City Council - Regular Meeting

¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. ¦ ¦ Thank you. Thank you.

So it's 530, and I'll call the meeting of the Rules and Election Law Subcommittee to order. Mr. Clerk, do you mind calling the roll?

Councilor Duran?

Here.

Councilor McDonough? Here. Councilor Scott?

She's not here at the moment, but I know she'll be back shortly, so we'll add her.

Be present.

Yeah, thank you. So we have three items on the agenda today, which are sort of shorthand for a couple of things that I think, and actually I think I had them in the wrong order in my head. THE FIRST IS THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OPERATIONS, WHICH IS THE TOPIC THAT I THINK WE HAD LEFT OVER FROM A DISCUSSION A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ON THIS SUBCOMMITTEE. AND THE OTHER TWO ARE OPEN MEETING LAW, TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. SO MAYBE WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE LATER, TOO, WHEN WE GET TO THEM AND KIND OF WHAT THEIR GENESIS WAS. BUT WE HAVE WITH US HERE IN THE CHAMBER CITY SOLICITOR CORY WILLIAMS AND ASSISTANCE YOU MAY WANT TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF BECAUSE I WILL GET IT WRONG

Assistant City Solicitor Olivia Hart Paulson.

Thank you. So the first topic then is on the Board and Commission's operations and I know that the City Solicitor had provided information to those of us on the subcommittee in the past about ideas of kind of conforming how the various boards operate. But I think if you're comfortable, Mr. Williams, I'll turn it over to you to give a quick overview. And then I know I have some questions, and probably the other counselors do too. Thank you.

Thank you very much. So this is something that we have been working on for a while the city manager he had wanted to do this. I want to say it's 20 for the 2023 and we started looking into it and realize that there are a lot of boards commissions that by no fault of their own they had no no formal training no real understanding of what actually goes into you know the procedures and the mechanism and and how and why we do some of the things that we do with these boards and we want we felt the best way to do this was because so much work has gone into the way that the city council has put together their rules and the way that we uh you know sort of conduct business on tuesday nights that well you know maybe we try to mirror that the best that we can and put it all together In one, you know, we call it a handbook but one Pamphlet one thing that everyone can look at that should be able to answer most of their questions and if nothing else it will kind of At least get newer members, especially and it can be for members who have been on, you know different boards and commissions as well some of the things to be thinking about the Oftentimes, it is the same issues that came up when we were looking at it, and it usually is the same issues that do come up. Nothing earth-shattering, but it's usually centered around some of the same things. We found that some boards and commissions didn't know how to appropriately do their minutes and what to do with their minutes, or even to have minutes, things like that. Again in speaking with some of them. It was what we didn't know no one ever really told us so we took this as an opportunity to put the information in one place for them and Get people thinking about something that is often overlooked, but I do think it can pretty easily be remedied by getting everyone on the same page and So we've gone back and Olivia was instrumental in putting all this together. So thank you and it Most of these is the same from packet to packet It's the first few pages that address specifically what the Commissioner board is, you know where it came from why it's there their purpose Oftentimes some of them have different structures how many board members Who's eligible for the board themselves? So things like that and we have all that organized for all the different boards and commissions So our hope would be eventually once it it makes its way through the subcommittee and and eventually If it makes its way back to the City Council we would want to put these in front of all the different boards and commissions and you know attend a meeting and sort of Bring this information to them while we're doing it and with the hopes of them taking this and using it moving forward. I

Thank you. That's very helpful. So I know I had some questions, and maybe I'll start. So the cover memo from back in March, and this I think was the informational that was provided at the City Council meeting back on March 24th, if I remember correctly. it describes statutory boards and then ordinance boards. And that's a distinction, I know it's described here, but it'd be helpful to give examples of what fall into each category, just a couple, just so we understand the distinction.

