not necessarily November. I want to say that. So So let's let let's try this. Um Kathy, you wanted to propose moving for from we're going to start with this and then and then we'll we'll deal with yours because it sounds like you want to move everything that's
in the first bullet point from special act all the way to 43B. Right. So, so but let let's get some some that are moving out of special act. If if the proposal Kathy, your proposal was number four, number four is the term limit on
council leadership and you would like to see it moved from special act to where I would like to see it moved period and to the extent not not in charter to the extent there's a genuine
belief that we should have a term limit I would just put it in the rules to proceed. procedure so we can live with it for a while and see whether we like it or not. I wouldn't embed it in the charter. >> So your request >> So I don't So I was doing it irrespective of which which way we went.
I would just not put it in a charter change. >> So your request is to move number four in the motion from the first bullet point of special act to the third bullet point of go. So go discusses potentially potential changes to the rules of
procedure or the charter and comes back with a recommendation. >> Exactly. Okay. Exactly. I wanted it to you have it. I wanted to remove it from the list of charter changes whereas I looked at that other set. I was somewhat indifferent to which process we used.
But I I just want to point out the processes and George you were trying to figure out time. Several of these not all of them we can do anytime we want. A few we can't because we're literally changing like the definition of public forum. It's written in the charter and
we can't change that. >> So a few of the other things if we decided to simplify the way we do measures we could do it in in rule. We could just do some of them you know and in other words we could >> only one person at a time >> you know so I'm just thinking as I went
through of these charter changes are permanent changes and we have to live with them. If there's some things we like the idea of and want to try it out, we can do it in rules of procedure. Some things if we want to do it, we can't even try it out. Like the definition of
public for we have to change it. It's just it's cumbersome the way it's written. So I go through those recommendations with that screen, but I was comfortable with what Mandy had done as a grouping, you know, except for four. I went one, two, three, four. She
she what she you you had a large number of them listed as in whether it's in in special act or putting it to vote and the reason I said special act is I feel like we can putting some of these
nuances to vote by people in the town feels crazy to me you know so and a special act will happen at some point and we can do many of them if we want to while waiting for the legislature to do but there is this discreet number
we can't do because there are they are our local law so that's so I would go I think I would go special act but I wanted to remove four together >> so so Kathy's pro hold on we're going to deal with Kathy's proposal Kathy's
proposal is to on the motion Athena can you just scroll up to page page one the motion is to move the number four from the first bullet point to the third bullet bullet point. So, it's listed under the go section there. Um, Athena has
highlighted it right there. We are going to straw pull this. Is there any discussion at this time on that movement? Keep in mind it is nearly 900 p.m. and we have probably four or five others of these to discuss tonight. This is not a final vote. This is just a
straw poll to try and get these all so that in two weeks when we vote, the vote goes a little quicker. Um, Pam, you wanted to discuss this one? >> I'd like to discuss the fact that we perhap I'm going to suggest that the first bullet and second bullet actually
be combined. To me, it doesn't matter at this point if something is going into a special act or to chapter 43b. Um, I think that KP Law is going to be looking at it no matter which way we go. So, I don't care which bucket it goes
into at this point. Can we say special act or 43B to amend the charter for the following recommendations and just combine it into one bucket? >> So, let's deal with that after we deal with moving number four out of that list
and then we'll talk about the potential for combining into one bucket. Okay. So, we're going to straw pull moving number four from special act to sending to referring to go. The way we
did straw polls last time, let's see if this works this time. Um, is that we all raised our hands in the Zoom window and then I read those out. Um, I don't know whether Athena wants that or not. It it
seemed to will that be okay Athena that that way we don't have to roll call it in a sense. So >> point of order. >> Yes, Andy. >> So if we are uh voting to pull number four out of
this category and send it to G. Are we expecting Joel to decide whether it should be in the rules or in the charter or what are we expecting them to do with it? I thought ta I thought um Kathy was looking to bas basically table it but
>> she did not ask for tableabling. She asked for it to potentially be in the rules which would be a referral to go. >> So so go would then make a recommendation whether it should be a charter amendment or whether it should change the rules. >> I I did specify in what I've put here a recommendation for a rule change.
Um, that's not elegantly worded, but to go to recommend a rule change on number four, >> Kathy, I actually was doing something stronger. I'm fine for G. I didn't want it in the charter. So, it wasn't a
recommendation to go in the charter or not. It was to consider do we want to have it in our own rules and we try putting term elements in and uh see how it works. So I I didn't want to um make it a
legislative change in the charter. So I wasn't asking go to within a week or two weeks to report back to us whether we're I was actually asking for a vote to not have it be in the charter change. But I'm happy to consider it if we wanted to
live with term limits for a while. And I think there's nothing prohibiting us legislatively from doing that to ourselves. So Kathy has asked that it be within the referral to go but for a rule change consideration, substantive rule
change consideration. So that is what the straw poll is on. If you raise your hand, we're going to have two raise hand sessions. The first raise hand is going to be to keep it under the special act consideration bullet point. The second time I ask for raise hand, it
will be to move it to go for a potential rule change. recommendation. So if you want >> councelor Ko Martin. >> Yeah. Can we make a third option that we would like to see it in both?
>> You you want both a special act and a rule change? >> Yeah, because I think that we could make a rule change more quickly and then we could wait for the special act process which is going to take much longer anyway. So,
>> so then just raise your hand for both. >> Okay. >> I was going to say point of order. I I don't know that that would be necessary. If if a counselor wants this as a rule change at any point, they can also propose it tomorrow in the exact wording uh for GO to take up. It doesn't necessarily need to be part of this
>> Yeah. process. >> Correct. Um but yeah, so raise your hand. So, we're going to if you would like it as part of a number four, term limits for leadership as part of a special act under this motion that will be brought to the council next week.
Raise your hand in the zoom application and I will read those names out. >> Um, councelor Mloud had his hand up beforehand. >> Did you want to speak, Sam? You need to hold >> Thank you. Sorry to bring this up again. Special act versus 43b. Since we're
>> charter change, we're just dealing with charter change right now. Wherever that ends up because we haven't decided how. So, right now they're just listed in special act, but assume charter change. >> I thought I heard you say special act. >> I I am because that's where it is in the bullet point now, but we haven't dealt
with how we're going to change the charter yet. >> Okay, very good. >> So, I'm using special act as charter change >> shorthand. Okay. If you want to keep it in the special act for charter change for term limits for council leadership, please raise your hand in the zoom
application now. >> And the alternative vote, forgive me, >> would be go rule change. So special special act um right now has Brevik, cano Martin,
Lord Walker, and Churchill. Welcome councelor Walker. We didn't catch you when you came in, but welcome. Um, so that is five for special act. Um, for those who wish to move it to the rule change go refer, please raise your hand.
