Uh, this is a regular meeting of the Fair Haven Planning Board of Adjustment. Adequate notice of this meeting has been given pursuant to the provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act. At the time of the board reorganization in January of this year, the board adopted its regular meeting schedule for the year. Notice of
the schedule was sent to and published in the Asbury Park Press on January 30th, 2026. and the Two River Times on February 26, 2026. That notice was also posted on the bulletin board of Burough Hall and has remained continuously posted there as required by the statute.
A copy of the notice is and has been available to the public and is on file in the office of the burough clerk. A copy of the notice has also been sent to members of the public as have requested such information in accordance with the statute. Adequate notice having been given, the board secretary is directed to include this statement in the minutes
of this meeting. Um but uh we don't want to speak about the notice. >> Actually, you technically do. >> Okay. Yeah. >> There is a new procedure for the publication of legal notices. On June 30th, 2025,
Governor Phil Murphy signed PL 2025, chapter 72 into law, which amends the legal notice requirements under the Open Public Meetings Act. Beginning March 1st, 2026, public entities must publish their legal notices on their website
rather than in newspapers. You will be you are able to view Fair Haven's legal notices using the following website link. Uh fair haven newwe jersey.orgnews legal notices. All right. Um
roll call. >> Mash here. >> Mr. Olson >> here. >> Mrs. Poe, >> she's online, I think. Yeah. >> Um, Mr. B >> here, >> Mr.
>> Here, >> Mr. Rivera >> here, >> Mr. Anderson >> here, >> Mr. Dorner >> here, >> Mr. Granetti, >> Mr. Rosello >> here, >> and Mr. Chara >> here. >> Okay. Uh, sorry. The pledge of
allegiance to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liy and justice for all.
>> So, um, so we'll start with with new business. So, um 777 River Road, uh lot 49, lot 2, zone B1. Uh they they have requested that the matter be carried to the May 19th meeting without renotice.
Um I will make a motion to approve this um this request. Second, >> uh Mrs. Bush, >> yes. >> Mr. Olsen, >> yes. >> Mr. Va, >> yes. >> Mr. R. >> Yes. >> Mr. Rivera. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Anderson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dor. >> Yes. >> Mr. Zolo. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Chand. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um so second thing we'll do
tonight is um uh have the new members take No, we did that. So we're Well, they're sworn in. So they're sworn in. They're mental dead. They're sworn there. Um, Saddam, >> uh, Doug, do you have to confirm the jurisdiction for the 777?
>> I didn't know that we were asked to do that. >> We're we're asked to carry the matter without them having to renotice. >> That doesn't mean we take have to take jurisdiction at this point in time. >> No. >> So, they noticed for today, >> correct?
>> Okay, great. >> We're just carrying that state. >> Okay, very good. Thank you. Yeah, but good good catch. >> Um, so the meeting the meeting minutes um from last month
um does anybody have any comments regarding those minutes? >> A lot of typing. Thank you. >> I have a procedural comment about that meeting but I think it shouldn't leave now. difficult to make sure at some point. I mean, we might as well talk about it now, right? So,
>> but you're really only on minutes. Are you going to approve them or >> make a motion to approve the minutes for the last? >> Well, make a motion. Now, it's a point of discussion. >> Okay. >> So, I would like to find out mostly from Doug if there is a
procedural way that Mr. R can limit the or if we can limit the amount of time that have um and extend, you know, so we're not so we're not going till 2 in the morning.
