Select Board: July 12, 2023

Transcript captured from MHTV’s Vimeo auto-captioning. No speaker labels; proper names and dollar figures occasionally misheard. Click any timecode to jump to that moment in the source video.

0:00 Everyone is in attendance. Um, it is, uh, Wednesday, July 12th, 2023. And, um, I just wanna announce that we have one member of our board who is participating remotely and, uh, again, per open meeting. Lo notice it, uh, is given that this meeting is being recorded via Zoom. So, um, we have a

0:29 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, sort of regular items of business and one item of, uh, board policy discussion. So I’ll just proceed ahead with, um, item number one, which is an annual request for permission to utilize the streets of Marblehead during the wicked half marathon. Um, just a regular request for, um, utilizing for a road race. And so I’m gonna ask for, uh, a motion to approve the request from Ashley Steves b and s fitness companies to hold the wicked half marathon on Sunday, September 24th, 2023, subject to approval of the Marblehead Police and Recreation and Parks, receipt of the required certi certificate of insurance,

1:15 naming the town of Marblehead as additionally insured and police details, and with a donation to be made to a Marblehead charitable organization. All distances will start and finish at Salem. Willows start time to begin at 7:00 AM with the last runners starting no later than 10:00 AM No permanent markings shall be made on the street at any temporary markings shall be removed at the conclusion of the event. So moved. Second. Okay. Okay. Uh, Roll call. Vote In favor. In favor, Mr. Marty? In favor, Mr. Gray? In favor, Mr. Ye In favor, Mr. Newy in Favor. Next, on our agenda, we have a motion to approve the minutes of two meetings. The first being June 14th, 2023,

2:02 and the second June 21st, 2023. And it’s been brought to my attention that there is a, um, need for a minor edit.

2:13 Madam Chair, can we do those independently? Cuz I can vote on The 20? Absolutely. Yes. Yes. I wasn’t on the board the 14th. Okay. So let’s take, um, a motion. Uh, I guess I motion that we approve the minutes of June 14th, 2023. I’ll move, I’ll second. Okay. Uh, Ms. Tamari present, uh, Mr. Greater in favor? Mr. Nay? In favor, Ms. Singer? Uh, in favor, can you just decide that the is on the 14th of the 21st? 14th. 14th. Thank you. Okay, Ms. Noon In favor. And then the next, um, minutes that we’re looking to approve are, um, June 21st, 2023. So, um,

3:00 I know that, um, Thatcher has, so you let me aware, made me aware of a minor, minor edit. So, despite what was stated by me at the last meeting on the, the number of years that the select board has been convening, the correct number, which is what’s reflected in the minutes, is 300. And this, this was the 375th convening of the select board. So we corrected the math, so the minutes reflect the correct number. Okay. So moved. Second. The grader in favor? Mr. Nay? In favor, Ms. Singer? In favor, Mr. Marty? In favor, Ms. Noonan

3:46 In favor. Okay. So we have, um, next a constable application for approval. Um, and, uh, for Naomi custody lo, um, the motion I’m asking for is to appoint Naomi Castillo as Constable to serve civil service, subject to approval from the police chief and the required bond on file with the town clerk. So moved. I’ll second. Uh, Mr. Nay? In favor, Ms. Singer? In favor, Mr. Murray? In Favor, Mr. Grater? In favor, Ms. Nunan In favor. Next, we have a memorandum of,

4:31 of agreement on the agenda, um, between the town and the International Association of Firefighters, firefighters Union. Um, I will, uh, I’m Gonna recuse myself for this section as I have a brother who is on the firefighter Union. Okay? So noted. Yeah. Um, and so what I will do is, uh, you know, ask for the motion in a second and then, uh, ask for, um, our town administrator to just give us a little background for both. So the motion is to, you know, we’re looking for motion to approve the memorandum of agreement as presented between the town and the International Association of Firefighters, A L f Ccio, C L C, local 2043.

5:17 So moved. I’ll second. Okay. So this was a grievance filed by, by the firefighters who went through step one, chief level, step two, town administrator, and then step three to here at the board. And the board participated in an executive session, uh, I forget the exact date, but, uh, a week before last. Um, and in that executive session, uh, after much discussion, um, that it was agreed, uh, and, and voted, uh, by roll call to, uh, um, authorized the town administrator to, uh, negotiate a memorandum of agreement to settle the grievance. Uh, the summary of the grievance was, uh, a disagreement on, on the reading of the contract relative to the benefit of

6:06 firefighters receiving sick pay bonus for not missing work, uh, due to sick time. Um, they’re allowed to miss for, uh, vacation time. And the dispute is over whether military time should count as work at the fire department or it’s missed work days. Um, as part of the agreement, we, we, we agreed not to agree, uh, to, to save that another date. But in, in the effort of maintaining good relations, and, and, and we will discuss this matter as, uh, later, is to, is to enter into agreement to settle for the two firefighters that were affected. Uh, and by, as part of the agreement not to set precedent and,

6:52 and both sides agreed to hold their positions. But again, we, it’ll be a matter of discussion in, in, in some future session. But by, by, uh, proving this agreement, it, it settles this particular grievance, um, that’s outstanding at the moment. Great. Thank you. That, um, was a very true, uh, thorough, um, summary of the executive session and outcome of such. I would also, you know, just, I guess I’ll just note that, um, member Marie was also recused himself from that, um, executive session for the record. And I think,

7:37 um, are we ready to vote or does anybody have any No comment or question? No. Okay. Ms. Singer In favor? Um, Mr. Grayer In favor, Mr. Nye? In favor, Ms. Noon In favor.

7:55 Next item on our agenda. Number five, surplus equipment. Uh, this is, you know, our usual, uh, motion, um, regarding surplus equipment. And this in particular is around toilet paper dispensers. Uh, paper towels, paper towels, paper towel, paper towels, towel. Okay, it’s gonna be a hot item. I’m just gonna solve our deficit.

8:25 All right. Motion. I, I’m, I’d like to entertain a motion to declare the following items as surplus and no longer needed for municipal purpose, so that it may be disposed of in accordance with the town’s policy on surplus equipment. 12 cascade paper towel dispensers. Good gear. Good gear. Second. So any Discussion? So, so I will mention, so, so these are one, taking up a lot of space downstairs. They, they’ve been replaced, so they’re no longer needed. Um, and I, I will say you’ll probably see more and more of this because we, we need to clean out, we need to create space both more so at Mary Alley, so there’s an effort on any surplus equipment, old equipment to move it out. Um, and there is a process that we have to go through, and this is part of it.

9:11 So what would happen is, uh, the board declares a surplus. We have a service that’s an online, municipal, what’s it called? Uni Uni Bed. And they, this is, what they do is they have an on online auction process for surplus municipal equipment. Uh, it has to be, I believe it’s two weeks. They have to be posted. Uh, any items that are not sold or any items that are sold, they, the service gets a percentage of it. And we, we get the balance of whatever, whatever is recovered in costs, um, after that process is done. Anything that’s not sold, we can dispose of as we see fit, we can give it away, we can throw it away, we can do whatever. So as long as we’ve gone through this process, we no longer need the items,

9:56 we move it on. So, um, similarly to equipment and such, that requires this process. We’re also pushing on a paper clean out. And, uh, there’s records retention laws that dictate, and it depends on what the record is as whether it needs to be kept forever, seven years, five years, two years. It depends on the category of the information. Uh, and so there’s already some network going on. And what, what the staff have to do is any of the documents that, that meet the criteria for just to be gotten rid of, they actually have to separate it, measure the inches of paper, notify the Secretary of State’s office that they wish to dispose of. They give a brief description of what the documents are and the measurement, uh,

10:45 secretary of State’s office reviews says, okay. And then when that, when, when that approval comes back, we get these big recycling dumpsters that they go into, and they go and they get, um, shredded. Um, so, so the, the waste department has, uh, providing that service for us. And again, the effort is a Mary Alley, more so creating space in our buildings and cleaning out and, and then following a true in the case of records, a true records retention plan of, you know, retaining records for as long as we’re required to, and then they’re no longer needed to move on. I will put a caveat on that. What I’ve also shared, there are some records that go way, way back, some really interesting, uh,

11:31 I was looking at payroll records from the 1920s and thirties, um, those type of documents, uh, the intention is to share with our historic folks, because there are folks who study that use those documents for, for studies as, as a professor I’ve met with several times who study social programs from, from those areas. So those are all useful documents, but I want them to have them and not us. Madam Chair, if I may. Of course, yeah. Follow up with a question. Uh, is there any way to, uh, well, how to, you know, to put them in electronic format to, to provisions for scanning some documents? Uh, yeah, we’re also talking about that. So, so it’s, it’s kind of separating now. So, uh, when I was in Framingham, we did a lot of that where it’s a service, there’s a cost to it. Um,

12:19 but it gives us the ability. You package, you box up all the documents, they come and take it and scan it. They scan it, they do the quality assurance on all the scanning, uh, they provide electronically, and then they shred and dispose of the documents. So that has a cost. So it’s, it’s separating out the, the junk from the historic, from the worth saving electronically. And, and again, the push to go more data information systems is stop producing paper documents and maintain ‘em electronically from, from, from birth to, to expiration, uh, maintain ‘em digitally, and then it alleviates the space issues that we have. So anyways, this is just a, uh, background on, you know,

13:06 there’ll be more and more of these type of actions to be taken. Okay. Yeah.

13:18 Um, so I think we’re ready for a Vote. Ready to vote? I think we’re Mr. Murray in favor? Mr. Grader? In favor? Mr. Nye In favor, Ms. Singer? In favor. And Ms. Newnan In favor. So next we have, okay, so next we have a policy discussion on the agenda, and then, um, proceeding that we have one more kind of routine consent agenda request. I’m, you know, just in the interest of kind of, um, I, I was just wondering if, you know, do people, okay, if we kind of deal, you know, take on the boosters, boosters, is that fine with everybody? And then we can kind of clear You, you wanna come back to that? You wanna take It outta order? Take it outta order. Does anybody have a problem with just kind of cleaning up the regular business

14:05 and then getting to the discussion? Okay. Yep. Um, so for, uh, agenda item number seven, just taking this item out of order, order is, uh, we have a, um, request from Mary. Can the, the booster around a 5k pull the 5K road race on October 21st. Um, would like to, uh, um, entertain a motion to approve the request from Mary Kenahan, Marblehead Boosters to hold a 5K road race on Saturday October 21st, 2023, the Marblehead Police, recreation, and Park Marblehead Public Schools in receipt of the required certificate of insurance naming the town of Marblehead, as additionally insured and police details,

14:53 the event will start on Smith Street in front of the post office and finish at the community center. Start time is 10:00 AM no permanent marking shall be made on the street, and any temporary marking shall be removed at the conclusion of the event. So moved. Second. Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Greater in favor, Mr. Nay? Ms. Singer? In favor, Mr. Marty? In favor, Ms. Noon In favor. Okay. So, um, the last, uh, you know, real before, you know, of course we have public comment and, um, and town administrator update, but is a policy discussion, uh, around, um, you know, that I had, I had put on the agenda,

15:39 uh, because of the, um, decision of the board at our last meeting and an interest to move things along in a timely fashion. Uh, I put together some discussion points, which I had shared out with the board, and some examples of Reapp appointment and reapp appointment policies to maybe draw from. I’m certainly not by any means the authoritative voice on this and anybody is, you know, this is just a discussion for us to have at the table to kind of start this process. And, um, I think, you know,

16:24 any, I, yeah, I, in the interest of kind of just being a little efficient and kind of guiding the conversation, I, you know, kind of put together these discussion points. But of course, like any, each and every one of us is free to, you know, do, you know, put together informational resources and share them as we go through this process, uh, with the board. I think you just could share, send it out to Thatcher and Kyle and they can distribute it to the board. Um, I hope I’m not, you know, I, I certainly don’t intend to be, um, you know, the only, you know, I, I certainly hope, you know, tend this to be collaborative and, um, that there’s other people sharing information around it and, and contributing in that way. I just, for the sake of kind of getting us started, I, I, I did put this out.

17:09 Um, so, you know, I don’t, you know, I’m sure that we could discuss this for quite some time, and I, I just wanna acknowledge that this is kind of in a first initial, uh, attempt to kind of, let’s see, like where, you know, I kind of identified some things here that I thought, some topics that maybe we could kind of see if there’s consensus immediately on. Are there things we wanna dig into a little bit more, just as really a starting place? And, you know, we’re not obviously going to, I mean, we’re not obviously going to kind of, you know, agree, you know, formalize the policy tonight. Uh, so, you know, just with that said, I kind of wanted to, uh, create a space to start the discussion.

17:57 I think we just need to take a, a half a step back just for a second, ma’am. Chair, you know, just because the motion was on reappointments mm-hmm. But new appointments going forward, that was not part of the motion. So we could still, because, and during that last meeting, you did say that there are openings for new appointments that’s not impacting. I just wanna clarify that. Right? But I think that the whole discussion, right, is around the whole, the whole process as a whole, which I think we’re in terms of, like, I, I think that, and I did that when, and when we think of a policy, it’s going to be around, you know, what are the goals? Like, I, you know, this is just some ideas. I’m thinking, you know,

18:42 what are the goals that we’re trying to, you know, serve or, you know, for the, this, for the volunteer appointments, uh, you know, are there, are there areas that need to be clarified? You know, what’s the process for vacancies? What’s the process for Reappointments when I look around at other community policies as examples in terms of a place to start? Um, so, uh, Madam Chair, if I, if I could Sure. I, I don’t wanna interrupt your thoughts, sorry. No, um, no, go ahead. Yeah, I mean, I, I, um, at some point in this discussion, I think it’s, you know, an appropriate time to raise this. I’d like to propose a motion to reconsider, uh, the, you know,

19:31 the discussion and the, the motion that was voted on in the last meeting concerning reappointments and, uh, you know, just to see how it, how it goes. And I think it, you know, based on, based on this discussion, so I’d like to, I’d like to, uh, enter a motion to reconsider what we voted on last time at Our last meeting. Okay. Before discussion. It’s up to you, Madam Chair. I just, wherever, wherever you think it fits in the conversation. And by the way, I mean, I do appreciate, yeah, I do appreciate these discussions points. Yeah. I mean, I think as you know, I think my, I’m trying to, you know, separate out the hold of the volunteers from the actual, uh, discussion and the, and the procedural discussion that we’re having. Okay. So,

20:15 so you’re, so you, so you’re making, you’ve made a motion. Um, I would, like, I would just are, Are you throwing It out that you’re considering? I’m, I’m throwing, I’m throwing it out there, you know, as, you know, just as part of the, discuss some part’s, part of the discussion that I, that I’d like, I think it’s a good time to introduce, to make the motion, and I don’t mm-hmm. But I don’t wanna, I just want to say that I’d like to do it given the subject matter that we’re talking about, Um, you know, just in terms of like, you know, as in terms of the agenda and since you’re, you know, kind of, um, asking like, are, you know, you’re, you’re kind of putting it out there. Yeah. I think pre my preference would be if we could kind of have a discussion, see where that goes, and then

21:05 Okay. Take, um, the motion as relative to the holdovers. Yes. I mean, it’s, it’s again, I mean, I’m very supportive of what you’re trying to do. Okay. Manager. I think I, I think it’s just the, you know, it’s just the holding of the appointments that I, that I would like, you know, my colleagues to, to reconsider. Yep. Yep. Okay. Okay. In, in discussion and whatever it comes Out. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So I’m inclined to, you know, if, if it’s the will of the committee, I think have an initial discussion, just see where this goes. Um, and of course, you know, you have a motion.

