##VIDEO ID:bhbiB6ov-KM## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e rock and roll okay okay recording in progress calling this meeting of the armd Board of Commissioners to order it is November 13th and um the meeting is being audio recorded held remotely on zoom and live stream on RCV armold the Board of Commissioners recognizes the importance of hearing public comment at the discretion of the chair on items on the agenda once recognized all persons addressing the board CH State their name and address prior to speaking it's the role of the chair to maintain order now public com um and who's participating remotely Pam I think right p balacas and um okay so we'll call the Citizens that okay with that do we have any board Le on comments no select board or other interested parties no okay how about uh any public comment tonight we do Rebecca I'm not sure if you can hear us and if you have a comment tonight or not yes I do have a comment uh give me 30 seconds to un can we just oh uh hang on I'll uh I'll make it louder one second thank you can we turn the volume up can you hear me now oh much that's better thank you okay sure um I'm gonna stay on uh muted audio video I mean if that's all right with you because uh my connection might slow be too slow that way so thank you for the name and address first thank you absolutely I'm Rebecca liberman 50 Pratt Street in Reading and uh I wanted to uh to report that the information last you can you start again we lost you oh okay uh hang on I contacted can you hear me now my face okay I contacted rmld on October 6th to report that the information about the renewable Choice program on my October bill was out of date the outdated information said that the program would become available to commercial customers in 2022 when it is now 2024 and it said that there are options for 50% 75% or 100% power through the renewable Choice program but all residential customers now get over 50% Renewable Power through Rec retirement so that 50% tier cannot be right I want to know how long have the customers at the 50% rate been overpaying since rmld customers now get uh I think it's 59% power from renewable sources and that that's been going on for months now is there a plan to get refunds to these customers Megan woo told me that rld would be quote evaluating what the higher Rex retirement in 2024 means for our renewable Choice program participants in 2025 and Beyond especially those who enrolled for 50% but that means that these customers will continue to overpay possibly for several more months so am I understanding correctly that rmld plans to continue overcharging these customers until you get around to this evaluation shouldn't the overcharging stop immediately and the proper refunds be issued Megan also promised to try to get the bill information corrected but now I see that in my newest invoice there's no information about the renewable Choice program at all as a member of reading's climate Advisory Group for Net Zero I'm really disappointed that rml rmld is not doing more to promote the renewable Choice program and any other programs that could help reduce our greenhouse gas emissions I found out that out of 33,000 customers only a hundred or so are enrolled in renewable choice and presumably that number is now lower once remove those at the 50% tier from the program and are any commercial customers enrolled in this program at all massachusett is going to require reading to reach Net Zero in the next few years so you should be preparing for that and not continue to use an outdated model that requires customers to opt into a poorly advertised program that is not being promoted at all please let me know what you're going to do to increase rld's overall renewable energy use and participation in your green programs going forward and you must also immediately stop overcharging your 50% renewable Choice customers and issue refunds for any overpayments as soon as possible thank you and I'll send a copy of this to you as well um is there there's no email to the whole board right do I send it to Erica moris or send to Erica moris okay thank you very much thank Youk you thank you very much for that comment um it's it's it's a question that I think we maybe we should get an answer to at the next meeting absolutely my my voice is very loud in here down I think those concerns would be I would say something we would also like to know more about um whether what was just stated is accurate and our um also this came this issue of contact from the board it came up the other few weeks ago in a different context of that they're unlike with the select board and I think put the school board there's not a way there's not something posted on our website where public comment could go to the board right currently based on decision we made two years ago but we're in the December meeting we're going to go back and revisit the email program okay for a whole bunch of reasons this being one of right okay I think I what I don't know if the board has a sense of like whether we want to be getting similar to how the you don't want to Bill okay well you know I I already have enough emails day already today today I got 75 emails okay I'm just saying I mean right that few that few I mean I believe I may be wrong I believe that selb which I think it's is a lot more sort of popular as a public participation uh board does have a way that the public can send and then it's sent to some you know select board at ci. reading and then they they it would then move to whatever Emil just they so they could have their own separate Gmail and then look at those as they wish but it's a way for anyway it's just a way for the public to to have a way to reach us and we can Channel those emails however we want go ahead um so responding to a number of those points um yes I think we should have an email where the the public can respond to the board when an email comes in that way you can identify it