Now that is Hanicki, Cano, Martin, Rooney, Goth, Develin, Gothier, Mloud, Tob, Ryan, Greimer, and Shane. That is nine in rule change. Um for the straw poll, we're going to move it from rule ch from
special act to rule change based on the straw poll results at this time. So we're going to move on to um councelor Ko Martin asked for 11 to be considered and councelor cano Martin number 11 is
um the council with the power to hire its own legal counsel for secondary opinion. Uh it was put in table um based on the straw poll of six counselors leaning towards opposing it,
four leaning towards supporting and three unsure. Um so it was put in table for that reason. Councelor Keno Martin, where are you proposing to move it to? >> Um I would move it to um I guess wherever we decide if we're going to do special act or 43b. I don't know what
we've decided, but one of those two. >> So charter change. Yeah. >> Okay. So, the options right now Oh, I haven't unraised my hand. The options right now are
to keep it under table or to move to what I'm going to call special act. Um just for sake of ease.
Um all those that would like to keep it under table which is where it was proposed in the published motion. >> Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Councelor Breick, you had your hand up. >> That's okay. Just point of clarification
I guess. Just can we also vote on referring it to go? Can we >> Sure. V is an option >> just just because there I think it it feels like it's either don't talk about it at all or put it up the
highest. So I I feel like there should be options in between if people just want to see it considered further. Sure. So we will do three and then we'll see which one gets the most. Um so it is currently listed in table. So, we're
going to start with table and then we're going to go to special act or charter change and then we're going to go to go for further consideration. >> Just it's currently listed as table meaning no action. >> No action. Yes. Yeah. Um so if we're
going to do the straw pull the same way we did the last one. If you would like to leave it where it's listed now, which is table no action, please raise your hand. Hands raised include Hanicki, Shane, Greimeamer, Churchill, and Ryan. That is five for leaving it as no action. If you
would like to um do a charter change, I'm just going to try charter change at this point. Please raise your hand. Now, we have Cano Martin and Tob. And if you would like to send it to go, please raise your hand. Now
we have Cano, Martin, Tub, Mloud, Rooney, Devon, Gothier, Brevik, Brevik, and Walker. So that's seven for G. sending it to go. Okay. Um, we're going to come back to yours number
six because that one's much more difficult. Um, I wanted to propose a a number of these, but I'm going to stick with number um um 14 and 16. I want to consider these
together and move them to go consideration. I want to redisuss those two. 14 and 16 are the public forum definitions. Um I would love go to discuss whether it's
necessary to actually put the definitions in the charter or whether they can be in the rules we saw tonight what in the charter potentially results in. So I I would like to move that one from charter change to go discussion. um
both of them, 14 and 16, one's council, one's school committee. Um so that's one of my proposals to move on the motion. Um Andy and Anna, you have discussion on that and Sam, did you have discussion on
that? No. Okay, Andy. Yeah, just I mean what we saw tonight is the exact reason why the charter review committee suggested that the definition be stricken and then the description of public forums for both council and
school committee would say that it's back and forth discussion but it's not 50/50 time-wise. So there was a reason why we proposed that to deal with so so that we don't have to sit around doing this time thing that is mathematical and
time wasting >> right >> um Anna can I clarify the um 90 days piece in uh so I'm I'm looking at this as go chair and I'm looking at the other things that go and I do not disagree
that this should go to go but I'm trying to be very cognizant of my committee's time and how we are able to uh get to things and then bring them back to the council from this as well as the other obligations that we have. So could you clarify the deadlines for things coming
out of go? That doesn't necessarily impact whether or not people in my mind whether or not people should vote to refer. Uh but I'm I'm aware that we're referring a whole lot right now. >> The the proposed motion has June 29th for a return from go. That was just a a
date. We can discuss the date. Okay. Um and it has a July 20 return date for finance because we thought when we were discussing dates that June 29 would be cruel for finance. >> I hear you. So, so the dates are up for discussion.
>> Is it a refer? Is it a report back or is it a report and recommendation? >> Report. Okay. Thank you. That was my clarifying point. Thank you. >> Okay. Um Kathy discussion on 14 and 16 moving from charter change to go discussion. >> Um I think I'm not sure it are you
proposing it just gets removed altogether from the charter and we define it and we put it in rules of procedure in which case I'm not in favor of that. I think the simple change that was recommended is it's we're trying to
get rid of that 50/50 time that adds to the awkwardness and defi define it any way we want that gets rid of that is fine with me. >> I am not proposing I'm I'm I have not proposed the
moving the proposal to delete the definition in 1.7. This is this is the added green 16 is up here now. the added green um which is well well there's there's a couple of added greens for public forum in number 14 it's dedicated
solely to the topics required by the section um and so that I'm proposing a go discussion instead of adding to the charter immediately because that means we have to call it as a separate meeting instead of part of a regular meeting that would be like public hearings right
now are part of a regular meeting um but adding that green language would require continuing to call it as a separate meeting with separate minutes and separate everything. Um I thought better more discussion on the 14 days notice of time and date. Um just just further thing doesn't mean it can't change the
charter but I thought it could use some further discussion as to whether the charter actually needs to have all of that in green or whether that could be in the rules. I still I'm not proposing changing using like getting rid of the reference to a public forum. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, you're just you don't not necessarily like the green language that's been added, >> right? >> And but you don't mind getting rid of the 50% of the time. >> Oh, no. I think we need to. >> And and then I think the town attorney added some wording, too. So, you're
asking go. So, it's Anna's point. You're asking go to say what language would we want to see in the charter that everybody likes >> versus the rules? Because the rules are easier to change than the charter. Yeah, >> but you still have to define what it is
if you're calling for it. >> You don't necessarily have to define the definition of public form. And >> so you could just say there shall be a public form period. >> Yeah. >> And then later on someone figures out what that is. That I like that a lot. >> Hence my request to move it from charter
change to rule to see if that's what we want to do. So, we're going to straw poll 14 and 16, moving from the charter change bullet points to the go bullet points. Um,
if you want to keep it, we're always starting with where it was initially put tonight. If you want to keep it as a charter change bullet point, please raise your hand. >> We have Churchill and Greimer. Sorry, I I don't have clarity on this. Can I just ask a question before
continue? >> Couldn't KP law tell us what language should or should not be in this as far as, you know, whether we need the 14 days notice? I mean, I'm I'm worried about overloading go with something that's fairly minor. So right now this
the proposed motion is to send to KP law things we want changed in the charter with ideas of that language the specific language and if we don't know the language send it to go to discuss the language >> point of clarification go will not be mad if one of the ones that you give us
is easy to just knock out of the park quickly. Okay. So, if you want to keep the 14 and 16 in the charter change bullet point, please raise your hand. Now, we have no hands raised. If you want to
move it to the go bullet point, please raise your hand. Now we have Haneki, Mloud, Ta, Develin, Gothia, Churchill, Canel, Martin, Walker, Rooney, Ryan, Brevik, Shane, and Greimer. Um, so 12.