21:51 Okay. So did you bring forward a motion yet, or did you consider I have not. I’m leaving up to discretion of the chair to tell me when I can bring it forward. Okay. I was confused. Thanks. Mm-hmm. Beyond,

22:06 So, right. So, um, he was just indicating that’s inclination and giving a heads up and, um, okay. So, um,

22:18 with creating a new policy around volunteer appointments, I kind of bulleted out some areas to like, that seem to be, that maybe we can have quick consensus on maybe, um, a little bit of discussion. And maybe we wanna, you know, we can come to some, some agreement or just kind of a starting place, you know? Um, I think the first place I was kind of curious to start with is on people’s feelings around moving the reappointment process up earlier in the calendar. Um, I did, you know, I think there was some discussion around, uh, uh, you know, kind of offsetting the term, uh, you know, when we, we, you know, when this came before us, and I think, you know,

23:04 I voted in favor of kind of pushing the breaks for a minute, um, because I do think it’s worthy of consideration and discussion before we, you know, kind of continuing on the, um, path. I think at some point you have to push the brakes and you have to kind of stop and pause and I don’t know, you know, we’ll see. Um, but I think that the, my, from my research, this is, you know, and don’t, this is just from my own research, it does appear to be that the policy among the communities in Massachusetts, uh, their select boards, that the term does always, it does, it’s universally that the volunteer board terms end on June 30th and start on

23:50 July 1st, first. So my inclination is like, I feel as though having done that research that we would be a bit of an anomaly if we kind of set a term different than that cycle. So I just wanna share that from what I was looking into. Um, and so that being said, and I think we had kind of touched on this in our last meeting, that perhaps the solution to this is just moving this process up a bit. Cuz I think the way our election cycle falls in Marblehead is kind of late. And it’s very often it’s, at least it’s been my experience that it’s the very next, you know, meeting sometimes the very next day that you’re kind of going through this process of reappointing people through your terms. That, and boards,

24:36 you don’t know, like, is there turnover? Is there, is this, is this person attended meeting? Like, I, you know, I just, you just, it’s hard to make, for me. It’s hard to vote on something. I just, I don’t like to vote on something if I don’t have a considered decision on it. Um, so that was kind of problematic. And I think I felt that I heard Alexis say that at public meetings. I, you had, you had said that at our last discussion. So how, I guess, do people feel about, you know, as a starting point, moving the reappointment process to, um, like on May, um, farther up, or is that the right word? Up farther up back, farther back, you’re right. No, up. Yeah. I always get that confused farther up, so that when board members are voting on reappointments,

25:23 they’re voting, they’ve had, you know, they’re, they’re sitting members and they’ve had the opportunity to, you know, after a, you know, a year at least, you know, one year term, you know, could have availed themselves of that.

25:45 Any thoughts from others about that suggestion or idea? I, madam chair, um, so, so the, obviously most municipalities, if not all the fiscal year is July 1st, so the 30th, right. And that’s, that’s why the terms and the way it is now is whatever the new board comes in, they’re voting for the next year. Mm-hmm. And you know, this past year, it was a week later, previous years, it was the next day, which are, you know, difficult unless you’re an incumbent. But even when you’re running, you should, you know, if you have an issue with some of the boards, remember when I was running long time ago, I went to many board meetings, not just the select board, but others, just to see what they were doing,

26:33 talking to other people, other chairs, and then, uh, so you should have some knowledge of what’s going on. Um, yeah, it’s just part of the homework of running for these positions, so, you know, to, to do it before mm-hmm. Now you’re doing, now you’re having a board that may not, you know, in a week or two or a month, may not be the same board making decisions for the new board Right’s, like a, right. Mm-hmm. So that’s my concern. Yeah. No, That’s chair, madam chair. Sorry, go ahead, Alexa. Sorry. No, I can wait. I just wanna let you know I was here. That’s all. But I’ll, whenever you can get to me, I just was flagging you, that’s all.

27:19 Um, so Moses, if you wanna go first, sorry, I didn’t mean to jump over you. Thank you. Thank you, Alexa. Um, so I guess madam Chair, just for clarification, you’re talking about the ex, the select board that has not been gone through elections yet voting in May, right? For the reappointments essentially, So, or, or the, or before, so right. You’re Just trying to get more time to, to be able to Build into, well, I think what happened too was recently maybe this wasn’t a problem, but recently, you know, we consolidated the election with the That’s right. You know, we moved the election back and so when I look at a lot of other, that’s right. You know, towns around this, their, their elections are like at a different cycle or whatever,

28:04 and I just, yeah, I think just because of the way the election cycle falls in this town, you know, on our town and then where we’ve traditionally done it, um, you know, could we be making this re doing this reappointment process, you know, the be the very, you know, the first meeting in June rather than the, or the, the, you know, the, yeah. The first meeting in June rather than the second, which is always after the election, cuz of the second and fourth Wednesdays or the, you know, so, you know, you’re vote, you’re voting on Reappointments either, you know, that fourth Wednesday in May or the fir second Wednesday in June for the July 1st term. That’s right,

28:50 That’s Right. Which is kind of in line with new, the new board. Right. So, which is kind of in line with, you know, what I, seems to me to make sense. Um, I take your point that it’s part of the homework. I think that there’s some things that come to your attention when you’re in the role that you don’t appreciate and that when you’re, you know, that like when you’re not on the board and you’re a candidate. So, anyway, left side. Sorry, didn’t I talked over, I meant to go to you. It’s okay. No problem. Thank you. Um, through the chair. So, couple things to, uh, bring to everyone’s attention. Just thought process. So I think some of the things that you’ve highlighted, one was the election cycle went from, you know, may to June. So there was, that built in for a number of years, kind of a buffer time period to,

29:38 uh, get spooled up on some of that information. And that, that has been, uh, one of the shifts that I think has had an impact. And I, you know, did personally feel that impact, although, you know, I did do as much homework as I possibly could, but even within that, you know, respect, there’s a different responsibility when you’re, um, placed into making those decisions. The other piece I wanna highlight as we are thinking about this process holistically is that, uh, the election of the select board is different as well. So to, you know, what Jim was saying, and I can understand, um, the concern there is that, oh, you know, what has happened prior is that the board would potentially, you know, turn over when all five seats were up. And then that would be a situation where then you would then vote the

30:26 appointments. Whereas the three year terms went through town meeting and is now, you know, moving on to being handled at the state house, that that will also impact this process in a different way. Meaning the turnover on the board and the change on the board will be different than anything that we have seen prior to, um, this cycle as well. So, uh, you know, I just wanna bring that to everyone’s attention that the, the turnover won’t be potentially in the same volume and style that it has been prior to the implementation of that new change. So I think that comes into this discussion as well. And if I can summarize, if you can correct me if I’m wrong, what, uh, I think it’s been brought forward so far is that, uh,

31:14 it looks like the standard process, uh, from researching, uh, you know, throughout the Commonwealth is that June 30th in line with the fiscal year, and the discussion is on potentially moving that appointment vote up to, um, somewhere in May, somewhere in June, um, before going into the summer months, perhaps, um, to discuss those re-appointments. But then, um, can, if anyone would like to add some clarity, is the thought that that vote would be made with the implementation date of June 30th? Like the vote would be made in, you know, in May with the implementation, like effective date? Is that what’s being proposed? I just wanna make sure I have the clarity around that as well.

31:57 Well, I, I think that what I found was that the terms are universally, it appears to me to are from July 1st to June 30th. So,

32:10 um, so, you know, I certainly don’t need to be, don’t, you know, don’t think we need to be an anomaly in that sense. There’s probably a good reason for that. And I do understand it’s on the fiscal cycle. I mean, you know, there’s, you know, a couple of these boards fall on a, a fiscal year kind of, um, budget cycle. Uh, but I think so, so yeah, so the term would be starting July 1st. So if you’re voting a reappointment, which is what a lot of i what you can just, you know, you can look online and, and, and some of the policies state specifically, like will be voted the first by the first week, you know, the, by the first meeting in June. Okay. Um, give them, set a date that’s like, you know, we will solicit, um,

32:59 responses on this date and by this, you know, and by this date we’re voting it. So there’s like, it’s, you know, there and, and then so you’re voting something and you’re, you’re appointing somebody to the term of July 1st. So, um, manager through the chair and to the rest of the board. Uh, I guess my follow up on that would be, so, uh, as we also are transitioning, uh, to a three year turn where the turnover rate would be different, meaning, you know, you would basically looking at two seats that would open the remainder three on the board would remain as that turnover cycle changes. So, uh, my question would be to the board. So with that being said, where you’d have some continuity, is there, can anyone speak to,

33:48 I guess I’m trying to see what the downside would be at that point, because you are holding a certain level of continuity on the board with the turnover rate being different in a three-year term. So not having the different impact that it would potentially bring up where there’s a one-year term on the select board in all five seats are potentially flipping over. Uh, so I, I just guess, um, trying to, with, from that lens, can anyone speak to really what the implications of the downside is from that angle? The downside to the status quo? Or like to like to to, to, to current practice or to, Yeah, no, the downside of, I guess if we were to say, okay, let’s, uh, you know, vote this by, um, you know, May 15th, for example,

34:34 I’m just putting an arbitrary date out, um, uh, what would be, um, you know, the, the, what the board sees is a, you know, the reasons potentially I’m discussing the pros and cons. I’m looking to hear if there are cons amongst the group to speak to that consideration. Um, oh, sorry. Just lost you. Um, so I guess that’s my question. I, you know, I know I think, Jim, your, your concern was, and please correct me if I’m misquoting you, uh, I think was in regards to allowing the new board to vote, but knowing in a three-year term, um, the changeover in the, in the board is a different composition than it has been has historically with

35:24 the election cycle changing. And also with the three year versus one year terms, Had nothing to do with the terms. It, it, by doing the vote before a new select board is in place, whether it’s no new members, two new members, uh, by a vote before the election, the previous board makes the decision for the new board. Mm-hmm. Right. I mean, just doesn’t matter the terms. And just for a little clarification, I’ve been there a long time, 19 years, and having two new members only happened in 2005, and when you two were on the board, it was usually only one member. So it rarely happens.

36:11 So three year terms, whatever happens, you’re never gonna get again in 20 years, we’ve had two new members twice. So if we, if the turnover, if that’s the situation, then I guess to me that would say that it wouldn’t be that big of a concern because you’re not really put replace like that. The board isn’t turning over very often then if you’re voting in May for the next year’s board, basically you’re saying it’s already the next year’s board. So it wouldn’t really have that big of an impact, Say something madam Chair twisted, but No, but you can madam that, yeah. Uh, you know, Alexa, I’m not sure that it matters at all what the, the composition of the board is. It could be a steady board,

36:58 it could be a board that’s been completely revolutionized, or it could be a three year cycle board. That’s not the issue. The issue is we’re kind of stuck between making voting between the election and July one, right? No matter what, if we think that the new board should reappoint the, you know, the, the committee members. So that’s just the reality of our situation. I don’t know that we can, you know, I, I, I don’t, to Jim’s point, I don’t think we can, we’d like to take a vote in May because we’ll, we’d be able to, you know, deliberate more and have a more, you know, deliberate approach into the decision. And that’s perfectly understandable to want that. I just think that we’re, you know, if we’re gonna let that new board reappoint, which they should do, I think then we need, then we need,

37:45 then we’re gonna be faced with that time constraint. But it doesn’t mean that we can’t, you know, articulate, you know, policies that can survive from election to election, right. Or that we can’t think about it more holistically, you know, with an eye on improving, you know, volunteerism across the town to the best of our ability, you know, and, and having volunteers kind of survive the, you know, the turnover of the, of the select board. I think there’s virtue in that too, so, right. Whatever you you think of to encourage that. Yeah. Sorry, um, through the chair. Um, Erin, uh, yeah, just to add to that, I guess, you know what I’m thinking based on the information that you guys are putting forward, my thought process is, okay, well if there is a preexisting board, then you are working with all of those volunteers throughout that

38:35 year, and you are, uh, you know, in the behind the scenes knowledge in every way, shape, or form. So then if you are putting a, a board in, you’ve had six or seven months, eight months, nine months at that point to really educate yourself and to, um, put forth what, you know, at that point are the best appointments. And then if someone is coming on as a new member, they would then have that same eight or nine months to then put forth, uh, an appointment. So they would vote, but they would just vote in the next cycle where they’ve already been a part of the process for eight or nine months and have the ability to, uh, you know, there is, there is, and I definitely think it’s important. And, you know, as Jimmy brought it up about gonna, the meetings and all those types of things that help you to gain the knowledge

39:23 that you need. However, there’s some things that you really can’t be briefed on or really know until you’ve been there in that seat and really understanding things from all sides. And so then you are participating in the process, but you’re participating in the process after you’ve had eight or nine months to be involved. So, um, I guess, uh, where maybe the distinction is, is the discussion is, is it, um, enough time or is it, um, the appropriate time to reappoint when there isn’t really a window to, you know, to, to spool up, I guess, for, uh, you know, lack of a, a better full scale de explanation there.

40:09 And I’m happy to hear from others. I just am trying to listen to, I know honestly for what you guys are putting forward and express, you know, what my view is on this from where I, you know, where my experience was. Understanding that’s very different than what others have experienced as well.

40:24 Madam, Madam Chair, if I may just quick. Yeah, I think Alexa, that’s probably one of the reasons I think that we have a system right now that relies pretty heavily on our designees. In other words, the office of the select board to kind of get the reim, you know, the, the reappointments kind of lined up with the chairs of the, of the committees, right? So there’s a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes under the hood, if you will, to get the, the slates of reappointments up in every, in every year that the select board kind of relies on. After all we, you know, we did select all these people to begin with, and right now we basically are saying to our volunteers, Hey, you know, if you want to volunteer for a long time, that’s great, you know, and we kind of say, you, you know, and, and we respect your decision to leave or to stay.

41:09 That’s what we’re saying to our volunteers, and that we’re not trying to, you know, to, uh, to, you know, to, to kind of force them, uh, you know, force them out or anything like that. Um, so I, I think that’s probably why, you know, as a general rule, we don’t have a lot of open discussion about Reappointments, where we have very intensive discussions around appointments, you know, or, or selecting new appointees. So that’s been kind of the way we’ve operated and, and I think what you’re, you know, I mean, it’s clear that we have a very limited window if you want the new select board to vote right on the reappointments, you know, if that new select board, however, constituted has to vote on those,

41:55 you know, on those, uh, reappointments, then there’s just a limited window. But I think that that’s one scenario, right? You get, you have the new board vote on the reappointments. The other scenario is the old board that hasn’t gone through the elections yet votes on the July one Reappointments. Okay? That’s seems to be what you’re, you may be suggesting, uh, Alexa, I, I don’t know. But there, there’s two clear choices here, I think. Yeah. Well, but I also wouldn’t throw out my, I’m sorry, but I also wouldn’t throw out the other option of changing the term dates. I mean, if lot of the other boards get elected in April, get elected in May, they have six weeks or so before they have the reappointments. So that might be the reason why a lot of them have the Shelley one,

42:41 just because it matches up with, and if that’s the only reason, and if, because we moved our date, because we were trying to do what’s best for the town to save money. So we had an override at town meeting, we could have the election, the override at one date, whereas the other way, it used to be town meeting, and then it was the election about a week later. And then if there was an override six weeks later, so there was a, so if if under the old rules, under the old election there was a, there could be a little bit of a gap. But right now we don’t have that, that timeframe. Okay. But that’s also depending upon state law and other, and, and, you know, and, and the, uh, bylaws, which we may have to change, but that’s why we’re having this discussion. That’s why we need to ferret this out. So if I can, I, I think I, if I could try to kind of summarize like maybe

43:29 two positions that are, are kind of like there, there could be two positions, right? Um, in terms of like, if we’re just talking about keeping the terms to July 1st and June 30th and moving the appointment process to May or like early June, it’s about whether we think a new board is in the best position to make the reappointment decision, or the existing board is in the best position to make that decision. And some might say that, you know, the new board, you know, they’re the ones that are gonna, you know, live with the, you know, they’re like, it’s their, you know, they’re like,

44:15 when they are on on July 1st, they’re inheriting, you know, volunteers that we, you know, that Elaine, you know, like that Elaine duck board I guess you could say, um, gave to them. But I guess I’m trying to kind of figure out, like, to me, you know, we’re doing that anyway because we have three your terms and all that. And to me, the best people in the position to make that decision are the ones that have been serving on the board for some months versus somebody coming in and like you said, were with a tight window and this was my experience, like kind of, you know, like faced with this kind of 54, you know, reappointments request and you, you can’t possibly understand what,