So we s tell each side at the beginning they have an hour and we can extend on our discretion but everyone has an hour, keep it tight, that's plenty of time. Is there a precedent for that or a way to do it? >> Uh against that there's a precedent. It
was a recent case about cutting off the applicant, not giving the applicant a full opportunity to the um it is difficult to do that because most of the time it's their hearing and their opportunity to present. Now,
there's obviously things that are reasonable and we have the ability to cut some testimony if it is not relevant, some testimony if it is duplicative, some testimony um if it's just just
improper. But the vast majority of the cases allows the applicant and in this instance objectors full opportunity to do that. If you if you cut it off, you need to state the
reason that you're doing that if there is an opposition to it. You are almost guaranteeing an issue or appeal. >> So I don't want to cut them off first of all. I want to tell them they have an hour. >> Well, you're cutting them off. If they if they tell you there's no way I'm
going to be doing this in an hour if both sides have an hour, that's I don't think that's cutting law. >> We disagree. >> Okay. >> Cuz I think I think we it was an abuse last time. Um it felt like to me there was an abuse
of the process. It was very insincere. Um and we're all volunteers. We take this seriously and I I did not appreciate uh what went on. Mhm. >> And I'm I'm trying to find a way to stop it
process, right? I don't the merits of any particular case. There's no comment there. >> Process. >> So if you come up with anything, I will I will take a look at I'll give you the case law that because I was I was interested in taking
a look at that. There was a recent case about that about being cut off when the hadn't been hadn't been um as much as it can be trying and it's a voluntary process
um to look at the testimony uh from what Mr. Anderson presented he needed to cover all the issues that he needed to cover in his notice. You know that he basically noticed in a in in an alternative just in case the form landed
that made his presentation a little bit longer. That's not a criticism of him. That's that's good good counsel. With regard to the objectors council, uh they asked a number of questions. I think we
attempted to raise issues of relevancy with regard to at least one of his witnesses as to the fact that they're the one co-owner I think is how I would refer to
him. Basically, we were talking about a number of issues with regard to parking in her area. scientific. We we sort of trimmed that testimony to the best that we could. And in fact, rather than go through
well, I know it was in excess of uh 30 photographs going back approximately five years to just simply mark those and identify them as the applicant's testimony of having difficulty with their co-abor. Um, so we're in we're in
the merits of this case and I I don't I don't want to go there. I want to know if there's a if there's a fair price. There has to be a limit. Somebody can't talk for camp or Saturdays. Well, the diff the difficulty is unlike say public comment where you where there's there's there's some cases out there concerning
limits on public comment to the extent that this is particularly planning board and when we get into an issue of variance it's quasi judicial you're now governed by relevance and those types of things.
So >> I think we discussed during the course as to whether or not the testimony was relevant. From my view of it, it was. There was re trying to reertify the professions after you had done that.
>> Uh I understand but there were there was an issue with his professional at one point in time. It's the one professional he called. We cut him off because the the professional tried to give this is where we got into some problems. Professional was qualified to give
testimony concerning fire and fire code issues when the applicant attempted to or when the objectors council attempted to bring out testimony as to general procedures that
were engaged in by zoning and code officials. We cut them off. >> Okay. Is there a way to say that based on past experience a particular person is not qualified to present in front of our board? Is that is there any any uh
if they're a licensed attorney unless there's questions about their lensure? It's it's a fairly broad test as to who represented on the factory board or an applicant performance board. In fact, the board
Brad, are you okay with this that I'm on this? >> Well, I mean, I would rather have I would rather have my counsel and executive discuss. Yeah, because I'm providing you counsel, but you know, the board is happy. >> Phil philosophically, I agree that there's got like is there a way to
add some organization or order to to to process where we can prevent something like that from happening. Yeah, it has to be fair. >> I I I don't I don't in in theory I don't I don't disagree with that, right? Like we should be able to run our meeting
under procedures that we decide. But if there's again if there is a if there is case law or there is some matter of law as volunteers and none of us lawyers or maybe some of us lawyers I don't know but but that that we we got to rely on
attorney and what keeps us out of trouble. >> Yeah, I get that. But like if if we hadn't stuck to it last time, we would be here tonight. Same rodeo. I would I would predict it would it would have been on.
>> Yeah. I mean, I have no problem with what we did last I I have no problem with it at all. Um and I I don't you know, could we I think we said could we have carried it like that? That was >> I wasn't here. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> We did not want to carry both.
>> Yeah. Same thing. >> Yeah. So unfortunately it just ended up being a sort of like >> extended proceed. >> Yeah. So um >> yeah there's a way
>> I I will take a look at that if there is some way but basically reviewing courts are fairly liberal subject to the again because we're not bound by the strict evidence here. This is administrative proceeding here is allowed within
certain you know limits um the strict rules of evidence to move and so it's hard to them >> force them on um residual rule which gets into the
regions you don't get to know about but >> other than that and relevance it's really hard to limit an objector unless Unless you know they start doing something which I would characterize as filibuster. I don't think you witness
filibuster. We may disagree on that. >> We disagree on that. >> Okay. Um because to the extent that and to the extent that there was bickering between the applicant and the and the objectors council, I think we re that in the best of our ability to stop that.