Okay. Um, are are there any other at this time people would like to consider moving? Can we see the motion again? I have a question. >> Um,
Lynn. Um, regardless of what GO thinks might go in rules of procedure, there is going to have to be a charter change to get rid of that
50%. >> Yes, that's actually number one, which is listed under the main motion for special act. Delete the definition of public forum. >> Got it. Thank you. Uh Kathy.
Oh, Sam. >> Uh thank you, Mandy. I'm not sure if I want to remove it or not, but I'd like to discuss the language of number six before we vote to send it to a particular destination. >> Okay. So, six um
the language can can you put six up? So the language right now, let me pull up a different document for me is to essentially just move. So so six itself is not changing the
definition of measure. That is number three I believe which is a different recommendation. that recommendation is sitting and and so what six is doing at this point um is simply moving
210A that affirmative vote of a majority of the full town council necessary for passage of a bylaw into 26C um without changing any quantum of votes required because the definition of measure changes some of the quantum of
votes. Um, so right now proposal number six is simply putting all of the vote quantums in the same section. But when we had our discussion at the work session on this, there was I'll say
I I proposed um present and voting. Um, and a number of counselors were unsure which they wanted and it became very clear at
one point that all of it given how everything in the charter is worded was confusing. So in last week's meeting packet I created I think it was five different charts that doesn't alleviate
any confusion necessarily. Um that sort of gave all of the options for voting quantums and what the language would look like because the charter review committee's goal from their final report was to in changing
the definition of measure and in moving this here was to simplify the non how how many things need how many different voting quantum there are. So they added everything into measure to get rid of
non-measures having a different voting quantum. Um in creating the chart to which was requested by a counselor to hopefully ease stuff, what I realized was that definition didn't really
simplify the voting quantums at all if the goal was to simplify knowing how many votes you need. um hence the large number of charts. So the recommendation based on I know
there was a majority that said support present but based on the conversation and based on that creation of a chart it seemed like the council needed a discussion as to how simplified does it
want its voting quantums to be. And until we know how simplified that is, it's hard to come up with language. Um the easiest one is can you Athena put up just pick one of the the last the
last packets document um from I think it was the 23rd that had the the voting quantum one in it. um was item seven, charter voting options
from the 23rd packet, February 23rd's packet, cuz it'll be easier to explain seeing that. So once we share this if The highlighted I this one right now is
our current voting quantum in the rules. The whole right box that's our rules. So, so, so hold on. This is the rules. Um, and our rules because our charter
refers to things like full town council sometimes as to what the vote is required or sometimes refers to those present but not the full town council and other times refers to present and voting means that sometimes we have votes that require nine
versus 2/3. Um, some require 2/3 of those present and voting. Some and so we have all these different layers of voting quantums. Right now, the ones that are highlighted um are
those that move depending on on what the language in 26C says. And so if you want to simplify and have
less numbers of categories, um I think Athena, the simplest on this is the very last one. If you go to the last page, and I'm not saying I propose this, but but this is what these charts show. And this is what referral to go could talk about. You
look at this chart and you then instead of having I think one two three four five six different categories, you end up with one 2 3 four voting categories because you eliminate two of the
categories depending on how the wording goes. And this also has some examples of what happens on an actual vote. And I used the same examples so you could see how it changes based on the wording. um and the blue is what the wording is to get this result. So the other thing that is
complicating even consolidating this down further if the council would want to consolidate those four into say two majority and 2/3 is um or three there's a 10 in there is the references in the
charter to full town council because that requires no matter how many people are present or voting or either seven or nine. Um, and so if you remove some of those references to full town
council, you simplify this chart even further. But that I did not do that on this chart. So this is this is why despite the straw poll, the motion has it going to go so they can essentially discuss these options in the chart.
Sam, >> uh, thank you, man. Mandy, it's certainly a complicated process and it sounds like you're on top of it. But uh the reason I asked the question is from my own perspective, I have less concern about simplification and more concern or
seeking understanding as to what is actually changing. For example, I see zoning in there in a couple of places where there's a seven or nine. And I'm not certain what the in the new proposed language I see financial measures and
bylaws. Uh so I'm wondering as an example what has changed for the zoning category that had nine previously since it's not a bylaw or I assume it's not a bylaw. >> Zoning by it is a bylaw. Okay. So there
in lies there is an example of my lack of understanding about uh what is actually changing as opposed to how simple it is. Athena, can you put page two up? One down. Page two is what that that one right
there is what the proposal of the charter review committee changed. So anything in red moved. So stabilization fund moved up from twothirds of president and voting to nine votes.
Financial orders that don't require twothirds got added because as a special category because they weren't specifically split out. They were included in measures before. uh the the rightmost column,
the middle column shows you what any particular vote whether it fails or not because some people wanted examples of specific votes and what that means for a vote the sort of example. So the middle column says if
you pass the language on the left column a 65 vote on a financial order with two people abstaining fails because it doesn't receive a majority of the full town council. Thank you for taking the time to explain. I have another question. You indicated that on the right hand column
those are in red are indicative of what is changing from item number six. Is that correct? >> Is what is changing from our current rules. >> Yeah. If if six this this particular page is proposed is
what the charter review committee proposed the other pages are other options. >> So if I read this correctly from what I'm seeing on screen uh issues related to zoning do not change under item number six.
>> Correct. And most items that require twothirds majority by state or otherwise uh be they financial or bylaws don't change. The items that are changing with number six, if I understand what you're indicating correctly, are uh spending
money from the stabilization fund, financial orders that do not require twothirds vote, whichever they might be, uh filling a counselor vacancy. Are those the only three items that are changing under financial orders change under the charter review committee's
proposal. Financial orders change from a majority present vote or a 2/3 present vote to a flat 2/3 or majority of the full council. So either seven or nine no
matter how many are present but right now they are majority or twothirds of those present. >> Could you repeat that please? I'm sorry. >> Currently, any financial order that's not borrowing or doesn't require 2/3
requires a majority of those present to pass. The charter review committee's proposal would move that to seven. >> So, it's actually an increase potentially if people are absent. >> Yes.