45:05 you know, uh, you know, are these, you know, I, you don’t know, like, are, are, am I repointing somebody to a three year term that, you know, isn’t attending the meetings? Or like, is there other people that are interested is, you know, I just, even if it’s like, you know, you wanna reappoint them and because you think they’re good, but you don’t really, you’re kind of trying to, you’re voting on something that you don’t have any information on to actually make me confi. I don’t know. That was how it felt to me. Mm-hmm. But I’m sure, I think, I think that’s what, uh, you know, uh, Jim was addressing a little bit earlier is that, you know, I think it is incumbent on, you know, the, the, the members to kind of get to know the committees. And I agree with you, it’s really hard, especially if you’re new to, you know, to come on and to kinda know what, who, who’s who. But I think, you know,

45:54 we’ve basically tacitly said this cuz this is the way, this is our kind of, our process is that, you know, when that, when that, when the committees and the designee of the select board, you know, mainly mainly the town administrator and, and Kyle, uh, mainly, you know, when, when a slate of volunteers is presented that the new board just basically ratifies it, you know, and, and, and moves it off, right? And I think right. And, and, and I’m not saying, and that’s, I think there’s an argument for why it’s not good. There’s an argument for why it’s good, also because it provides continuity. Mm-hmm. And it kind of insulates the committees a little bit from political change at the, at the mm-hmm. Select board level, you know, in theory. Um, you know, uh, yeah. So I, I I think, not to say that it’s not worth kind of thinking, you know,

46:43 articulating it more clearly as we’re doing today. So I think it’s a, it’s a useful discussion for sure. But I, you know, my view is I’m, I’m okay obviously with the idea that, look, the select board, past select boards, right? Have selected these, these, uh, wonderful volunteers and you know, these, the chairs of the boards have, and the town administrator and Kyle have advanced them. And usually it’s not a rubber stamp by any stretch, right? Because it’s not a rubber stamp at all because the town administrators completely knowledgeable about all of these committees and how they’re functioning. So you can always get kind of an indication, you know, if there’s some real issues that, that may crop up. So Yeah, I mean, look,

47:29 I mean, I, I think yeah, there, there’s some tough constraints, but Okay. I, I don’t think, I don’t think it’s, I don’t think it’s a broken process at all, frankly. Um, you know, but it’s worth discussing. Can, can I? Of course. Yeah. Just, uh, since this is only discussion Yeah. And it’s gonna continue for, um, at least another meeting or more, can we find out just which are, um, you know, uh, state mandated, federally mandated that they have to be July 1st, things like that. Cause right now it’s just all guests, right? Yeah, I think, so what is state mandate is regulated based on a fiscal

48:18 Yeah. Payment where we’re talking about volunteer board. I don’t think there’s a per se requirement that a volunteer board needs to be seated by a fiscal year. It’s largely relative to like, you know, the regular employment reappointments that we make. Like we reappoint the fire chief, we reappoint town administrator, the account, the town accountant. There’s a bunch that we’re statutorily, you know, required to do before the fiscal year. But it doesn’t apply. My understanding wouldn’t apply to what we’re talking about as volunteer appointments. Okay. Um, and So we’re sure of that.

48:51 Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I mean, I’m, I mean, that’s my understanding of it. Okay. I don’t know that anybody, is there any information we didn’t we’re required didn to point volunteer board, But no, we just got this yesterday, so I don’t, I I’m just putting that out there. Yeah, It’s just Through the chair. Yeah, Through the chair. Um, Satcher is Thatcher. Do you have any, uh, you know, to uh, speak to Jim’s question? I, I might be wrong. I thought that this came up at the last discussion, um, about where there are any specific, um, you know, uh, guidelines around this that we need to be aware of. Is there anything that’s been brought to your attention between the last meeting and this meeting? I know potentially, you know, if there’s any, uh, I mean we should definitely be 100% sure.

49:38 I 100% agree with Jim. What Jim’s asking there. Do, do we have any forward motion on that?

49:45 So here, I mean the information that is available on these different appointments, cuz you have, you have state appointments to, to local boards and you have, you have committees and boards that were created by bylaw and the bylaw would set, um, they will typically set the terms one year, three year. Um, I’m not aware, you know, throughout a lot of bylaws or, or, or actions by boards where they set the date. That’s more of by tradition. Um, and municipalities do work on a, on a fiscal year cycle. So, uh,

50:33 in my experience in multiple communities, uh, more, more so in cities, it goes very much to a fiscal year cycle. Um, but what needs to be looked at is, you know, the bylaws for those boards created by bylaw and what the terms were set. I doubt you’ll have a start date, end date. Um, then you have committees that are created by the select board in whatever the term, the select board set. And so part of the, the, the research, I know there’s been some work done in the past and Kyle has some documents where they’ve gone through all the committees as to what’s the origins of the committees. But the point being, um, most of those, it’ll dictate what the term is, but it doesn’t necessarily dictate start date.

51:20 Date. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I mean I think we should have that information in line with Jim. Were there, um, apologies, Erin, through the chair. Uh, Jim, were there any committees that come to mind that you, you know, that are jumping out at you that you have concerns about? Or that anything that jumps, jumps to mind that’s bringing the question forward? Anybody that’s has a budget to handle Right. Any Committees. Okay. Like I can think of the finance committee and um, Harpers and Mars and Winter Enterprise Fund. There might be others that touch, there might be others that touch facts Aren’t voted in. Oh, sure, yeah, Yeah. You know, that kind of obviously are attuned.

52:08 I think it’s also just a matter of like, you know, you’re required by statute to avoid, uh, to reappoint to make the employment reappointments. And it’s just kind of a natural place to draw those to, to make, to set the term. I think that’s really what it come down to. Um, it just sounds, so, it sounds, what I’m hearing is that there’s, you know, the board is a little split around, you know, inclinations on moving the reappointment process forward. Um,

52:40 doesn’t, you know, it sounds like moving, moving the, um, the process up a few weeks in June is something that maybe we, you know, not everybody, there’s not consensus on. Go ahead Alexa. Yeah. Through the chair. I, I guess I just wanted to follow up a little bit on this cuz I, I guess I’m just trying to understand where other people are thinking and where, what the thoughts are here. Um, uh, Moses, my question, I guess one of the things you said was the, you know, the current process relied on the, the understanding of the past select board had put the, you know, had put the current appointments in place and that there was kind of that trust and reliance. And to me,

53:28 I’m having a hard time differentiating what the difference is between that process and then if the someone who came on the board knew that that vote was taken in, for example, may, um, or June or April, you know, um, what, whatever that suggestion ended up with, um, how that is different because you’re still would be doing the same thing. You’re relying on the past select board to have made a decision for a reappointment when you were coming onto the board. But at that point you’re knowing that prior select board had eight months to make that decision. If that, you know, whoever, what, you know, all, all five members of that select board had eight months to make that decision. So I would think based on that point,

54:15 it would even reinforce it more cuz you would say, okay, well it wasn’t even like two people came on or one person came on and didn’t really have a time to review the appointments. All five people had eight months to review the appointment process. So therefore you are reinforcing that idea that you’re putting trust in that passport, that they have in fact had the time to really invest in understanding the process and the boards and all the other nuances that might be occurring. So I, I guess I’m just having a hard time differentiating between those two things. Cuz to me it seems like it’s the same. So can I Yeah, go ahead. So to my point on that, so, uh, that’s fine having this discuss discussion. So if that’s the concern, we should vote on the reappointments because

55:02 we’ve been here, besides Brett, we’ve been here for two years, we should all know what everybody’s doing and Brett was on for six years. So if that’s the case, we should vote for Reappointments and then do all this policy over the course of the year for next year. Well, I think what we’re doing right now is discussing this. That’s great. That’s keep discussing all we want, but if that’s your concern, we’re all veterans here. Yeah, let, I think we, if I, if I could also not into this for in particular we’re talking about that’s fine. So we’ve pushed everybody back because the concern is, you know, we’re trying to do a policy and, and find out, dig into what people are doing. I still go back to the, to the, to the issue that, that I think

55:51 my opinion is that this is about two particular boards, you know, one board this year and the next, another board next year. And you know, we’re not trying to get rid of people, but it’s absolutely about getting rid of pe, getting rid, getting rid of people. If that’s not the case, let’s vote in Right. You know, let’s reappoint everybody like we were gonna do two weeks ago because we’ve all been here, we all, we’ve been around for a while, we know what these committees do, we know what the volunteers are doing. And, and then over the course of this year, let’s come up with a new policy and maybe switch it for next year. So again, I’m just going from what you’re saying about the experience and things like that. We all have the experience. Alexa, maybe Madam Chair if I could through the, through the chair

56:38 Yeah. And then I Yeah, go ahead. Okay. Alexa, I can, you know, perhaps answer it another way. I mean, I don’t think you, it, whenever there’s new, a new member right, who has, who’s coming fresh onto the board, absent doing, interviewing all the volunteers. Again, there’s no possible way that that new elected select board member will know the people that are, you know, will be able to make a a a real decision, objective decision. And I think that’s why, you know, traditionally we’ve always had people who have been engaged pretty heavily in the networking of the town, you know, uh, who, who end up, uh, on the select board and it’s an easier transition. They know the players, right? And there’s, there’s kind of a, you know,

57:24 an assumption of prior knowledge as as, uh, as Jim was hinting at, you know, that you kind of know what’s going on at all the different committees. So look, I think if you’re coming on, you know, to the select board, there’s no way you’re gonna be able to know all the, all the volunteers and there’s not a process right now absent interviewing all, all of them all over again for reappointment to be able to, to generate that knowledge for a new person, Right? Which is why I think the question is

57:55 how do people feel about, you know, not putting somebody in that situa, like if be if we are gonna take on two new people who we are acknowledging, like you say, have no basis to form an opinion to vote on it, why would we not, uh, move up this reappointment process to the five people who have been on the board? So I guess, I guess I just wanna clarify, like, are you in, or do you find it, like, are you opposed to the idea of moving the process up? Do you Well prefer Keep it the way it is? Is that your gut instinct? You know, like we’re just getting first impressions, I just kind of wanna keep Yeah, madam. Sure. I mean, I, I think I was one of the, one of the first ones to basically propose moving things forward, you know, bringing forward, okay. Okay. Okay. So I’m not generally opposed to anything if it Okay. If it makes sense.

58:43 I just think that there’s a logic though, to having the new board, which is usually constituted of members of the old board too, that were part of the process to have that new board reappoint and launch the new volunteers because it’s a way for the select board to announce its authority at the beginning of the fiscal year with the, with the, with. I think that’s the idea behind it. I’m not saying it’s, you know, we, we could do it a different way. You know, we, I I, I think we probably have to check in on the, um, I don’t think it was such a problem is my understanding when we had an election that happened in late May and we were doing this and I think it’s recently like been, our personal experiences we’re coming from this, that We we’re, we’re tight. So I don’t think it goes back that far. I think it’s just in the last couple years we’re kind of identifying what we

59:32 feel is a problem. And so can we, you know, I think, you know, let’s think about maybe, you know, considering we move the election, why would you know, would you know, could you consider moving it up? Um, election? Yeah, I just wanna The Election or the reappointment? Oh, the reappointment, sorry. Moving the reappointment, you know, up a bit because of the Nope, just New election. Yeah, I mean, I mean, I mean this is truly you know, it, it’s about policy, it’s about process, it’s about parody, it’s about making it fair for people who wanna serve and making it fair for those who wish to continue to serve. So that’s where the parody comes in, and that’s where we have to strike that balance. We don’t have that now. You know, and that’s why, How, how do we not have that? We, We, yeah, I disagree with that. Don’t, that’s the,

1:00:18 if you take a look at some of the, the different process, and this is why, and we’re certainly not even gonna come close to even getting one of these things even agreed upon tonight. And we’re likely gonna have to have a, probably a, a standalone meeting, you know, or two or three on this. Um, but I can tell you, you know, in talking to the community out, you know, when I get out, they’re saying this is one of the first times that this board, all five members have been actively engaged in discussing. So I think this is wonderful that we’re, you know, looking at this process. So I think that’s a good thing. And I think we have to put that in perspective. That’s what we are here to do, is be leaders and to do this. And we all come from different backgrounds. We all have different perspective, and that’s what’s gonna make this process work. And we’re not gonna, it’s not gonna be a, you know, a, you know, five oh vote. It’s just not.

1:01:04 Um, but we can work together and I think we can address it. And that’s why we have a few months to do that. And it’s gonna take some time and effort, but we will get there. And it’s going to be, I think, a more fair process for everybody, for the new members who get elected to this board, for the members who wanna serve this town, and the ones who wanna continue to serve this town as a appointed. Right. Madam Chair, if I, if I could just respond really quickly, I mean, I just would, you know, I guess I’d like to understand better, you know, kind of identify what the problem is, per se. Okay. And I think we’re going through, I’m all in favor of it, by the way. I’m very aware of what it takes to change the, both the mandate and the composition of boards. Right? I led the fair, the restructuring of the Fair Housing committee last year.

1:01:49 It took four months for one committee. Lot of delicate negotiation, ultimately with Aaron taking over, um, you know, the, the, the, the, the committee. And it’s a very delicate process. You know, you think that now volunteers, the only currency they have absent politics, the only currency they have is the joy of giving back to their town and their civic reputation, right? I mean, that’s what they have. And you, I think you spoke to the same thing when you talked about parity, right? I mean, it’s that kind of thing where, you know, that’s what people love about volunteering for the, you know, town of Marblehead. So I think, I’m trying to think, you know, what is the real problem we’re trying to solve, you know, within that kind, right? And I think, um,

1:02:37 it doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have a discussion, but we should also acknowledge that the reason we have the current process, which by the way is a process. We have the, we have the, the select board office working very hard on all these reappointments and stuff, right? So I, I’m trying to understand, you know, what’s the real problem? I, there’s no question that a newly elected select board member will not know who the players are that they’re voting on. There’s no question about that. Right? And I’m thinking, you know, that’s not, that’s why you have the experienced, you know, select board members there cuz they are voting, right? And there’s continuity there. And I think it does take a couple of years for select board members to get up to speed, you know, who’s doing what where. I don’t think there’s any way around that. So I’m just trying to understand what the real problem we’re trying to solve here, because Yeah. And

1:03:22 That I think goes back to pushing it, you know, potentially up and allowing it before the election. Well, what’s the problem we’re trying to solve? Solve the Problem’s, the problem we’re policies written down and we wanna create policies written down Well, For we’re having a discussion. Ok, that’s fair enough. Fair. So that’s the problem, really. Like, just that simply like, why don’t we write down, the problem is we don’t have anything co Why don’t we down the process we have now, why don’t We do that? And I think, and as we, so my, because We have a process, there’s no question. Right? But not everybody knows that. Or maybe we could entertain, maybe there’s, we should discuss the current process. And I think when we do an institutional review and create for the first time some operating board policies and procedures, which are, you know, kind of ubiquitous, frankly, among other communities. And we’re just,

1:04:11 we’re trying to,

1:04:14 and part of that process is what do we currently do? What do we think of it? Mm-hmm. You know, where are we starting from? And, you know, and so the, to to dial it way back, the problem, the problem and why we’re having this conversation is we’re just to bring everybody back. We actually do want to develop express policies. And so, you know, maybe it’s not a problem the way it’s done, it’s just we have to say the way it’s done. And that’s, I I go from there, you know what I’m Saying? A hundred percent. Look, I am not, you know, as long as you’re, you know, you’re not handcuffing a policy board, which is a select board, right? As long as you’re developing policies and guidelines that don’t, you know,

1:05:00 handcuff a a select board, why not put our process, which we have down on paper. Okay? Right. I think it’s, I think it’s because we have very strong traditions in the town. We’ve had great continuity, and I don’t disagree with you. I mean, someone new coming onto this select board, you know, I mean, you’re, you’re, you’re, you’re, you’ve got very, uh, long-standing, you know, uh, members who have conducted business in a certain way, right? And, but, and, and putting that, I don’t see any harm in putting that. I actually think it’s very beneficial. And that’s a story, Right? But I, but I think, I think, you know, it’s important to understand though that, you know, before we interject, you know, procedural, uh, requirements, you know, before understanding what we have, I think it’s important to first understand what we have. And that’s why,

1:05:46 that’s why, again, I, I think, right, you know, I would, I would like to, you know, to at some point to move to reconsider our, our whole Monthly appointees. I mean, so, so to the, so currently what we have is a process by which new members participate in what feels like a voter of reappointments to three year volunteer boards in what is one of the biggest and roles that they’re, you know, elected seek office, whatever. So that is what we currently do. We’re explaining what we can do, and we’re having a conversation around the merits of that. And is there a better way to do that? Yeah. It goes back to east and Moses, this is, we have long traditions and that’s wonderful. And, you know, we wanna keep the good traditions in this town that are good. But in the same regard, if, if,

1:06:32 if you look at something and the only thing you can say is, well, that’s the way we’ve always done it. I’m not, am I saying it then? I’m not saying no, but I’m just, I’m saying this, not you, I’m not saying you’re saying this, but if, but a lot of times, you know, you have to take that look, step back and go, wait a minute, is this the best way? Is this, is this falling best practices? And that’s why, you know, Ms. Newnan for several years, and even Alexa had been trying to bring this up, but unfortunately have gotten cut short and, and haven’t had this discussion until length and that we have. And so I’m, I’m thankful that we’re having this, this discussion. I’m glad we are because again, I think we all agree we wanna have a better process. We gotta look at, put it on paper first, our current process. And then cuz I’m looking at what Mr you know, Mitch, Mr. Keyser gave us here all these communities that have it all right here.

