transcript

transcript  Special Commission on State Institutions (SCSI) Meeting: September 6, 2023

>> Matt: Good afternoon, everyone,  I like to call this meeting  

0:08

of the Special Commission  on State Institutions to   order. My name is Matt Millett. I'm one of the co-chairs with Evelyn  

0:14

Mateo. Before we begin we like to inform everyone that this  

0:19

commission is open to the open meeting law.   The meeting will be conducted by role have the. Also this will  

0:30

be recorded. We ask   -- it is by the Mass Office on Disability that is great. We hopefully have a lot of people to  

0:39

join us so we ask everyone to be silenced or on mute. Also raise hands  

0:47

if you have any questions or issues. Thank you. Evelyn  

0:52

Evelyn? >> Evelyn:  

0:58

Before we drive into this afternoon discussion, we have some house keeping  

1:04

items to attend to. So with that, I would like, would propose that we vote on the  

1:12

minutes from the commission's first meeting on June 1, which were  

1:18

recalibrated to the group prior to the meeting. We would be conducting a role call  

1:27

vote so if everyone would please unmute themselves, I will be calling  

1:33

out your names in alphabetical order.  

1:46

Before we begin, I know one member reached out regarding the proposed change to the  

1:52

draft minutes. And that was the inclusion of a request from  

1:59

Ms. farret to use plain language during   discussion. That has now been added to the draft minutes. Are there any other changes to the  

2:12

draft minutes? PM  

2:21

[Pause] If so, please unmute yourselves   and state the proposed change. Do we have a motion to approve the  

2:44

minutes? >> Andrew:: I'll   make a motion to approve the minutes  

2:49

as amended. >> Reggie: I   approve. >> Matt: I'll second  

2:58

the motion. Mash mash.   >> Evelyn: Thank you, I'll now read out members' names  

3:12

alphabetically. Elise Aronne  

3:29

PM >> Evelyn: Elies   Elise. >> Matt: Elyse Lee, approve the minutes, right,  

3:45

approve? This clarification, we should say   approved, sorry. PM  

3:55

>> Let them know. >>   Elies: I approve the minutes. >> Matt: Thank   you. >> Evelyn:  

4:01

Kate? PM  

4:18

[Pause] I don't see her.   I don't see her here, Reggie  

4:28

? >> Reggie: Yes.   >> Evelyn: Anne PM   >> Anne: Yes I'm here PM  

4:41

>> Evelyn: We have to say if you approve so you have to say approved.   >> Anne: Yes I approve the minutes  

4:48

PM >> Evelyn: Alex   ? John.  

5:00

Reggie. PM  

5:05

>> Reggie: I approve the minutes. >> Evelyn:   Richard? >>  

5:15

Andrew. >> Andrew::   Yes I approve. >> Evelyn:   Mary? PM  

5:27

Vesper. Sorry. >> Vesper: Yes, yes I   approve. >> Evelyn: Brenda?  

5:35

PM >> Brenda is not here today.   PM >> Evelyn: Jane?  

5:42

PM Mary-Louise  

5:49

PM >>   Mary I approve the minute.   >> Evelyn: Matthew. >> Matt: Yes,   I approve. Evelyn, you missed two people, supposed to be rainia Kelly was -- you  

6:04

said Richard twice,. >> Rania::   This is Rania yelly. I approve the meeting minutes.  

6:11

>> Matt: Also it was June, is   she here? PM  

6:29

[Pause] At first,  

6:34

we invite Lauren Cleary associate counsel on   EOHHS. You think I would know how to say that after working  

6:42

for year to provide information  on the open meeting law and   how it applies to commissioners' work, the open meeting law is very  

6:54

complicated to help us effectively to provide for open meeting laws  

6:59

transparency laws we've invited Lauren back just  

7:06

director of authority division. Her office is possible  

7:12

for promoting openness and transparency   and it pertains to the attorney general's open meeting hotline. Prior to the meeting we  

7:24

are -- we ask to submit questions to you, to  

7:29

assess the questions or  concerns. We as members might   have with open meeting law, questions or the commission  

7:40

. I believe we received a question -- several questions for Alice. I  

7:47

like to invite Carrie and Lauren to talk about the open meeting   law, please. >> Lauren:: Good afternoon, all. I'm  

7:57

going to defer to Carrie and then if there are any specific questionings for me,  

8:04

then I would be happy to take those.  

8:10

PM >> Carrie: Thanks so much, Lauren,   I'm really happy to be here, I have a Power Point presentation that  

8:16

I would like to use to accompany my discussion about   the open meeting laws. So if it's okay to everybody, I'm going to share  

8:23

my screen and hopefully you  can get the Power Point up   and working PM  

8:29

[Pause] Is my screen visible for everybody?  

8:41

PM I see heads   nodding. >> Yes.   >> Carrie: Thank you so much for the introduction, and thank you for having  

8:49

me here. I heard your discussion regarding the meeting minutes   about using plain language. I'm going to make every effort myself to use plain language  

8:59

during the next 45580 minutes  while we're talking about   these matters. Of course this  is a presentation about the  

9:06

law and there are some legal terms but I will do my best to  

9:12

define any legalese that I need to use and to be cognizant of the language that I'm  

9:18

using. Feel free to ask me  questions as we're going.  

9:24

The purpose of my presentation  here to you today is to   give a little bit of an overview about the open meeting law and to discuss  

9:34

the primary requirements of  the open meeting law. In   the time that we have today, this is not going to be a comprehensive, every  

9:43

detail about every requirement type of presentation. For that,  

9:49

I do want to mention that twice a month our team   presents 90 minute long open meeting law webinar trainings, we present them live  

9:59

every time. They are open to the public. There's an   opportunity for asking question so the hope today is that I'll present enough of  

10:08

an introduction so as you go  about your work, you know   what issues to look out for and what sorts of things to follow up on,  

10:17

if anybody would like to learn more about the details of the open  

10:22

meeting laws' requirements then I  do encourage you to sign up for   one of those full lengths webinar trainings. With that, let's jump right  

10:31

in. I always start with the open meetings laws  

10:37

certification requirement.  Some laws like the state   ethics law have an actual training  requirement where everybody  

10:45

who is subject to that law  has to undergo a training.   There is no training requirement  for the open meeting law  

10:51

but what there is instead is a certification. So every member of   a public body which includes a commission like this, is  

11:00

required to certify that you have received certain   open meeting law materials and resources and that you have reviewed them and you  

11:10

understand the requirements of the open meeting law.   I don't know if everybody here has already received this  

11:16

certification form, okay. So this would be the first thing to do  

11:23

PM Often I apologize that I don't know a lot   about what kind of staffing  and support you have, if  

11:31

any. So often this would come from administrator or executive director. You might not  

11:38

have that and I know different  members of this commission were   appointed by different people. So on our website , if you just search for  

11:47

Massachusetts open meeting law you will get the open meeting law website   and one of the links about halfway down is to complete the certification. You can  

11:56

find this certification form along with links to all   of the materials that you'll have to review and everybody just  

12:04

needs to sign their form  and keep a copy of if. Our   office does not need to receive it. So I'm going to talk about four  

12:18

main portions of the open meeting law today. The first requirement of the open meeting law  

12:24

is that notice needs to be posted of all   meetings. So that the public knows that you will be having a meeting. All meetings  

12:31

need to be open to the public unless there's an appropriate reason   to meet in a private executive session. Minutes need to be kept for  

12:41

all meetings. I can see that you  are already doing that. And then at   the end I will just mention  the complaint process so  

12:48

that if somebody were to file an open meeting law complaint you know what to do with it  

12:56

T. T.before we get into the detailed important   thing is to know who needs to follow  the requirements of the open meeting  

13:03

law. So the open meeting law applies to public bodies and the law has a definition for  

13:10

public bodies. It includes boards and commissions. Importantly the  

13:16

law also specifically applies to subcommittees. So   if a commission creates a subcommittee. Then the subcommittee also needs to comply  

13:26

with the open meeting law. So if you create a 3-member   subcommittee, that takes on a  particular task or is going to work  

13:34

on a particular issue or make a particular recommendation, when that  

13:40

subcommittee communicates with  each other, they also need to post   notice of their meetings and create minutes and all of  

13:48

the same requirements apply. The open meeting law applies to  

14:00

element all communications between a quorum of members of a public body.  