>> Is it the chair's prerogative on if it's relevant or not? Uh, not entirely. Usually you would seek counsel with Republican relevance. >> I mean, there's a lot. Look, in some of these more, and I'd argue this was, you know, we we said it in the meeting, and
I'll say it again here, it was a arguing dispute masquerading as some kind of like you guys didn't, you know, it was it was I mean, it was nonsense. And so I like what I you know but we're going to have applications I'm sure where there's
going to be matters of law matters of what people are presenting where I may not or those sitting at the table may not have you know need a lawyer to say this is like we need to because the MLUL
subsection B of draft nine says says something right like and and you know we're gonna we are going to hear an application in next month that there's a matter of law of of how it should be handled. And there's I'm going to rely on Doug a lot to talk about when you do
something and when you don't do something, right? So there's there's a lot of like there are going to be instances where maybe it can be my prerogative or our as a board's prerogative as to when you cut something off, but we got to be careful that we allow each side to present what they
need to present. >> Let me suggest this at this point for this discussion. I think it's a it's a wonderful discussion. I think it's something we need to do in terms of approval of the minutes. I thought this was just a clarification on the minutes. We have a technical motion. If there isn't any more discussion on the
minutes, may I suggest that at the end of our meeting, when we're done with our business, let's have an executive session where I can give also give all the members of the board a little more flavor as to how we got here and why I'm particularly cautious as to how we
conducted the hearing and then we can go from there. And I I promise you I'll try to answer all the questions that you have in the best of >> You okay with that? I'm fine with that. >> That's good. >> Okay. So, um I don't want the discussion to go till what?
I think we have a motion on the minutes, right? >> We have a motion to move it was discussion. >> Second. >> Second. >> Uh Mrs. Bush. >> Yes. >> Mr. Olson? >> Yes. >> Mr. B? >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes.
>> And Mr. Anderson. >> What? >> That's it. Um so the next um item we'll do is the approval of the resolution >> uh from last month.
>> So an opportunity to the motion should be if everyone's had an opportunity to review it and you can wave reading of it and approve. But if there are additional items let's make a motion second to then have discussion. >> Right. But I I think I I'm sorry. We've there's members of the public. I don't
know if anybody wants to make comments about the res. >> Oh, okay. >> Well, no. Here's here so that you understand. So, no. So that you understand the board's action was taken last month. >> This is merely a memorialization. >> Fair of of the board's action. And in
fact, and under case law, you only need one member who's eligible to vote to approve this. >> Fair enough. >> Hypothetically. Um but you know the and to that end the reason I'm saying that the board had an opportunity
to comment on this at the meeting to raise those issues and I think to the extent that we could or did it's incorporated into the resolution. >> Fair enough. Yeah. We give the public their checks last memorialization isn't an opportunity to
duo. Well, I was just saying we litigated if there was >> Yeah, fair enough. That's good. I I mean, I'm I'm happy with the >> It is It is somewhat probably that that that we are somewhat
constrained, but in light of my earlier comments, it's difficult to constrain the presentation. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Wait, I'm sorry. One sec. Somebody did want to >> That was Kristen. She wanted But maybe we just wait until executive session. I know she does. She still have
>> You should have a hand up. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I'll make a motion to approve PBR 2026-4. >> Second. >> Mrs. Bush. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bow. >> Yes.
>> And Mr. R. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, um >> no. Mendus now your master plan discussion. I'm gonna hold off until >> No, no, no. We have things to do tonight.