1:07:20 And it’s a shame that we don’t did put that Oh, you did. I’m sorry. Put together, It’s just a, but we don’t resource reference, Reference to, and that would help out any new select board member from an onboarding. Because I can tell you, when I first got elected 12 years ago, I had a two hour onboarding with Tony saso and that was it. Right? Right. That’s not acceptable either. And that’s why the citizens at town meeting passed, you know, that bylaw about, they, they want to see policies for certain boards and commissions, and that’s what we’re doing here. So I don’t, um, just in the interest of kind of, I, I kind of am trying to get a sense of where, you know, like we said, what do we do? Do we like what we do? And is there cons do, is there some starting point of consensus? Okay.

1:08:09 So, okay, so timing of the appointment seems like still kind of a mixed, mixed opinions on whether it’s advi, whether peop there’s consensus on moving the process up a few weeks. Okay. Currently we have many one year volunteer boards and that are r routinely reappointed. You know, that’s how we currently do it. Do we thi, you know, I guess I’m wondering would, is there, um, you know, a will of the board to revisit whether one year terms makes sense and we should just put everybody on a three year staggered term versus a lot of like five reappointments at once type of thing?

1:08:57 Um, so if we could kind of transition from the time framing and see if maybe is there, you know, kind of take people’s temperatures around the one year term versus the three year term. Because right now we have seven one one-year term volunteer boards, eight three-year terms, and one five-year term, then that’s by statute. Um, so any opinions around, um, you know, while we’re making policy reviews, and again, it’s this going back to the bylaws and what we’re capable of doing. You know, anybody can go on and do their own research. But I looked up the bylaws for, um, any, like, like, you know, there, the only bylaws on the one year term boards that are relevant are the old and

1:09:46 historic district has a bylaw around it, as does, um, there’s a bylaw on harbors and waters. But to my first, you know, initial like reading of the bylaw, it was silent as to the term. And of course we wanna get a, you know, a, you know, confirmation of that. But if that is the case, because you can go and look and read the bylaw around O H D C and harbors and waters, I could not find anything in the bylaw that specified. It’s a one-year term. It just says appointed by the Board of Selectmen. So it would be then up to us, which in our purview, whether we want to reconsider these volunteer boards as, you know, the normal three-year staggered terms versus one year boards.

1:10:35 Okay. Alexa, Behan. Yeah. Thank you for the chair. So my initial thought would be to, obviously as we look at the bylaws and confirm there’s no state statutes, but after that would be to also solicit the opinion and thoughts of the individuals who are currently serving. Um, you know, if, uh, there might be some specific feedback on that that would be helpful for us as the board to hear perhaps there is, uh, sentiment of, you know, universal support for a three-year term, perhaps, uh, there’s, you know, considerable opposition. Uh, to me it would be really helpful to also have that information from those that are sitting in those positions. And, uh,

1:11:21 I don’t know if we’ve have any of that direct feedback yet, or if Thatcher you have any information to add to that. But that’s the first question that I would like to know. Mm-hmm.

1:11:37 Yeah, go ahead, Alexa. That is the question, right? Because unless we get work closely with our volunteers and with the chairs of these committees in a deliberate, careful process over a well thought out period of time, it’ll cause mayhem. You know, I mean, I, I believe it will, uh, just based on, you know, my, my experience both ofcom and, and more recently, you know, restructuring one board, right? It takes a lot of effort. People are very opinionated. You’re talking about their reputations, right? And they want to give feedback. And I just think, uh, every board, so to answer this question, Madam Chair specifically, I think, you know,

1:12:23 every board’s gonna have its particular, you know, characteristics. And whether it’s one year or three years staggered or not, there’s reasons why the terms are the way they are in some instances. In other instances it may make no sense. But I think whatever it is, to your point, Alexa, we’re gonna have to do very careful research not to have a heavy hand over these committees who are basically, many of them are independently mandated, right? Uh, pretty much. Uh, and even I think we encourage independence and we avoid, the board has traditionally avoided micromanagement of these committees once we set them up. Because, you know, we are hoping to bring on experts who know what they’re doing. Not to say we, we don’t frame the mandate, you know, and the policy and all that we do.

1:13:12 But I’m just saying when it comes to, uh, you know, you know, it’s the management that we don’t, that we don’t micromanage. So bottom line is, I think it’s, it’s a very long process that we’re really talking about here of review, which is why I’m not really, I’m kind of opposed to having a, an artificial end, you know, end date out there by the time we’re gonna complete the review. Cuz I think there are gonna be some committees that’ll take a long time perhaps, and then there are others that won’t. Um, my experience is, is that people are very sensitive and, you know, you just, we just have to take that into account. Okay. So through the chair. Sure. Uh, so, uh, you know, I think, Sorry, one quick question. So like, so we’re going to discuss the issue around the holdover, but I think I’m trying to

1:14:00 mm-hmm. First No, that’s fair. Which is on the agenda is to actually Yeah. Engage in, in consideration of the Actual, I I don’t know that we can make a decision on That. Second, I’m, and I’m not saying we are, I’m just trying to see, you know, you know, just lit, you know, our first flush at this, you know, um mm-hmm. You know, where are people at? Is that something we need further discussion on? I mean, even the one year, you know, one year versus three, or let’s say people come back and they enjoy the, you know, they enjoy like, you know, a one. Yeah. We’d, I mean, I’d love more choi, you know, more choice. But when you look at it as a board, most people are seeing for three years. I mean, to come on the first year you’re volunteering, you’re usually, you know, learning and kind of going, and I, it,

1:14:46 I think it’s probably the rare exception that people come on and serve an actual one year term and leave. So, you know, people, circumstances change. People don’t have to, you know, if they, they their life change or they just, you know, something, they really, they’ve served two years and they really don’t wanna volunteer the third year. They just, you know, we post the vacancy for the remainder of the term. Um, but then it kind of puts everybody on the consistent playing field. That’s a consistent cycle and a consistent, um, tenure that inspires both learning and then room for leadership throughout the volunteer period. Um,

1:15:28 so, okay. Um, the vacancy process, um, you know, I guess just curious if people, you know, we could, you know, in terms of like I, how we currently do it, um, if we were to write a policy, would we want to, like some of the, um, examples that they, you know, kind of, we do it anyway, it’s just kind of codifying what we do, uh, you know, a notice requirement of like 14 days at least where we’re posting the vacancy, right? Because we’re just, we’re lit. We have to put something into writing about what we’re, you know, what our policy is. So, um, you know,

1:16:15 would, you know, I guess, you know, is there anything that we would, you know, people that stand jump out as something we wanna consider from what we currently do to something, you know, we should consider around just your routine vacancy appointments?

1:16:38 Go ahead, Alexa. Just an idea. Um, this was based on, you know, kind of what Moses had thrown out about taking, you know, what the current, you know, current status of things are, having that all listed. And, uh, you know, one idea that just came to mind was, you know, uh, perhaps, um, you know, that Thatcher has that document, um, you know, and, and edits can be, you know, made, made. It’s just try, you know, thinking of, of ways that people have time to look at a current document, have their thoughts on a new document, you know, bring forward the, the ideas. I, I think that we’re trying to, to bring forward here to make sure everyone has the time and the space,

1:17:26 you know, to be doing that. I, I think it’s that the same thought I have for the volunteers to giving them, you know, obviously we want to make sure that we have a timeline that we’re getting this information. But, you know, even asking the volunteer boards, uh, you know, do, is there, uh, you know, based on what you were suggesting and with let’s say a one-year term went to a three-year term, you know, were there other concerns that obviously if they have the ability, you know, to resign if necessary or step away if necessary, if there other things that they would want to bring to the board’s attention, you know, um, just, uh, uh, some way to continue to execute this process. But, um,

1:18:11 perhaps taking what we have and then working as an edit from there might help move this in a more streamlined fashion. I don’t know, uh, if there’s feedback on that.

1:18:28 I mean, I haven’t heard, I guess I just kind of put, you know, put the vacancy process there cuz I haven’t heard where, you know, the timing of the appointments kind of came up as an issue. So like I put that out there. I’ve heard, you know, it’s, we’ve had a mixture of terms, so, you know, we’re constantly repointing one year term, so like, you know, if we’re right. Rewriting policy, let’s look at that. I guess I’m wondering, does anybody feel like the current process that we have for the vacancy needs to be, you know, that there’s, that there’s certain areas of that that we should reconsider or we can start by co like we can at least draft and codify really what it is we currently do?

1:19:13 I don’t personally, you know, I think there’s some things, you know, we could tweak. I i person, for me, I don’t have, you know, I think we could start, I think starting, I’m happy to start with a draft if the way we do it currently do it since we’re, you know Yeah. Madam chair. Yeah. I think, I think you’re basically, you know, describing Kyle’s part of Kyle’s job description right? With with the whole vacancy process. Cause Yeah. Just in case she putting the call writing in what she does. Yeah. She, she runs that and, Right. Like, I, I think in, I think in terms of advancing candidates, you know, I think, you know, I, I think written responses, I mean, we do require appointees to submit a letter, a resume Yeah. And then stand for an appointment Yep. Or I should say for an interview. So I mean, that, that’s a pretty robust way of, uh, you know, uh, yeah. Look,

1:19:58 looking, looking at candidates, right? Mm-hmm. And, you Know, yep. It just came up as one an option when I was looking, you know, um, around, I think it’s in some of the reference materials like that mm-hmm. There’s like a form people fill out, it’s a volunteer form, and then they send their cv and the form has like what professional skillset, you know, I, I don’t have an opinion strongly or the other, I just was pointing out Yep. You know, kind of what I see other town communities doing since we’re doing this exercise. Um, I don’t particularly identify any, you know, thing that I, we couldn’t just kind of draft a policy with the way that we currently are doing our vacancies by identifying like, you know, clearly what, you know, we’re expecting a notice requirement period to solicit in, you know, um,

1:20:46 you know, what’s what we’re asking for, um, in terms of, you know, are we asking for a CV and a letter? Are we asking for just a form they fill out and a cv? And I guess, you know, do we wanna have, uh, some boards have more of a, like a written interview, kind of like four questions, kind of like a written response. And so a lot of the decisions made on the paper and then the candidate comes forward and they have an opportunity like for two minutes to like personalize their stuff or, you know, do we keep asking questions, you know, live, I don’t really, I don’t have a strong opinion one or the other just pointing out a couple different ways you could do it since we’re writing a policy down. And

1:21:31 Madam true. I, I mean I, I think the biggest thing with the vacancy process is this, is to try to encourage as many people as possible to apply. Mm-hmm. That’s what is the most important, I think. Yeah. However we do that. And I, I think we can probably do a better job, you know, of re of finding areas of, you know, underrepresenting underrepresented folks that aren’t engaged and kind of trying to get them to come forward. I think our process will recognize that and we’ll, and we’ll select, you know, can select more inclusively, but the inclusiveness is gonna depend on how well we reach out and attract as many volunteers as possible. Mm-hmm.

1:22:11 Yeah. Um,

1:22:14 some of the policies I looked at had, you know, obviously it says, you know, we, the vacancies will be announced on the website and posted in the local newspaper. Um, and then of course if it’s just a kind of incumbent upon, you know, the members and and community to, to foster that. Um, okay, so it sounds like, sounds Like we’re already doing everything, we just need to write it down. Okay. That which is, which is where Yeah. Was hoping one of these we could start from. Yeah, no, we’re already, we’re already doing, right. All these things. So if we are creating policies, I just, this is kind of what the goal was to just kind of identify, is there consensus around someplace to start from and write the policy? And so, um, you know, I’m happy to,

1:23:02 or, you know, or if others wanna, you know, offer to draft, um, something that we, you know, kind of identifies what we do for discussion and to review a discussion at our next meeting around our vacancy process so we can have a vacancy process, appointments policy that we’re looking at and discussing and then hopefully voting on in the near future. That would be great. Um, like I said, I’m happy to take a crack at it. Um, but any one of us also could, could do that starting point for then we get to the board and we say, let’s just, you know, edit, we kind of do some markup and it would just, and with, with the, with the kind of like,

1:23:48 it seems like the consensus is let’s write down what it is we do and let’s start from that and we can actually draft something and look at it. And maybe, maybe we could vote that, um, you know, rather quickly. Could I suggest just Yeah. Quickly, not, not to put anything more on Kyle’s plate, but Kyle does all of this. Can we just ask Kyle, and please let’s give her months to do this cause it’s summer, um, to just what our practice is now. Um, and then we can look at, and then we can look at it. But I mean, I can, I mean, and you can add others Write down, but just exactly what we Do. Yeah, we can, yeah. I mean, I, I can, I’ve already actually, you know,

1:24:35 we’ve kind of talked about what it is currently, what, you know, what it, what it is. Like when do we start reaching out to people. Like, I had this conversation with Kyle today, um, so I don’t need her to write it, you know, I can just get the information from her, but I’d rather, I mean the, you know, again, like

1:24:57 I, I, you know, I am I, in the interest of time and bandwidth of staff around policy making, which I feel, which is our role, um, I’m happy to take a crack and draft something that Kyle can look at and say, yep, that’s how we do it. And, um, present to the board as a draft to consider for this.