Sure. So some of the more well-known ones would be the Planning Board, the Zoning Board, Board of Parks. These are all boards that have their own statute that comes down from the legislature that says, you know, if some of them, it requires it, but if your municipality is to have this particular board, here are the sets of rules that go along with it. And a lot of their authority is born from statute, so there isn't They have their own separate authority from the city, and even in situations where the city manager is the appointing authority, they are a separate entity. And a lot of those are driven by the law, so there isn't much to it. So if you look at the statute and then you see what the governing rules are here in the city, whether it's in the form of an ordinance that we put together, they oftentimes the language mirrors one another and there are there are other boards like while there is different authorities we have a memorial auditorium board or trying to give another good example like a cultural commission, things like this. The city of Lowell is, we create some of these with an ordinance because we wanted to have it. And we create the rules that go along with it. Just really, it's just kind of putting parameters onto what the expectation is. If they hold a meeting, what is it that they're going to be doing? What issues are they going to hear? And where does it go from there? Oftentimes, it will be similar to these subcommittees where it will be a recommendation to The full city council for a particular, whatever that matter might be. So there is a difference. And like Florida parks, I think is a great example. There's, they have a higher level of authority that goes with some of them when it comes to control of the parks. So oftentimes there is confusion between, you know, who can do what, who can do this. So you just have to go back to the statute. It doesn't mean that it's simple or easy. But it's just a little different than these commissions that we put together ourselves.

And so do the statutory boards typically have the right enforcement rights or is that dependent on the statute or do they or not?

Right. It would all depend on the statute. And usually it's pretty clear as to what that is when you go to the statute. But most people don't go to the statute, which and that's fine. I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to do that. But THERE ARE ALSO INSTANCES WHERE OVER TIME THINGS ARE JUST DONE A CERTAIN WAY AND IT'S NOT MALICIOUS AND OFTEN TIMES IT MAY EVEN WORK BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT'S CORRECT. SO WE SPELL OUT SOME OF THAT BY WAY OF A SUMMARY IN THE FIRST FEW PAGES OF THESE PACKETS. when it's applicable to say, you know, this is what this board should be doing. And hopefully we'll get lots of questions after this happens, because I think that's really the only way I'm gonna be able to tell if everyone's on the same page and understands. So I think this is a good first step.

And before I turn it over to my colleagues for their questions, where do what I think of as advisory boards fit? So I think of like the Citizens Advisory Board with the Police Department, the Sustainability Council, and there are probably others that could come to mind, which I don't know, I guess, what real authority they have. But so I don't know that I would think of them as ordinance boards, but maybe they are.

Right. And I think, no, you are correct. Their authority, if any, is limited or even nonexistent. But we oftentimes you don't want to look at it that way because you would hate to deter someone's ambition or their desire to be on a board thinking that it was meaningless because that's That simply isn't true. I mean if you want to look at it that way, okay, but you know oftentimes it is those advisory boards that they'll get together and they'll have conversations that Wouldn't have come up otherwise and even though they can't tell anyone what to do It's those advisory boards that come up with these topics and these thoughts and these ideas that that can lead to the council making real decisions So they're equally as important. They just don't have the authority a zoning board or a planning board or a license commission might have you know through the statute but still very very important

But I guess maybe my question is really, do you think of those which might not be quite ordinance boards in the same way as some of the others? And maybe that's really my question. Do you see them as also being obligated to comply with open meeting laws and other things, even though they're kind of ad hoc isn't the right word, but whatever they are?

It's a great question. And yes, whenever you have a public board, a public commission of any kind, regardless of their authority, Once that is established, there are rules in place and you are you are portraying yourself as one and you are conducting business as one. All of those rules are going to apply. And that's I'm actually glad you brought that up. Oftentimes it is the smaller advisory boards. But again, no fault of their own or anyone. You just don't look at it the same way as some of the other boards like, oh, it's not a big deal. It's fine. But you do. And I'm hoping that some of this stuff will help get everyone on the same page.

Thank you. Not all of this is totally related to this, but I just want to ask you over here, I guess. So a few things that are related that stood out to me. The part about the city council being standing subcommittees was interesting to me, because on the school committee, it specifically called out that they're not standing subcommittees. and basically you know anything they the work in the school committee is encouraged to happen on the floor and not go to subcommittee so it's an interesting difference between the two boards to me and also something has to be referred from the school committee to a subcommittee it can't be brought up at a subcommittee on its own and I don't know if that's specifically the same with the city council

No, I'm not as familiar with why that would be true in the school committee, but that would be perfectly fine on our side. I mean, no one would ever. I can't see why that would be inappropriate, I guess, is the way that I would say it. But you're right.

Because it wasn't referred from a full body. It had to be referred from the whole vote of the council that they were interested in even having the discussion on the matter, basically.