in your email and pull it to a folder so it can get separated from other emails that might come in that's an easy thing to do but um second I support re Rebecca's comment as a former member of the climate advisory committee and certainly endorse the goals of reading Net Zero um looking at all of the different things reading wants to do in terms of renewable Choice uh time of use uh EVS panels all all of these things I think are things that we need um to get an update on I think we haven't had an update on solar panels we did have an update on on um incentive programs but we didn't have solar panels where in that discussion and um euse um is is certainly a major driver of of energy use we need to pay attention going forward so all those programs I would expand it Beyond just the uh renewable Choice program um but look at solar choices as well as um as we put panels out there um make sure that that's a something everyone can access I I think that the challenge in Reading is because we're 25% cheaper payback period for solar panel fund come home make it uneconomical at this point and we do not have a reimbursement I great went over that before um and and that's that's the challenge that we have lower rates equals lower participation um will there be a break even point at some point in the future I think yes as as energy costs overall go up but I think right now um it's whe it's a payback that to me that's a individual Choice by the customer that's correct and we certainly want to incentivize that but as you add uh fuel cells I mean not fuel cells U heat pump and EVS to your home then that's going to be a sizable Bill and that in itself will be an incentive for you absolutely people will migrate that way but right right now it's a low take because it's just not economical but there is one other um question about billing that came up I know there was an issue with um the uh reduced rate that that came up you know some people that use the get it you pay early you get a discount promp payment discount promp payment discount I heard that that window was would had been not working um is and has that been corrected I heard that there was an issue with the with the time frame you you that was the prompt payment window was reduced it was extended because of a mail problem sending paper bills out oh that's okay that's what our Our intention is always to eror on the side of extending if there's a problem never shorting okay okay so it was it was extended due to a ma it it was it was not digital bills it was thank you okay by the way is it is it the sense of the board that we want an email address where the public can contact us and then it gets forwarded to whatever email We Choose Or I don't do we do we need it to be more complicated than that ER takes them now distributes them one to one or two come in per DEC um I think that that that is very workable at at the moment till we get something set up in the future yeah I'd endorse at least Erica passing along anything relevant but I'd be open to a an email mailing list that if you send it to the board that get I mean if it's only a couple then why would we need a gatekeeping process or even having you worry about forwarding it just have it be rmld board members group reaches the board and we have it forward to whatever address we want either way why we bring so we there's a couple of security issues relative to that so why don't we make that a December item on the December okay yeah right backing up um so if that's was the answer to that question backing up one step um about board lisons yeah um I I do want to comment onto that um that we have been working I have been working uh with Greg and Megan uh with the Kellum School U building program and we had a discussion recently about how rmld can interact with the kilum building school and provide solar panel options uh as a part of the school plan um that went very well I think I spoke with uh Jenny hey for lack of pronouncing her last name um inappropriately or incorrectly um she's works with the architectural team um that's supporting that school project and and she was expressed gratitude for having that discussion um and so we receive plans from them about what the roof area is and what obstacles might be in the way of panels we expressed to them that we're definitely interested in the roof possibly interested in supporting stuff over the um parking area because that would really more than double our capacity there we could do both um and uh we sort of talked about the discussion continuing as to whether that's Town owned us owned or or something else probably us owned with a rental back to the town being the more likely option but that's not a decision that's just part of the Matrix of things that we are considering and uh so that that's I just wanted to support that that's well what's the decision point there so they are doing a number of there's a sustainability working group which will meet next Monday and they will be going over some of the various sustainability issu this being one of those on the agenda um brono he pumped in various options you know with or without air with or without air source components uh Power um not sure if we settled on hbac systems in that discussion or not but well we did yeah um they have they're considering a couple of different air distribution options um Beyond where the um power comes from uh that'll be discussed in the working group all of that will ultimately go into an economic model for a Net Present Value and and be sorted out but it it's a little bit of a stepbystep process with the board as to what those options are what are the benefits what's the feasibility um I think increasingly or moving toward getting a good understanding about what uh all electric building means and where that comes from and how that can be supported and this is just one of those steps that rmld will support that um with panels and and some sort of payback on energy I