All right, good evening everyone. I'd
like to call this meeting to order.
So, we don't have any remote, so we can
just do this roll call orally. Okay,
Veronica, roll call, please.
» Council member Husco here.
>> Council member Flynn,
>> present.
>> Vice Mayor Hufty
>> here.
>> Mayor Taylor,
>> present.
>> We have a quorum.
>> Thank you.
All right. So, for tonight, um, we won't
do the sort of general oral
communications on things not on the
agenda until we get to the regular
meeting. So, the first item on the
special meeting is the closed session.
So, I'll open that if there are any
public comments on the closed session
item. Now is your time to speak.
So, anybody? No. Anybody online?
» Veronica.
>> Okay, great. All right. So Ben, I'd like
to close the session. So
this is your opportunity and then we'll
come call you guys and and hopefully
it'll be pretty quick. I would hope 15
minutes or so, but um but but we'll come flag you down.
» Okay. We're gonna we're going to call
the council meeting back in session. Oh,
Katherine, do you want to report on the
close session?
Uh thank you mayor. Yes, the council met
in close session just before um this
item to discuss uh the litigation county
of Sonteo at all versus state of
California. Uh the town and all of the
cities and town towns in uh the Sanonteo
County are parties to this litigation
which is challenging the state of
California regarding the what's known as
the BLF shortfall. Uh, I have nothing to
report out of close session. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
All right, let's move on to 5A.
Do does the subcommittee want to present
anything before I open it up to public
comment?
>> Yeah, just a brief summary.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> Then you're up.
>> Okay. Well, just to re refresh folks,
um, our subcommittee was formed with a
pretty direct task of identifying
outside council other than our town
attorney to advise us in connection with
the Hawthorne's uh, property in town.
Um, we wanted to make sure that we had
council available should
we have a need to confer and understand
the town's rights with respect to MRSD's
plans for the lowerbound project and
historic complex. That's when the
decision to
uh seek alternate counsel was made. Um,
we are, uh, we're happy to report out
that we identified Bill Seligman, who is
a veteran attorney. I think he's the
town attorney for Campbell at this
point, but also has a private practice,
and he's very experienced in these these
types of issues. So, we made the
recommendation that we select Mr.
Seligman as alternate counsel for this
uh set of issues for the town where our
current town attorney is conflicted out.
So that's the setting here. Um I'll turn
it back.
>> Great. Thank you, Judith. Um any
clarifying questions for Judith before I
open it to public comment?
>> Uh yes. Um there's a budget associated
with him. No more than $10,000 for is
that for this fiscal year or or does
that include some of the costs that
might be for next fiscal?
>> Well, right now it's just to get him
started with getting his bearings um to
look at relevant documents that are
publicly available.
So, whenever he gets through that, he
has to come back and we have to
reauthorize.
>> Do you know how much has been spent to
date?
>> I personally do not.
We've not received any invoices for his
services to date.
>> Any other clarifying questions?
All right, with that I
go ahead. Yeah, no worries.
>> Um, do we know if mid I'm sorry. Um,
hang on. I might have jumped ahead.
We're on item
>> 5A.
This is the report out.
>> Yeah. Okay, never mind. my questions the
next.
>> No worries. Thank you. Okay. Um, so now
I'll open it. Is there any public
comment? So I see none in the
schoolhouse.
Is there any online?
>> We have one in there. We have
» Linda Brothers, uh, a resident of the
ranch. Um, I just wondered to what
extent you've authorized this to bring
any action or undertake any work. You've
just chosen him. Is that correct?
>> We have only chosen him and um I think
there's an agreement in place with a not
to exceed number, but that's to get
started. There's no decision or input
that we've given him other than to get
it bearings.
>> Can I ask why he's not here? Uh
specifically as to the next matter and
with all due respect, why Katherine, who
has an ethical barrier, is here.
>> You can ask. Um, I don't we didn't,
frankly, it's a cost issue. We didn't
want him to spin his wheels essentially
and spin up the cost. So, I would
imagine that as time goes forward and if
we approve additional amounts that that would be an appropriate
>> step.
