Light Board - Regular Meeting

Hello everyone. I am starting the September 3 Le Concorde Light Board meeting. I am John Dalton, the chairman of the Light Board. Let's start from the roll call. Chris Schaffner is here. Lauren Leon is here. Nicole Brosner is here. Jason Kuczynski is here. Good. Then we have Chairman John Dalton here. Our first agenda is to discuss the open meeting of the first agenda filed in August. Jason, are you the first to talk about this, or is it the Town Council? In this video, I will introduce the Town Council, Meena Magarias, to you. Meena will be able to give you a brief description of how she handles such complaints. Welcome, Meena. Meena, you may begin. Greetings to everyone. As Jason pointed out, my name is Meena Magarias. I am the Town Council. This is how the Open Meeting responds to complaints as per law. Let's look at the details of these complaints. If a complaint is received, the Board or Committee must respond within 14 days. Discuss the complaint. If you need to resolve anything, do it. If anything has gone wrong, understand that and resolve it. This is the purpose of this. The right to hold a meeting with the Board of Directors can be granted to the staff or to the council or to anyone else. In this case, that is what we are discussing. Then, the accused and the Attorney General's office should be handed over. The Attorney General's office does not immediately investigate the accused. They will check if the accused is satisfied with the public opinion. Or, after a certain period of time, the defendant may need to be examined by the Attorney General directly. After that, the Attorney General's office will examine the matter and decide whether to give more guidance, decide to take a decision, or decide to cancel the examination. In very unusual circumstances, they may suggest that the decisions taken in meetings that do not comply with the Open Meeting Law should be revoked or dismissed. This is usually reserved for mentally ill people. To put it clearly, it is a mentally ill person who does not comply with the advice given by the Attorney General on one issue. Whether a person in the public is saying that this is not the right way, or whether the feedback on new things is not the same. Just see it as an example. So, this is all about the procedures before we get to the point. Do you have any questions about this? Does anyone have any questions on the board? No, I think this is very difficult. In this case, when the complaint failed, Jason approached us to discuss what kind of compensation should be given to the actors. We wanted to start thinking about what kind of compensation should be given. There is a piece of paper in the shelves next to you. It explains the origin of the complaint and the paper we are suggesting. I am happy to explain that, but I don't know if you have had the opportunity to read it or discuss it before. Yes, board members have had the opportunity to read it. Would it be useful for them to ask any questions or provide more information? I have read it, but it would be good to provide a brief description to make sure that my understanding is correct. It is understood that there are many reasons in the method we use. One is that the complaint is not related to the time, and the other is that we did it according to the frequency of PPA, PPA, and discussion on a light board. It was good if we got at least a little more clarity and details, even if it was a simple complaint. Yes, you can see how our complaint is prepared. Let's start with the complaint itself. The problems mentioned in Mr. McCone's complaint were addressed by three of him. They mainly revolve around one issue, which he calls the use of the tenth exception. Sorry, tenth exception. Sorry, there is a slight change in the sound because it is morning. The tenth avoidance was intended to protect. The secretive nature of the discussions related to health care. That's why other boards and committees in the city asked for it, and you are experiencing it more. Although this only happens in the office of the EG in OML complaints, sometimes it happens higher. The second thing related to the solar panels being installed in Middle School in Melkuri was discussed in the Executive Session by Mr. Makoni. It was actually a discussion on objects, and it had to come under Section R. Section 6 states that, as he points out correctly, the discussion of a municipality will have a negative impact on the situation. In addition, he also claims that you have done this to cover up the incident in Ottasrodas. As you can see in our video, we expose each and every incident in this and give more guidance on them. In the beginning, I think Mr. Schaffner started to think about this. Your meeting was filed after 30 days, so it is not normal for the investigation to be delayed. Mr. McConey warns about this in his articles. He says that he didn't file it early and that he found out about the things he discussed when he accepted minutes from the town clerk. Our opinion on this is that, according to the Open Meeting Act, there is a limit to the number of complaints that can be found in a board-secret meeting without anyone knowing about it. There was no way for the accused to know about it, but none of that happened in your case. There were meetings where you had this discussion. There you went to the executive session. Why did you go to the executive session? You had a meeting in the open session. I understand that you announced the intention of the open session on July 8th. I would like to make sure that the board is cooperating with these items. I know that we have done this with the help of Jeevan. And it was there. There was a meeting that you went to the executive session because there were two disqualification declarations. So