make a quick comment um not being part of that program um but when you start talking about canopies in the um parking lot um hopefully you're dealing with the um the DPW because plowing snow removal snow hauling a lot of new schools don't have place to put snow so when you start putting canopies in and then trying to maneuver around them and then haul the snow off the property so just keep that in mind when they're doing their design so that that can be effectively done and efficiently done so you don't lose days in school by they're trying to figure out how to get that out because we've talked about it in wington and that was one of the concerns was snow removal um and how to get those pocket Lots empty yeah no good point and we're nowhere near design no I just as you talking design you want to think of that yeah yeah good point yeah Tom meeting last night um there was a presentation about kill the schematics didn't show any option for solar at that you're not on to meting uh I'm not a time meeting member but that having solar appear on the plans was one of the points of discussion we had with Jenny right and I would have been surprised if it had gotten to plans in such a short sure interval of time but I think I think we provided a reasonable insurance that panels we would be supporting a panel effort on the buildings and that it would be reasonable and feasible and and appropriate for the plans to show them okay yeah speaking of town meeting the last night they also approved the Green community act yes last night last so that people where it gets done just so you all know the administration of that building would be done through the local electric utility which in this case is rld we made Provisions to be able to build just the town just the residents of r i shouldn't say residents all the meters and read Y and not the them so that we've been ready for that for a little while is it Wilmington a member of green communities it's okay I take that what are you guys thinking about that um we've talked about it more with the new school coming online or possibly coming online where working with the mspa whether we look at um joining or not and what values it will add we haven't got much deeper than that so it's in discussion but it's not anywh they moving forward yet yeah we we're hearing roughly two x return for whatever goes in for the 50 cents a month okay well thank you Ray keep us updated especially if there's action like votes and action points that we should know about or if there's anything we need to do to formalize anything as a board maybe not and of course Greg thank youil okay right Charter review update meet up to the update um present time we're just we're on hold at this point I don't know when the next meeting is going to be at this point um you know we not the matter of fact the committee is is a little bit in disarray today uh because Bill Brown who was on the committee has bowed out completely the representative from uh the uh the bylaw committee has uh bowed out also at this point and so the uh he's been actually Jeff sto's now been from the from bot committee has been do into place so I don't know when the next meeting will be let me give a little background here uh as to the original when this originally came about in 2001 the Inspector General came out with a report um basically in 20 2001 the legislature took the position that that utilities admin should be deregulated and basically everybody at that time took the position that we need to run the we need to run the the the utility as a business uh the Inspector General took a lot of U came out did bid a investigation and said well you know you can't if you're going to run a business you know you're not you're violing this law you're violing that you're violing this law you're violing that law at that point um you know and then they they you know they did things like we went to the conference and you know the department coached a dinner for the for the Commissioners they subpoenaed the records of that dinner you know then they said well that's not legal you know those kind of things um you know I have my own personal feeling about the investigators to investigate is show to my office uh never Read Me My Rights and I stupid enough to talk to them you know less and Mar um basically the town got all upset about that and they formed a committee because they believe Mr rucko who was the manager of the time exceeded his authority at this point and this is where the original some of these items came in place in that in terms of what they've got in terms of legal councel he felt he uses the Ruben and run legal counsel to defend in position at that point point and that's why they did that um the financial man of the time said that he never had access to the uh board to bring up any concerns which he denied later on in a meeting at the time so these are the kind of things brought up at that point um you know I tried to fight it but you know the choice was very clear the choice was either accept this or we're gonna have the appointed board and I think that would be that would be have it to the outside towns to have an appointed board you're in ready of this and so that's you're talking about the origin of I'm talking about the origin that's now disputed in the chart right that's what put in put in I mean we fought it in in 2014 as you can see from the from the uh the minutes that included here uh you know I felt I was authorized to go and fight this you know and so that's that's why I felt that was my authority to go forward at this point to to try to push these items now it failed back at the beginning of time in 200 in 2001 it failed in 2024 and God knows where it's going to go at this point either at this point so that's kind of the background of where I am at this point this is some of the background now Mr rer left the department he did not leave because of the inter inspector General's report misconduct cired um