1:25:24 Does that sound like a good place to start? Yeah. I mean, look, honestly, I think, you know, anything of, of strong substance has to come from the professionals on our, on our staff at the town, right? So I think typically as a policy board, what we do is we, is we reach down, uh, to our professional staff to bring, you know, bring up product to us right? That we can deliberate on. Um, there may be an exception here with kind of high level policy, you know, kind of things. But I think what we’re doing now is we’re getting into process of, you know, of how things, you know, how things get done. Which I think is a very useful exercise, don’t get me wrong, because I think it, for a number of reasons, frankly. Um,

1:26:11 but I think the question is, are we also gonna allow for a cycle where we go back to the individual committees and get their feedback as well on, on these particular policies? Right. I think we can do both. I think we can start with the draft. Okay. And I think we can, um, bring, you know, ask for feedback at the next Yeah. Two weeks if anybody has any around, you know, weeks. Like, can you get us some feedback and you know, if, if you, if you’re so inclined, Um, and then, yeah, two weeks after we get it, Or just now. Okay. Right. How about the current? Cause we’re codifying the current practice, right? Nope, I got, I gotcha. Yeah. So like, so some, we gotta get it done in writing, which is not gonna take a minute. And, uh, again,

1:26:58 this is all good stuff. I don’t want to put a, like a two week time limit on it cuz I don’t know if Kyle’s going on vacation got, I mean, I’m going on vacation, you know, so, you know, those types of things. It’s, it’s the summer. I agree. Yeah. Um, and I, and I do understand I’m not pushing off and so, you know, so that was one thing I agreed with, with Brad, if you are gonna do it, push it out to November 1st cuz it’s, you know, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s why we live here. It’s the vacation time, you know? And so now, so now we’re doing work and we’re putting time limits on, you know, in the past we’ve only had one meeting in August because there’s, there’s limited amount of business, um, people are on vacation trying to get people here. So, um, yeah, I mean,

1:27:44 I’m all for it, but, you know, I’m Not so just to be, I don’t, I I don’t wanna create any additional burden on professional staff. I am happy to draft. Mm-hmm. It’s not reinventing the wheel. Um, you know, I’m, we’re just, you know, literally codifying what it is, you know? Yeah. Run it through Kyle verbally and say, okay, you know, she can review it. Say, yep, that looks like, you know, that represents a true and accurate kind of, you know, summary of how we currently doing things. And again, bring it forward as a draft for consideration as a place to start. Yeah. Sounds good. Okay. All good. Okay. Can I suggest Yes, in regard to feedback that amongst you

1:28:31 to come up with the questions that you want answered Okay. As the feedback, because it’s you that’s asking the questions and looking for it. Sure. Yeah. That’s a point we can facilitate the email distribution of, of it out to all the current members and get it back. But, uh, I say put the burden on you to come up with open-end question. Yeah. You come up with the questions, we’ll facilitate distributing it out, put on some kind of timeline for feedback and getting it back, um, that we can do. Okay. We Have Madam Chair. Yeah, go ahead. Um, Thatcher I would love your opinion on this, but is this something you think could go, uh, provided that we put the questions out,

1:29:17 like something they could put out like just like a, you know, some sort of like quick survey type thing that the volunteers could go through and, you know, rank choice, give their preference, give their notes, and just trying to think of a way that would be easy on the volunteers, easy on the professional staff to get the information that we need, um, but not, you know, take more time than it’s necessary. I don’t know what that, that, you know, that you would have to execute that. I’m just throwing that out there. It depends on what, what is the feedback you’re looking for? How complex of the questions do you wanna ask or you want it simply two, three questions. Tell us how, what you think about X.

1:30:02 Yeah. And let, let people, so if it’s, and my preference is always simpler, is better, uh, facilitating quick responses from the, the people you’re asking so you’re not bringing them. And, and so the, the task is defining the right questions in a way that you get valuable information back. But it’s, it’s fairly easy process for us to put it out and for the recipients to fill out and send back. Okay. And just,

1:30:39 All right. So, um, it’s, I had been going, having a conversation about an hour about it. Um, you know, starting this discussion was, you know, we’re like, I don’t think it’s ever starting the process of writing anything is always the hardest part, right. When you sit down and write something to start it, it’s the hardest part. Um, so this was, I expected this to be, you know, kind of a little bit of, you know, kind, um, tricky and like, you know, hope that kind of having some bullets around it helped

1:31:26 start it. Um, I think there’s just one last point that I think that I had on here that, you know, I don’t wanted to get people’s temperature on is around the reappointment process and in reviewing other policies,

1:31:46 uh, um, many, most, I guess of them. And again, everyone’s free to look online. I was just googling, you know, select board operating policies and procedures, appointments and reappointments and whom comes a bunch of towns and you can find them there. And, you know, I guess do you know, do people feel like there’s a need for, um, a, a more, uh,

1:32:18 prescribed review process or, um, or not

1:32:30 versus, you know, the presumptive reappointment? I’m sorry, I don’t understand the question. I I for terms of, um, reappointment process, some is, do people feel that, I mean, I, it seems to me that

1:32:50 I can think of a few situations where you have, um, or were reappointing, but at a certain point, especially with the one year terms, it kind of falls in the cycle where it’s like you’re not allowing for new members to come on if you’re never ever having kind of a right routine review of long tenured reapplications and within the materials and in, you know, what’s available out there along among, you know, other communities. It seems that, you know, there’s many examples of, you know, po different, different policies around, you know, reapplications re applicants are invited to apply alongside, reapply alongside, um, uh,

1:33:38 new volunteers or, you know, after two terms. You know, there’s a presumptive right of reappointment for, you know, six years came up in one of the boards, one of the, one of the boards. And then after six years we would like to see, we’d like to put it out to interest. And if there is interest, you know, re applicant and volun and new volunteer apply, um, you know, alongside each other,

1:34:10 is there like interest in kind of establishing or, or, or you know,

1:34:21 some type of policy around Reappointments? Yeah, Madam Chair. I mean, I think that’s definitely one of the things we have to look at. And, and that’s going back to the people who we’ve reappointed get their opinion on the process, but also you’ve done some, you know, due diligence and looked at other communities. Um, but again, we have to be fair to a, the new people, but also to the existing folks. And I think, you know, if they’ve served six years and new people do wanna come on, you know, I think six years is sounds somewhat reasonable for an existing member to have to come back in front of the board again. Um, and maybe they’ll decide, maybe they wanna serve on another committee or step away. And again, it goes back to yours, Mr. Greater, you know, these people have reputations in this town too. Um, so I think something like that would be, um,

1:35:07 I’d be open to consider something like that.

1:35:13 Okay. If we were to codify what we currently do,

1:35:19 you know, I guess I’m looking to, you know, Jim and Moses having like, what would you say? Cause I’m not sure How, but served the same amount of time as Moses. Okay. So yeah, sure. If we were to codify current practice around Reappointments, what would that, what would it be? What would be the policy? What is the current policy? I guess We don’t ask for really new applicants. If somebody wants to reapply, we disappoint them, reappoint them. And that could be for 15, 20 years without coming from the board. So there are people that I’ve appointed when I was first on that are still appointed now that, you know, should be considered. And maybe there is And That’s great. And maybe there’s new people that wanna come on. Exactly. Okay.

1:36:06 Okay. Definitely something, you know, like, again for further discussion, you know, we’re not, like I said, we’re not gonna reach, you know, Nirvana here tonight. Wouldn’t that be lovely? Look, I I think there’s also perhaps another way to, to think about it as well. Mm-hmm. You know, we do have town administrator and, you know, the, the, the select board’s office, right. Can, you know, talk to the committee chairs and basically usually if there’s a blatant problem on any committee or any board right, that gets handled that way, kind of, you know, it’s kind of under the radar and you know, everybody, you take care of it Right. Type thing. Again, it’s it’s all about preserving reputation and not,

1:36:51 you know, making a big display of getting someone, you know, throwing someone off a board effectively, because it’s very discouraging to new volunteers that want to come in. So, you know, you can, you can put a six year thing. I mean, look, I mean, that is a long time, no question. And, uh, but it’s still, you know, you’re require, you’re basically setting up a, a, you know, kind of a, another speed bump that the person wants to stay on, right? Has to, uh, cross and, um, you know, it can force a, a decision to stop to quit. Or if they go up against the new, you know, the newcomers and, and lose, you know, then you gotta kind of consider the implications of that. I mean, I think, you know, yeah, I’m not, I’m not a hundred percent decided on that. I, I think, you know, I kind of lo you know, the, the approach of having, you know,

1:37:40 the town administrator, uh, discuss, uh, with the, the, the chairs of the committees and it is very much their prerogative. I think we should discuss that too, you know, because it’s like, you know, how much do we want to kind of maintain the prerogatives of the chairs to kind of make certain decisions, you know, that, that obviously feed into our process. Uh, and I agree. I mean, if we’re gonna have a policy, it should be something like this. But I think on the other hand, you know, maybe there’s a way for, you know, to kind of, uh, write down how the town administrator should approach a, a chair if, you know, for, you know, for, to to increase the rate of turnover. Cuz this is what this is all about. It’s increasing the rate of turnover in the, in, in the committees. And I think that’s, that’s a, that’s a, you know,

1:38:26 policy judgment. So Yeah, I mean, I think that if you, I think if the goal, like I think, you know, you if you know, a lot of, a lot of the reappointments are around the goal of boards wanting to continue to inspire volunteerism and opportunity to volunteer while preserving, you know, a healthy balance of newer members. Um, you know, you know current members and then longer serving members, right? Uh, so I, I think rather than, you know, reapplication about like, you know, malfeasance or someone’s, you know, in particular about, it’s more about the needs of the board versus like a

1:39:14 single person. Like if we look at a board and we’re like, you know, there hasn’t been an opportunity and, and by the way, maybe there’s no interest in it. And maybe this, maybe the policy is like, you know, if there’s, we solicit interest, if there’s no, you know, no interest, obviously that person’s reappointed. But if there is interest after six years, like what does the board look like? What’s the vision? Do we, are we kind of missing a professional skillset that would be helpful that somebody new could bring, um, you know, not, so just more about kind of the overall like health of the board versus like, you know, I mean, I’m sure that there are those circumstances where we have a problem, you know, volunteer or whatever. I’m kind of like setting that aside, like looking at it more holistically in terms of just healthy

1:40:03 boards. Yeah. Because mean you gotta get away from that lifetime appointment. I can’t tell you how many times when I talk to people and they’re saying, I’m so happy you’re having this discussion. I’m glad you’re addressing this issue because the way that this has been done for many, many years, it, it seems like it’s a Supreme Court lifetime appointment. You get appointed and you’re just reappointed and reappointed. And, and, and that’s not, and that’s not being fair to people who do wanna serve and bring new ideas. Because I look at Mr. Thatcher right here, you know, I mean, I mean, I know it’s a different, he’s an appointed individual, but he’s somebody new and he’s brought a lot of great ideas to this, you know, to this town in the short tenure. Sure. I mean, we, the way he thought about, you know, the HR position and the, um,

1:40:52 um, sustainability, sustainability coordinator, thank you. You, you know, and basically it’s, it’s either gonna, either this budget’s gonna stay up or it’s gonna, it’s gonna shift. And, and ultimately that’s gonna save money, you know, for the town that’s gonna more than pay for themselves. Cuz I didn’t tell you, and, and one of my pro, you know, previous institutions, I mean, I saved on the workers’ compensation alone because I got, you know, involved with myself and a bunch of the, uh, claims, uh, committees and the safety committees. We saved hundreds of thousands of dollars year after year for that institution. And, and so by doing that assessment, by looking at new, new members, it’s not to to be mean to the older members or the long, the long-term members, but sometimes we need some different skill sets. And there’s some newer ideas that we just haven’t thought of that Wow,

1:41:39 that person would be amazing for that position. And I think we’re losing out on those type of people and those opportunities. Mm-hmm. And that’s how this Yeah. Reappointment is, is is looking, but we still have to balance, I agree with you, Mr. Grayer. We still have to balance the people’s reputations long term. And, and that’s, you know, and, and it’s, but we have to do something because the current, you know, the current process is not a good one in my Mind. I, I’m wondering though as well, whether we’re kind of cherry picking our point of view, right? Because there’s, I think if you look at a lot of the committees, there’s, there, there are probably two where you have, where the demand to wanting to be on the board, it, you know, it exceeds the retirement rate. You know what I’m saying? Back when I was on fin way, way back when, we had a hard time getting people for FinCo, right? I I was,

1:42:26 we didn’t have more than, you know, than just a minimum quorum, right? It was impossible to get people. Why? Because the, in the, uh, volunteer environment kind of kind of sucked back then. Right? And you had to make, I think every chair has to make, and the select board has to make each of these committees and boards exciting places to do town business, right? I mean I think we, we agree on that, right? And I am all about getting high talent, you know, maximizing talent and good people and diverse perspectives into, into each of these boards. So I’m not at all, uh, opposed to that. But I think, I guess what I’m trying, maybe what I’m really trying to say here is that one size doesn’t fit all. Cuz you could have a general policy that may be very effective for fin common

1:43:13 and harbors, but it’s not effective for the others. Cuz not all the boards get, you know, have high demand. It’s sometimes hard to get people, uh, for a lot of our volunteer positions, it really isn’t, you know, Kyle is nodding her head. It’s really hard to get people. So I think, you know, we have to balance that out is what I’m saying. You know, we, you know, I think that to the extent that you put obstacles in their way, it’s, it’s harder to, to to, you know, to, to bring people on board. That’s why I’m suggesting a, a committee by committee approach, you know, to this and, you know, kind of trying to figure out what we wanna do for each committee. And I think that what can happen then, and once we describe what we do in our own board, perhaps we write that down as we’re suggesting, right? We write it down, we,

1:43:59 we understand what our own board’s process is, and then we kind of work on this each committee as a separate case. We can then kind of aggregate a broader policy about how this board interacts with, with all the committees. Cuz right now there’s a defacto relationship between this board and all the committees that we appoint on, right? I mean, it is, it, it exists. We have a, we have a process. So I think if we can write that process down, but I would suggest that if we’re moving to changes, we ought to be sensitive to, to what’s going on at each of the committees. That’s cuz they’re very different, you know? Yeah. That’s my only suggestion. Yeah. Can I make one suggestion if we are gonna discuss this? So let’s say, um, so somebody’s been on a committee for 20 years, so, and we,

1:44:48 we adopt some of these, does that person continue on a, let’s say, with this six year term? Or does, does that person have to reapply right then? Cause he’s already been over six years? Yeah, I mean I think that Just something for discussion. Yeah. Think That’s something we flush out when we mm-hmm. Revisit when we actually dial in and actually get farther along from that conversation. For sure. Like, is this retroactively, are we gonna start, you know, is a policy starting from zero and six years from now? Mm-hmm. Yeah, no, fair point. Yeah. I think I’d like to kind of draw the, the discussion to close for now. Um, I think where if that’s, you know, acceptable to folks, um, just kind of mindful of the time, mindful that Moses has, um, expressed a desire to bring something forward and also, um,

1:45:36 you know, it’s July 12th. Okay. I, if I could to, if I could to do one takeaway and summary of consensus is that we are in consensus or nobody is objecting to, um, a draft policy around vacancies that codifies, you know, the spirit and, and and substance of our current practice that I will review with Kyle, you know, that, you know, make sure that, you know, she sees that then I can bring forward at our next meeting perhaps. Um, and in a draft format that is, you know, like can see examples of other you vacancies. It’s pretty simple. You know,

1:46:24 it’s like, just clearly like a written policy. Um, and, you know, perhaps, um, we could, you know, look at it, you know, at our next meeting and then be prepared to vote that. And maybe also, um, there’s, you know, we could set a meeting dedicated, you know, kind of just to policy, um, because it is, you know, um, you know, substantive. So, um, is that, I think that’s, I think that’s Fair enough if we proceed in that way, that that’s fair enough. Yeah. Okay. That nobody’s objecting to that as a starting point and a way to move forward for our next meeting. I could have. Okay. Okay.

1:47:13 Um, so that’s kind of, um, the discussion. I can close Madam Chair if I could. Of course. Yep. Go ahead. I it’s part of the, part of the, the committee. Well, as I expressed, uh, you know, our last meeting when Mr. Murray brought forward the motion, you know, by putting the holds that I thought and I was exploring at the time, cuz I wasn’t prepared completely to, uh, to, to, to respond. But I, I voted in favor principally because I agree with the goals of what we’re doing here. You know, kind of fleshing all that out. Um, I, uh, I’m not in agreement however, with the, you know, with, with, with the process around the holding of the appointments. Okay. And I think part of that is I think we’ve made, you know,

1:47:58 a very definitive statement about the intent, the seriousness of how we, you know, of our wanting to move forward. And I think that’s, that’s useful. But I think that we ought to, you know, we gotta honor the, you know, the reappointments and I’d like to put a, you know, motion of reimport, uh, you know, of reappointments back on the table to amend the, the prior motion, uh, to reappoint, uh, voluntary boards and committee members as presented on the select boards meeting of, uh, of June 28th. Okay. So that’s what I’d like to propose. And you know, I do have, you know, points of reasons for, for, for this, but we can, we can a second and then we’ll

1:48:45 Obviously have discussion. Okay. So, um, open for discussion, open for, you wanna continue with your persuasive Argument. Yeah, that’s, um, yeah, for sure. I, I don’t wanna repeat myself too much, but you know, we, I agree with the review as I say. I mean, I think from morale to governance to effectiveness to management of appointments, reappointments, all very important stuff. Uh, don’t agree with the process of putting, uh, the years appointments on hold. Cuz I think we have to put ourselves in the shoes of the, uh, of those volunteers where their status is uncertain as we are, uh, you know, conducting our review. And, you know, it’s, it feels like a probationary message to them no matter how you look at it.