you know why you did this. And, all of that was general information from the time of the meeting, and this was more than 30 days before the complaint. And, you made it clear what you were going to do in the Executive Session. So, in our view, the complaint was not filed on time. And I would like to ensure that there is no misuse of the things mentioned there or what happened in each part of the letter. Do you have any comments from the board members? Yes, I have a question to clarify. I know that one of the things that makes this unusual is that we had a meeting, and it had to be stopped due to issues related to Zoom. We resumed it. So, how will it affect us to talk here as it is related to time constraints or any other issues? Certainly. And then, I realized that the Zoom-blocked meeting was on July 8th. And when you started it again, it was July 14th. That's when you went back to the executive session. That was also clearly announced. And so, a few things. If Zoom is stopped, what you did is the right thing. There is no need for it. You understood that you had lost access to your meetings or the public had lost access to you. You decided to resume from there. And when you went back on July 14, you did the same thing as a subordinate and went back to that executive session. I believe that the complaint was filed on August 19, so it is still more than 30 days. So it does not affect the needs of this time-related problem. You may have made some mistakes in the beginning about when you should go in. But on the eighth day, you went to the executive session and I don't think there was any objection. You could have done that, even though you were working for the board and not for the public. But you didn't do that. And I don't mean that this is not a matter in this complaint. The board has very strict requirements on when to stop meetings only because the executive committee has not worked. Yes, it is. Yes, I am referring to your description of the things related to it. Yes. But I would like it to be a little less in this regard. The reason. You are right about the objects. The fact that the victim's complaint is being considered in reality does not mean that we are only talking about our property at a specific time. Therefore, it is a different matter. However, I feel that it is attracting more attention in the property. Um, I appreciate that opinion. Um, I think, because I can tell you when we prepare it. You know, I had the same thought. You know, there are two things to be careful about in mind, and I think that's why I'm doing it this way. First, I think it will take some time for it to come out, because there are discussions about what was said there and there, so there are more things there than the legal part of it. Secondly, from the perspective of the Attorney General, if they need to make this announcement later, we can understand from our experience that they are paying attention to this decision first. They have the ultimate ability to examine all the victims. So if they realize that one of the victims is not at the right time, they will stop there. So I wanted to make sure that they have all the necessary things to move forward. Okay. Thank you. Yes. But I do pay attention to it. Also, if people are ready to move to another area, we usually, you know, not very late, but in a city, there was an incident where a person complained late for a year. You know, we want to make sure that things are discussed with good faith, and we want to talk about its benefits. So I can move on to that. i.e., facts about useful things. This is included in Section 10 and Section 6. I think that there are some doubts about what is discussed in the Executive Session and what does Section 10 mean for its use. As we have pointed out, this is the purpose of Section 10. As you know, sensitive information is included in the actions carried out by a government institution according to the language of the letter. In addition, the institutions that have been licensed as Chapter 1641F are also included in this. In your case, you accept and use those information. That is, it is intended to fulfill the purpose of Section 10. Because, when the PPA, PPA, and the PPP are discussed, it will affect the ability to obtain the highest deal in the power supply sector. We have explained the principle of how Section 10 is usually used. You have a limited freedom to discuss exactly what needs to be discussed in the Executive Session to ensure the necessary protection for those details. That is why you went there. If you are talking about the real estate market, you are talking about how it is related to the PPA, PPA, VILANIRNAYAM, and MIDDLE SCHOOL projects, so there is a suspicion that you are conducting real estate discussions here. However, as shown here, you do not have a part in handling municipal or school real estate. So, if you go to the Executive Session to discuss School Committee or Select Board or Rooftop, that would be a good intention, but in your case, you spoke about its price. So, that's not a good intention. So, we have described it in detail for those two things. So, do you have any questions or opinions? Do you have any questions from the Board? No, let me say it again, things are very clear. Then the last thing, about keeping the single source procurement hidden, the first thing was said at the top. The board does not have the right to change the municipality itself, so what you are doing is not that, and you are not involved in it either. Secondly, there are a lot of restrictions in terms of energy and energy-related events, so you have not tried to ignore any of them. The most important thing is that whether the single-source event was conducted in the right way is not a problem related to the open meeting law. The last point