>> The new measure would be that >> the charter review committee's proposal Uh I believe your explanations are helpful to me. Uh I hope that I haven't burdened time that others didn't understand it either. I have a feeling
it might have been confusing to others. But in summary again since this is significant we're sending it to uh one method perhaps go and the essence of the change are the items whatever page number three that we're looking at here.
Uh the items in red are what is changing and the vote totals are not being lessened. They're perhaps being increased if there are absences. >> So if if it goes to go, go consider not just the
final reports recommendation of the charter review committee. They could consider different options to the rest of that too. >> Yeah. What the current recommendation is not reducing the vote totals with to pass anything. >> No, not that's not what the charter
review committee's recommendation was. The charter review committee's recommendation was not to reduce any vote totals as currently acted on. >> Perhaps I misspoke. Uh the current
number six that we're proposing to send for consideration by go in its current language does not reduce correct required vote totals for anything to occur. >> Correct. And uh the items that are twothirds, the most important ones,
bylaws, which include zoning and certain financial measures, borrowing, um would still require >> two of the total council regardless of who's present. >> No. Under the fine under the charter
right now, a borrowing authorization, if we were to vote it, requires twothirds of those are present. The charter review committee's recommendation was to change that to nine no matter how many are present. So if only eight
people are present in a meeting, you cannot pass a borrowing authorization under if if we were to adopt the charter review committee's recommendation. >> And under what we're submitting currently for review by go, if this
passes, do we retain the nine or are we >> We don't have nine right now. What final the charter review committee recommended was a nine and that is part of what would be submitted to go for consideration >> and then depending on what they recom so
we don't have an opinion in what we're sending to them we're saying here are the varying options that people >> we may have an opinion if people want to vote options but when we had it at the work session there was very much confusion as to what the language actually resulted in hence the charts.
>> Could we display it again? >> Number six. >> So number six is Yeah. We're going to move on to Andy. I I guess I I'd like to con I'd like to briefly consider number nine
that the the idea of um having all of our committees have resident members. Um primarily because of our capacity to appoint those members. were already appointing I'm on committees that are appointing members
of other committees or or and now we're going to have to have three additional committees that were that were vetting and approving residents to be on those committees. And I'm just wondering if we want to try that in rules rather than in
um the charter. So, I'm going to explain the difference between the charter versus the rules on that one before we go to a straw poll on that. If it's in the rules because the charter
assigns the appointment of town council standing and ad hoc committees, the appointment of members to to those committees to the president. If this language were in the rules, the president would appoint the members of
the public. We can do it, but it would be a presidential appointment, not a town council appointment. In order to make it a town council appointment of members of the public, you have to reference it in the charter. So the difference between
putting number nine in the charter and in the rules is not can you do it. It's who the appointing authority is. It's the second sentence. Yeah. It's the third sentence in green. Council rule
shall address the appointment of such members. Allows the council to appoint the resident members, not the president. But that has to be in the charter because otherwise the charters 2.3 2 whatever
wherever it is in that gives the president the authority to appoint the members of council committees would would give the authority to appoint members of the public to those council committees too to the president. So that's that's a difference between rules
and charter there. There is a different application there as to whether it goes. We can take the straw poll as to whether to keep charter change or move to rules and I'll do that. But I wanted to make sure the council knew the difference on what that
change is. >> I'm not sure I understand. I'm sorry. >> So the language that's proposed here is the same language that allows the council to appoint non- voting finance committee members. It's just in a different section of the charter. Yeah, but if it's not included in the charter,
it means if the council committees have non voting resident members, the president appoints those members, not the council. >> But we in finance, that's not the way it's worked >> because finance is in the charter. It is the only committee in the charter
that is required and it is the only committee in the charter that has um the potential of other >> I know that but we decided that the council would appoint those we decided the president didn't so we didn't have council shall determine we just it was blank
>> all right the council that we decision the >> the charter decided that >> the the charter gives the council the opportunity of appointing non- voting members to the finance committee and it and it says that it can be governed by the rules.
>> The rules say that the go makes a recommendation to the council to appoint a member of the finance committee. >> 5.5B has in it >> quote the finance committee may include members of the public who shall have a voice but no vote in the finance committee's deliberation. Council rules
shall address the appointment of such members. So the charter does say that which is why the council can appoint the finance resident members not the president >> and so without that language in 2.6E the
president would appoint any members of the public to the council committees. >> So are you saying that addresses my concern about council capacity? >> I'm not saying that. I just wanted to make sure people understood the difference between if it goes in the
charter, the rules can say the president can appoint it or the council can appoint it or the manager can appoint those members. The rules could assign that appointment to anyone, but if it's not in the charter, the president does the appointing.
>> Okay. All right. >> So, if you want more choices, it needs to be in the charter. Does that make sense? So we can straw pull that and we will straw pull that. Andy's proposal is to move number nine from a charter change to a go.
I sorry I I I actually think my my proposal is to table it. I I I think that having me resident members of other committees other than finance, I think it's I think it's confusing and I think it conflates
volunteers with elected officials in a way that is different from the finance committee. Okay, we have a lot of hands up and I'm getting confused as to who wants to talk about what and I know we moved off of Sam's, but we were taking a lot of time with that and I thought we needed to move off that unless Sam has a proposal
to actually change it on the thing. We can always try and discuss what that what go discuss later, but it seems like people need more time to think about that one. Um, so we're on number nine. Wait,
which is resident members of council committees. Andy is proposing a move from charter change down to table. So no change at all, which does not prohibit the council from allowing resident members on its
council committees. The default would be that the president appoints those resident members, but the charter doesn't prohibit them, which means the council could put resident members on its own committees under charge. So, no change just means we could choose to to do it.