1:49:30 So it’s kind of like, you know, we’re reviewing the process and, and we’re determining whether, you know, you should be reappointed or not effectively. So I, I do take Jim Nye’s view on this that mm-hmm. You know, we, we do need to put ourselves, um, you know, I think it’s gonna hamper our ability to fill vacancies until the review is completed, which is, which is not great. Uh, I think the timeline for review is unrealistic, as I’ve mentioned. You know, uh, I think it takes a lot, a lot of time to kind of, uh, do this properly and we ought to give ourselves the space to, to go ahead and do it, which I’m all in, which I’m all in favor of, but, but let the, but let the vol current volunteers go, go about their business. And I think we talked about this, I think it, it, the whole just sets a bad precedent. I don’t think, you know,

1:50:16 if this gets redone with other committees, I just think it’s very possible if you get a political shift in another committee, uh, that, that, you know, that that would be a precedent that we set. And, you know, I think that the, uh, you know, the whole, you know, the hold kinda undermines a lot of the hard work that gets done to bring the slate forward. Uh, you, you know, in the process that Kyle goes through, and as I mentioned before in the prerogatives of the committee leaders, uh, you know, I think who will, who could, you know, view this as a micromanaging exercise rather than a deliberative discussion by the select board. I think we ought to focus on the deliberative discussion. I think we ought to reappoint and get them to go about their business as they always have until we come up with our policy recommendations.

1:51:05 But that’s kind of my, my great ba basic case. Yeah. Okay. Um, further discussion,

1:51:19 Alexa? Yeah, sorry, I can’t tell if anybody or is like brought, you’re so far from mine. No, You’re, you’re big on screen. I Just, like, you’re, I might be big. You’re not. Um, okay, so I mean, I, I guess, uh, my thought on this is, um, you know, based on what you’re saying, you know, I think we discussed this last week specifically direct Thatcher to make sure that we, or two weeks ago, my apologies, to ensure that all the boards and the committees understood that this was a process and that the whole, um, pulled over, uh, did allow them to continue to do their work. That they were, uh, you know, the volunteers were still in their positions. They were continuing to do the work that this provided the space in order to do that and to communicate that this was not, uh, you know,

1:52:06 as some sort of, um, probation pro, excuse me, probationary stance that we were putting forward. Um, and, uh, you know, I, I don’t think a whole by any means allows or prohibits the volunteers from doing their work. Uh, I think the, the whole idea was to create a space that allowed for time to explore the process and to literally hold meaning. Uh, there might be things that we have not, or have not been brought to our attention, um, that doing in a reappointment could be premature to what we’re trying to facilitate. And this allows that space to happen,

1:52:51 which is why for me, I supported it in the first place. So, uh, you know, I hear one of the other concerns and I’ll, you know, defer to the other board members to speak. But, um, you know, in regards to the timeline being, uh, not being realistic, uh, you know, I think that’s, you know, I hear that concern. I think that’s something, um, that we should, uh, I I don’t know if that will or won’t be true cuz it hasn’t been fleshed out yet. You know, I, I would like to see us, uh, specifically dedicate time to working on this, whether that’s at a retreat, whether that’s at a meeting, whether that’s, um, at whatever space. I think we need to dedicate time to this. I think we need to, um, reach out to the chairs and the committees and the boards and elicit their

1:53:36 feedback and make sure that we are working on this and pushing it forward. But, um, I, I don’t necessarily agree that it’s unrealistic because I don’t think that we have had enough time to make that, just to be able to make that decision yet. So just interested to hear what others have to say. Um,

1:54:00 I just, so I wanted to just kind of clarify because I thought and thought and thought and thought about this a long time. Um, and then I had, you know, kind of reached out to Kyle and kind of just kind of getting, gathering information around, you know, how do we do things or whatever. And I think when you were, you know, I think what we need to clarify is that the motion to hold was for Reappointments. And so, you know, there, there shouldn’t be a hold on open vacancies and soliciting interest cuz am I right that the motion was to hold reappointments, there wasn’t a motion to hold on Correct. Vacancy process. Yep. So we should proceed a pace. Uh, and per,

1:54:48 you know, there was not, there was, there was, there’s a hold just regards around reappointments so we, we can proceed a pace. And I, I know that was confusing and I had to think about it too when we were, we were talking kind of just clarifying like, is everything on hold? Wait a minute. What was the motion? The mo you know, I think there’s no, I don’t, I don’t see a reason why we can’t just continue forward with, you know, soliciting interest on the open vacancies. And we’re talking about, we’re talking about is the, um, is the kind of like the reappointment process as it came up before us that day. We Don’t know who’s actually vacant, whether they’re still gonna serve till November. I haven’t reached out to all the people that weren’t going to be reappointment. So we don’t actually know.

1:55:33 So, okay, so if somebody, so if somebody has, okay, so if somebody was up for your appointment and they said, no, thank you, I’m moving on, that’s a vacancy that we can fill. How many do we have? We have we accepted those at that Meeting, right? Well, you, you would’ve accepted those by not Reapp appointing them. There were a few people who gave a le like the Notice, right. Notice. Right. So to me, those are vacancies, assuming They were ending at the end of their term, but now their term really. Right. So they’re, they’re the holdover reappointments, they’re not the, like mid-cycle term or there’s not like a just a general vacancy. If it’s a vacancy, it’s a vacancy. So There are known vacancies and unknown vacancies depending on how this process

1:56:19 plays out. Okay. It’s Like Donald Rummell did. So I mean, so the, so the option is for, so I guess, so for me, I,

1:56:31 when Kyle had explained how the letter goes out for the reappointments, it’s, you know, kind of like, it’s the thank you for your service and it’s, you know, would you like to be reconsidered for reappointment? And what we are doing is still reconsidering and they say yes, and we are still reconsidering them for reappointment. We are allowing to do what is they wanted to do, which is to continue to serve on the board. So I guess the holdover aspect, you know, kind of people not being sure, it’s like all we’re doing is honoring what they wanted to do, which was to continue to serve. Yeah. Even the one year terms, Or not one year end. It’s like, oh, well I might, I, I don’t know. I mean, I think, and I think it’s not really like that we’re trying to, like,

1:57:17 it’s more that we’re, you know, I, there’s a lot of three-year terms and there’s a five-year term, but if we’re writing new policy, I personally am not sitting here wanting ready to like reappoint somebody to a five-year term, when we’re literally actively rewriting policy around reappointments. We haven’t flushed it out, and we still have, there’s not really an urgency to do that, you know, to, to reappoint somebody for five years when we’re allowing them to continue to serve, which let’s say that’s what they, you know, put forward, was to continue to be considered, which is the way she phrases it in the letter. Because when we get to the, yeah, I guess that’s where I’m at with it. I, I think it’s a little premature. And I’m not saying that the timeline’s not a problem, and I’m not saying that, okay, we might not get to a position in August and say it’s not,

1:58:06 it’s too, it’s, it’s too tenuous to do the, to do this simultaneously. But I think, you know, for me, I kind of, I, I, I take your point. I think the timeline is onerous, but I’m not sitting here today, July 12th, ready to say we can’t do it. So, Madam Chair, Uh, yeah, go ahead. Um, just a, a thought based on, on this consideration, um, look at my calendar. Uh, so, um,

1:58:41 sorry, I just wanna make sure I had a date. Um, so I’m like, I’m gonna put an amend and I’m gonna put an amendment forward to amend the motion to, um, postpone until like September 13th, uh, to, you know, postpone this vote until September 13th. And the thought process being, we at that point will be able to know, and I think, uh, have a better discussion. Uh, you know, I feel like I, at that point, I could vote more appropriately on if, uh, what Moses was bringing forward with the concern over the timeline not being realistic. Uh, so I, I would like to put that amendment forward.

1:59:29 Could I continue in discussion? Uh, of course. On this motion? Yeah. Well, I mean, so, okay. So are you formally making a motion to amend because we, that cuts off discussion, or are you just, are you saying that you’re inclined to think, I can’t remember how you said that. Yeah, so I’m, I’m thinking this could be a potential option to address it. Um, not to cut off discussion, so, Okay. All, Yeah. I mean, I, I guess what I, I’m just trying to summarize what, what, what I thought I heard you said, which is you’re not ready to reappoint, uh, longer terms, like for five years, right? Mm-hmm. So, and so the purpose of the holding is to not reappoint some people, right? I mean, I think that’s fair to say, right?

2:00:16 Well, I guess I don’t feel that we’re in the process of revi creating new policy that we’re, where if we don’t, I think where she’s right. Like, if we don’t have a policy by September 12th and a plan to implement it or whatever, the 13th, you know, I’m, I think this is a fair, like, you know, I think it’s, I don’t have a problem like revisiting the hold decision to November if like, we’re getting to 13, we’re like, you know, saying, you know, this doesn’t seem practical, but I think we just created a hold. Mm-hmm. It’s been one meeting since then, right? We have, so we have consensus around a policy on vacancy. Yeah. I think we can, it’s a little premature to say we can’t possibly create policy around

2:01:04 reappointment, um, and do this because it’s just the very next meeting. But I sympathetic to the, to what you’re saying, and I don’t wanna, and guess I’m kind of like inclined to like table it, just to give us a chance to like, Look, I mean, I just, I just look, I, I think the point, I, I think that the, you know, it, it’s, it’s true. I think that we’re just not ready to reappoint some people, uh, be for, because that’s the purpose of the whole, fundamentally, right? Because if we’re gonna go through process, you know, we need to, we need to deliberate through it, right? We’ve Decided we’re gonna re we’re Gonna review process. We decided that we’re we, that we’re not going to reappoint some people. That’s what we’ve decided. No. Okay. Tell, tell me why not,

2:01:49 Because let’s, let’s just assume we do this two term, six year reapplication process. Okay? I’m just saying let’s just, let’s assume we do this right here as, as written, right? We don’t know what the policy be. That means those people who wanna serve could come, we would then also do that 14 notif, 14 day notification to the general public. Mm-hmm. They would then come in front, we would assess and we would appoint accordingly. That doesn’t mean we’re gonna not appoint them. That doesn’t mean we are going appoint them, but it means that now for people, if we did do that for the long-term folks mm-hmm. They may have to come in front of this board. So We’re gonna have to re we’re gonna have to re-interview everybody. Correct. Not everyone. Well, that means anybody that’s challenged, I don’t think we’re gonna come. Anybody that’s challenged, again, I, I, two weeks ago, we’re beating around the bush.

2:02:35 This is harbors and waters you can save for every, for anybody else, but it’s about the Harbors and Waters board. So,

2:02:43 you know, this is all, it’s pressure and it’s all great stuff. It’s great to have policies, procedures, but are putting these people’s lives on hold. I’ve had people in old historic call me up saying, what’s going on? You know, it’s, it’s, we’re putting people’s volunteers that are passionate about whatever committee they’ve been appointed to. We’re putting their lives on hold, even though, you know, they’re not appointed. They’re not appointed. You know, we’ve extended it to, no, no, not November. Am I gonna be gone in November? You know, that’s, that’s their concern. We don’t know. And I, to Alexa’s point, you know, we have to relay this to ‘em, but is this necessary to be doing it? Moses’ motion is to reappoint everybody now and let’s handle it over the course of the year. And then we can give people the,

2:03:30 the respect and the, uh, opportunity to not, you know, to say, okay, geez, maybe I don’t wanna do six years, or maybe I, you know, if, if you’re gonna make it a three year turn, maybe I don’t want to do it. But this year we’ve just thrown this on people and say, we’re not gonna do it till November 1st. I just think it’s disrespectful and, and I stand by what I say. So I think, I think it’s a heavy hand I’d, I’d also raise that if we’re developing policy, right? It’s quite contradictory to then say, oh, we’re going to fill vacancies even though we have an incomplete process. Right? Or we’re just gonna use the old process to fill vacancies, right. During a review process. I mean, that makes no sense to me at all from a governance point of view. But,

2:04:16 you know, and so I, I think you’re gonna have to put the vacancies on hold until the process, until the process is developed, because it looks like we’re, we can We’re to be another vote. Yeah. I, I, I understand that. But, but you, but we’re all talking like, look, I mean, it could look you, I think this is, I mean, I’m just trying to say, look, we, we need more time. It shouldn’t be top down. It should be bottom up organic. We should be thinking about, you know, this is gonna be a multidimensional issue. This is bottom up. This was the people at town meetings saying, we want more clarity Process. Well, that was, yeah, no, no, but that’s, And this is also about, I think we’re doing is, and this is also about that. If these individuals, and, you know, we, we do the analysis and we come up with three year terms, those people that we reappoint are not gonna be on an annual basis. Yes. We could say, we’re gonna have to stagger this board so that people who in November Yeah.

2:05:03 Could now have a three year term. Yeah. Yeah. We are. And or two, we’re a one. And then just like what hopefully is gonna happen with, with, with this board, you know, next year is alternate. And that’s something that could, so that’s part of the reason these people could get longer terms. Right? Or maybe they don’t wanna serve three years and they say, you know what? I’ve served enough. I wanna back on it. Can I, can I ask a question on that? So, so let’s have a, let’s say you have a six person board, or seven, most of ‘em are odd. Seven person board. Are we choosing who’s the three, two, and one to stagger ‘em to get ‘em on this? No, we do that. Do that. We do that anyway. Anyway. Yeah. No, yeah, we do people apply for that. If we, if we have, if there’s an empty, and we say, and we prefer term, but sometimes there’s two ask they prefer, right? And then we go around and we vote. Right? It’s the same. Well, I, I look, I mean, but We still ask them. I would, I, that would be part of Kyle’s, you know,

2:05:50 due diligence issue. Have to say if, do you wanna serve? And, you know, do you wanna serve for the three year or one term or two year, whatever, if it, we do the stagger basis. I just, I just think it’s a timeframe issue. Uh, and a respect issue. Um, you know, I think we’re honoring what the town wants us to do by taking seriously the process that we’re undertaking here. Without the hold, we don’t need the hold. That’s my only, uh, difference. You know? Cuz I did vote for the motion, um, with the hope that we could have a discussion around reconsidering just the hold for the reasons I’ve, you know, I’ve articulated. So I, you know, I think it makes sense. I, I don’t think it changes the pace at which we can bring, you know,

2:06:36 the, you know, the, the, the transparency forward and the proce and the process and procedure and describing it. Uh, but I think we need, uh, I think we need more time. And, and I don’t think we need to hold this over the Denise, there’s no reason For that. I mean, I look at just all this information. Yeah, That’s separate. That’s separate. No, but what I’m saying is this, all you have to do is, it’s a lot of cut and paste and tweaking it to our needs. This, this is, it’s, it doesn’t, it’s, it shouldn’t be that difficult. And like Alexa said in Ms. Singer said that if we get to September and we get some of this past, great, then we can reassess and just point them for the remain of the year in September. If we think we’re not gonna meet that November. There’s nothing wrong with that. But I think we, uh, I made the motion two weeks ago, and I stand by it. Go ahead, Alexa.

2:07:22 Yeah. I’m just, I’m gonna put this forward. So I’m going to put forward to amend the motion that’s been proposed to, uh, September 13th to allow us to have some more time to explore this process and see what the, I just think there’s not enough information to, and that’s what the holdover was put in place to allow for, is to have the time to answer those questions. And I think postponing this vote to the 13th allows us to address the timeline issue and have that ability to say, okay, at that point we’re, you know, six weeks into this, uh, where exactly are we? And also

2:08:10 considering that, we still are making sure our volunteers know that we’re asking for the space to address the process holistically. And I, I, I think for all of us, there’s could be parts of this. We don’t know what we don’t know. And that’s part of having the discussion and putting, you know, putting this forward. So I, I’m gonna put the amendment out there. I don’t know if I have a second, but I’ll second that amendment. Well do we, we have a, we actually have a motion and a second on, on an existing You vote. Amendment. Amendment. She’s amend. So we vote. So she’s a motion and a second. It’s amendment to your motion. Okay. Discuss. So motion second on the amendment discussion. Um, you’ve, you’ve kind of already given your rationale for it.