14:07

For starters let's talk  about what a quorum is. It's   just a majority of the members the public body. And if there happen to be any vacanc  

14:18

ies at any given time, that does not change the quorum. Let's say, for example, you have a  

14:24

9-member board or commission.  A quorum is five. If a  

14:29

couple of those seats are vacant a quorum is still five. Any time there's  

14:34

communication between or among   a Quar yum, a majority of members of the commission or members of any  

14:41

subcommittee, that is considered deliberation under the open meeting law and deliberation needs  

14:49

to happen only during hosted public meetings. The own  

14:55

meeting law does define deliberation and it's very broad. Deliberation is any communication  

15:02

through any medium so it  includes e-mail, in person   communications, any communication  between or among a quorum that is  

15:10

about public business within this   commission's jurisdiction  is considered deliberation  

15:18

it's not limited to decision  making communications  

15:23

or sharing your opinion. So even just discussing facts or discussing how to conduct  

15:30

meetings or things that might be considered procedural, any discussion among a quorum on  

15:37

matters within this  commission's jurisdiction, this   commission's charge is considered deliberation after locality of people  

15:46

hear the word Deliberation and sume it refers to deliberative type  

15:52

communications. The law is not  so limited. So I just want to   the put that out there that almost all communications need to be reserved for  

16:03

meetings. There are a few   exceptions for things not considered deliberation and so these sorts of communications can happen  

16:14

outside of a meeting, they can  happen by e-mail or phone call.   Some of these competences are communications about setting  

16:23

the agenda for an upcoming meeting or scheduling a meeting. Provided that nobody is  

16:28

conveying their opinions about matters. So it's   fine to send an e-mail checking  everybody's availability or asking  

16:34

people to suggest agenda topics, people can respond to the  

16:39

full commission with their suggested agenda topics but be careful   not to also share your opinion about those matters.  

16:48

It also is not considered deliberation to distribute reports or documents  

16:55

that might be discussed at an  upcoming meeting providing   again no commission members are  sharing their opinions in the reports  

17:03

or documents or in the e-mail where they attach the report or documents this.  

17:09

Can be a tough one because especially for a commission   like this, part of what you will be doing is putting reports together. Putting  

17:16

together recommendations and so your drafts necessarily contain opinions. I'm not going to  

17:24

say that every draft will  automatically contain an   opinion. Some might be like a factual history of what has occurred in Massachusetts. But  

17:33

for the most part. When you   are preparing a report that contains recommendations and that sort of thing,  

17:39

it will contain your opinions. It's your   judgment as to what should be done. So those sorts of reports or documents  

17:46

should not be exchanged outside  of a meeting. They should   be changed during a meeting or immediately before a meeting so everybody has it  

17:53

in front of them to discuss at the meetings because we've  

17:58

talked about how deliberation  is communication among a   quorum, it is okay for less than a quorum of commission members  

18:08

to discuss matters outside of a meeting. So I'm looking at the names on my  

18:13

screen. If Mary-Louise and Alex want to have a   phone conversation and talk  about something where they  

18:22

maybe one person has a concern  or they realized they are   like mind and want to discuss  something and maybe bring it to  

18:29

the commission's attention at a  future meeting, that would be   okay because two people certainly is not a forum. We just say when you are communicating outside of  

18:38

a meeting with less than a  quorum, you have to watch out   for something called serial communication. That is where maybe 2 or 3 people talk then one  

18:47

of those people calls another  commission member and   relays what was discussed. Then perhaps unintentionally  

18:54

a quorum is reached. So just be careful any time you have those   informal communications outside of a meeting in a you don't unintentionally  

19:02

convey the same information to a majority.  

19:11

The requirements of the open  meeting law apply to all meetings   of a public body so that means regular meetings, special meetings, whatever you call it.  

19:21

Sometimes boards or commissions  will schedule things they call   retreats or workshops. Really  it doesn't matter what  

19:27

it's called. If it is something where there will be communication between or among a  

19:34

Quar yum of you all -- quorum of matters of you all, that is a   Quar yum for purposes of the open  meeting law. You have to post notice. It  

19:42

needs to be open to the public. Let's talk about accessibility which  

19:51

is really important for all meetings.   Accessibility in the context of the  open meeting law means a variety  

19:58

of things. So you, as I can see are holding your   meetings currently by Zoom and perhaps that is expected to be  

20:06

your norm going forward. That is allowed under   current temporary provisions that are currently in place through 2025 You  

20:18

can have a meeting by remote  means. That's referred   to in the law as adequate  alternative access but really  

20:25

it's what you and I know of as a remote meeting. You have to make sure that the   public can clearly follow the proceedings of the public  

20:32

body. So everybody who is speaking should have a clear   conviction. Make sure that the consumes is working well, those things. -- Zoom is   working well. If you happen  to have a meeting where you  

20:43

expect a particularly large  attendance make sure that the   Zoom license can accommodate a  large number of people. We've seen  

20:50

situations where usually  only 10 people attend the   meeting and the Zoom license is capped at 50 All of a  

20:57

sudden, there is interesting  topic and too many people try to   attend. Make sure that truly your  meetings are open and accessible  

21:05

to the public. Certainly accessibility means accessible to  

21:11

individuals with disabilities.  When meetings are held in a   physical meeting location, it needs to be an  

21:17

A.D.A.compliant building. An A.D.A.compliant room. When  

21:23

meetings are held remotely , different considerations   will come into play. You might get requests for accommodations from  

21:31

individuals who are hearing  impaired or require other   types of accommodations. So just as with any sort of meeting or access  

21:42

to government services,  it's important to make sure   that somebody is able to make  reasonable accommodations  

21:48

to enable all members of the public to clearly follow your   meetings. I have on the bottom  

21:56

of the screen the phone number for  -- it's the direct line for one   of the attorneys in our office's civil rights division. This attorney is able  

22:06

to assist if there are questions about accommodations for public meetings  

22:11

and what types of accommodations might be necessary. I will send this Power Point  

22:18

through, probably flew Lauren  afterwards so everybody has   it. =-- probably through Lauren afterwards. So  

22:26

I've mentioned that one of the key  requirements of the open meeting law is that   notice be posted of all meetings. So I'm going to talk for a minute about meeting notices.  

22:35

A meeting notice needs to include the date  of the meeting, time of the meeting and   the place of the meeting. That's  pretty straight forward. If  

22:41

the meeting is held remotely the place is simply the access   information. The meeting notice needs to include a list  

22:49

of the topics that the chair reasonably anticipate will be discussed as  

22:55

of 48 hours before the meeting.  So if the meeting notice   is posted a week or two in advance and new topics come to the chair's  

23:03

attention that will need to be discussed, the notice should be amended so   that as of 48 hours before  the meeting, the notice  

23:12

accurately includes all of the topics that are anticipated for discussion and the topics need to  

23:19

have enough detail about them so that a member of the public can have a pretty good  

23:25

sense of what you all plan to   discuss. The meeting notice  does not need to include every  

23:31

detail about each topic, but  it should also include more   than just broad headings like old business, new business, updates, that sort of thing. It  

23:40

should include some specificity.  A rule of thumb we like to   use is that somebody should be  able to look at your meeting  

23:47

notice, which is also received to as an agenda , and make an informed decision about whether you  

23:54

will be talking about  something of interest to that   person. So if all you are saying is, you know old by, new by, subcommittee updates, somebody  

24:03

does not know if there is anything  of interest being discussed   so, I think that can be a helpful rule of thumb. Is there enough detail about the specific  

24:13

topics so someone can decide if this is a meeting   they care to attend. Then finally, the  

24:20

meeting notice needs to include  the date and time the notice was   posted or since you are postings  your meeting notices to a website,  

24:26

the website can specify the date and time the notice was posted.   That makes clear that it was posted at least 48 hours before the meeting.  