Kathy want to say one thing, Andy. If you look at the words, it says may, it doesn't say shall. We actually had a long discussion whether we even wanted them in finance and we finally decided we did. So it doesn't require it. Th this that's what I'm saying was people
are voting on if it's in the charter. It doesn't force us to have it because the word is may the way it's worded right now. So that's the only thing I wanted to say on nine. The way it's worded right now. >> I'm straw pull on moving number nine to
table. Those those Oh, Anna. Sorry. >> Oh, you want to say it like that. >> No, I can't keep track of who's got their hand up for what. Sorry. >> So, no, it's okay. Um, I was going to make the same point Kathy made about May. I do have to agree with Andy broadly though. I I hope that should
this go into eventually through whatever course it takes into the charter. I don't think that this is a helpful idea. I think that we've and and I will leave it at that for when it comes back. But I I don't think it's a helpful idea and I support tableabling it. >> Any other comments on this one? Lynn, is
your hand up for this one? Yeah, I actually um having experienced this on the finance committee have felt that it was actually a terrific idea and has led to a way of helping people think about being on council and also gets at the
issue that too many people feel excluded, if you will, from their um from being part of government. So, um, I'd like to continue to have it as a
option and maybe future councils decide not to. So, the word may for me takes care of that. Having said that, it's tough to recruit people. It's tough to then interview and recommend them, but it
still provides a serious opportunity for citizen engagement at a level that otherwise doesn't happen. >> Okay, we're going to straw pull this one. If you want to keep it in the bullet point for a charter change, raise
your hand now. I'm just trying to move things along. We have Greimer, Cano, Martin, Shane, Walker, Rooney, Brevik, Lord, and Mloud. That is eight. If you would like to table it, please raise your hand. Now,
I'm I'm giving some time here. We have Devon, Gothier, Churchill, Ryan, and Tob. So for now it will stay in the charter change section. Okay. Um
point point of order. >> Yes. PM >> that last that last discussion on number nine has nothing to do with uh re-evaluation of the number of counselors involved in a committee should we have residents on the
committee. And that's a another whole topic. Does that get discussed in equal measure or how does how does something like that get discussed? And is that just a rule change rather than a if you would like
to change a charge of a council committee or a rule of our council rules of procedure, you can propose that at any time and have it referred to go. You have to propose it in a form that can be adopted. Uh, Athena, >> I I believe the committees themselves are tasked with reviewing their own
charges every year and and asking Goo to review them and then those come back to the council. >> Um, I would like to propose number 19 be tabled. Number 19 is similar to number nine, but
this is turning the finance committee from May to shall. So it would require 19. And I agree it's worked well so far, but I would like the charter to still have
flexibility. So I'm proposing to table that one. Right now it's proposed for special act adoption. So I would propose to move it to table. Um is there discussion on that? Kathy.
>> Um I think the word shall's important. I think we'll keep it hopefully for a long time. I think pre-consel the old finance committee of town meeting worked very well because we got people
who knew something about finance and were willing to volunteer. And since we have three-year terms with an opportunity to be on for another three years, we have people that learn the budget and they have institutional knowledge, which is not necessarily true
of counselors. both we might change every year which five people are are on the finance committee and then there's a learning curve and if they don't stay that learning is gone. I think both what Lynn said it's provided a potential
pipeline for future counselors but it's also provided an entree for people who just want to work on the budget and financial issues. Um, the only barrier that I found, the old recruitment used to go to the department of finance and
management at UMass. And I spoke to one who used to be on finance. He says, "I don't want to be on a committee that I don't even have a vote on." But I think that's been dispelled because we do ask a vote if we get a support vote or not. So, I think this has been a
strengthening feature because it was allowed and I think it should be a shelf. So that's that's my reason I think it's an institutional strength to have non-counsel members. Now it may be over time we don't always get a great
pool but we've had some really good people on the finance committee who weren't counselors bringing strength knowledge experience um that many of us didn't have before.
>> Thank you Lynn. Um I believe in creating maximum flexibility in the charter and I therefore I would keep May. I think that this that allows down the road the option of saying no. Uh at the same time
what the practice has been has been very successful. I I would not I would I would therefore vote to take this off. >> Um we're going to move to a straw poll on this one. Please raise your hand in the Zoom window if you would like to
keep it as a charter change the may to to change the charter to shall at this point. Raise your hand in Zoom. >> This is a vote to keep to change to shell. >> Keep it in the bullet point of changing to shall. Yeah.
Um we have Shane Brevik and Mloud. raise your hand in the Zoom window if you would like to table this change which would then keep it as may. We have Hanaki, Greamemer, Delin,
Gothier, Churchill, Ryan, Cano, Martin, Tob Rooney, and Walker. That is nine. So, that one's going to move to table. Okay. Are there any other requests?
Can we put the motion sort of as it's sort of been changed tonight? Yes, we've got tableabling is 19, not nine.
Um, so 19 gets deleted in the first one. Okay. Now, there was a request to discuss whether we combine essentially bullets one and two and essentially say to the town attorney, I I think Pam, your suggestion was just to request the
town attorney prepare language for charter change at their own discretion on whether it should be 43b or special act, like leave it to the town attorney to make the recommendation. special act and or 43b
>> at their discretion. So, so leave it to the attorney. Um thoughts on that? Uh councelor Ryan? >> Just uh why would we leave it to the attorney? Why would we let the attorney decide
whether it would be one or the other? We feel that they would have some kind of I mean they probably have a lot more they certainly have a lot more experience than I do. Um, but just somebody help me understand why we want to leave this up to the attorney as opposed to just asking them to prepare all the language
um, so that it's legally appropriate and then we will decide what we want to do with it. >> Are you meaning prepare say I'm just going to take number one which was delete the definition of public form. Prepare that both as a special act and a 43b.
>> So the language would be different in each case. >> Yes. And so that would be obviously a great deal of labor and people are comfortable with letting the attorney decide because they simply would know what that Yeah. What would they know?
>> Well, well, this is the discussion. Do we want the attorney to decide or do we want to decide? And if we want to decide, which way does the council want to go? That's that's the decision. And >> that's what I earlier started this sort of mental or just, >> you know, thinking start a thought
experiment. Imagine that we go the route of 43B and it requires twothirds vote of the council. Then it goes to the attorney general and then we go to the voters and we have to explain to them um what we have done and
then they will make the final decision and that will happen we think in November of 2027. If we go the route of a special act, requires only a majority vote of the council. Um, we ask u Mindy DOM to file
a special act that it goes into a well, I won't call it a black hole, but it goes into a maybe a brown hole where you're not quite sure what's going to come out. And, you know, maybe it'll come out quickly or maybe it'll never come out, but eventually it comes out. Um, and in the process, they could also
require us to also send some of the things to the voters. So, as I describe that process, at least in my own mind, I'm thinking this really sounds terrifying. On the other hand, the first process, basically, since we've worked hard on this, this the
citizen body has worked hard on it, it would require us to go to the voters and district meetings or however forums we create and try to explain to them what they're voting on. Um, whereas, if it goes to the the state house,
who knows what's going to happen. I mean, maybe some of it will come back and will go to the voters. Maybe it'll all be decided by them. As I think this out, just in my own mind, I think the first strategy seems preferable to the second, but >> what's your first strategy?