I have a copy of the report IND the misconduct at some point I don't know if the department still has that report at this point I don't intend to I intend to die with that report at this point so anyway so that that's really he did not leave because the Inspector Inspector General's report he left because of misconduct okay so that's 22 or three or four year old history so what do we what are we doing now what we doing now is I felt I was authorized to go push for the changes to to bring the charter in line with chapter 164 and I I based that on you know back to 2014 also when I was chairman I remember I brought this up nobody seemed to have any objection to me going forward at that time only now we seem to have an objection you know I father's authorized to go forward it's like bang your head against a wall some days trying to get these things changed but you know that's that's where that's where I'm at at this point so you know I mean in April I'm disappearing you know this is this chatter form is not going to come to this town meeting it's going to come to the April town meeting when I'm not around anymore so at some point some to have some this board's going to replace me at that point too so Pam a question what Pam's got yeah needs to be uned yes thank you thank you for unmuting me um yeah so I just wanted to ask so Phil thanks for the the history and the and the summary what I understood from some of the documents that were were shared and are included in the packet is these changes were uh proposed 10 years ago were not accepted by the charter committee were reviewed again and Town Council has uh has said that they do not need to come in line with uh with uh chapter 164 um so and we I don't believe there's been any uh dispute from the AG's office so I'm trying to understand what what's the motivation behind changing them because it feels to me like it it it's been attempted and rejected in the past why are we trying to do it again so we're trying to bring it in line with 16 now legal counsel from the town did at the last meeting stated the fact that the board can choose to go 164 and that's what this board has done we've going to follow 164 that's a decision that was made a long time ago May was before some of you were here at that point so that's the decision we made you know my my understanding is that was the decision made as a proposal to the Charter Review Committee 10 years ago that was this this board made to follow 164 what what does what does following 164 entail versus following something else which I don't I don't know what what we follow before but chapter 164 is just is it just paying bills can give me background on that yeah we always follow 164 but I mean I don't think the opinions okay we don't have the benefit of I Freed's opinion or her ability to sit here and answer questions but I I didn't read it that it was in conflict with 164 it just it was acceptable um well alongside of 164 I don't agree first of I do not agree with her opinion I believe her opinion is wrong and John can address that too when he gets he gets his ready to speak when so maybe we should let John talk this point well before we do that I mean we we've had these the two briefs we have John's brief now we we we didn't have it before but we got it in the last meeting a month ago or whatever that was and we got I bed's memo we have a and we have a subsequent thing from John so I mean what we know is that the changes were proposed 10 years ago and after we did that vote in 2014 or the then board did it you were chair after the then board voted what they voted on then the town attorney said no that's uh you know I had a different opinion which we had at the time and then the charion commission the town attorney did not say no the town attorney said that the the charter commission do what they want she didn't say no okay had a different opinion from the one that we have been working with and then the charter review commission made no changes then the same thing happened this time without us asking for any but any intervention none of we didn't ask of the board for any any additional intervention after the changes were sought and rejected 10 years ago we we we asked for nothing it was raised by you and Greg hired John Coyle to bring this up again none of us knew about it okay no I did bring this up when I was Che I felt I got authorized to go forward so you cannot say that this board did not authorize me to go forward we we didn't we didn't see we did not see the legal Memo from John Cole That Was Then brought forward to the Charter review commission and understood by them to be our position that we didn't but okay in any case we had a another opinion from the town attorney again countering everything John wrote and then the charter review Commission in its wisdom did not accept and put in their running line ATS any of these changes well that's still up for debate okay but so far they haven't and um I think it's just incumbent on us to now make a position of do we want any changes made at all with something that's been standing for 21 years without challenge by the ago uh that's not being sought by the ago that's not being sought by the Charter that's not being sought by us what what if anything are we saying to the Charter review commission are we asking for changes or are we not so that's what I think we need to get to if people have questions for John we could ask him questions but you know we have all these opinions already and we only have John we don't have the town attorney here and I don't think we ever may may not ever be able to get her to speak to us so does anybody want to ask anything I got a qu question what is the goal there like why why did this become a topic is someone is there failing that the board is losing control of decision-making process what like how did this become what it is I've been on the board this board for many years yeah um and I don't remember these