24:40

I'm going to talk briefly now about executive session. So I've  

24:46

mentioned a few times that all meetings need   to be open to the public. The exception to that is when entering  

24:53

executive session for a  proper purpose. For the sake   of time, I'm not going to talk about all of the permissible purposes for  

25:02

executive session, but we do have  a lot of resource ons our website   that list the permissible purposes and some examples of them.  

25:12

But I will just say that the open meeting law specifically   lists 10 permissible reasons to meet in executive session outside of public  

25:21

view. In order to have a  discussion in this scootive   certification the discussion  does need to fall within  

25:28

one of those ten purposes. Sometimes there are   matters for discussion that generally are sensitive, but if it doesn't  

25:37

fall within one of the 10 purposes that the legislature decided, then  

25:42

it's not appropriate for executive  session and would need to be   discussed in open. So whether something falls within a proper executive  

25:50

session purpose can sometimes be somewhat, you know complicated decision  

25:56

and we do encourage you to reach  out to our office or if you have   access to legal counsel to reach  out to the legal counsel that  

26:02

supports your commission,  if you have questions about   executive session. But there are some procedural  

26:10

steps I'll just highlight in the event that there will be an executive  

26:15

session. First, the meeting  needs to be convened in open   session so the public has the  right to attend the beginning  

26:23

of the meeting in open session , then the chair of the  

26:29

commission needs to state the  purpose for the executive   session. So what is the purpose? What is being discussed?  

26:37

It can be in somewhat again terms. As much detail as possible should be  

26:42

conveyed, but of course you  don't want to provide so much   detail that it defeats the  purpose of the executive session.  

26:49

But some description of what  will be discussed behind   closed doors is important. Then  

26:55

the commission votes by role call whether to convene an executive session  

27:02

. The chair needs to announce whether the commission will reconvene back  

27:08

in open session so that way if you have members of the public   who are watching your meeting, they know whether they should stick around and wait  

27:14

for more discussion or whether the meeting   will simply end after the executive session. For anybody which, as of now is  

27:23

all of you who are joining  the meeting remotely, it's   important to state at the beginning of  the executive session that there isn't  

27:30

anybody with you who is not authorized to be there who can hear the executive session  

27:36

confidential discussions. Then the  last piece is that when you are in   executive session, all votes need to be taken by roll call.  

27:49

Now I'm just going to go  over the requirements for   meeting minutes. As you know  meeting minutes need to be  

27:55

created for all meetings.  The biggest question that we   get is how much detail needs to be included in meeting minutes.  

28:04

The open meeting law requires that the minutes include a summary   of the discussion of each topic. So sometimes  

28:12

we see meeting minutes that are completely inadequate because all they say is  

28:18

a discussion was held regarding -- and then it lists the   topic. It doesn't include any summary of the discussion. So there needs to  

28:28

be an actual summary of the discussion that took place not just a mention that there was a  

28:34

discussion. Ed summary does   not need to be a transEgypt. It does not need to include every comment. It  

28:42

does not need to include each person's name and what they said  

28:48

but there needs to be a substantive summary so   somebody could read the minutes later on and have a general sense how the discussion  

28:56

unfolded. Perhaps how a  decision was reached. Again it   does not have to be every comment. It does not have to use the exact wording that somebody  

29:07

used, but there needs to  be at least somewhat of a   narrative summary of the discussion. Then the minutes also need to include a record of  

29:18

any decisions made so if there is a  vote that is taken, there needs to   be a clear record of the vote. Because you're meeting remotely  

29:26

all votes need to be taken  by roll call. The minutes   should document each person and how they voted or if somebody wasn't present or be a takenned. The  

29:35

minutes should -- or abstained minutes should reflect how each person voted.   Finally if during your discussion you used  

29:44

documents or exhibits as part of the discussion, then the meeting minutes   need to list the documents used as part of the meeting.  

29:58

I don't have a slide on the  complaint process, but one thing I   do just want to mention as  we reach the end here about  

30:04

the open meeting law  complaint process is that any   person, whether it's a member of the public, or a reporter or even somebody on the  

30:13

commission can file an open  meeting law complaint.   The open meeting law complaint  form is available on  

30:20

our open meeting law website. And the complaint is filed by first sending it  

30:26

directly to the chair. It does not  come to the attorney general's   office. It goes directly to the chair. The chair then receives the complaint and  

30:36

distributes it to everybody else  on the commission and it needs to   be discussed at a meeting of  the commission. Commission  

30:43

would need to then respond to the complaint. All of that needs to happen within   14 business days of receiving the  

30:50

complaint. So if the chair does ever receive an open   meeting law complaint that will be on the attorney general's open meeting law  

30:58

complaint form, then and the complaint form has a  

31:03

cover sheet that explains in detail all of the steps. The chair should be aware that if  

31:10

a complaint form is received, there  are certain obligations to have   a meeting, to discuss the  complaint and to discuss  

31:15

an appropriate response.  More information about how   to respond to a complaint is  on our website or feel free to  

31:23

reach out to our office. I know that all of you are committed to complying  

31:28

with the open meeting law and hopefully you will not be on the receiving end of   any formal meeting law complaints but we want to mention that exists so it's not foreign  

31:38

if one were to be filed.   We do have a variety of resources  about the open meeting law  

31:47

on our website. So the website address is on the screen. Again I'll share this Power  

31:53

Point presentation. We have an open meeting law guide which includes  

32:00

a plain language   overscrew of the requirements of the law. We have a lot of frequently asked  

32:06

questions which we're constantly updating. We've some check lists that can be helpful.  

32:12

A checklist for convening in executive session   because I mentioned there are all of those steps.  

32:17

There is a hand I checklist that is available, there's a check lift for meeting minutes   that you can be sure you have all  the required components then any  

32:26

time an open meeting law complaint is filed and and makes its way to our   office for investigation we do write a determination  

32:33

letter and those are formal opinion letters,   we've issued over 2000 of those over the years and they are all on-line in  

32:41

searchable format. If anybody  is looking to see how   we ruled on a particular issue, those are available.  

32:51

PM Final' I'm going   to leave you with contact information, this is contact information for the   attorney general's division of open government. If there are questions  

33:00

about the open meeting law, you can contact us by phone or e-mail. We aim to respond  

33:05

within two business days. Often sooner. But this shouldn't not be relied on for  

33:12

emergency advice. But we do try to response promptly if there are questions  

33:18

where you can't find the answer elsewhere in our resources.  

33:23

So I'm going to stop there and  I'm happy to stick around for   a few mings and take any  questions. -- minutes and take   any questions. That's a locality of information. Especially for  

33:45

those who my not have served in this type of boost before and this might  

33:51

all be new. If you have  questions at a later time feel   free to reach out and know Lauren also has been a  

34:01

source of great knowledge on this issue. PM  

34:07

>> Could I ask a couple of questions. >> Carrie:   Absolutely. >> Alex: Thank you so much for doing this  

34:14

and being here. I want to make  sure I'm clear on a couple of   minutes. Two big areas stand out to me. One is education. The other is some of  

34:26

this subcommittee deliberation drafting stuff. On the education  

34:33

point, is there -- so we're all coming at the work of the  

34:39

commission from very different directions and there is a need to kind of just   understand some key issues by  having reports or documents or  

34:47

information that's available out there. Is it   okay to share with the commission? In what form?  

34:55

Is it okay to have a description of the thing that is being shared as long   as it is an informational summary of it? And sorry, tacking on many things to this,  

35:05

but is there a list of the types of   acceptable resource that is can be shared?  