Sure, and I think that where an issue could come up is if something that wasn't referred from the council to the subcommittee and that ultimately went back to the council, I suppose at that point the full body could be, well, how did this get here? You know, this didn't come from us. Ultimately, I think it's more of a benefit than a harm if something does come up organically from a subcommittee that makes its way to the full council. But I understand your point. The proper order would be from the full body to make its way to here, without a doubt.

yeah um and then my another question around the the boards and i just pick one the zoning or planning or whatever some of the larger boards when they need technical or legal help is that completely they're independent to to look for those things and the city provides it to them how does that work

yes so a few of the boards i i should know them off the top of my head there are one or two that they are permitted through the statute uh to hire an attorney to help them with certain matters and i can there's at least one i it's escaping me but almost all of them We would, the solicitor's office would be the legal resource for all of them. And that's oftentimes the case. We'll get information from all sorts of boards before a meeting, after a meeting, we'll help them through things. If something is to get appealed with the zoning board, we are the ones that indemnify and defend the board in those cases. So I'd say it's like 100% of the time they come to us, but it's something very close to that.

I just I actually wait the next is more of an open meeting law thanks on if I should we talking about everything together and we OK that's right now.

Thank you. Are there best practices, examples that you might offer for meeting minutes for the various boards? Because I think they probably do range quite a bit. Oh, that was smart.

I just said the same thing. I forgot I could just take a microphone.

Sorry. We're having enjoyable microphones here.

Yes. And I think one of the places to start is some of the boards, they don't have someone designated to do that. You know, typically it's a secretary would be the quote unquote title of that person. But, you know, even if it's not to have one person that is going to do the minutes, I think that sort of consistency is really important because then things don't get lost in between, well, you know, Cory did it this week and Olivia did it the week before, but I don't know what Olivia did with her minutes and Cory puts us in a different place. So that sort of consistency is important. and i myself like to handwrite things i know others are the exact opposite of that i think if uh no offense mr clerk i think and i'm with you on this but it is easier to have these things done electronically if you can i just think generally that especially for where it's a part-time volunteer sort of situation i think the risk of falling behind or losing your minutes is far less likely if you are doing it electronically, especially falling behind. I noticed that with a few individuals where they became overwhelmed at a meeting that was busy for someone who doesn't do that very often. And you run the risk of leaving chunks of time where they just fell behind and they couldn't. Now, again, they could They could go back and they could watch the transcript and make amendments and bring it before the subcommittee for acceptance based off of those revisions. But there's only so much time that most people have to dedicate to these things. So I think the reality is if if possible and you're able to do it electronically on the spot, I think that makes the most sense. So. staying organized very important uh and also some sort of continuity with who's doing the minutes and it should be the same person that's doing the minutes every week I I do want to make that clear but that isn't always what has happened and I think that's where some of the issues come up

So I think giving a body who hasn't done minutes or hasn't done them well examples of some of the other bodies that do them in a way that are done well would be helpful, I think, as well as training on how to deal with you know uploading the agenda how the agenda gets out to the public and how the minutes get out to the public the drafts and and final and all that kind of stuff is going to be important otherwise because I do think our agenda center is very valuable but if things aren't there then um but there is clearly a process that and I didn't notice it in these instructions but that will be important I think

And I agree, especially because typically these bodies don't meet as frequently. And God bless you if you can remember everything that came up, but being able to go back and look at minutes for different reasons, I do think there's a lot of value there.

So yeah, maybe that could be added into however the training happens. One thing in looking through the packet of information that will likely be shared, and much of this is information that's been shared with the council members as we were brought on board. The one question I think was about sort of the use of social media. And I've seen different things in here versus what I've seen on some things even from KP Law about the use of social media by public body members. So I think it would be good to get your thoughts on that. I know it talks about it here, but I think that would be something we should all be aware of what your position is on that.