discussions honest opinion here yeah my honest opinion is the chair is trying to justify some of his actions that is what that is what this is all about Phil I think you're line out well that's fine say express my opinion my opinion I mean I just been following it recently obviously because it's become part of the agendas um but I'm just trying to figure out if something's been around for 20 years and now we're trying to to change it or not change it like what drove that and why are we where we are and then what's the benefit for all this time NE none in my opinion the board didn't seek changes as a board so Phil did and Greg h John John Co advocated changes yeah thank you um yeah I guess I guess ultimately I I I I I don't want to relitigate you know what happened or what people's motivation is I think ultimately I'm focused on your question there what is driving this change um what you know legally do we need to change what do we need to change in you know the spirit of how we want the board to operate and you know again I'm relatively new so I don't have all the history everybody has but we have we have taken a position on this in the past it has been rejected there has been no nothing that I've seen that either from the town or from the AG's office that says we need to make this change you know not withstanding you know some healthy debate we've had over the last few months I think this board operates um quite effectively and and you know my my own opinion is it it does not feel like there is a need to make a significant change in this manner um and in my opinion I I think you know I would I would propose that we just make make a motion to determine if we want to make a change or not um I just to to take a a stand as a board on which way do we want to go so I I would you want to make a motion go ahead well there's of the all the changes that are in here the paragraphs of the only in paragraph seven if you could please put it up which document do you want to see the the document it would be page six of the Duncan and Allen one is probably the most easiest one to um find uh what page is that yes um page 19 of 178 um item line seven and and and it that's the only thing in there the Municipal light board of the commissioner shall employ the auditor appointed by the town of reading audit committee um we you know that's we already have an auditor um the auditor comes in we H we do not hire the one appointed but it it's basically the only inaccurate statement there um I would say that it could come out because we have an auditor com in every year and audit that's that's not employed by the town of reading it's an independent auditor um that's probably the easiest one that could be changed and and removed what's your view on that Phil well right now the auditor is appointed by the town of reading audit committee that's that's what it is now so that auditor that we employed comes through comes through the audit committee Town Town writing audit committee I thought it came from no it does not come actually as long Milan anymore they now merge with somebody else but Markham it now comes through the the town Town reading audit committee I you know in terms of the changes I recommend that we do not make that change I think you know the Chang up above about you know appointing the chief accountant and things like that you know I think those should be I don't think those even needed at this point they're not even the right right wording at this point those don't even exist well if if I'm I apolog that that my ignorance on that fact I I thought we employed the auditor directly so that auditor does come through yeah the town we pay the bill we pay the bill okay I I and the contract the contract is directly with rmld d yeah but historically we've been with the same auditor and the only reason why that's a challenge right now is that ourl operates on a calendar year um and the town operates on a fiscal year and the Auditors do the town's books first and then ours and the reason why it's a problem now is several a couple years back the prompted us to submit for reimbursement to the tune about a half a million dollars from ISO New England for um charges about us operating and so those for the past two years because of of the scheduling of the Auditors um we barely get those in and if we if we they've extended graciously but they're not going to extend anymore so partially what's at the table is the otter needs to be faster and again no complaints very slow so but it puts at risk a half a million dollars of reimbursement to us well if they're too slow then terminated we to say it you do because they have many box you're out a contract did you have question Ray you had your hand up yeah the reason I I like Pam um being brand new I don't have any of the 20y Year history or the 40y year history that that Phil has and and I think this can be VI far more simply it's just that it's come up because the town shter review comes up periodically and and that's where these questions have come from and why there's been such a gap between 2014 and and 20 um 2024 it is common in lots of regulations and guidance that state law and local law federal air pollution law state air pollution law uh air pollution District law has differences in it we operate under state law so doesn't really matter what the charter says we have to follow 164 That's the Law that's what we'll follow I think what Phil was trying to address or the coil memo was trying to address is to what extent do we have to change the charter to match state law and if we decide or if the charter committee decides that being consistent with state law should govern then take out anything that isn't in state law and that's what they've done but that's not a re sorry the charter review convention has not made any suggest changes understood there's a recommendation that that memo said that they take out certain things which are inconsistent with state law it's