35:12

That's the first one. >> Carrie: Sure, let   me start with that. So, as far as a list of the types of acceptable resources,  

35:19

I won't say there is a comprehensive list other than   that the open meeting law is clear that you can share reports or documents  

35:27

and of course document is a very broad term. So it would be fine, for example, to  

35:33

include links to news articles or maybe links to  

35:40

similar reports that other states have put together, and background  

35:47

materials and to send those out and say   something like, Attached are several resources that would be helpful  

35:57

for an understanding of the issues that we'll be working on" something that is neutral. You  

36:03

are sharing information, you are sharing resources.   Presumably those resources  would not include your own  

36:10

opinion. They might include other  peoples' opinions, for example, if you,   let's say Connecticut has a similar  commission that already is a  

36:18

couple of years ahead and put their  report together and you shared their   report. It has somebody's opinions into it but   it's not yours so, that would  be fine to share. The thing  

36:28

we say to watch out for when  you are sending those types of   resources is be careful that  you aren't including your  

36:35

opinion. If you send a report, use the Connecticut example, you send   Connecticut's report you should  avoid saying I disagree with their  

36:44

4th and 6th recommendations  but I think the others are   worthwhile and we should  incorporate those, avoid that  

36:51

Ed car tollizing -- editorializing but   otherwise simply sending resources in a neutral way and suggesting that people  

37:00

take a look at them before the next meeting is generally   fine. >> Alex: Thank you so much.  

37:06

A gray area there but I want to be sure about, like, is it not okay if say  

37:15

we're going to discuss the  Connecticut example, say   we're going to copy the Connecticut example word for word and we're  

37:22

voting on that in the next meeting. I imagine there   is a time relationship issue to the, to the agenda where sharing  

37:30

informational material is not  okay because it is actually   a form much -- it informs deliberation. Is that fair?  

37:39

I don't know if I'm being clear but I kind of -- sharing   information where something is going to immediately be  

37:46

taken up for a vote that would use that information. I imagine   it's a trickier, is that a trickier eschew  

37:51

there? >> Carrie: I won't say that the open meeting law   necessarily restricts that differently. So if you are  

38:03

sharing a, you know, a report from let's say a different state and you  

38:10

simply pass it along, then without sharing your   own opinion or what you think about it, that would not necessarily be  

38:19

problematic. Sometimes we see things, like, a say a staff  

38:25

member puts togethers a proposed annual budget and the chair sends it along and says here is  

38:32

the budget. We're going to vote   whether to approve this tonight, there is nothing wrong sending that in advance so that  

38:39

everybody can look at it. You are not conveying here is   the but the and I think it's a good  budget. You are not necessarily  

38:46

saying here is the budget and I think  it's a bad budgets. You are saying here   is the budget. We'll vote on it tonight.  

38:52

So or vote on it at the meeting, you know, in October.   So that sort of thing where you are sending a report or document that maybe discussed  

39:03

is fine and falls within that exception. >> Alex:   Okay. That's terrific. Thank you. And then my other area of questions,  

39:12

we have this subcommittee on hiring. And some of us went   to the meeting even though we're not on the subcommittee. I got very anxious about two of us  

39:22

agreed one member of the  subcommittee then me, it was   agreed in the meeting that two of us would try to draft up some work. That would look like a  

39:33

scope of project document.  I got anxious that that   in and of itself could be seen  as deliberation, especially  

39:39

around drafting something. Does -- it seems crazy to me that before you were  

39:46

saying, drafts have to come forward but I assume we can't vote on every single  

39:52

draft in a drafting process. I wasn't sure   if you have advice for those kinds of interactions where material is being  

40:00

prepared to be presented , that's sort of inherently a deliberative  

40:06

process. I won't sure if you have  advice for the right way to go   about that. e-mail or what can we do?  

40:13

Do we meet in person? What are the requirements   around there? Conference what you've just   described is -- >> Carrie: When you described is  

40:20

an inherent problem. I shouldn't say problem but it's an   inherent issue with have  the open meeting law with  

40:28

how broadly the legs usual defined deliberation  

40:33

because -- legislation defined deliberation, if you have a quorum of the commission or a   quorum of a subcommittee working  together on a draft of something,  

40:43

just the working together on that draft is deliberation. Certainly this can  

40:49

create inefficiencies say you have a   three person subcommittee and two people want to work together to put a draft  

40:59

together, the open meeting law really does not have a good way to do that outside of a  

41:06

posted meeting. Because of the how broadly the law defines deliberation.  

41:13

So when -- what can be done in the interest of efficiency is  

41:18

that individuals can work on drafts so you might divide up one  

41:26

person works on a portion of one issue and one person works on something else. And then you  

41:32

can each say send your drafts to the chair or to a staff person if you  

41:40

have any who can compile them and then at   the meeting have a discussion about, you know, editing them and working them together.  

41:50

But this is certainly an issue we hear about a lot where it is very hard to efficiently  

41:57

get that sort of work done because it really does need to take place during a meeting if   it involves a quorum. >> Alex: Okay. It's helpful to know  

42:06

it and I guess one follow on question for   working with it, do some folks do posted public meetings as a working  

42:14

session? >> Carrie: Yeah.   >> Alex: I imagine the public doesn't come to a million things, if someone   came they would be interested in it  

42:20

anyway but to record it, comply with all the things, take minutes but work on drafts  

42:27

through those meetings. >> Carrie: Yeah, that's something that   sometimes is done because there isn't another great way. I will say one  

42:38

thing our office has recognized on several occasions is that a  

42:44

subcommittee is created when a subbody -- public body takes official action to  

42:50

designate multiple people to work  on something and come back with   a recommendation, that's what a subcommittee is. If a public body designates  

43:00

an individual to work on something, then that individual is not a subcommittee because it's not  

43:07

a multiple member body. So  sometimes what happens and   what we've said is acceptable is if one person  

43:13

is delegated authority to work  on one thing and one person is   delegated authority to work on  something else, those people  

43:20

can then get input from others. They can,   the person who is responsible for creating the first section of the  

43:30

report and recommendation can tap a couple of other people to help them and  

43:37

because only one person was truly delegated that responsibility,   that's not a subcommittee. PM  

43:44

So does that make sense? >> Alex: That's   helpful. I imagine there is a risk there serial communication thing but I imagine that  

43:53

can be addressed also.   >> Carrie: Right. That's asking if a commission says Alex  

43:58

is responsible for doing X.then you can at least work on it and get input from a  

44:04

couple of people. You can discuss  over the phone but ultimately you   are the one that was tasked with doing that piece, not the three of you. So that's not  

44:14

a subcommittee. >> Alex: Incredibly helpful. Thank you for all   of this is. This is clarifying in all useful helpful good way, thank you  

44:23

so much. >> Carrie: Sure,   any other questions from you, Alex or anybody else?  

44:30

>> Evelyn: I have a question. How about the field trips?   Eventually we have to go to field trips  

44:36

to cemeteries and other places. How do that is work?  

44:41

>> Carrie: That's a really good question. That is something that I didn't get into but I will for  

44:47

a few minutes because I can see that is particularly relevant to you.  

44:53

So the open meeting law says that a site visit, that's   what the law uses, it refers to it as a Christ visit. At site visit is not a  

45:03

meeting -- site site does not have to comply with   the open meeting law if there is no deliberation, if all of you or a quorum of you go  

45:15

to a cemetery and maybe you get a tour by somebody who works there or has  

45:21

historical knowledge and they do a presentation, but there's no discussion, rather maybe  

45:27

everybody takes notes in a notebook  then you go back later and have a   meeting that day or another day , that field trip or site visit does not have  

45:38

to be posted to the public at a meeting if you aren't having discussions at  

45:44

it. So that's one option is that you all go there. You see what you see. You get a  

45:50

tour. You get a presentation  but you don't discuss   it. Another option if it is ein an PM  

45:58

accessible location and some may not be, if it would be a physically  

46:04

accessible location, you could actually   post your site visit as a public meeting. You don't need to have  

46:14

a Zoom remote option if you have  

46:19

an in. Person option, the public is welcome to attend then you can say this is  

46:26

an in person meeting taking place at this cemetery at this time and all are   welcome to come. That would  be one option. Then you can  

46:34

discuss whatever you want. You  don't have to be careful about not   having discussions   on site. That's another option. The third option is that you could go in a few small  

46:48

groups. Each one of which is less than a quorum. So say four or five people at  

46:55

a time go. They get the tour, they see what they see. They can have discussions among  

47:00

themselves because it's not a quorum   and everybody goes back to the next meeting and has a more robust discussion, those are the  

47:07

options. >> Evelyn:   Thank you. >> Carrie: Sure  

47:24

PM >> Carrie: I think I've perhaps   overstayed my welcome already so I'm going  to let you continue with the rest of  

47:30

your business meeting but feel free to,  like I said reach out to our office   or check out all of the resource  that is we have and if anybody is  

47:38

interested in attending one of our more comprehensive 90 minute webinar train,  

47:43

the upcoming dates and times are  on the open meeting law website as   well. All right. Thanks for having me.  