Sure, I think, and I'm glad you brought this up because this did come up after the fact that I think a separate, adding to the appendix specific to social media, I think would be important. And the biggest, at least that I have seen, and it hasn't come up too much locally here, but I have seen in other municipalities it's the the distinction between you know what is your personal side of things with social media and what are things that um and this is where it kind of like runs into the open meeting law like what becomes board matters quote unquote as like the open meeting law describes it what is the deliberation you know if you have a board that has three people on it and there's a a Facebook post and all three board members are commenting on it, that's a deliberation. So that would be a violation of the open meeting law. It seems silly to most people, but the reality is, especially with the smaller boards, no one is going to realize that. No one is going to understand that. So Olivia and I thought about this after the fact that maybe spelling some of that out a little more clearly in a separate exhibit for people to look at would help. Because it's normal, especially on these part-time volunteer boards, that, you know, it comes up like any other normal conversation talking point, whether on social media. Then you lose track of the fact, well, oh, I'm actually the chair on that board, and this person's the vice chair, and maybe it's not appropriate for me to be talking about this outside of a public meeting. it's very common to happen. So I do think getting that information out there would be helpful. And that's something I'm, you know, we're happy to add before these make their, these packets, handbooks make their way out.

Thank you. Actually, I don't have very much to add. I really like this as an idea. I appreciate the handbook. My only comment, I guess, is it's been a ranging conversation already. And I know we're moving into the social media piece. not all of our boards and commissions we have a variety of people that serve on our boards and commissions that's that's a way and I do wonder and this might just be the teacher in me but like a cheat sheet for some of the the most common pieces and I may have missed it in here it's very possible that I missed it in here

No, I don't.

Or even like a nice color printed cheat sheet, right? I know, Mr. Clerk, you give us our city council cheat sheet that has the whole meeting on it so everyone knows exactly what they're supposed to say to start a given procedure. Every now and then it's followed. It's not often, but every now and then somebody follows it. And obviously not how to vote, just what does this motion need? This motion needs a motion and a second. A hundred percent. And I bet it would make your job easier. I'm sure it would make a volunteer clerk secretary's job easier. And then same thing like when I was running my first IEP meetings, which can be long, we had the same thing. It was the cheat sheet, big number, underlined, okay, first I do this, then I do this, and just kind of the standard procedure of the skeleton of the meeting. And so you can't, it's really hard to screw up because the meeting's on the rails.

Yeah, and I think that's a good idea because especially during these meetings, they don't have the resource. A, they don't want to pull the whole book, and they don't have the resources of a clerk or a solicitor sitting next to them to ask questions. So they're kind of the spotlights on them, and it's just go.

Yeah, just kind of like, I guess that's all I was thinking. I think the information contained here is pretty good. I think just we have the handbook and then also just adding a reference sheet or more, depending on how many, if an issue is too large to fit on one, then you want two. But thank you. That's a good idea.

One of the things that the you know that the materials refer to the City Council rules and so to what extent to those apply and I'm thinking specifically about things like who may speak at a meeting there are rules about who can speak at the City Council and how they need to present themselves and curious about whether that really is and should be applicable in every other context.

Sure, I think our approach has always been like the default to anyone is fall the City Council rules and that's just kind of like the easy way around it now that's that's a pretty big overarching concept so we do you know we try to narrow it down a little bit now with most of these boards. We typically, and this is, you know, I don't know if this is followed or not. I mean, I don't follow all of the boards and commissions, but we don't have at least listed for most of them a residency requirement, say, for instance, to speak at a subcommittee meeting or an advisory board or whatever. We can add that. I don't know what's best. It just feels like there just aren't as many people who come out to speak at them that I'm not sure there's value there. I'm happy to put it there, but, you know, that's, go ahead. right maybe i just missed that did you not at the city council you're talking about you're talking about right i'm talking about all like all the subcommittees like uh and but if the default was the city council then we have that requirement right so that what i mean is we do have the for most things if there's an issue we say default to the city council rules now at least in my time i haven't had an issue where someone wanted to speak and they were asked if they were a resident and they they lived in Billerica or something, they wouldn't let them speak. I do think that is, in a way, different. And I didn't list that specifically in these rules. Like, it doesn't say in order to speak, you have to be a resident of Lowell or a work in Lowell. I can't add that I just don't know if it's necessary and I suppose that they could always suspend the rules that they needed to for different things and when I give well I don't know if it'll be a formal training but when I talk to these boards about this I would help them understand the concept of suspending the rules like there will be a time when you may feel it's warranted to suspend the rules for something and that's allowed but that is one big difference between the city council rules and most of these subcommittees if you're not a resident typically you're allowed to speak

Yeah, and I'm not proposing, in fact, that we add that obligation. It's really the question of how these interplay. And the assumption might be that the city council rules are to trump anything else that the board might do. And on some things, maybe they should, but maybe not on that, depending on the topic. So that's the challenge, I think, of trying to weave all this together when something that's done for one very specific board is now kind of applied across the board. That's, I think, the challenge. And especially if the other boards have less familiarity with suspending the rules and when you can and when you can't and what topics could be covered under that, which I'm not at all an expert on.