Yeah, please.
Um, yeah. No, thank you for the
question. is something that um I've
considered uh in terms of you know legal
advice that wouldn't generally be given
in open session um because of the
confidential nature of it. So that would
be another reason to not have Mr.
Seligman here but ultimately that would
be a council decision. Um, in terms of
the items tonight, um, uh, as as
indicated in the staff materials and
when my firm was hired, um, my firm does
represent a pen, um, as well as post on
a variety of matters. And so that is did
create the the conflict uh, for this
situation. Um, I did give some
consideration whether I mean this was a
carryover item from a from a prior
meeting. Uh, my personal opinion is this
is a procedural item um, as opposed to a
substantive one. And so for that reason,
I didn't see a need uh to recuse. Of
course, if the council wanted me to step
out, I'd always be open to that.
>> Um,
>> thank you.
>> May I follow up and ask you that I think
I have substantive legal comments to
make on the next matter and that
appropriate then to ask if you leave
» that would be a council decision.
>> Uh, I I can wait and ask the question
then.
>> Sure. Why don't Why don't we wait for
the next one? Um I I would say that the
next one isn't about legal matters. It's
what we think a subcommittee should
start looking into to bring back to the
council
>> and it's a matter of perspective I think
whether that should include legal
matters but I'll wait till the next
item. I just want raise the question.
Thank you.
>> Thank you.
All right. Anybody else in the
schoolhouse? Don't see any hands. I
don't see any hands online. All right.
So, let me close public comment.
Bring it back to the council. There any
more comments for the sub committee?
No. Okay. Then let me close 5A and move
to 5B.
So, who's going to present this? Darcy,
is this you? Great. Thank you.
Okay, just give me a second. So, this is
an item to discuss the appointment or
potent potential appointment of a town
council ad hoc subcommittee to research
options to work directly with the Mid
Peninsula Regional Open Space District
regarding the Hawthorne's property. And
I'm Darcy Smith, your town manager. This
is just a brief presentation, a simple
background on the Hawthorne's property.
It's a 79 acre site in the Pulla Valley
town limits. It was gifted from post to
midpen in 2011.
No town permit applications have been
submitted yet. So the town has not been
formally engaged at this point. Um the
town has been informed through
conversations with the midpen staff and
action by the midpen board directors
that the SQA environmental review is
anticipated to start this year. And the
town is a SQA responsible agency. Again,
according to MidPen correspondence,
um, also important to note the planning
public access planning process led by
Midpen began about five years ago. There
was a public access working group that
met in 23 24 and the last time the
council had a session with MIDI pen was
um October 2024.
So, just a quick
update on ad hoc subcommittees and what
they're allowed to do under state law.
So, the composition is a minority of the
council, so maximum of two. It's a Brown
Act exempt subcommittee and it can only
include council members only. It can't
include staff. Um, it's advisory only to
the town council. There's no authority
and no action of the subcommittee could
bind the town. And the subcommittee must
have a specific finite assignment of
work. And for this rough estimate,
depending on what the council chooses to
assign to the subcommittee, I would
estimate is about a two or three month
duration where the subcommittee would
work and then return to the council with
a presentation similar to the one we
just had by the other subcommittee. Um,
and important to note that that
subcommittee dissolves after that point.
no formal action is required to dissolve
it, but essentially like what you saw on
the previous item, that subcommittee
doesn't exist anymore. They're not going
to do any more work. Uh so some options
that were developed and in is in the
staff report. So this is not any new
information. Um, but some options
uh because this is a an item that is on
the council agenda from a council
request is there's some options to for
the subcommittee. But I want to
emphasize that this is not work that the
subcommittee would be doing. These are
just options that the subcommittee would
be studying more or analyzing and
they're and then come back and advise
the council as to which options these
options may be other options that the
council would want to um direct any
potential subcommittee tonight to
examine and then they would report back.
So there's not going to be actually
actual work done by the subcommittee
which is important consistent with the
Brown Act. They're advisory in nature.