not a requirement the the town can express its its preference but when push comes to show we'll have to follow state law so that the town authorizes something it'll be state law that we have to follow because that'll be because privacy would would take there take premise priority there and and that would be what we would follow so basically they saying so I understand what the committee Phils been part of is to to bring the two to 164 so it sounds like that I I think also we need to let this be a board of commissioner debate respect opinion I mean if you guys have an opinion as a cab on what you think should happen to the Charter but Dave this has been a normal thing for a while now I know you don't like our opin it's not that I don't like we're part of the four towns I know it's not that I don't like your opinion I thought we were sharing but if you don't want the Cab's involvement usual I'll be quiet no it's fine but I think I'll be quiet don't worry this is this is on our agenda for our our board it's it's there sometimes because you feel you're being attacked you I don't feel that I think the Board needs to know as W me part of w me and being a representative one of the two people go ahead then just go ahead no this is you trying to run the meetings and every time you turn around you try to do this to the cab and I've had issue with it before and you sit there and say this I thought we having an open conversation about it you're getting defensive which makes me wonder why but I was asking questions as a representative of wilington in this board and and you've gotten defense go ahead no no you've made it clear that the cab means nothing to you we should sit here and keep quiet and you got it that's what you wanted you got it not what I said and it's not what I mean I'm just say you just said it was a board of commission discussion is and and you didn't I'm asking as a CA M which this effects what was the reason and Ray gave a great explanation right and and I was asking questions you got frustrated and then you wanted to shut me down this is we have just as much right to have an opinion and I can go here as a taxpayer as a rate payer and and speak my mind but you don't want me to do it here and I'm fine with that not true you made many many great comments you just said it you have made many great comments over this except on this topic you didn't want me speak this is one where the Board of Commissioners has to either make an opinion to the Charter commission or not so I think this one the scope is a is a board but we should understand why you're doing it and what it how it affects the town right well then we then you should have had it over the past 10 months too so I think what I've tried to do is bring this process which has been done in without any Board of either of our boards involved but for 10 months I brought it into the board meeting so I think part of my agenda package so I thought it was something I could talk about right well just so you know for 10 months these memos have been circulating and have been presented to the Charter commission without our board knowing or your board knowing it's because I brought it on the agenda that it's being discussed here at all but the fact that I'm discussing it shouldn't have put you off to tell me that it wasn't for me to speak about and that's where I have an issue I stand I stand corrected I apologize for you for not for saying what I said finish what you would like to say go ahead no please do I think I think what Ray was saying you're trying to blend the two which is the goal right two one if possible it can be gold and it's fine if the town has a separate opinion on the matter and says Charter differently okay it's just whatever then appears in the charter it should state law change then the town has expressed its preference in terms of how the board should interact with the general manager but state law says the general manager has Primacy and the board can guide and suggest things to the general manager has control of the general manager but not the operation and therefore state law would say we don't interfere in that other than provide guidance to the general major is my Layman's understanding of what state law is telling us would have a desire to have more power than that that may be their desire to continue to have that opinion um but as far as our functioning we would have to follow state law that would be the Primacy also s us to add to what Ray is saying if there's there's state law and there's compliance versus not compli but then there's just the concept of home rule like what local authorities do we have like and it's it's a related but separate idea so it's it's not merely like we have to exactly comply with state law so so so let me let me sum up let me sum up here so we can move on yeah I'd like to move on before before we go on the parking lot duke it out we it out right here come on it's all good Dennis you make so many great comments all the no no harm no foul go ahead from what I'm here first off you know the cab should be allowed to talk Fair okay okay and I notice you always turn this way you do not you do not pay attention to them which is wrong which is wrong okay and I suggest that you correct that in the future okay okay thank you okay so what I'm hearing is that you know the board says let's not make any changes let's go let's go away with this all right and then but we're going to still follow 164 which is what Ray Ray said because that's what we've adopted to do to follow 164 because I've already told that Charter commission that we don't follow what what they have in here I'm told them that we first I I I do think that's where we're going is is is a recommendation that we do not here's the whole thing I want somebody to replace me on the chter commission because I'm I'm disappearing in April anyway this is going to go into the April town meeting when I'm not around anymore okay so somebody