47:51

>> Evelyn: Thank you.   >> Lauren:: Thank you. >> Matt:   Any questions before we exists?  

48:00

Sorry; I want to make sure  one last time no one else   has a question, that's all. So -- thank you.  

48:08

>> Lauren:: bye, all.   >> Evelyn: Thank you, Carrie and Lauren. We would now like to shift gears  

48:21

a built and turn towards the work of the subcommittee during our first  

48:28

meeting in June. As you know the commission was aloud  

48:34

145000 which could be spent for prooccurring administrative and  

48:44

research support for the commission's work. The hiring  

48:49

subcommittee was organization  to research options for how we  

48:55

meet, might bring on administration and research support.  

49:16

Outside a member of subcommittee, Alex, provide a summary of  

49:22

the 45506 subcommittee meeting and the opposite was  

49:28

prosupported. Members of the commission may want to vote on moving forward with  

49:36

a particular plan of action PM  

49:44

As co-shares, you would, we would make a clear motion on the issue to be  

49:51

voted upon. Having a second roll  

49:57

call names. >> Matt: Evelyn   , Alex, or Richard, anything to talk about with the  

50:05

subcommittee. >> Victor: I hello, everybody,   I'm sorry, I was late getting on.  

50:11

You think after a few years I would get this log in thing and go on but anyway. Glad to be  

50:18

here. I just   would make sure people understand that I was, I was away that week  

50:28

so unable to make the meeting but just, you know, people can, can appreciate  

50:36

that there has been some  work done on this and some   really good discussion here. I think there has been some work done  

50:47

on this. DDS has you know has the  

50:52

money. So that's not a problem. The money is there. We have it.  

50:59

And it's there when it's voted  

51:05

on what best to do with it. I   think it will be good if somebody who was at this meeting in  

51:15

August could talk about some of the key issues there. I  

51:21

do think that we've been doing some behind the scenes work  

51:29

in terms of meeting the mission of the commission, and also  

51:38

may have a very good alternative in terms of  

51:44

how we can meet the goals of the commission and in a way  

51:51

that we could expedite this very   quickly. Without some of the detail that normally takes place when we do something  

52:04

like this. So you know, I,   itself members of the hiring subcommittee  that were there in August, you  

52:11

know, I don't know if you want  to talk about the meeting   there or if you want me to  go into a little more detail  

52:18

in terms of what I was able to find in terms of some of the issues that or some  

52:24

of the interests that you think we should be able to pursue with  

52:30

this. PM  

52:37

>> Matt: Anything you want to talk about. Alice -- sorry  

52:45

PM >> Andrew:: I'm happy to give an overview.   I don't have my notes in front of me from the meeting but essentially what was  

52:52

proposed were four separate options we could pursue. One of them was to do a  

52:58

request for proposals which is  essentially we put out a bid to see if   anybody comes back and would  like to do the work that we're  

53:04

recommending. I think the  determination was that that's going to   be a very lengthy process that , Victor, feel free to  

53:12

lop in if I'm misrepresenting anything, you are more familiar with it, but essentially  

53:18

that was going to be a lengthy process, there is a lot   of requirements that the state mandates when you go through that and we didn't  

53:25

that I would be necessarily the most direct approach.   There are some consultants  

53:31

under statewide contracts which means we don't have to go   through that lengthy process because they're already under  

53:37

contract with the state so we could reach out to   them and see if they would like the services that we're looking to propose. So  

53:46

that was an option that I  think we're giving serious   consideration to. There was also an  

53:52

option where we essentially hire somebody, a researcher. We put out a posting on the  

53:59

state's website. We see if  anybody would be interested   in working with the commission and be sort of our go-to person  

54:08

for guiding us through this process. So I think   we were interested in pursuing that a lilt bit more and we were  

54:14

going to work with the state archives,   our understanding was that a lot of graduate students might be interested in part  

54:21

time work, they could look  to see what the scope of   the overall project S.magnitude. How many records they would be dealing with then maybe from there  

54:30

they could assist us in getting  the proposal out and coordinating   with entities or agencies that  are already under statewide  

54:38

contracts. So I think that was  the option that we wanted to   at least try to pursue is  basically the commission  

54:44

hire a contracted staff  member. They could do a lot of   the organizational behind the scenes work then try to find somebody to do the larger project of  

54:55

PM gathering all   the records and compiling that and work with that vendor and report back to  

55:01

us and describe the process. So but we also, as I said the statewide contract was  

55:07

something we wanted to keep in mind  because there might be a vendor under   the statewide contract who  sort of has somebody who  

55:14

can fulfill that role as well. Victor, I don't know   if you wanted to expand on that or fill that in any more detail.  

55:22

>> Victor: I sure, there is -- that   process there are different consultants, contractors out there that have already been  

55:31

approved by the state and   essentially an significant a, it would have to be an agency would have to -- an   agency, it would have to be an agency would have to submit a proposal for somebody to  

55:44

respond to. And then   the group would select from those who respond. The, the catch  

55:57

is that you may not get a response or you might get a response from two or  

56:03

three people who may not necessarily understand what it is that you want.  

56:11

So that's something that is something that at least should be out there and   understood. The request  for proposal response that  

56:21

Andrew talked about, process, I mean, that can take time. Lots of  

56:28

time. Hiring a staff person can also take time. But, you know, I'm just going  

56:35

by D.D.S.' how we have to work within certain guidelines and  

56:43

posting a job and making sure that we have enough responses and  

56:48

interviewing and working through the references and everything  

56:54

like that. That can take some more time as well.   There is also a, another option that I've been able to  

57:02

explore as well. On my own. But  

57:08

it's a research group, state research group that, through UMass  

57:16

that we've been able to -- D.D.S.has had a very  

57:22

successful relationship with. They are the center for developmental  

57:28

disabilities evaluation and research. That's a mouthful. So we  

57:34

just go by their initials and call them C.E.D.A.R.and they have done a lot  

57:41

of research work for D.D. S.. And everything  

57:47

from mortality reviews, when people pass  

57:55

away or die. What is behind that?   To quality for D.D. S., quality control. Safety  

58:06

. On the DDS website we have  a link to them where you can   see a lot of the work they've done. And they themselves  

58:16

are folks who have an educational or human service background  

58:23

and are very interested in the mission of this commission. And  

58:30

they find the work of in  

58:36

group fascinates willing, this is another group as well, option as well and they  

58:42

themselves can also provide the   administrative background. In other words, they can have somebody who can  

58:51

do the minutes, set up the meetings, you know, coordinate  

58:58

everything so it's out of one of the  

59:03

state agencies if you will. This is a group out of UMass. They are a research   group. I know the director very well. And runs a very,  

59:13

very good frequent speaking  relationship so the this is something  

59:18

that just in terms of cultivating and working with, we  

59:25

could do. Also the convenience is that we don't have to  

59:32

-- something for it. We have  a few contracts with them.   So we could just essentially just  

59:39

develop one within one and  this is something that can be   done very, very quickly. So they also have the ability  

59:51

to be able to map out, if you will, thinking ahead.  