>> Strategy is 43B. >> Okay. >> The one I Yeah. But anyway, right. >> Um, Councelor Ko Martin. >> Yeah. Um, I concur with councelor Ryan. I think that either process is difficult, but at least with the voter process that we know we can get it on
the ballot next year, whereas with the special act, it could just go there to die. So I yeah, I would support what councelor Ryan said. Councelor Brevik, >> I wonder if it might be helpful to
think about if there are specific um specific numbers that we really think or feel should go to the voters. like just and I don't know if we have time
for a discussion like this or what we're how we're really going about this right now, but to me it might it might help to get a sense of what type of thing we're say, you know, like what or are we or are we really saying it's all or nothing? It's all going to the
voters or it's um or it's all going to a special act. I I guess sorry it's late and I'm not picking my words. Great. But um I think to me it actually feels like the special act process would be easier on
everybody. It would be smooth and maybe not take that much longer actually in the scheme of things. And so I guess I might just be interested to hear what people think really would be worth packaging up and and sending to the voters.
Lynn, >> I wonder if there's a step prior to this and that is to ask KP Law based on their experience which of the ones that we are putting there they think the legislature would
then come back to us and say, "Oh, but you need to have the public vote." I think they may have done that in their memo. I remember their memo at least identifying identifying at least one of the changes, right? >> I don't know whether they had identified
more, but they certainly identified at least one. And I don't know whether it's still on this list cuz I don't remember which one it is that said it will likely require a local vote. >> The this the legislature would probably say you got to send this to a vote
anyway. Right. Um but but I but we we could when we send these to them I I think that was Pam's sort of suggestion. It could be bring back special acts for those that you believe the legislature would pass without requiring a vote of
the people. Bring back 43b for those that you believe the people were. I think that's sort of where Pam was going with it. And councelor Brevik, I think, is saying, "Let's look at the actual um proposals." >> For example, number one's easy to to
talk about cuz I just remember what it is, which is delete public forum. Does the people really need to vote on that or can we just send that to a special act? Um versus, you know, something else that they might actually more care. It's not that they don't
care, but that might be more personal to the voters than the definition of public forum. >> Um I think is what councelor Breivik's suggestion is. >> And I just to finish I actually liked
councelor Brevik's point and that is are there some things that we feel the voters absolutely would like to have a voice in? And then the other one is are there areas that KP law is already giving us the signal this is probably
going to have to go for a vote and I think that's our assignment for two weeks from now >> is to use those screens. >> So to take these numbers 1 2 3 7 9 10 12 and figure out which ones you think
should be a vote of the people. >> Yes, if that's where people are going. Um, we've got Sam hasn't talked on this one, so I'm going to go to Sam and or Andy, have you talked on this one? Sam and then Andy, and then we'll go back to Pam.
>> Uh, thank you, Mandy. Uh, I I see a couple issues in terms of how to determine uh, one was George's explanation of going to the people, but we're not. But another one, if I understand correctly, there are two
different vote totals required from the council. Correct? One is twothirds and the other one is a simple majority. To me, that's the singular most important determination on whether or not we seek to go forward with some of these changes because in looking at the recommendations, there's a few of them
are like 66 8 to three on the strap holes. So I see a a distinction there between a simple majority versus a twothirds irrespective of whether or not it makes
sense to go to special uh the public or not. All things being equal, it'd be great for the public to have a say in whatever changes are, but some of these may not. But I see two different aspects of this discussion.
>> Thanks, Andy. Yeah, I was trying to um address what I think Pam's >> Can you speak closer to the mic? >> I was trying to address what I think Pam's original question was, which is do we need separate bullets for special act
amendment to the charter versus um you know 43b amendment to the charter. Can we ask KP law to give us the right language to amend the charter and that's combining one and two and
then subsequent to that to say which of these should be go you know do they recommend going via special act versus um 43b because >> so the language to amend by special act
is very different than the language to amend by 43b because the language to amend by special act, you write the special act for the legislature which looks very different than the language to amend by 43b where you write the ballot question which is prescribed by law.
>> Okay. I mean the chain you know the first question is what's >> Pam? >> That was actually my question. What is so different about writing for the special act? And it sounds like it's a
whole lot more >> Athena. I had my hand up, but councelor Bravik also did. So you don't have to call me. >> That's that's essentially it. Um, I don't want to spend town money on
attorney fees to develop this elaborate thing. Why Why is it so difficult? Can we not in the House create the language for ballot questions, if you >> They can do it quicker than we can
because they do it all the time. >> Ah, and it's prescribed by law. So they can actually do it quicker than we overall than than we can and then we would know it's right.
Yeah. Um Council Brevik. Okay. So not to add another layer of complexity, but these other items that are going to go could also presumably we could decide that we want those to go to the voters too. like that's going to be a decision-m process after they come
through go where they want to are going to go from there. So it could make sense to just keep the first bullet as it is because also in just looking through those what those items are, they kind
they are the simpler ones. So they're they're one and they're ones that had more agreement which I'm guessing is why you put them there. Um, we will still have an opportunity if we have KP Law write these up for a special
act. It'll come back to us. We could then say, actually, no, we all want that one to go to the voters and maybe one from Goo is going to go to the voter. You know, we'll be able to do that kind of maneuvering then. But at least if we can all agree that most of these feel
like they're they're more appropriate for a special act, they're not things that the voters are going to have really strong feelings on. And again, that's not binding because it'll come back to us and we can always shift then. I would personally feel comfortable with
that at this point in the game for simplicity's sake. Councelor Ryan, >> I think it was just one of these duh moments. Um, for me, um, the point that I've grasped finally is that it's not either or. We can clearly take multiple
paths here. So, thank you. That's that helps me. >> So, we're going to Athena, >> I I just have a suggestion. Um, and I'm glad that I waited till after council breick spoke because there all of them will come back from
committees for recommend for another set of discussions at the council meeting and it might make more sense for the council to determine which pathway when it has all the recommendations done and it knows what's going to be a rule change and what's going to be a charter change and is ready to act on them
finally and then asks for language from KP law one via one of the two pathways. So, we could change the language in this motion to to pursue charter amendments on the following recommendations simply for that first
bullet and not and not ask for the KP law language yet and just wait until the other ones come back from committee and do it all together because I think it makes sense to have all the special
act things that you want to do together, any potential ballot things you want to do together, any rule change things you want to do together, and kind of look at it holistically. >> I I will say I just worry that that won't be considered an action if it simply is just
>> to pursue >> to pursue with no concrete, >> but we're slaves that it is an action. Um but but what I will say is what I was going to suggest is we leave them all in special act because it seems like that's
at least from the counselors that are commenting where counselors are leaning at this point. Everyone look at the numbers that are there and say you know look and say I would really like to see maybe if there's something they want to see a 43b vote of the people on be ready for that in two weeks to ask for that.