>> Okay. >> So, master plan. So, so a few things have um >> Yes. >> have happened since um since the last meeting. So, first and foremost um the uh the survey has has you know made its
way through few more uh few more comments. There was nothing major from when we last looked at it. So I I it was there there was a couple of typos. There was um where we talked about the
walkability there. There was the request to have um a section on the business district and a section on residential. And so it it just added another question, right? Almost duplicative of the question that was being asked, but
then it just split it. So I didn't feel it necessary to bring it all the way back given the time considerations and the comments that were made were not did not structurally change or systemically change the survey in any way, shape or form. So we we did that I did that with
Christopher and um and we got it out. you've seen an email go out and so it's up to us, you know, as as a board to to I guess you you know, through your your social channels and and other um networking through the town, make sure
as many people fill it out as possible, encourage everybody to engage with it and um and fill it out. And so, um, uh, we are going to have the opportunity, there's two dates, um, that
I want to bring up. Let me just pull them up. Um, and I can give you, uh, what will happen. Um, okay. So the first date is love where
you live day is on Sunday, April 27th from 1 to 4. Now the survey will have passed by that time. So we're we're doing four weeks. Um the survey is going to be out there for four weeks. It might go an extra week depending on um on the
response, but I Chris said that there was already a fairly strong response. Um, and I guess there was some uh having some trouble on Chrome browser. So, I think they were trying to fix that and and so we may let it run a little extra
a little extra time than we had um originally scheduled for it. uh the planner and then uh council has strongly um recommended that we have a presence at both Love Where You Live Day and Fair
Haven Day and have our planner present at those at those events. And so, um Sunday, April 27th from 1 to 4 is Love Where You Live Day. We're going to arrange to have a a table there for the
planning board where we can engage with the public and discuss the the um the master plan. The planner will be present >> for the second day. >> Oh, the second date is a similar um uh is similar, right? It's fair haven day
is June 13th. And so beginning at 5:00 pm, we're going to also have uh a table Oh, wait. Love where you live today is April 26th. I'm sorry. Is that she? >> April 26th. >> It's a Sunday. Let me Let me just make sure.
>> Yeah. Sunday, April 26th. 27th is a Oh, wait. Yeah. Uh 27th is a Monday. I'm sorry. April 26th. Everybody got that? Sorry. Okay. And then June 13th is uh is Fair Haven Day. So, we're going to have
a presence at both of those events to discuss uh the master plan. um someone on Michael Sullivan's team uh will be present um to help facilitate discussions as as people see fit or as
the public sees fit. So the survey will be done at that point. Um I don't So as we go to the next steps in the in the master plan um after the survey has been um out there for the four or five weeks
the planner will start to schedule open houses and engagement with the public where uh the different subcommittees which we're going to discuss in a minute will will be present and will help facilitate those meetings which are
going to be very specific to different elements of the master plan. And so, um, you know, there'll be more information to follow about when those when those will happen. Um, but I assume some of them will happen maybe not before Love
Where You Live Day, but certainly before Fair Haven Day, there will be there will probably have been uh one or two of those open houses um by that time. >> When is you say the survey ends a week? Is there a a hard >> It's four weeks. So it went out I
believe it went out on Monday >> and so it's this week went out on Monday, right? Or >> it did. Yeah, it was Monday. >> Wondering if it makes sense to have some sort of end date publicized because I think sometimes people like they get it and they're like, "Oh, I'm going to get back to that."
>> You don't want to have people get back to that and find out that they've missed the window and I did look and I didn't see >> Yeah. What what I'll make sure um DJ does is is say like is send out another announcement saying, "Hey, survey is going to close in 3 weeks.
Survey is going to close in two weeks." >> We can start to notice that um or get that that word out um when uh each each week or or through each period of time. And then um the next
uh piece is so the appointment of the different subcommittees and so um we have each element of the master plan um there there's a subcommittee for there are elements of the master plan that
don't have subcommittees. Um they'll be done you know by the planner with our input uh and the input from the survey and the outreach to the public. those elements were deemed to to just not that they're not important, it's all important, but they're they're obviously
more weighty, more meaty, uh issues in certain of the elements than others. And so um the the the subcommittees um that relate to the elements that are are going to have probably more issues and more uh elements to discuss um are are
circulation, utilities, recreation and open space and land use. Uh the housing element by virtue of of doing the um affordable housing uh element approval uh several meetings ago. satisfy that
requirement for that part of the master plan. There might be some update. >> Not only that, but you've done the third, >> you got the fourth all within your 10ear period. So you're I I think you're solid. There may still be some things you want to tweak with regard to those things. But in terms of the bulk of that