59:58

What will be necessary in  order to be age to, let's   say, explore the cemeteries. The  

1:00:06

work done, special commission wants to look at the cemeteries. Explore working with the  

1:00:12

state archives and collecting  records. This is something   they system they was have done. Also too, what is behind in memorializing, set up a  

1:00:20

memorial, you know, as stated in the charge for the, this  

1:00:28

commission. So this is something, too, that I think is an option  

1:00:35

I want to present to the group  and the hiring subcommittee so   that way, you know, you can decide the best way to approach the mission of the members  

1:00:44

here. But I think that we do have some very good opposites. And I think that at our next hiring  

1:00:52

subcommittee meeting, we can definitely come to a decision and be able to move  

1:00:58

forward. Happy to answer any questions if anybody else has   anything else to add to that.  

1:01:06

>> Andrew:: No, thank you for that additional information. At   the times we meet initially I know it was sort of in the works with creeda  

1:01:15

we're going to see if this  was something within the   scope of them because that was a very  viable option and it seemed like  

1:01:21

the quickest option, is there  any chance maybe they could come   to the next meeting and give us more background --  

1:01:26

>> Victor: I I approached the  director about that. She is   very, very excite and very  open and would love to be  

1:01:34

able to talk with you all and discuss what it is they can do. And  

1:01:43

you will see her excitement  about working with this   group. Again this is something that , it's more than just a contract with  

1:01:53

them. It's, it's something  they think that is the right   thing to do. They would love the  opportunity to be able to be a  

1:02:00

part of it. So, yes, I did mention to Emily. She just got back from vacation   but, but I definitely mentioned to her before she left. And she is very open to attending a  

1:02:13

meeting. So it could be this meeting or the hiring subcommittee meeting or we could  

1:02:20

schedule a quick meeting in  order to be able to talk to   her. But I think this is something that is very, very good viable option for this  

1:02:31

group. And it,   it enables us the opportunity to, you know, get moving.  

1:02:39

I think that's where we are with this. >> Andrew:: No, maybe   if we could do a quick touch base with her and the subcommittee and then maybe if she could,  

1:02:48

if she doesn't mind presenting to the Fultz group so everybody is on the same   page and everybody has the opportunity to ask information.  

1:02:56

>> Victor: I absolutely. She is open to that and if selected they would be a   presence at these meetings. >> Andrew::  

1:03:03

Excellent, thank you very much. >> Matt: Thank   you. If I hear a motion to vote to have emmy come  

1:03:14

to the subcommittee meeting, the hiring committee. Is that okay for the group  

1:03:20

PM >> Andrew:: Yeah.   >> Matt: I believe we have to have it on the record so she can, you know, if we  

1:03:28

work that way. If I say it correctly.   PM >> Andrew:: I'm  

1:03:37

happy to make a motion to have a representative from C.E.D.A.R.come babbling and present at the  

1:03:43

next commission meeting. >> Matt: Thank   you, second. >> Alex: I'll   second that. >> Matt:  

1:03:50

Roll call vote now. Evelyn, names and do a roll call for the motion  

1:03:57

please just -- sorry Evelyn,  

1:04:04

do a roll call vote please. >> Evelyn:  

1:04:10

So Elise?  

1:04:18

>> Elies I agree   PM >> Evelyn: Okay. Thank you   Kate ?  

1:04:30

Reggie? >> Reggie:   Agree. >> Evelyn: Anne  

1:04:39

? >> Alex: I think Anne had to   go. >> Evelyn: Alex.   >> Alex: I agree.  

1:04:45

>> Evelyn: John . Rainia.  

1:04:52

>> Rania:: Yes.   >> Evelyn: Richard. Andrew.  

1:04:58

>> Andrew:: Yes. >> Evelyn: Mary  

1:05:04

investigation per, is that how you say it. >> Vesper:  

1:05:10

Yes, yes I agree. >> Evelyn:   Brenda. Jane . Mary-Louise.  

1:05:20

PM >> Mary-Louise: Agree.   >> Evelyn: Myself I agree and Matt  

1:05:32

PM >> Matt: Sorry, yes, I muted myself. Sorry  

1:05:37

about that. PM   >> Victor: I thank you, I will,  on this move by the motion  

1:05:44

by the commission I will contact Emily and work with the hiring   subcommittee so we can get  together a meeting as soon as  

1:05:54

possible. PM   >> Matt: Thank you. Lex not to put you -- Alex not to put you on  

1:06:02

the spot have you and John talked about hiring that person?  

1:06:07

>> Alex: No, no. Good question. No,   we haven't had a chance to see each other at any length. We talked briefly after the  

1:06:16

meeting about the ideas around T.I think John was, where things were left was open  

1:06:22

to considering any of the three. We talked about just the time-related stuff but I  

1:06:29

would, like how long it would  take and what is the process   if we were to bring in an individual researcher just at a quick conversational level. So I  

1:06:38

would love to get his thoughts  at the next subcommittee   meeting before we know for certain. But I, there was no iron clad  

1:06:49

settling that I guess. >> Matt: Thank you. I was   just wondering. >> Alex: Sure, absolutely.  

1:06:56

And. >> Andrew:: Just to   follow up on that we didn't necessarily have all the information about C.E.D.A.R.. It was   an option but we didn't know if  this would be within the scope  

1:07:04

of something they could do. It sounds like from   victorias presentation that would  probably be the best match because they  

1:07:11

can handle both research and  administrative aspects we were   hoping for but we'll explore it  more at the next meeting and  

1:07:18

certainly come back with  additional information for   the full commission. >> Alex:   Sounds good. >> Thank  

1:07:23

you, Andrew. >> Matt: So honestly there was a  

1:07:31

lot 6 information right there from Vick tor and Andre. Before we move on, any other   questions for the subcommittee, hiring before we move on?  

1:07:41

Because I know that was a lot of information. Okay  

1:07:48

PM If we have nothing else   with the subcommittee we'll move on to the next topic which is  

1:07:55

structure and frequency of meetings. The first meeting we didn't   have the opportunity to ask members how often we should meeting. How long  

1:08:06

the meetings should be. Maybe  what time the meetings should   be. I know I work nights so I can't really do 10:00, 0.458333333333333 in  

1:08:14

the morning because I will be a zombie. It would not be pretty.   So I don't know if anyone else  has preference ors thoughts  

1:08:22

when we should meet. Every 2 months, 3 months?   I'll open up the forum right now.  

1:08:34

I Alex raised his hand first, Alex light to talk.   >> Alex: Thank you. We don't want folks to be zombies. I know it's  

1:08:42

tricky some of us can do this  during work and some can do   it after working hours. My  thinking the last couple of  

1:08:50

days is thinking about this, I know we won't all, we'll be close to quorum sometimes,  

1:08:56

that is okay. It's nice to have the recordings of the   meetings for that reason sometimes as well. But my rough sense and  

1:09:04

I'm totally open to thinking about it differently is that these coming months, even  

1:09:10

just the last conversation  about a subcommittee meeting   and the need to hire someone  and those decisions, and also  

1:09:17

the open meeting discussion  before that where some   things clearly have to be  meetings to get them done,  

1:09:24

that it might be good, sorry, third thing that also there is a just a need  

1:09:29

to do educational sessions where we   know. I know Kate Benson wanted to present on the history of all of this so we all know what  

1:09:38

we're looking at for an hour. PM   To do meetings once a month through the, until January 1st and then after that, to  

1:09:48

go to less frequent meetings because  hopefully by then things are   up and running and we can do them quarterly or something like that. Every three months,  

1:09:56

something like that but that at that point, we would be, we could meet a   lot less frequently but it does seem like now to make quick decisions and get things in  

1:10:04

base, get the baseline right  that might be a way to do T.I   don't know if that is too complex and I'll  

1:10:13

stop there. PM  

1:10:19

[Pause] >> Rania:: Honestly I think   once a month is not enough in  the beginning just because  

1:10:24

there is so many decisions and -- I personally, it might be too   aggressive think once a week until we have someone doing  

1:10:35

the work and they have made decisions and they're starting to have progress but I do realize that's  

1:10:41

asking a lot. I wanted to  say my opinion. Everyone   can disagree with that. PM  

1:10:52

>> Andrew:: I agree we should keep the momentum going, once every couple of months   at least initially probably going  to be too far after stretch. Once  

1:11:01

I week, I appreciate you wanting to really build momentum. That might be a little   aggressive to coordinate  everybody's schedule maybe we do  

1:11:09

something every other Thursday if that  works for people, something like that then  

1:11:15

we can reassess and see where we are as Alex said. Once we get close to  

1:11:20

the holidays it is' going to be tougher. Maybe we reassess where   we are around mid November. That timeframe.  