But what I was going to say is that town attorney prepare language doesn't have a date attached to it. So it doesn't have to go immediately in terms of we can wait until go and finance come back and all to send
whatever happens there with these at that point if that makes sense so that it is as efficient as possible at that time but we'll have done something with them by the deadline. Does that make sense to
people too? Sam you have your hand up. Uh if I understand correctly, previously we said let's put them all together, just change the charter via whatever method uh for those items in number one. Uh we're going to have to make a determination at the next meeting how to
proceed in terms of what we send for the special act. In other words, at what point in time are we going to uh we can have items go into both a special act and a 43B? Correct. Um,
>> we can have >> probably not the same item. >> Correct. Items can go in one or two basket. >> We could choose to send items one, two, and three, for example, to special act items 7, 9, 10 to 43b process >> and that would be the same with the
items that are being referred to go or is that a completely separate discussion at this point in time? So go will whatever's going to go could come back with in my mind potentially depending on how it's worded a recommendation on changing the charter a recommendation
with language uh a recommendation on changing our rules of procedure with language and a re or andor a recommendation on changing charges themselves with language or all three for the same thing depending on what the thing is. Um, so we might see some of
these come back from G with just a rule change recommendation. Some of them might come back with a charter change recommendation. Some of them might come back with both >> premature in other words for the items that were sent. Let's wait and see what they say. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, thank you.
>> Is there any other discussion on this? This is we we'll modify this a little bit for next week in terms of based on this discussion. Maybe we'll see different language on the special act based on the discussion or 43B. But right now the numbers will be where they
are tonight next week. If people want they can propose moving the numbers to now that they know what they're talking about. >> Okay. Sam your hand is still up. Sam >> and and the numbers under the first category of special act are in our
discussion currently really indicative of change the charter. >> Change the charter. Yes. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Okay. Seeing no other hands. Um thank you for that long discussion and for indulging us. Um that was longer than that was quite long. Um but we're
going to move on. We needed that. Hopefully next time it will be this will serve has served us well so that it's quite quick. Next week um next council meeting we're moving on to um uh committee and liaison reports because
appointments were done under consent agenda. It is 10 p.m. I'm not going to go through every committee by itself. Are there any questions for the committees instead of having the committees report out individually? Do counselors have any questions for
committees or is there something a committee really needs to report on? Anna, >> I'm so sorry. Two really quick things. Please read the bylaw review committee charge thoroughly if you didn't. It was in your packet. We passed it on consent. It's a really exciting and important committee and go worked really hard in that. So, thanks for passing it unanimously. Second, GO is doing
interviews for uh non- voting members of finance tomorrow at 6:30 p.m. should you like to observe from the audience. >> Say what time again? >> 6:30 p.m. on Zoom. and go will be taking up um applications for the bylaw review committee now. So those will be active. I'll send the link
to the um calf >> and we'll refine the calf to add that as an option >> and I will be petitioning very hard against adding resident members to all other committees because of all of this. Sorry um unnecessary but yeah we will be starting that soon as well. So keep keep
your eyes peeled. >> Any other questions for committees or leaison or reports? Jennifer, >> this is an announcement. >> Oh, um, we'll get to that after town manager report. Does that sound good? Town manager report.
>> So, given the hour, I'm open to any questions. I know some of you do have questions if you'd like me to address anything. >> No, >> no written reports next meeting. >> Next time. >> Um, councelor Keno Martin.
>> Hi. Um Paul, I just wanted to see if you could give us an update on where we're at with having enough um people to appoint the members of the reparations committee. >> Um so that is something I don't think we have many applicants for it and I think
the um profile of the candidates who have put their names in aren't really matching up with where um the appointing group were hoping to get. So we're re still recruiting. We've asked people to reach out to people um uh and we we
basically we asked Michelle Miller who chaired the AHR or yes I think she chaired the H Ah um to give us guidance on when we're ready to move on that but really we're looking for candidates. >> Thank you Athena. Could you unshare
sorry councelor Kamar Thank you. Okay. And um and Paul, I just had one other question if you could just share with the council the executive order that you put out and thank you for that. >> Oh, sure. So, we're going to put out a statement to sort of promote that a little bit more. So, it's an executive order that um responds to the council's
resolution and um it's something we had worked out in advance of that. But um it really does sort of try to um follow the uh lead of the governor and some communities in eastern Massachusetts to establish what the town's process is,
what our police department will do. Um, and so I think it's it really um tries to be pretty explicit about reaffirming ourselves as a sanctuary community. Um, and um, living by our our
our mission, being what we are, who we are as a community. That that's not very articulate, but I'm sorry. We'll have something out first thing in the morning, actually. >> Thank you, Kathy. Oh, councelor Brevik
is on my sorry she was listed first. >> Um, well, I'll reiterate what Amber said to you and thank you for that that executive order. I appreciated that. I had a question because I I'm sure a lot of us are getting questions about I know we've talked a lot about the roads but
about the current just situation with potholes and forgive me if this is some information that's out there easily accessible but is there a place where we can see what roads are coming up what are the next roads that will be paved and in
what order and I think that would really help us if you know to direct people to just have a sense of what's coming up um in the immediate future. Sure. So, uh, the next we'll be making a presentation to the TSO committee in April. I forget which meeting we've chosen, uh, where
that entire plan will be laid out to the council. You're all welcome to, uh, part, you know, to participate in that meeting, obviously. Um, and at that meeting, we talked a little bit about the um, the condition of roads, the different treatment methods, and then we shared the work plan for the coming
year. uh we had to wait till tonight to find out how much money we had so we'll know how how far we can go down the list >> and with actual street names listed out. Okay, great. >> Yes, >> Kathy, >> I sent this question to Paul earlier and
Paul I didn't actually expect to answer tonight. So, um, seeing your note to us on how many ambulance runs there were because of the weekend, h how many police were out, how many extra time. I wonder I I thought it'd be a good idea
for the town to do a reasonable estimate of the cost to us in terms of people, overtime hours that were put into a a 24-hour event. And then I my understanding is UMass campus people
don't help. They they were very happy for what we did, but the campus police I think don't come off campus um for what was in North Ammerst you could still see evidence of what went on you know so there's a cleanup part that happens
afterwards and then there's so I I quantifying that um uh and then in the future trying to think of how can we avoid it you know it's this year was less bad than last year because the weather was miserable But 20 trips
um in an ambulance is not a small amount from kids drinking too much. Yeah. >> So so I would I mean I think um this year it's diff was different and I think for a lot of good reasons. There were a lot there was a lot of advanced planning. The university dedicated a lot more resources to the town to be able to
have nine external ambulances on scene so that it was less of an impact on our staff. Um all all of them were used. There were 20 transports, but that's during the course of the day. Um, you know, the UMass police were out early inter with interdiction efforts on
campus and at bus stops. Uh, anybody who was carrying uh alcohol and they seem to be underage, they were actually interdicting and so we appreciated that work in advance. um it didn't materialize like it did last year and I think that was because of some additional planning by the um
Ammerst Police Department and their community partners to sort of um they as they said titrate the uh the the attendance in different ways without being uh overly confrontational. uh as what has happened, you know, that event
pretty much um died out at townhouse by noon, one o'clock. Uh and then we saw lines developing in the afternoon at the bars downtown uh at the spoke at uh the recck room at Mc Murphy's which had just opened up in Stackers. Um that's not too
unusual at night. It was a little bit surprising and we're we're g we have a afteraction analysis tomorrow with all the pe all the town staff who are involved to sort of um unpack how everything went to understand what we could do better. We already know there are some things that we can do better.