Yeah, no, it would be challenging to say well you can suspend the rules not even a right workable concept and I think more The idea is if there isn't us if there isn't a carve-out if there isn't something that's specifically addressed by this this Particular Boers rules you can default to the City Council rules But now that I'm thinking about it this one thing that we just spoke about It doesn't address whether or not you have to be a resident or not speaking But then if you defer to the City Council rules in that particular instance, you wouldn't be allowed to speak so maybe that's just the one carve out that we can put in there that that requirement isn't it but typically you know if it's not listed here it's usually like a roberts rules issue or it's in the city council rules that's generally accurate

I have sorry. Yeah, that's right. I have I have spoke at a few neighboring towns boards because I live on the border of a few towns and both of the boards there their rules were that it was by vote of the board. If an out of town press was allowed to speak OK so I don't know that could also be a kind of a default.

Yeah, I mean, that's, I would defer to the three of you, whatever you thought was best, and we can bring that back to the council. I mean, it's whatever you prefer.

Thank you. I'm not sure I see a reason to prohibit, and I might just be in left field here, I guess, but I'm not sure I see a reason to prohibit people from speaking. Nobody is speaking at these boards, unless it's a really contentious, and I get that that CAN HAPPEN. I HATE TO BE THE BOARD BY BOARD PERSON. I THINK THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF BOARDS WHERE I SEE A BENEFIT IN A RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT SMALL HANDFUL, I THINK THIS WOULD ACTUALLY CAUSE MORE i'm thinking even of something like the board of parks where i mean the non-resident permit is right there on something you can do and okay you're the one who applied for the permit so you're allowed to speak but what if i have five people that want to you know also support my desire for this you know thing that i want at the park and now we need to suspend the rules where you know maybe the the planning board outside of having the the person who's doing the work i don't know that we need anyone else from outside the city to come support you know the guy who wants to do the work i And I don't necessarily need people coming up from Boston to yell about being against the work. I would prefer that only be Lowell residents.

Okay.

Yeah, I think perhaps what I'm hearing and what I think we're suggesting is the practicality should win out over trust blindly following the city council rules on some of these.

Yes.

And I think where you draw that line is hard because this is one example, but there might be others.

I think how you just articulated that is sort of like hitting the nail on the head. I think they are less formal in most ways. And I do think there's ultimately probably some benefit to having the rules being slightly more lax than at a city council meeting. we could take a shot at trying to pin some of that stuff down if you'd like i mean we could go through or um it's it's really i suppose it's up it's up to the three of you i mean i'm happy to do whatever makes the most sense sure

I will propose that. I hate to create, if it's a huge amount of work, but I think if we use the city council rules as kind of our starting point and then we just kind of simplify that down to a little bit more plain language and cut out the ones that are like, there's a whole section in there about the mayor that we don't need to look at on a board, right? And obviously they wouldn't be looking at those rules anyway, but if we're simplifying this down to the core handful of rules, I think that could work really well.

yeah it's no problem yeah that make yeah i think that makes sense to you councillor scott yeah So anything else on this topic or should we move on to the other? And I think the other two kind of overlap, but I'll just mention both of them. So we're open meeting on transparency and public participation. The first, I believe, came out of a motion from Councilor Noon on March 31st. And anybody should correct me if I'm wrong, because to ask about all supporting backup materials associated with each item that appears on the agendas of the various boards, et cetera, that they be available online for public viewing. that they and the agenda be submitted to the city clerk's office for posting prior to the date of the board or etc meeting to ensure that no individual needs to submit a public records request to gain access the other piece was from the same night March 31st a motion by Council McDonough 4.9 about potential changes to council rules to encourage public participation. So it's sort of maybe a continuation of an immediately prior discussion here. Yes, Councillor Scott.