1:11:29

>> Reggie: I'll say that it's going to depend on peoples' schedule and what happens  

1:11:35

and what's going on. But if you're going to do that,   if they're going to do that every week like that, that is a little bit tight  

1:11:45

for some people because it might be other things they're attending   and stuff so you have to look at -- you have to be  

1:11:53

practical. >> Alex: If I may   ask you if we did it every  other week for a couple  

1:12:01

of months or three months it  sounds like to get things started   to get whatever employment set up we do in place or those things and then we ease off and  

1:12:11

we meet much less frequently.  Is that something you would be   able to do or is that too frequent?  

1:12:19

>> Reggie: It won't be bad  if I knew who was going   to do it with me. You know. PM  

1:12:25

>> Alex: Okay. That's a huge -- we should note that then to make   sure if that is something we do, that you have the folks there it's not worth  

1:12:33

doing. >> Reggie: Right.   >> Reggie: Okay. >> Reggie: Thank you.   >> Alex: Sure, thank you. PM  

1:12:44

>> Matt: Do you have any suggestions how often we should  

1:12:50

meet? [Pause]  

1:12:57

Unmute yourself. >> You are on  

1:13:03

mute elies. >>   Elise: No. >> Matt:  

1:13:10

Would you like to meet every three weeks?   Every two weeks? Every, every   other month? Like that?  

1:13:20

PM >> Elease:   Yeah. >>  

1:13:25

Every other month PM   >> Matt: Will you be okay every two weeks, every three weeks, every 2 or 3  

1:13:34

weeks? >> Elise  

1:13:51

PM e.   >> Matt: I didn't hear that response. Sorry about that.   PM >>  

1:13:56

Elise: Yeah. >> Matt: Will you say every 2  

1:14:01

weeks or 3 weeks. >> Elise: Every   2 weeks. >> Matt:   Maybe after the holidays we could -- around the holidays slow down a little bit because  

1:14:10

people are busy around the holidays.   >> Lots of Christmas parties.   >> Matt: Definitely a lot  of Christmas parties. Thank  

1:14:19

you, Elise. PM  

1:14:24

>> Evelyn: I'm fine about every  two weeks, once a monthments   monthments. I'm exibl   I am I'm flexible.  

1:14:36

>> Alex: You are muted again. >> Matt: One of the days I'll   figure out how to use Zoom, I'll ask you what your thoughts are on this.  

1:14:45

Vesper? >> Vesper: For me every two weeks  

1:14:50

seems just for our group and I imagine what is needed, yeah. I think every  

1:14:58

two weeks would be most appropriate. PM  

1:15:11

>> Matt: Marry leies, how about your -- Mary-Louise, how about your   thoughts? >> Bimonthly what would fit in my  

1:15:18

schedule but if you say meetings will be recorded so, it's not so  

1:15:26

it works for the group but  unfortunately that kind of   frequency doesn't work for me. >> Matt: Thank  

1:15:34

you. Yeah. I would love to get all 15, 17  

1:15:41

of the members for the work schedules but   thank you, Mary-Louise. I believe I asked everyone,  

1:15:53

right? Rania's idea I like every week but   that's a little too much more me. Sorry, especially working nights would not be pretty  

1:16:02

PM PM  

1:16:08

If we had to take a motion for this or just for the  

1:16:15

meeting, sorry. >> Victor: I I think just to   memorialize things it would be  good to make a motion and people  

1:16:24

vote so that way it's clear as to how often we're meeting, and  

1:16:31

just for time period like we said up until the holiday break, but I think it's, I  

1:16:38

myself, I think it's always good to memorialize any type of decision, this is a decision  

1:16:44

of the commission. >> Matt:   Thank you. Motion for  

1:16:50

-- a motion every two weeks, every three weeks, would somebody like to put a  

1:17:00

motion forth until after the holidays. >> Alex: You   phrased it that sounded good. I  don't mean to put you on the spot  

1:17:09

for a motion but -- >> Andrew:: I'm fine   with if we want to do yeah, every our week bimonthly meetings.  

1:17:20

I think maybe we sort of -- what is the best day for everybody's schedule. This is Wednesday,   2:30, does that work every other Wednesday  

1:17:26

at 0.104166666666667 until, you know, we get to around mid November then we can reassess  

1:17:32

where we are? PM  

1:17:38

>> Matt: The motion would be every Wednesday --   >> Andrew:: Every other. >> Matt:   Sorry. Sorry about that. Every other Wednesday  

1:17:47

meet, will this time work for everyone hopefully?  

1:17:53

I know maybe for a couple of people it may not.   >> Alex: I think it might need -- I'm concerned about Kate because she has a tricky  

1:18:03

schedule in the afternoon. I know she  wants to do one of these educational   sessions. Is there a way for us to word it, and there may  

1:18:12

not be, but to word it where we follow up with all the members and get a sense of  

1:18:20

what times are most available  every other week and   then kind of set them in based on that? I know  

1:18:27

that might be a form of deliberation office the meetings. I don't know. But is there a way to  

1:18:32

word that -- >> Rania::   They said scheduling is not a form -- scheduling is the  

1:18:38

exception. >> Andrew::   Unless if everybody knows, anybody knows how to do one those doodle polls  

1:18:45

where you put in what works and  compile the information and you   see what the best -- maybe we make a motion to poll the members on best time for  

1:18:56

a meeting and -- >> Matt:   Lets. >> Alex: What if we did that and we have  

1:19:01

a motion to meet biweekly until the first week of December,  

1:19:08

something, second week of December so we do both of thoses?   Would that be enough to get it rolling?  

1:19:14

>> Andrew:: Sure. PM   >> Matt: Clarify, first motion would be to meet biweekly until  

1:19:22

mid November. The week before Thanksgiving.   >> Alex: Yeah. >> Matt: Motion for  

1:19:30

that. >> Alex: That's   the first more, I'm make the motion. >> Matt:   Second the motion. >> Andrew:: Why don't we do a motion  

1:19:39

to meet biweekly at a time  that can accommodate the   most members of the commission? PM  

1:19:45

>> Alex: Beautiful. >> Matt: Motion will be   , yes, Alex, first, Andrew second.  

1:19:55

>> Andrew:: Yeah.   >> Matt: Is that okay with the motion?  

1:20:02

Is that -- I know you are on mute to get off mute.  

1:20:08

PM >> Gabrielle: We should clarify the motion   is to meet biweekly and also  poll the group for the best time  

1:20:15

of day to meet, is that correct, it will be on Wednesdays?   Every other Wednesday? PM  

1:20:22

>> Matt: Yes. >> Alex: Wednesday part is not   part of it because we'll have to  poll it whether Wednesdays work  

1:20:29

with everyone but the rest is accurate PM   >> Victor: I yes. >> Matt: Motion will  

1:20:36

be to meet biweekly and to poll members on what day and what time works for everyone  

1:20:45

PM >> Andrew:: Yeah.   >> Reggie: I'm going to say that for me,   if you are going to do that on the 20th, I already have something scheduled  

1:20:56

. So, you know, I can't mess up what I have.  

1:21:02

>> Victor: I if I can jump in, Matt, for a minute. The   motion is to meet biweekly and we, meaning myself and the people I work with  

1:21:13

behind the scenes group, will send out a doodle poll the best days and times   for that but I think it's important that the motion is clear that we'll meet  

1:21:23

biweekly at least up until  the holidays, and we'll   poll the group as the best  meeting times for those  

1:21:29

meetings: I can't make a motion so I'm throwing it out there.  

1:21:36

>> Reggie: That's not necessary for me.  

1:21:41

PM >> Alex: That's good. I'm afraid if I'm   counting on the screen we just lost quorum.  