else need to be appointed to that chter commission at this point okay well should we do a motion and a vote to what Phil just said does anybody I don't know sounded like I think just a sense sense I think there was a vote 10 years ago that's been brought up as The Guiding philosophy of the board I think we need we only what we say only means anything when we vote and have a motion in a second and a vote to my to my way of thinking Dennis would you agree with that the Voting is good voting is good thank you see see how much I respect you I'm just trying to lighten things up a bit it's all good all right so I I thought Pam you were on the way to make saying something but maybe I miss understood what you were saying but are you still there got her hand [Music] up why okay there we go sorry it's I I have to be unmuted by someone else so um yeah I I guess I what I was going to recommend is that we uh take a vote on whether we want to make those changes or not make those changes um and you know so do you want to make a motion with respect to what you think the board's recommendation should be to the committee like move yeah I I yeah so I'll move that we don't make those changes um and we besides the um there were a few kind of like smaller details which is fine but I I would move that we did not make the changes uh to stay in line with uh the the recommendation by the Town Council okay so move to make no changes in line with the recommendation of the Town Council second yes okay what about 164 well that's what we just have a motion a second on the floor that may conflict with 164 but it's the ex it's the interest of the town the town's voice so we just did a motion in a second to not recommend changes and to go with the town attorne here's here's what the motion should say well we had a motion on a second let me just tell what the moot the board should move the board moves to uh get it right recognize that there is conflict between the town Charter and chapter 164 and that the and that the board the board recommendation the board recommendation is that uh the present Charter language stand as is but I don't I don't stipulate that there's conflict I know that there's there is conflict there is that's one opinion we also have the town attorney saying there is no legal issue and there is no legal conflict and we have the Attorney General's office that has never said there's a legal conflict I I don't like your Amendment to the motion to say it's in Conflict as if as if it's an accepted thing when it's it's not it's not accepted by we'll just vote let's vote on the thing as read and as seconded any further discussion I I support the phrase as written in that we're supporting the town council's interpretation of the edit without judgment in terms of the conflict and then let the town council's that the lawyers battle it out but that our our motion is in support of the Town councils yeah to and to recommend no changes and and recommend the no changes that he's recommending okay are we good any more discussion Dennis good okay I'd like you to actually help vote vote with us on this we just in the spirit of Cooper the weather we'll do a 60 vote or a 62 or 4 43 um are we ready for a vote on the motion in second move the question yes we have to do by voice because we got rter I desac it's I bill present just how I so 40 and whatever present means one 401 Dennis honorary vote I'm gonna do this every time now just to C chops motion motion they're doing the not going the door first second I think what Pam read the first one move to make no changes in line with the Town Council move that we recommend no changes to the current Charter language in line with the town attorney's recommendation or opinion right P it wasn't a recommendation it was an opinion um okay okay I yeah I'm okay with that and and we voted so that that that first part is done um if there's going to be another Charter meeting um and we're looking for a replacement uh I dealt with regulatory language as a part of my air pollution career I take that on if the board wanted to to still have a representative there I nominate great Porter to replace Phil Paso committee okay do we have a second on that I'll second it can I second as chair I think I can second I thought you can make the motion you might be a second okay is Pam still there Pam you still there are you muted again can can you leave her unmuted I didn't mut herself uh did sorry I'm I'm back now uh did somebody second I will second if nobody did okay you did and and now we'll take a vote on replacing Phil with Ray on the charter committee and all in favor with no exensions no let man know the change please yeah yeah need yeah follow okay I'm glad I'm reti in April I've had enough I've had enough with the chair all right Al righty so on on with the next agenda [Music] item are we doing executive session real quick yeah we go to Executive talk about come back to open to cab is joined the executive is joined C suggested motion move that the rml citizens Advisory Board go into executive session pursuant to Massachusetts General law 164 section 47d exemption from public records and open meeting requirements in certain instances and then the purpose number six to consider the purchase exchange lease or value of real property relative to property reading North Reading Wilmington Windfield in return to regular session for the continuation of regular session second second all in hi and move to the RL Bard commission going executive session res to mass generaliz chapter 164 section 47d exemption from public records uh to consider the purchase exchange lease or value of real property relative to property in the reading North Reading rington and lynfield and return to regular session for this for the continuation of the regular session we have a second okay all in favor of that by by Ray I I I I okay Pam dropped off had drop off okay so we are now in executive session oh we got [Music] e e