about the purpose here is that Mr. Banfield asked you how fast the meeting should be held. It would be good if Mr. Banfield paid attention to whether it is a select board or not on your board. He did not tell you when to go to the executive session. In fact, he did not do that. You decided it yourself. Even if he is required to do so, it is not illegal for him to say that he wants to hold a meeting immediately with a specific notice according to the Open Meeting Law, and it is certainly not illegal. When he said that he wanted to do what he had intended to do on the 8th day before Zoom was stopped, he never meant to break the law. We don't have to wait another month for this to happen. This is something that any community can ask of you. So, in our view, there hasn't been an intentional violation of the law. We don't think there has been any violation of the law. Certainly, there are no negative signs in that statement. Does the board have any comments or questions? I think July 8th is the meeting that took place on the 14th. It was scheduled correctly. In it, two things about power purchase contracts were discussed in the executive session. So, I think this will help answer that question. Do the board members have any other comments or questions? Meena, in this case, are you recommending that the board should nominate you as the person who is responding to you and that you should accept the language here? Or is there anything else to be accepted before that? Or, if you think that the meetings and the board's position reflect this correctly, Jason, I believe you have a good understanding of this. So, you can take it forward. So, Chris, you? Yes, I think everyone is satisfied with the memo prepared. I think that's the basis of the discussion we had. But just to make sure. Yes, I am completely satisfied with this. I think it would be good to explain a little more about the program requested by the government that we can use for that project. Because it was a single source, it was a desire. But in reality, this is a public service. This is brought by the government to use it for self-employed institutions and people like us. I don't know if anyone can give more details about this. I think it would be good to say it here once more. Or did I make everyone more confused? Mr. Schaffner, I am happy to explain very briefly what that program is and how it is related to Section 10. Since this is not included in today's agenda, I do not want to go into too much detail. The Board does not need to discuss this now. It is necessary to follow the Open Meeting Act. In short, the reason why the price statement obtained from Select Energy falls under Section 10 is that it was obtained by Power Auctions, which is an energy broker with DPU and DPU license as per the law. Those payment processes are carried out, as you have seen, through a public payment that takes place at the local level. This is not about choosing a developer and accepting the price they say. This is done through a public payment that is worth energy. The aim of this is to use the tools of a large program that includes more than one municipality. The purpose of this is to get the highest price. That's what you were examining as an option in that session. What Chris meant to say may be to make it clear to the speaker in a way that the speaker can understand, because it may not be so familiar to Eiji. Yes, I note that the third item of the laws, i.e. the single source procurement, has been rejected. As far as I'm concerned, that's a respectable thing. That's not an open meeting complaint, it's a special complaint. So, even though I don't think there's much to say about what we've given in this report, it's important to make it clear to the people of Concord that we're not conducting a single-source procurement. We're following a program that's in line with the general law. That's right. It applies to the last point of Mr. Paxton's view. Although it is part of the Open Meeting Act, the Board follows the rules of the Act. I think it is clear. Yes. In addition to the A.G. office, the Congress will also use two or three more power options, including what Chris and Tyson said. Of course, we can add one or two more power options to it. I don't want to talk about the power of the procurement through an open meeting. I don't think it's fair to you or the public. Yes, that's why we can do it for sure. I think it's actually the final decision in this department. It's been well discussed. Yes, on the fourth page. Here, what I mean is to attract the attention of the people in the court. Okay. So, if there is no problem, let me make a statement. This is a verbal statement. On August 18, 2026, I request the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council to re-invite the town council My vote is also the same. So, we made a decision about one thing in our union. Anything else? No, that's all I have to say about this. But if there is anything left, we can go back to Mr. Balder. I have no other choice but to ask you whether public opinion is accepted in such events. So, we usually do it in our monthly events that are going to take place next month. Yes, of course. When I look at your agenda, I don't think so. Okay, we haven't made it public. Yes, according to the Open Meeting Law, there is no obligation or obligation for public opinion to be accepted. I just wanted to make sure. Thank you. That's why I think we can cancel this meeting. Do you want to pass a statement? Yes. Can anyone give a statement to cancel the meeting? I'm giving a statement to cancel the meeting. I agree. I agree. Tyson. Yes. Nicole. Yes. Chris. Warren. Yes. Did you go to Chris' meeting? Chris. I said yes. Oh. My vote is the same. Okay. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Okay. Bye.