2:08:56 I’ll say for myself, um,

2:09:01 I think that represents a good, um, kind of compromise position forward that doesn’t, that doesn’t, you know, make us the day after, you know, the next meeting heal emotion and the, and the spirit of what you’re saying. I, cuz I’m not sure that I don’t won’t get to a place where I agree with you. Right. And I feel that for me. Um, and I do feel like if we get to September 13th and we don’t have a plan to implement, and we’re not, you know, really, I mean, it’s, like I said, it’s July 12th. I feel like we’re, I know it feels like it’s the summer and stuff, but I, I think it’s something we possibly can achieve.

2:09:48 I think we can definitely achieve a written codified policy on the vacancies. I think we could probably achieve very quickly around a policy on the timeframe for Reappointments. And then Yeah. Will it, will we have more discussion and fulsome debate around, uh, reappointments for sure. Uh, but I guess I don’t see the harm in, and I guess I extend that benefit and, and I, you know, credit to our volunteers that I don’t assume that they’re, that they’re are feeling this is punitive. I think that they would, I think our volunteers understand that we are, for the first time trying to institution institute institutional policy change that’s never going to like,

2:10:37 you know, happen without, you know, what’s the expression? You know, make a crack a few eggs to make an omelet Right. Or whatever. So I think, um, we’re just talking about a short period of time. And when I think about what it is, these volunteers are reappointment, want have, you know, they’ve, they’ve signed up to be reconsidered for reappointment because they wanna continue to serve. Nothing we are doing stands in the way of that. So I guess I don’t see putting our li their lives on hold. I don’t see it all. I feel like we’re just granting them access to Yes, please continue to serve while we finalize the policy. Mm-hmm.

2:11:20 Do, are we ready to vote on the amended motion to continue to postpone the reconsideration on the holdover to September 13th? Okay, so we have to roll Call Ms. Singer In favor? Mr. Murray in Favor? Mr. Greater, uh, Not in favor, Mr. Aye.

2:11:46 So tell me if I vote, I’m not in favor of it, but if I vote not in favor, can I, we can’t bring this up again in two weeks. Depends on if it, Uh, I don’t think we Meeting with that Secondary motion. You cannot on a, Gonna Be a motion motion, But it depends on the prevailing side. Well, but I think my reading mm-hmm. This is a secondary motion. It’s an amendment to a main motion that you don’t have reconsideration. It’s only on a main motion. So I think the answer is no. Right? You don’t have another shot at this motion here. You have another shot at the Repointing. Everybody? Yeah. Okay. So not in favor. Okay. Thank you Ms. No In favor. So it’s three, two, uh, for the amendment

2:12:32 To push it to September To amend the motion to September 13th. So now it’s a vote on the, the main motion, Right? Okay. To reconsider And then Right. The failing side would be able to reconsider on a main motion. Okay. Right. So we’re not voting on Moses’s motion. Now you’re on the main motion. But his motion was modified to be instead of immediately reappoint to postpone to September 13th to reappoint To, to make the vote if we make the, to make the vote of reappointment on September 13th. Right. That, that’s reason.

2:13:14 Okay. So, um, You need to vote on that. You need to vote on that. On the Original Motion. On the main motion, which is now scheduled for September 13th, right? Yeah. To re to to take up the matter and to set the date of September 13th. So it’s a reconsideration. We vote, We voted amendment. The amendment doesn’t, the amendment carries. Right. So now you’re on the main motion. So the original motion was to reconsider the vote from the last meeting, which set a deadline of November. Mr. Mo, uh, Mr. Greater made a motion in effect to Okay, make the appointments immediately. That’s been modified to September 13th. Right. To set it to September 13th. So now you have to vote on the

2:14:01 Make appointments immediately on September 13th, Um, Whatever she said the amendment was to, to, Yeah. Can I just a point of clarification, my understanding that is if you vote an amended motion, then that, and that carries, then it’s gonna supersede the original vote that you’re not understanding motion when you’ve passed an amended vote motion.

2:14:26 No, you, well, it, this is my understanding of it, what you did, there was a, you can’t do that because that’s a, there was already a motion on the floor. So you can’t supersede a motion that’s already on the floor. No motion to amend you amended. Right. So now you’ve successfully changed the motion that was proposed by Mr. Greater to, rather than being an immediate, who was set to September 13th. So to vote. Now a yes vote would be, um, uh, that the reappointments would happen in September. A no vote would mean the reappointments would happen in November, which was what was voted at the last meeting. Does that make sense?

2:15:12 So yes. Is September 13th? No. Is November 1st. The whole thing fails. The whole motion fails. And so no, to where we went the vote. And that the last meeting is still in place, which pushes it out to November. Thanks Thatcher. With the explanation,

2:15:29 Um, I was paying attention. I guess I, I mean I, my, I guess I have a different, and I’m, I’m not saying it’s right, but I, I,

2:15:39 procedurally I am, my understanding is that you vote the, when you vote on the amended a motion, and that, that the motion to amend either fails and you revert to the motion, the main motion or the motion to amend passes because it cuts off debate there, it passes, and then that is the, that is vote. And you don’t revisit a vote you already voted to amend. That can’t happen, uh, under Roberts. Because what, what what in effect has happened is there was a motion on the floor that would be the same effect of just making a separate motion and not resolving one out the, the first motion. So you have to, you have to go through the, you have a main motion that was Mr.

2:16:26 Greater mm-hmm. An amendment to the main motion. Right. Which We voted in, Voted and decided in that past, which alters the main motion. So now you, so you wanna go back and vote, vote in the main motion. Okay. All right. Yeah. We voted to change the wording to postpone, postpone the vote. To have the vote on September 13th. Okay. So now the motion is amended and it is to postpone the vote to September 13th. And we are voting on the main motion, Correct. So a yes vote would Yep. Set the date in September. Yep. A no vote means the main motion fails. The motion, the vote of last meeting prevails, which is okay. Date is November. Okay. Ready? Mm-hmm. Mr. Murray in favor? Mr. Gray?

2:17:13 In favor? In favor. As same in, In favor, Ms. Noon In favor. Okay. So that sets sep the September 13th. That’s the date, right? Okay, great. Um,

2:17:30 easy.

2:17:35 We now have public comment if, is there anybody who would like to make public comment? If you’re online, please raise your hand. If you are in the audience, please forward the mic.

2:17:47 Go ahead, Dan. Uh, thank you, Dan Albert. Uh, uh, 58 Less Road. Very brief. Before I say it though, I, I, I could just comment that I, I appreciate this fear that you’re making people who were appointed to boards, uh, worry that they’re not, uh, uh, up to snuff or something like that. I look at it the other way. So I, I know I’m not on a board, but I got appointed. I feel like if nobody want, if you just kind of rubber stamp me next year, I feel like nobody’s paying attention to what I’m doing. And I would love the opportunity to come back and say, boy, I did a great job this year. Look at how good I am at my job. And, and frankly, if somebody’s gonna be better, I’d be happy to have them. And then, since we talked about history, uh, um, I, I would love to see, uh, what happens with all those papers in the basement.

2:18:34 I’ve used that material for, for historical research. I’d love to see it get into a proper archive. Okay, sorry. Uh, but that’s not why I’m here. Uh, Dan Albert, 58, uh, Lester Road. I’m here to request permission in principle to restore the Frederick w Bailey memorial sign that hung over Bailey Square. And I can tell you about the privately funded plan. But first I want to tell you about Bailey Square. Um, 1937, the pupils of Glover School petitioned the select board to name the intersection, which is Maple Esco, Humphrey Pleasant and Glendale. In memory of Marblehead police Officer Frederick w Bailey,

2:19:16 the action was promptly passed by your predecessors. The Marblehead Messenger, uh, reported the late officer was popular with the children. The paper said, and a sign was soon erected, but it’s since disappeared. So let me jump ahead. 1993. Now, there’s a, a man named Richard Cl. He lived on, uh, kamut Lane. He petitioned the Board of Selectmen. He came to the Board of Selectmen. He petitioned the Board of Selectmen to put the sign back up to replace the sign to put in a new one. And, uh, he, he was an old, old timer. He had been at Glover back in Bailey’s day. He recalled the officer, and I love this description, a rather portly gentleman, much beloved by the kids. And then several months later was still no sign in evidence.

2:20:03 Another fellow Olin Curry of Rockaway, another old timer, demanded in a letter to the editor, get that sign or reasonable likeness back on his corner. And he used three exclamation points and courier again. He was also an old timer. He remembered Bailey as quote, one of Marblehead Best in Blue. And he talked as well about, uh, uh, Bailey’s, really zealous enforcement of, uh, traffic laws. So PLO and couriers, uh, uh, please, unfortunately fell on deaf ears. And I’m afraid that Officer Bailey be saddened to see what’s become of his namesake intersection at the Safe Routes to School Award ceremony, which, uh, Mr. Greater, when he was chairman here, uh, marked on behalf of this board.

2:20:49 Uh, at the ceremony in the State House, uh, representative Jenny Armeni described Bailey Square as, quote, a very tricky, large, busy intersection that would make any parent of a small child shutter. Last fall, we had the mass d o t Safe Routes to School liaison for Marblehead, come out and map a bus route along with, uh, um, I’m sorry, a bike bus. So this is, the kids all get together and they biked to school together, uh, with, uh, Glover parent Mark Holland. And she told Holland, avoid that intersection. It is scary. And bring the kids a few blocks away to get the road, uh, get across the road. So there’s five roads that converge on Bailey Square that converge at random angles. The sidewalks are blocked by utility boxes,

2:21:35 bike lanes that were required in the 2012 Glover site plan were never put in cars double up in single lanes. They squeeze past stop traffic. They jockey around for position. I, I live in the neighborhood. I know what it looks like. The light cycles are so long that drivers just routinely run the red lights. Um, and, and I collected the date on that. So that’s why I’m here tonight. It’s 30 years later, 30 years past 1993. And I have the same plea. No one needs to tell marble headers that history’s important, right? History matters. And the history that, that Bailey’s story teaches us is that 90 years ago, the Board of Selectmen and the people of Marblehead believed our children needed safe routes to school. And they believed children deserved roots that were free from danger,

2:22:21 as well as free from fear. They believed it was such conviction, conviction that they sta uh, stationed a law enforcement officer who portly or not had the power to stop and ticket drivers. And more to the point, you know, when crossing guards are there, drivers don’t necessarily pay attention when police officers and cruisers are there. Drivers drive within the law and drive safely. So Officer Bailey obviously can’t be there, can no longer issue tickets, but he can be present as a symbol of this history, and this history really matters. And having him there matters. This board recently approved the painting of a pride flag around the Marblehead information kiosk. That artwork announces our town as a safe place for some of

2:23:09 society’s most vulnerable. And I want to give you this board, the opportunity to show that Marblehead supports its most vulnerable road users. So I ask you to prove in principle, the proposed installation. And I’ll conclude by saying that obviously you’re gonna have questions, more details of what I have in mind, and I look forward to that conversation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Albert. I have, Okay, sure. Albert Jordan Roosevelt Avenue. We’ve been discussing this is the third year that you’ve tried to make changes on what you’ve been discussed for the past hour and a half almost. And, um, I think before you vote on it, you should get the new policy in effect because there’s no,

2:23:55 you’ll encourage you people to work a little quicker cuz you couldn’t get anything done for two years. I voted for change. I’m not happy what’s gone on here for 19 years and I’d like to see some change. We can wait a few more months. Has anyone, you don’t answer any questions anymore, but has anyone resigned from any of these boards? All these people want to be on these boards. They’re not leaving. I, I haven’t heard anyone threatening to leave. But you, you’re privy to information that I’m not, I think before you vote on this, that you should get the new policies, how you think would be best fit the town. We need changes in this town. Not everyone likes the changes, but it’s time to have changes. That’s why we made a change and put new two pe two new people on the board.

2:24:42 And the only reason why we got two new people, because one guy ran for select, but, and left six months later and didn’t fill his seat that I voted for. And unfortunately, Mrs. Jacobi passed on. So we don’t have many changes. And, um, I’m not happy with what’s gone on over here the last 20 years here. Um, I don’t have anything against anyone that’s on this board, but the public has been telling people calling up and you want to appoint people to the finance committee. I took the time, came down here twice, the finance committee never called me back before town meeting. I came to a meeting and he told me he wasn’t interested. We volunteer on this committee as enterprise funding. It doesn’t affect the tax rate. Uh,

2:25:28 I think before you appoint people to any board, you should ask if any people at a public, you can’t even get the phone numbers. You call the selectman’s office. They won’t give you out the phone number or the person that’s on the board. So how do the taxpayers that pay the taxes that go to town meeting and go to these meetings and get a jersey barrier put in front of ‘em, that these people tell me that they volunteer. They’re not interested in hearing my climate. I don’t bother them every day. I bother the chairman of the finance committee once and I wasn’t impressed with them. Okay. Um, so I think before you appoint any people to any of these boards, some of them, they’ve been on there a number of years, things have changed.

2:26:14 And I think before some new person comes into these boards, it gets elected. It’s ludicrous that you’re rubber stamping these people when you don’t have a chance to digest because the board member are privy. I don’t know what’s going on in the harbors and waters that you don’t wanna appoint any people down there. I wasn’t aware that there was a problem going on down there. Mr. Nye seems to be aware of it. But what I’m saying to you is I’ve lived in this town all my life and I don’t want anything sneaky going on here. And I’m offended that board members know that two or three committees in this town that I’m not aware that anything’s going on on any of these committees. I I haven’t seen anything in the paper about it. So I hope Mr. Knight talks to the press. And the other thing is,

2:27:00 everyone’s worrying about their vacation. This town’s dly, the streets are deplorable hot Talk Lafayette Street a few years ago, the crosswalks were never put back in by, up by a school. The, the state just rep repaired the bridge deck at the bottom of lead Mills hill. It was repainted striped two weeks later. I don’t know what the department heads are doing in this town because when we hot top a road, I’m retired from the state. And when we hot top a road, we put temporary markings and then we went back within a few weeks, whether permitting and finalized it. It shouldn’t take years and years and years to complete a project in this town. I know the state, it takes years and years, but I installed crosswalks, I painted the lines.

2:27:49 So we had priorities when work was done. But I think you people should decide what you want to do. If you want to make changes on these boards policy. And then everyone’s still on these boards. I don’t know if anyone in the historical society that they’re offended that they didn’t get reappointed. They’re still on that board. So I don’t know what the rush is. Why you have to appoint people. And the other thing, I don’t want any of the town people investigating this will have the town. This is the way this has been going on for years. We haven’t had any changes. You people know more than I know about it because you have more people calling you. So if you are getting calls that there’s not transparency here,

2:28:34 then someone needs to look at it and then make the change whatever way vote up or voted down. But when you say that you’re tr he’s been spinning the wheels the last two years here that you’ve had all this time that Mr. Greater brings up. Well, we are keeping these people hanging. Where was he the last two years when he was here as chairman of this board and brought up this discussion? We don’t need a discussion that we’re gonna wait three months or six months. These people can stay on the board for the next until the next term.

2:29:04 Right now they’re still on, on all these boards. So there may be, I’m sure there are a few people that are concerned about it, but I think the ones that are concerned about it are probably the ones that think that they’re not gonna get reappointed. And I know a person that used to be on the finance committee and he didn’t get reappointed and he’s still upset about it. And, um, you know, so, so all I’m saying to you is I’m not trying to tell you how to do these things, but I think instead of going on vacation, deal with this, it shouldn’t take six months. This should be able to be done in 30 days. Go out and get more opinions from all these people. You’ll have 30 different people telling you you should do it this way. Up, down, left. Right. You are on the boards. You people make policies.

2:29:51 We need a change in this. And it should have been done a long time ago, but it should have been done Jordan, for your Yeah, it should have been done two years ago. Thank you for your comment. Have a nice night feedback.

