>> 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)