work, you're going to find those in the basis for the amendments to our housing element and affordable housing plan. >> That's right. >> Can you repeat circulation again? So we we have we have an overall steering committee. We have circulation,
utilities, recreation and open space and land use. >> Are all of them represented by a board member at this point or >> they circulation is not because we have a resignation. Um but we there's a new member that I think might take that. So
we'll we'll hold that one. Sure. But >> yeah, and depending on what your survey results have, it may inform something else. I know we've had discussions, we certainly have had things for the housing element, but the housing element, again, I don't want to foreclose that you haven't
really talked about if you want to have changes, or see things in your downtown. That really wasn't the housing element if you meant. So, if there's still things there, I think you dovetail that with your land use as well. Um, so what I'm I I think Doug, what's
the best way? I mean, I have the list of names. We've reviewed that. Um, h how do I I mean, should we just I I put a motion for everybody or put a motion for each person? >> No, put a motion for everybody as listed in Do we have a master list for
>> I can I can read it off. Yeah, >> sure. We can read it into the record. We can do that. So, this the steering committee is is myself, Dave, and um Peter Mesnney from the zoning board. >> Yes. >> Um
utilities is going to be led by Dave and Rich Gardella. And and that's Jim O'Brien and Paul Canella. Uh recreation and open space is going to be led by Patrick Randinetti. And uh it it's Mark Olsen, Bonnie
Tortiva, Robin O'Neal, Joe Rogan, Brian Clark, and DJ Breenri are going to be members of that committee. And then Lan use is going to be led by Andrew Anderson. And uh it's it's the the members are Todd Leer, Frank Forte,
Chris Cornell, and Michael Crriscola. Chris is not he's not gonna do it. >> Okay. So we're gonna have >> That's fine. That's fine. We have So we have we have enough people. There's three. Yeah. And if if we if someone else wants to do it, we can always add them. Yep. >> Later. So, um circulation we're gonna
we're gonna just hold off on. Um we can do that next week. Just I want to speak to uh a couple couple people and also we have new members as well. So um uh so I will make a motion approve and constitute those committees um to work
and authorize them to work with uh Michael Sullivan at and at the direction of the steering committee and the planner um to to execute the um the master plan process. I'll second that. >> U Mrs. Bush. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Olson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Taylor. >> Yes. Mr. R. >> Yes. >> Mr. Rivera. >> Yes. >> Mr. Anderson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dorner. >> Yes. >> M.A. >> Yes. Yes.
>> Okay. There's one other uh item to the master plan. So, um let me pull the information from Chris that we just got today. So, this is kind of hot off the presses. Um
>> while you're looking for that Sheila any um regarding the survey any early numbers back like as far as response >> I haven't seen it just heard generally that there there have been some but I I don't details sorry
>> so the the burrow applied for a grant um to help with um uh master the the business district part of the land use part of the master plan. So there are extra funds that have been
granted to the bureau for purposes of of the master plan. And so um it's it's with a group called local planning services. Um so they're going to provide uh you know pro bono work uh on um you
know on the uh on the the business district of planning. So we have extra I guess extra funds than we had had or extra help >> which we probably desperately need. So uh that's uh that's some good news and
so there'll be some more information. Uh we're we're going to put Michael Sullivan in touch with um the person at local planning services and um and and see how they can be integrated into the into the process. And so Andrew, I'll
probably have you be on that on that call. >> Great. Thank you. >> Um that's all I have on the master plan right now. If anybody anybody on the board wants to make any comment or or have ask has ask questions. >> I have a question as you as you
encourage us to get the survey out through our social channels as you say. Do you do we have any restrictions on like um amplifying the survey through social media? Is that something we should avoid? Uh >> no get to everybody.
>> Yeah. I had a conf like a Zoom call with my like they're all like do whatever you can to boost. Yeah. It's perfectly in balance to to sort of boost. >> Does the Does the survey know that like people are living in Fair Haven?
>> Uh, it does ask my friends in California. >> It does ask what your >> Yeah, they might. So the survey um I I I don't know how they do it.
>> Yeah. >> Has anybody on the board taken this or I have >> I have >> Yeah. >> to work with. >> Yeah. >> Great. >> I don't know which browser I use. >> Like it's good. >> How long do you think it took you guys? >> 10 minutes. >> Yeah. >> Oh, that's perfect. That's great.
>> Excellent. I was a rather excited uh participant though. So maybe no and and you may have already come to some preconceived notation idea just to what you want to to place. So I'm just thinking for the average person who's coming on, you know, looks at it,
digests a little bit more, doesn't always have a ready answer at the fingertips. That is that's great. >> Great. Um, members of the public, open to the public. Anybody here?
>> Hi, I'm Carolyn Fergus. Um, the master plan. I I didn't hear all of it, but uh did you say there's a sectional business districts >> there there is a there is an element there's a land use element of the master plan, right? So the document has
different elements that address different um different aspects of of town planning and the land use element pack it there that's where the information and the the guidance will be given about the business district.