2:30:09 Um, sorry, who, sorry. Sarah Fox. Okay, go ahead. Um, Ms. Sarah Fox. Yep. Sarah Fox 46 Beach Street. Um, I had just raised my hand where you guys were going through how to, like, whether you can reconsider an amended motion and so on and so forth. Um, I would just encourage you guys to look back at that. It is my understanding, you can reconsider an amended motion. Um, so I just, where that was a question by Mr. Nye, I would just look back at that. Okay. Thank you. Did you have a, I just thought he had stepped up. So, um, get to everybody. Hello? Um,

2:30:59 I was outta town for a little bit, but, uh, came back to find out that, uh, and correct me if I’m wrong, that, uh, a um, down at the, uh, uh, information booth in town right in the middle of town, um, space has been devoted to, uh, uh, pride, Um, through the chair can name and address. I just didn’t know who it was. I’m sorry if I missed that. Yeah, sorry. Uh, could you, sir, could you please, uh, state your name and, and Street? Yeah. William Anderson. Uh, sorry, say it again. William Anderson Elm Street. Sure. Thank you, sir. Sorry, I just can’t see. Your comment is regarding the Pride art installation at the Chamber

2:31:45 of Commerce. Exactly. Now it’s my understanding that, uh, this board, um, approved, um, the, and, and I don’t know, I guess paid for somehow the town paid for. I can correct from a factual level. I can, I can correct that, that that that, um, art installation is considered public art. It came forward to the board through our cultural council, which, um, is grant funded. So the, the, the art and the artist was paid for through grant money through Via the State. Okay. Commonwealth. Now, um, I’m, I’m not aware of any other location in town or whatever,

2:32:31 wheres space on the sidewalk was devoted to,

2:32:37 uh, some sort of, cause in this case it’s pride, not the Boy Scouts or the Girl Scouts or anything like that. And, um, I’m just, um,

2:32:51 can you, and it was voted by the board to, to, uh, uh, execute this, I believe. Yes. Correct me if I’m wrong unanimously. Um, is there some reason why this particular group as opposed to any other group in the country, was selected out for this

2:33:15 special designation in Marblehead? Um, and can you define for me and everybody else who might be listening, uh, what the Pride, um, is all about Pride Organization?

2:33:37 So at like, and with regard to the factual, um, you know, how it came to be, if you go online and look at the Marblehead Cultural Council and, um, Well, you, you approved it. I’m asking you, And I’m explaining that the process was, it came forward by that group. And I think looking at that group and how it’s related to this board will help, um, answer your question without putting It, but you, you approved it. You should know. You should know what it is. I’m asking you factual Information to, you know, is that, but you know, I, you know, otherwise I, you know, know, I don’t, we don’t typically gauge an exchange of back and forth discussion of ideas substantively.

2:34:22 So you don’t know. It’s not that. I don’t know, sir, you can go back. The meeting is, um, the meeting where we voted on it is reported online. And if you would like to, um, wa rewatch the consideration and discussion that went into the vote, you can access that, um, via the Marblehead Community Access Channel. Okay. Well, I’m, I’m, I’m sorry that you’re not able to provide information on why you voted for this particular group to have some special spot in Marblehead. So it was brought to us by the Cultural Cultural Council. Okay. We approved it. I, it was, in my opinion,

2:35:09 it was the right thing to do. Um, I don’t recall anybody else coming forward with am If you have something that you want to be painted or displayed, you can come, certainly come forward to the board, um, and we’ll discuss it. Okay. In this, in this, in, in this, in this particular instance, uh, the pride has a, um, uh, a certain,

2:35:37 um, reputation

2:35:42 that may, um, deserve, um, special consideration as to whether, uh, you know, they should be there or not. But the town of Marblehead,

2:35:59 did anybody, did anybody look into this Decision as Jim said, and thought it was reasonable? Thought it was reasonable, and it was part of the Pride month? I Mean, you’re welcome to Revisit the session far. It’s part of the Pride month, um, you know, celebration, which we, which we all all recognize and That’s, that’s fine. Pride run, celebration. No, but, but you can’t, nobody can define what PR the Pride organization does. Frederick Bailey’s. Okay. So sir, thank you for your comment. Um, that if you are interested in the, how the discussion and the decision made, I suggest that you vi revisit the discussion has been had at a previous meeting. There’s not a discussion on the agenda for us to discuss the item. So I mean, this is a public comment and you’re free to make your comment. Um, I,

2:36:49 it, you know, if you have another further comment or, you know, otherwise, um, we take, you know, thank you for your comment. So is, is the pride group connected to L G B I Q T A I plus The, an the question that you’re answering is not one that came before us, sir. That’s something that, you know, you can look on your own. It’s not something that has come before us for discussion. If that’s a question you’re asking. You know, you’re asking it rhetorically for the purposes of public comment. It’s not, we’re we’re at a public comment. We’re not having a discussion on an agenda about the L B G T Q

2:37:36 group. If you, I understand that, that your concern is around how the decision was made. If you would like to go watch how the decision was made, you can do that online at the Marblehead Community Access television. Thank you.

2:37:52 Anybody else? Jeff?

2:37:58 Sorry, who? Jack. Oh, go ahead, Jack.

2:38:03 Good evening, everybody. Um, good evening. Two things. Uh, one is just a point of clarification. Mr. Murray mentioned that, uh, the town passed a bylaw for policies and procedures, and that was Article 54 and was just an advisory vote, um, and not a, not a bylaw that was passed through a town meeting. Um, I think that that’s important. And the other, the other point that I’d like to, to mention is that I hope that you’re very, you proceed with caution, um, with your deliberations about the appointed committees. I think the work that you’re doing is very important. Um, on the other hand, our decentralized form of government relies on volunteers and relies

2:38:49 on people. And without the, the longevity of people, we wouldn’t have enough people to serve on committees. I can’t think of the last time when there wasn’t a vacancy in at least one, if not several committees in town appointed boards and committees. Um, and just recently, our finance committee, I believe, went for nine years without a full finance committee, um, to say that, you know, people are, people are fine setting out this process that you’re going to go through. I wouldn’t, I I, I’d be more cautious when I, if I were to think like that. And the reason I say that is, um,

2:39:34 is because there are a lot of, I I don’t think any other small town like Marblehead has as many engaged nonprofits that these people can go and give their time to and not be hanging out there the way they may consider themselves to be right now. Um, I, I understand the deliberative process that you’re going through. I I commend you for it. But remember the roots of what makes us tick and what makes us tick, just like you’re all sitting up there and, and I’m sitting here, is the people that, the people that step up, it’s easy to stand by the microphone and, and, and get mad at everything, but the people that step up are really putting the skin in the game,

2:40:20 giving their time to volunteer for the town to, and, and, and they’re doing it. I, it’s been a long time since I’ve seen anybody that’s doing it for, other than the fact that they want to do their best for the town of Marblehead. So I, over the next few months, I really hope you put a lot of consideration into the, into the people that make our process work. Thank you. Thank you, Jack. That’s all. Okay. Um, okay. So, uh, so no further comment. Uh, town administrator update. All right, is next, do we have a town administrator up? Uh, we do brief, um, is, I had my vacation too, so,

2:41:09 uh, is coming back one. Uh, so we’re closing out fiscal year 2023. Um, and I, I, the, the takeaway is the closeout of 2023 will be much better than the closeout of 2022 has to be because we only just recently closed out 2022. And I, I, I just want to call out the folks in, in the finance department and all the department heads who have to feed into that. Um, there was a lot of, you know, within the finance department, a lot of work of really fixing up, cleaning up, um, our processes there so that, um, it’ll be a much more orderly and timely closing, closing of the book so that there’s great work being done. Uh, and again,

2:41:56 this is before we try to implement, you know, the, any new software. So they’re still doing it with some of the old, old systems, but they’re doing a great job down there. The other update is just, um, so we have our, uh, deadline is Friday for applications for building commissioner position that we posted. Um, thus far we’re not getting a lot of applications. Um, my concern is, is we’re not competitive, uh, in the position. So I’ll be doing some work a as we hit that deadline, looking at what we have, making a determination as to whether, um, we have any potential good candidates or whether we need to go back out on the

2:42:42 street. And if we go back out on the street, what needs to be changed. I mean, there’s two factors. Um, one, um, the current job description, and I’ve talked about this here before. Uh, the building commissioner is really two jobs in one position. It’s the building commissioner, which oversees all the inspections, um, the inspections department and all the work that goes on overseeing that. But it’s also the superintendent of buildings at the same time, having to manage all of our facilities. And in some recent conversations I’ve had with folks who are in that business, um, uh, towns many years ago, that was more typical.

2:43:28 Um, the workload on each far exceeds the ability to have that as a merged position. So, um, given that the, the budget is baked with the numbers we have, there’s gonna be some creative work to figure out, uh, possibly looking at reconfiguring the position if I go back out on the street to, to move, split the responsibilities and, and, and do that. So that’s, that’s one component. The other is salaries. We we’re just, we’re not competitive, uh, in, in the salaries. Um, so those are the two challenges. So wanted to make you aware of, of, of those challenges. Uh, I’ll, I’ll end on, I think as a more upbeat note,

2:44:14 it is just recognizing all the work that went into the 4th of July fireworks and the celebrations and, and all the activities. Um, I came back from, you know, off the grid back, came to Marblehead to, to be here for, for the fireworks. Um, again, the takeaway there, the amount of work we have, the fireworks committee, Alexander Faulk is our, uh, our, our chair of that, but it’s mostly made up of, of fire Chief Police chief, myself, D P W Health, um, harbor, the Harbor Masters on that. There is a lot of work and a lot of logis, uh, logistics that go into having that type of event

2:45:00 and, and recognize all the folks that did that. Um, the, the, the, the other part of it is, you know, the decision, the go no-go decision for fireworks. Uh, it’s weather dependent. Um, the, the no-go is simply based on public safety. In other words, if it’s a lightning storm, if it’s a downpour where they can’t safely launch fireworks, then that’s a no go. Um, the weather cleared at about 1130 or so. We, we made the go. Uh, uh, it wasn’t in our ops plan to have a fog bank roll in at the same time. Uh, but I’ll say this, it was 4th of July. We all had a wonderful evening out and we got to commemorate a

2:45:49 monumental historic event for our country. Whether we could see the fires or not, we could hear them. The cloudbursts were beautiful colors. Uh, we celebrated the event and we all safely left. So I think it was a, a highly successful event, in my opinion. Great. That concludes my update. Great. Pending. Any Questions? Thanks for that, Patrick. Yeah, Thank you. Um, any announcements?

2:46:19 Yeah, of course. Just, uh, I’m sure we all read, uh, M H T V for the ninth year in a row. Uh, received an award that exactly what it is, but for Excellence in broadcasting award for local access, uh, tv. So I think we should, uh, I’d like to a motion to write them a letter of congratulations. Second.

2:46:45 Oh yeah. Well, greater. Greater in favor, yes. Ms. Nye In favor, Ms. Singer? In favor, Ms. Ari In favor? Ms. Noonan In favor. Great idea. Anybody else? Um, I just, I, um,

2:47:08 uh, Alexa had mentioned the idea of doing a, a retreat, scheduling a retreat, um, would be like around like scheduling a meeting. I don’t know if you don’t set something you wanted to, um, take up at this. Like, did you wanna like speak to that, around that request? Uh, yeah, sure. I just put out a request. I, I think there’s a lot of things that, um, we have in front of us this year to look at. And I found it valuable, the retreat that we had in 2021, and just giving an opportunity to set aside a specific space for

2:47:49 talking about, um, goals and priorities and, uh, you know, communication. Uh, I’m just throwing some things out there, but, you know, lessons learned from 2022, you know, just, uh, some of the things that are, uh, harder to jump into in the way of a normal business meeting. And I think it, it holds, holds that space to take a look at those things. So I did put a request forward, uh, it fits the will of the committee to participate in a retreat again, and, uh, look at addressing some of those things in that space. And I also wanna say thank you for the patience of all of you guys in dealing with family and, um, near ocean. So the Jets were really loud, so I apologize for that. I dunno if you’ve heard it in the background, but apologies if you did. Sorry. And thanks for your patience.

2:48:41 Pleasure. Oh yeah. Yeah. I mean, my only thought on that is maybe we, you know, if we were to have a retreat, we could do it around the time that we get. I don’t know whether that falls properly in the cycle. We’re, we’re actually talking about the select board’s goals for the year mm-hmm. As it’s integrated into the G F O A plan, which I’d like to continue to emphasize. Um, it’s both kind of a strategic plan and a budget document, but I think that would make, kind of make it very productive for Thatcher, you know, to kind of make it the basis of a discussion. I think it’ll ground our discussion on, on real, you know, on issues as well as other issues specifically relating to our, you know, our board policies and so forth. Yeah, that’s a great, Well, what do, what do you think? I mean, just to, yeah, I

2:49:28 Mean, well I think it’s based on, you know, schedules and availability. Uh, you know, I think looping it into, um, the G F O A and using that framework as well. You know, I think, uh, obviously maximizing our time when we are together working, that’s a great idea to, you know, uh, make sure that we’re streamlining those goals as well. And that that part is necessary to create that document too. Uh, so I, uh, Moses, do you remember? I actually can’t remember the deadline. I wanna say it’s like November to present that document, but, um, do you, do you remember? Yeah, I mean, I, it’s, I I guess this tempo will be a little bit different under, under, uh,

2:50:13 Thatcher’s leadership, you know, particularly if we get the software up and running, we could actually have it sooner. But I, but look, I, I think the, there, there is a definite, uh, you know, in the G F O A plan there is where we’ve been in the past two fiscal years, what we did this fiscal year, and then kind of goals and objectives for the next foreseeable, you know, three or four years. I think that’s super, that would be a great opportunity to kind of have that discussion. But to have, you know, kind of have the chair and Thatcher kind of develop that and then, and then kind of have it be part of a process of populating that document. And I think, um, bringing that, you know, I know, uh, prior we had done it, uh, I believe in August in the summer, you know, I wanna be mindful of everyone’s time. Um, yeah. And, you know,

2:51:00 that might not be everyone’s first choice. Um, I do think that, uh, my preference would definitely be to have that prior, well before the start of the budget season, because I think those goals and priorities and addressing some of those other things that I just put forth would be, uh, really important to do prior to then. Um, so other than that, you know, I, I defer to the rest of the committee and what your thoughts are on the timing of it. Yeah, I think, um, I think that, you know, given it’s a new, you know, we’re into a new term, you know, if we’re talking about setting priorities and, um, you know, kind of, I guess goals and around the GFA o process and, and even like,

2:51:46 you know, what does the budget process look like this year? Because we’re coming off of a, you know, an unsuccessful, um, override and what is a plan. So I guess I, if we can, to me it seems like, you know, if we can find a date like the end of August that works for folks, great. You know, I understand that might not be possible. Um, maybe it’s September, but I think if we are kind of doing some goal setting and, and, and priority, you know, kind of establishing some priorities for the, for this term, the sooner the better, I guess. Like, you know, either end of August or sometime in early to se September. Um, and then people could like, you know, put what they would like to, to see,

2:52:35 to have on the agenda for the retreat. You know, we could, you know, every, it’s free to suggest agenda items for the retreat. Um, so yeah, maybe we could just kind of, you know, let Thatcher think about it, look at the G F A O process and, um, does it make sense to do, to circulate potential dates online or is it better for people? Do we think we should do it? Try to pick something out

2:53:09 If I can. Yeah, go ahead, interject. So as far as in, in tying, I think, which is a great idea, it absolutely before we start deep diving into the budget process, and that happens at the end of the calendar year, but this would feed into it. But I, I would say, let me, you know, Alicia’s out this week on vacation. Yeah. Have a conversation because participate, Well, The policy that we haven’t yet presented, cuz she and I need to do a bunch of work on is the budget cycle policy. And so this let us sit down and kind of hash it out, I think end of August, early September, I think is a good timeline, uh, is, is a good spot. Um, but I wanna be able to have a conversation with Alicia cuz she’s currently doing well. Hopefully she’s not doing any of it this week. Uh,

2:53:57 really pounding away and getting the, the budget books and, and, and those things done. So. Okay. It all ties together. Perfect. Thank you. Thanks for the feedback

2:54:12 Motion. Yes. I’ll second it. Okay. All right. I don’t know where I left on. Mr.

2:54:21 Ye In favor. In favor Adjourned. You.