1:21:50

>> Andrew:: It's fine as  long as you start I believe   with a quorum. >> Alex: Okay then I'll make that  

1:21:55

motion and Reggie, you are  right if it doesn't work Anne   and I will work with you on  the doodle poll stuff and  

1:22:01

be sure to get everything that  doesn't work for knew that   calendar poll. >> Reggie: Right.  

1:22:07

>> Alex: So it doesn't mess with your schedule, all right?   >> Reggie: Yeah. >> Alex: Awesome.   >> Reggie: Thank you, Alex. >> Alex: Of course.  

1:22:14

>> Matt: I'll do a roll call vote now of the   members. Elise in the did we lose Elise?  

1:22:22

PM Kate.  

1:22:31

Reggie, you approach the motion ?   S. >> What?  

1:22:36

>> Matt: So the motion is to meet biweekly and to set a time to poll the  

1:22:42

members of it, on it? >> Reggie: I'm   not going to vote on it because I won't be  

1:22:52

-- >>   It's biweekly so -- >> Reggie: I'll vote on it but  

1:23:02

like I said I won't -- I won't be here on the 20th.   >> Matt: Sadly, I like, I know I would like to have  

1:23:11

16 members every commission meeting but sadly, that probably won't happen. I wish we could  

1:23:17

but it was set -- I work nights. I don't know how many other  

1:23:24

people work nights so I can't do -- that's why we   make a motion to poll everyone to see if we can find common ground next meeting is  

1:23:34

at 3:00, maybe it's the second meeting at 0.333333333333333 one time   that way people can make it so that is the motion if I understand  

1:23:43

correctly. So the -- >> Reggie: In a   biweekly meaning it will be on  Wednesdays ors that's going to be in  

1:23:49

the doodle poll. >>   Doodle poll. Still going  

1:23:55

to ask about which day of  the week. If that doesn't   work then you can pick a different day, okay.  

1:24:03

>> Reggie: Yeah. >> Do you want meetings to be biweekly   like every two weeks? >> Reggie: They can be bye weekly  

1:24:10

but I don't, I don't want stuff to interfere with what   I've already got scheduled. >> Do you think it would be good  

1:24:21

for the group to meet biweekly?   You don't have to go to every meeting necessarily --  

1:24:26

>> Reggie: Right, sure. >> Matt:   That's a yes, Reggie, just wants to clarify.  

1:24:33

>> You think the group should meet every two weeks?  

1:24:40

Yes or no is the question.   >> Reggie: Every two, if we, we already met this week  

1:24:46

so next week we wouldn't meet. It won't necessarily be on the 20th.  

1:24:55

It could be the 19th. >> Matt: The week of the   18th to the 22nd.  

1:25:05

>> They'll ask you which days will work best for you. So the first  

1:25:12

question is do you want the  group to meet every two   weeks? >> Reggie: Try it anyway. I'll vote on  

1:25:18

T.sure. >> Matt: Thank you.  

1:25:27

Anne, is Anne off, Alex   PM >> Alex: Yes.  

1:25:33

>> Matt: Rania.   >> Rania:: Yes. >> Matt: Did I say your  

1:25:40

name right? >> Rania:: I should   tell people it is' like Tanya but with an R. >> Matt:  

1:25:47

You said it last time it's hard to remember. I'll --   >> Rania:: Maybe I should spell it differently on the screen.  

1:25:56

>> Matt: I have to learn it. That's all. Thank you. Richard, I don't believe  

1:26:02

is here. Andrew. >> Andrew::   Yes. >> Matt: Thank you. Mary   is not hear. Vesper. >> Vesper:   Yes, I agree. >> Matt: Thank you, Brenda is   not here, June is not here. Mary-Louise just jumped off.  

1:26:21

Evelyn, do you approve? PM   >> Evelyn: I agree. >> Matt: I approve.  

1:26:26

>> Evelyn: I approve. >> Matt: Thank   you. Any other issues with structure of the meetings notice or  

1:26:37

the commission, sorry? >> Alex: The only thought I had and we   could wait for another meeting  when more folks are here,  

1:26:45

a lot of committees have a vire chair and a   secretary. The one other  thought is when we set up  

1:26:52

the commission, typically  these commissions would have   legislators on them. The Senator who sponsored the bill,  

1:27:00

the representative who sponsored the bill, or the speaker of the house and the Senate  

1:27:05

president. We didn't do that  for important reasons. We   wanted co-chairs who were actually from our communities. But I was thinking about  

1:27:16

the idea of special advisors  to the commission, people   who know they have a role in supporting our work. That could help them to do the support work  

1:27:24

and be present at the meetings.   I don't know what shape that would take so I think it could wait. All could wait for another  

1:27:32

meeting and we could think about it  but I wanted to put it out there those   are probably things we should consider and whatever shape they take, I think is  

1:27:43

good. It's something good for  the group to think about.   But with so few of us at this  point and there is no point  

1:27:50

pushing it and it doesn't seem like it's urgent by any stretch.   >> Matt: One thing I would say about that, Alex, I was an another board, as  

1:27:58

chair, vice children chair  but this was set up with two   co-chairs, each member was specifically asked to come on for a  

1:28:09

reason. If someone else wants to come on they can come on but I forget  

1:28:16

her name already. She came  on to speak, that would be   five. I'm not sure if we add any more members. I asked somebody  

1:28:26

else for that, does that make sense. >> Alex: It   does opinion I would not -- I don't think we legally could add actual members  

1:28:34

to it but some commissions have advisors or consultants who are people  

1:28:39

with expert skills who just  have that role working   for the commission almost. That's, it's rare. That is not common. If you feel  

1:28:50

it's not worth doing, again I don't see any urgency in think of it. These were things  

1:28:55

that occurred to me that I know are part of the   other commission. The vice  chair secretary would be  

1:29:00

the more important one to take up and talk about. I'm down for whatever   you think. It's more, you two are the chairs. You know what you need. I  

1:29:11

think it's only useful to have things if they're there to actually   make your job easy to do.  

1:29:17

Or easier to do. So I defer   basically. >> Matt:  

1:29:23

Thank you. Let's talk about maybe next we go then. Any other questions before we move  

1:29:29

on? Evelyn, do you want to speak now?   I spoke a long time. >> Reggie:  

1:29:37

PM >> Evelyn: Now   we're going to do the wrap-up. Thank you, everyone. Copies of the meeting  

1:29:45

materials today will be posted on the commission website.   We'll be researching out to schedule the next -- reaching out to schedule the  

1:29:53

next meeting. If members in questions in the meantime feel free to call me  

1:30:02

or Matt. Directly. PM   >> Matt: Maybe e-mail, not call. >> Evelyn:  

1:30:09

e-mail PM   >> Matt: I can't talk right now. I would hike to maybe have  

1:30:22

a motion to -- unless someone has a question or   comment. >> Alex: I'll make  

1:30:31

a motion to dismiss the meetings PM   >> Andrew:: I'll second.   >> Matt:Ot roll call, Elise not here. Kate. Reggie likes  

1:30:46

the motion to dismiss. >> Reggie:   Yes. >> Matt: Anne is not here, Alex.   >> Alex: Yes.   >> Matt: Thank you. John is not here.  

1:31:00

Rania. >> Rania:: Rania.   Don't Washington Post call me Ms. Kelly. That is a lot easier, no one needs to  

1:31:10

remember. >> Matt: That will be a lot easier, did   you say yes. >> Rania:: Yes.  

1:31:16

>> Matt: Sorry about that. Richard is not here h   Andrew. >> Andrew:: Yes.  

1:31:22

>> Matt: Thank you. Vesper.   >> Vesper: Yes. >> Matt: Thank you,  

1:31:28

Mary is not here. Brenda not here. June is not here. Mary-Louise had to leave.  

1:31:34

Evelyn. >> Evelyn: Yes.   >> Matt: I approve the motion, thank you, everyone, we'll nopefully set up and  

1:31:42

hopefully talk to you in two weeks or so, bye.   >> Victor: I thank you. >> Andrew:: Thank you, everyone, take

English (United States)