Okay, thank you. Councilman Noon's motion, if he hadn't made it that night, I would have been making it the next week. But I'm not really sure if it falls as much around open meeting law or if it's more around transparency. My particular concerns were around documents, responses from the engineering department, from legal department, whatever, that end up on a project. uh but don't end up in the packet publicly ahead of time i've seen them handed from the proponent that they received from our city engineering department to the planning board on the same day during the meeting and the residents are kind of like what is that document like what do you you know what if we wanted to speak on that document we didn't get to so even though it might not be a open meeting law issue the meeting was posted you know um the documents i feel should be there ahead of at least the 48 hours ahead of time for the public to see them Thanks.

Councillor McDonough.

I agree with Councillor Scott and everything Councillor Scott just said. I would also add, and this might be a question to the city clerk, I'm not actually sure, although you don't do all the board's agendas, so this is just ours. I do wonder about the feasibility of I know we get a printed not printing the packet for everyone, but we get a unified packet that has all of the documentation in it. We also get the electronic version from the clerk's office, all the links that's available to the public. But then we also get from the city manager's office, we get that really nice PDF that you can scroll through and have everything right there without having to open 75 tabs to read a document. And I'm wondering if that is kind of the model that we could follow on our boards and commissions online, where presumably we're printing that packet for all of our board members. They're showing up that we're not printing a packet for our board members. Maybe. Maybe we are. I don't know. I'm going to hope. I'm going to hope that we have a packet for our board members, especially our statutory boards. I guess we'll find out. If we do, and I hope we do, it would just, to me, be a fairly simple move of, When you hit print or when you go to email your board members, that exact packet is just what goes to the link on the agenda center that has all of the documents in it. And then we really need to make sure, I agree with Councillor Scott, that people aren't coming in with documents for consideration of a board and passing them out at the meeting. That is a wild thing to do.

So I think so far, various boards post just plain agendas. that yeah and including mention of that there are reports but not the reports and it may vary depending on you know sort of how actively engaged the public has been and the topic about whether they want to see it or not but i think it does make sense for all of those materials to be made available electronically in the end, to the extent that they can be made available, you know, in accordance with the 48-hour notice. I think that is really, that's important. And they can be linked electronically. I mean, I'm pretty certain that not all boards get printed copies from the city, nor do I think they probably should. No, no, no. Yes, and everything is available or should be available in the agenda center in electronic form. It's a very useful tool with the different formats that are there. So, yeah, I'll turn it over to Councillor Scott.

And I guess in that same vein is whether or not the departments had adequate time to provide the response. And maybe that's the reason that they're coming in that day, whether or not there's a little discrepancy between scheduling of board meetings and bringing all the documents in to be reviewed. So I don't know if there's any way to look at that. But like I said, the 48 hours should just be a minimum, in my opinion, that the documents, if they're available, if they're going to be discussed in the meeting, they should be available.

And I think part may be part of this is the interplay between sort of how the management of what gets posted on the agenda center is handled by whether it's by MIS or whether the departments have access to that. i i believe in the past that uh mis managed all that i don't know whether they still do but that could be a gating item in terms of you know sort of in like somebody having to be responsible for making sure all the materials are there it probably should not be mis who has to do that for each of these boards but it does then mean that So the process has to be figured out to make that available for folks. And I think even at times, we in the council get non-consequential things. I'll put it that way. Because on our desk, some are just small notices of events. But we, too, need to work with the clerk to make sure that those things are available. And actually, I think, Councillor Scott, I think you were thinking about a suggestion about even links to the underlying items for like a meeting like this could be helpful if I under. Yeah.

Just the link of what was referred that's off to the body.

So that might be a suggestion for for the city clerk that when we the subcommittees are began maybe because we have such a challenge in trying to schedule these subcommittees that by the time we we have forgotten. what the motion was that was directed to the subcommittee and so having a more detailed link to the topic because I dug out that furthest that would that might be helpful um yeah I do think that there are, the agenda center is an amazing tool. And the more we can put things there and the more we can collectively make sure that the minutes also reflect the attachments when they weren't, if they weren't in the original document, I think that's very helpful. for instance i one example in the city clerk did this for the finance subcommittee meeting a week or so ago is that it included the presentation by the cfo as an attachment or a separate document and actually the minutes did as a separate document so that the public has that material um So PowerPoints, I think, are actually a good example of cases where information sometimes gets fed to all of us at the same time, but there's no record of them or there's a record of them, but there is no way that you can access it easily after the fact. So I think that would be a recommendation I ask of the city clerk and others that we link all of those PowerPoints to the minutes so that we can see them. Right now, the only way to see them is to look at the YouTube video by LTC.