>> Okay. And is there a committee working on that? >> There is a subcommittee working on that. >> Okay. The Fairman Business Association has seven D member businesses. Is there anyone on that committee representing the Fair and Business Association?
>> Uh, I don't know. I don't think so. >> No, there's not. There's not. >> That feels like a miss to me. >> Okay. We can um if you have individuals that you think would be this, it's not a fixed, you know, we
kind >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'll go back and talk to leadership and give you a name or two is >> that would be appropriate. >> Yeah, absolutely. As soon as possible. >> Okay. >> Yeah. E either that or even if not on on the committee itself if you think
there's something that you wanted to make for a presentation to the subcommittee you can also interact in that way too. >> Yeah. And there will be an open house and there'll there will be an open house for land use and and where business
district will be you know a primary point of discussion and so um we can yeah >> so there'll be plenty of opportunity for businesses to have their voices heard in the process.
>> Yeah the the process just started. >> Okay. >> Right. So it's it's early the survey. So to give you a flavor of what what the survey did >> I took the survey. >> Yeah. So remember it was walkability but it separated residential area and business area so that people aren't answering it sort of generically right
trying to separate those issues to capture the survey and I I wonder if Michael Sullivan didn't that I don't know I didn't >> I think it was uh Kristen that suggested it separated. Yeah. >> So it's it's you said local planning services specific to the business. Okay.
Yeah. So that group is also specific I don't know who they are but specific to the >> so we'll have a almost a separate planner for what seems to be a separate planner for the um business district. So the business district is going to get
you know a fair amount of attention obviously and so if there's individuals you'd like you know to have represented please get get us their names and >> yeah we I mean we have >> we can make sure those those people are involved. Yeah, we have a lot of concerns about the state of the business
district and what it could be and um what to do about long-term vacancies which create dead zones. Um so like if there's any opportunity to address stuff like that, we'd like to make sure that people um are heard and we can come to the public things, but if you need a
committee member too, I think we could come up with that, too. >> It's a good idea. Good idea. Absolutely. For sure. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from the public? >> Any hands raised? >> Yeah, >> Robin.
>> Yes, Robin O'Neal. I'm at 935 River Road. Um, I can't make it to the meeting tonight. uh postsurgery, but um I am honored to be on the recreation, conservation, and open space subcommittee. Thank you for that uh
ability to contribute to contribute to um Fair Haven, the vision of Fair Haven. I also uh am so excited. Um, this is my first planning board meeting and I'm loving watching the engine that is going
to drive this new vision of of the master plan and I am co-chairing the fth annual Love Where You Live Day and I'm so excited for your presence at a table there. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Robin.
We really appreciate uh you helping us with this. We we absolutely need it. Thank you. >> Actually, I have one more question. >> Sure. >> Very good. Uh, with the 777 River Road getting pushed forward, is POE getting
pushed forward? >> So, yeah. So, actually, I did. So, so at the top of the the meeting, I I meant to to go through the schedule, right? And and I didn't do that. So, I'll do that now. So, next month, PO will be heard. So that was delayed because um I think
their lawyer couldn't come something. >> Well, that was the jurisdiction. >> Oh, okay. So carry issue. >> Yeah. The original the original the original delay and then there was another delay and so um
the short of it is it will be presented in at the April meeting and then 77 River will be at the May meeting. >> Oh. Okay. pass. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. To Po is next one. Po is next one. Got it. Yeah.
>> Um >> any other raised hands? Anybody else from the public? >> Okay. Um I'm going to make a motion to move us into executive session. >> Yeah, we should we should make a clear announcement that we're going to go into executive session. We're going to take any other business after the meeting.
after the executive session. >> There's there's no other business after that. >> We're going to go into just I'll announce gently. We're going to go into executive session. We have an idea of how long? >> 15 minutes. >> Yeah. 10 or 15. >> 15 minutes. >> We're going to come back out. We're not
going to take any official action other than to close the meeting. >> Um basically say the old cartoon. That's all folks. So we're going to excuse those folks so we can go so we don't have to travel
into another room going into motion executive session council on board attorney approximately 15 minutes. There will be no further action taken out. >> There will be nothing discussed after executive session. I assure you
>> thank you. >> Thank you. >> There you guys. >> Thank you. >> I make that motion. Make that motion. Are we going to exe? Do I need to make a motion? >> Yes, we need to make a motion. We need a second. >> Second. >> All in favor?
>> I oppose. We're now in second door. Shut the uh