Um but I think the um anything that the town asked for in terms of external support the university said yes to. So, in terms of financial, um, they covered all the external expenses, but I think you're asking what did it cost us internally for the town, right?
>> Did, but I I did see you got mutual support, too. So, we're we're it's spilling over to all the communities around us. >> Well, actually, it it it it does, but it's planned. And that was the that was the concern last year was that there we were calling in ambulances uh on a
moment's notice. This year, everybody who came in was contracted in advance. They knew what to expect. They had people coming in and we had private ambulance companies as well. Everybody who came in was well prepared. There was no call. I I don't think there were any
calls from mutual aid at all um for ambulance or police um support. Um we released most of our mutual aid partners by 2:00 in the afternoon. Uh state police stayed on scene. Um, I'm not sure how late they stayed, but they have a a tactical unit that stays in town as well
that to support Ammerst Police Department. >> Thank you. >> Anna, what's your question? Kathy asked my question. >> Okay. >> Um, see no other hands for the town manager report. We'll move to council comment sections. I my reports in the
packet. Um, future agenda items and then we'll move to you, Jennifer. Um, because I know you have something. So, future agenda items right now. Next meeting, March 23rd, we'll have a public forum on the Aaron property
purchase if it's out of finance by that point. The financial order we just referred today, we'll have potentially three proclamations. They're all in go right now. Um action item. It's our final deadline. Well, it's our deadline because it's our last meeting before the final action on charter. So, what we
just spent a lot of time on tonight will hopefully go a lot quicker in two weeks because of the time we spend tonight. um uh purple heart town signs to go with the proclamation that is coming. CPA presentation and referral to finance is
slated for two weeks from now. So the presentation from the CPA committee recommendations at this point it's slated for for the 23rd. Um maybe univers well and we'll be discussing this tomorrow. So this is just what's I'm I'm reading from the working list
right now. Um the vote on the Aaron property. Uh Anna, you mentioned a draft letter to MSBA. That sounds like you might want to bring that to the council. >> It'll probably go to finance first. >> Okay. >> I'm bringing it as a member of finance, so I'll bring it there first. >> Okay. So, we'll pencil it in, but
probably not. Um and we received a well the town manager received a request um under the general bylaws from the human rights commission on detainer actions um that
will be on next meetings under presentations I guess with a report from the manager. Um we'll get that request out to the council. I just got it late today, so I'm still trying to figure out, but it will be in under
presentations. It's under the is it the human the sanctuary city bylaw? >> Yeah, under the sanctuary community bylaw. We we did I think they we do this every year. So >> pretty quick. >> But they they've made the formal request to get some information. So that'll be
on there. Um appointments if they're ready out of go right now. That's that. If I think there's enough time, I I have still penciled in the beyond the charter stuff, but I don't know whether there will be enough time for that. I'm still trying to figure things out. Um, but I have not forgotten that part of the
final report yet. Um, any other requests for agenda items? I see hands. Are these for agenda items? Councelor, Councelor Kennel Martin is nodding. Yes. So, councelor Kel Martin. >> Yes. Um, I just wanted to propose that
we add to the next meeting agenda um, if we could discuss um, some of the ideas that we had to help the DPW that went beyond the contract negotiations. I know there were like a few things that some of us were talking about um, including helping out with the building conditions and potentially sewer and wastewater
fees. And I think there's other solutions that we could talk about that don't include collective bargaining. So, um, I wanted to see if we could have that on the agenda for the next meeting. And then if not, do we still want to consider doing a special meeting so that we can dedicate more time to look at it comprehensively? So I think I would be
open to either. >> Okay. We will discuss that in agenda setting with the agenda setting team tomorrow. Um Jennifer, you seeing no other hands related to agendas, we'll move to counselors. And Jennifer, you had your hand up first, so I want to go to you
before Sam. No, I just wanted to share that um Pam and I are having the District 4 meeting this Sunday afternoon at 3 PM um in the community room at the Ammerst Police Department and Kathy has very generously um agreed to come uh as
the finance committee chair to answer budget questions, but I'm also saying that for the benefit of the atlarge counselors that I know the meeting is. >> Thank you. Um Sam, >> uh thank you Mandy. I'm wondering, you indicated that the CPA is going to
schedule for two weeks from now. Has there been any indication as to a report that they might provide? >> Well, we are waiting on that report, which is why it has not been scheduled yet, but the expectation is that report will be ready for the March 23rd meeting. >> Thank you.
Um Pam, uh one additional um agenda item for April 27. We hope that there will be a short presentation of
clean energy/solar bylaw that comes asking for a referral for public hearings. It won't be it won't be really a presentation, but it will be the bylaw coming asking to be referred to CRC and
to the planning board for public hearings >> on April 27. It is penciled in already. We're hopeful, but yes, >> I wanted to say it publicly. >> Any other counselor
comments? Seeing none, I'll make the motion to adjurnn. Is there a second? >> Shane seconds. >> We will vote. Um, we start with councelor Lord. >> I >> Sam Mloud.
>> I. >> Pam. >> Yes. >> Councelor Brian. >> I. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tub. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Councelor Breick. >> Yes. >> Councelor Keno Martin. >> Yes. >> Andy Churchill.
>> Yes. Anna Devongier I Lane Gremer I >> Mandy Johanni is an I. We are adjourned at 10:15