I certainly don't want to get myself in any kind of trouble here. I have nothing to do with the Agenda Center. I don't know what goes into it. I compile my documents or whatever has to go in, and I send it to the manager's office or to the clerk's office. i don't want to say yeah great idea let's do it i think it makes all the sense in the world to have that for sure i don't know what goes into it i'm happy to help in any way that i can but i i agree that it would um and i think even just this meeting is a good example where some of these things could be you know someone could earlier in the day say oh okay yeah this is what so i i agree

We have a lot of motions that go in front of the council. And the clerk does a great job. He mails a letter to the chair of each subcommittee to schedule it, what was referred. But that doesn't necessarily go on to the agenda. And sometimes I look at it, what's today? What's today's meeting about? And it would be nice to be able to go back and link to what the motion was that was referred. So thank you.

So this may let us transition into the 3rd topic unless that we have any other things on the 2nd and that was councilor McDonough's motion on changes potential changes to Council rules to encourage public participation. So I don't recall what that covered.

So the general idea behind that motion was to at least have the conversation. The agenda for the Lowell City Council seems to undergo a shuffle every couple of years. I don't remember if watching one of the city employees sit in the corner quietly and nobody noticed is what inspired this, or if there was another issue. But both have now happened. And I guess what I'm wondering, two things. One would be if we go back to an older version of the agenda where the motion response and the informationals from the city administration are kind of front loaded before the motion. So that way any city employees that are here are able to kind of say their piece and get out. if they're not one of the employees that is here for a full meeting. I think that's a little... And it cuts down... And the other piece of this was trying to cut down on how often we're suspending rules or taking items out of order, which is personally confusing and I think is also confusing when some members of the public watch have seen commentary online when they're like, okay, here's the agenda, here's the timestamps, but also you have to click here and then go here and then come back down over here if you want to see this because it does get a little... WHIPLASH. THE SECOND PIECE HAD TO DO WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO THE FIRST IDEA WAS AROUND TRYING TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR CITY WORKERS TO SAY THEIR PIECE IF THEY HAVE A PIECE ON INFORMATION COMING IN FRONT OF US. THE SECOND PIECE IS IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC AND AGAIN TRYING TO LIMIT HOW OFTEN WE'RE SUSPENDING THE RULES. THIS WOULD BE DIFFERENT. IT'S NOT UNHEARD OF. THERE ARE OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT DO THIS AND THAT WOULD BE TO HAVE A DEDICATED TIME ON THE AGENDA FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I know it gets content. People don't like it. People don't like it. That's OK. That's why I said conversation. I'm hoping we can at least move the city workers. But sometimes it does feel silly to have people sitting here until 9 o'clock at night to comment on their petition. We could at least put the petitions at the front with the city workers. I don't know. Thank you.

Yeah, no, I'm sorry. I'm sorry for shaking my head at you. Me too. I am too. I'm sorry about that. Yeah, and I think it's worth us looking, because you are right that things have moved around. And maybe the clerk has some insight into why parts of the agenda have moved to the front, to the back over time.

It has been switched up in past. The order of law has been switched up in the past. There's really no, I think the rules just state a few agenda items that are always on the agenda. But I think they can be adapted in terms of where you want to go with it on the order. On the order of the agenda. I don't think that's an issue. And like I said, the reasoning is it makes a little bit more sense to get the responses out of the way so people can... What about them today?

Councillor Scott, thank you.

So I understand what you're saying about like a resident petition that that kind of makes sense for it not to be at the end of the agenda. They took the time to do the process that we asked them to do to come and speak and then they sit unless we suspend the rules and then we bring them up, which we usually do anyways. But as far as like employees or anyone that wants to speak on agenda items, we'd still have to take the accompanying item out of order for them to speak on. Yeah, so maybe if you can explain, I guess I'm not sure what you meant, because we're still going to have to basically suspend the rules to what we're doing right now anyways. Councilor McDonough.

Thank you. So, I said too much at once and I got confused. On the suggestion to maybe revert to an older form of the agenda with the managers. whatever we call it, but the manager's agenda or the manager's business at the front of the meeting, it was less about so anyone who just kind of wants to speak and more that we frequently, as part of those motion responses and informationals, we frequently have members of departments who are not required to attend every city council meeting here to give a presentation or to answer questions of the council, either prior to a vote for the manager, an informational from the manager. And right now, we put all of the manager's portion of the agenda is after what tends to be one of the longest sections, which is the council's chunk of the agenda. And so I guess what my suggestion was Not so that we continue to take things out of order, but that if we just flip them, we're less likely to be taking things out of order. And while city workers are here until 8 o'clock at night, they can come in, they can say their piece, and they can get back to their office and also go home and close out. That's all.

No, thank you for that clarification. That makes sense. I thought you're talking about people waiting to speak on items specifically of concern or whatever. But you're talking about the reports that are belonging to that department, which does make sense to not have them here waiting till 10 o'clock at night sometimes. Yes.

Yeah, I thought I'd heard from Councilor McDonough the proposal, which is one I reacted poorly to and should not have reacted in, whatever, by shaking my head, was the idea. I know that Cambridge has all of their public input at the beginning of the meeting. And I have watched their meetings, and I find that to be a bad approach because people are saying they're speaking on motion 4.2. They get one, two, or three minutes total, depending on how many speakers are signed up. By the time you get to motion 1.2 or 5.7 or whatever it is they've spoken on, their input is irrelevant. I mean, because they've spoke three hours ahead of time. And I think we should be thinking about people's input at the time that we're thinking about the motion and I just found that I just I was surprised that Cambridge's approach to me seems actually to although it may be easier for people to yes be able to leave the council if they don't want to stay but they I think are given short shrift um both in terms of yeah and they I don't think it's a yeah it provides the listening but I'd be happy to yeah you know get other ideas if we

No, I'm totally open to the second piece being a less good idea. I had both. Neither one was I super amped about. It was kind of, it struck me as something that when this subcommittee next met, it was a thing worth talking about. So I figured put it on the agenda. I do strongly believe that flipping the council's agenda and the manager's agenda would would make a lot of sense though I just we I don't know how many times we have like Matt Sheehan or the parking director image start The traffic engineer missile and they just sit there and wait and wait and wait. Yes. I

Yes, agreed. One thing I just wanted to mention quickly before, I'm glad it just dawned on me. One thing, if I were to make a suggestion, would be having executive session at the beginning as opposed to the end, and that's not something that's shared by everyone in terms of what they would rather do and not do. I just, at least for me, and maybe it's selfishly, oftentimes the things that we're having to discuss in executive session are a little more intense. And sometimes after a marathon meeting at 10 o'clock at night, it can be difficult for everyone, not just the councils, but the administration. So that's just something I wanted to at least mention once.

Councillor Scott.

So to Councillor McDonough, I mean, would you want to make a motion requesting maybe legal and the clerk come forward to us with recommendations on changes, possible changes to the schedule that they think make sense?

Yes.

So in the form of a motion.

So I would say I'd like to make a motion that the city manager's office, most likely through the law office, but that the city manager of the appropriate department work with the city clerk to propose a revised council agenda. Yeah, a revised council agenda in particular to consider

moving the managers business to the front of the of the agenda right second that would you like me to bring that back here or bring it to the council the full council floor for discussion probably no full council I think that makes sense yeah

I would I would ask, as you think that through the point about executive session, because if we have public hearings that we have to hold at seven or at a set time, I don't know how that all plays out. And I don't know how the impact on the public waiting for us to go through who knows how long. I wouldn't want executive session to be given short shrift because we're feeling the pressure of coming back to the public. So I am a little

nervous about that point but just one quick comment a possibility of having it on a different night so I think that could work or you know maybe we could carve something out that if there is to be an executive session on the same night as a public hearing it would be held at the end as opposed to the beginning and if there is no public hearing maybe we have it at the beginning something along those lines or if it can wait great But I can put all these things together so that everyone can kind of review and see what makes sense to the body.

Any other comments, questions from the clerk or anything? Just want to make sure we weren't missing getting your input if we at this. No, I don't think. Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Seconded. All in favor? Aye.

Great.

Yeah, no, I think.

Yeah, no, no, no, it's good.