They study these. come back and report
again, that would likely be August or
September. Um, so that the the things
that I've heard in the community that
might rise to the level of the
subcommittee examining to whether they
would want to move that forward. Again,
separate action by the council would be
community communications, potentially
working with the midpen board at joint
meetings or forming what is considered a
Brown Act joint subcommittee. Important
to note, it would not be this
subcommittee. there' be a separate
subcommittee writing a formal comment
letter to Mid Pen, which again we have
not done at this point because the
comment letter would need to come before
the council for a vote. So, we've had
this body has had no formal
correspondence with midpen staff or the
board. Um, and there's some other
options here, including working with
Council Bill Seligman to study potential
legal options.
So, the council's consideration tonight
is fairly simple. I would suggest you
take this in two pieces. First, does a
council want to appoint tonight
a town council ad hoc subcommittee to
research the options to work directly
with midpen regarding the Hawthorne's
property? And then if yes, what specific
finite assignment or assignments should
the subcommittee work on? And it's just
really important that those are defined
tonight so that we leave this meeting
with a record of what the subcommittee
is doing. Um and then you can the
subcommittee would return back and again
that estimate is two to three months. So
August or September
and that concludes my staff report.
Happy to answer any questions.
>> Thank you Darcy. Clarifying questions.
» So just timeline I'm picking up figure
one out of your submission. Um and it's
pretty complicated. Um develop. So, I'm
looking at where we are on this. It's 26
27 and 27 plus. Uh, this is
uh
well, it's in the staff report, the the packet, and I'm wondering what the
next step on that timeline practically
is for the Hawthorne's MRSD. Is it SQA?
like like how far out are we from them
doing taking some action?
>> Well, so there is a board meeting
tonight where they would be approving a
SQA scope of work and contract and
budget. SQUA is slow.
So I think when I last looked at their
schedule, they were going to be working
on the project description neck. Um, and
that could be done later this year into
next year.
>> Mhm.
>> And the the next milestone in the SQL
process is that they send an official
letter out. It's called a notice of
preparation, official notice, and the
town again as a responsible agency would
get that notice and be able to comment
on it. But my best guess right now is
that would come later in the fall,
>> assuming they approved tonight.
>> Yeah, assuming they approved.
>> Several many months away. several months
away.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> Thank you.
>> Another ignorant question. When does it
do they submit for a cup? What is And
>> well, I'll just say we do not know
exactly what they're submitting for. So,
just to correct you, it could be of a
cop, it could be something else. We do
not know at this time. The notice of
preparation does list anticipated
entitlements or discretionary approvals
that they may seek again from other
agencies or they may have to give
themselves. Um, and that's a preliminary
list. It would be refined through the
SQL process, but we have no timeline of
that. Again, my best educated guess is
it's after SQA and SQA could probably
take 12 or 18 months. So, it could be
late 2027 or even 2028. But I just want
to caution, we have not received any
formal correspondence or statements from
Midpen as to what they will be
submitting or when. Can I just follow up
because I think I have a slightly
different angle on the same question
which is we as a town
have not yet been advised because we've
only just appointed the town attorney
for this set of issues um or the the
interim whatever we want to call them.
Uh Bill Sullivan has not had a chance to
advise the council right now. So, you
know, there's what MOSD thinks it needs
and we have not yet come to a conclusion
on what we need because we haven't had
that advice um or a chance to explore
that with our
>> That's correct. That's well described.
Yes.
>> Thank you.
» I I wanted to just clarify a little bit
about Bill Sutherland not having
provided us any advice. I got a report
by email,
a whole summary description. Is that not
the background?
>> If you're questioning my phrasing, my
phrasing came about because
a one-way transmission without an
ability to engage and discuss isn't
advice. It's a one-way transmission that
needs followup. That's that's where my
phrasing came from. I don't know if
Darcy had different phrasing.
>> Well, I'll just clarify for the council
and public that there's not been a
public
distribution of information from Bill
Seligman at this point. Nothing's been
provided publicly.
» Could I get further clarification on
what the decision is we're making here?
Um, if we decide to move ahead and
appoint the subcommittee, that's yes or
no. And then the finite assignment. Um,
you gave us a list of things that the
subcommittee is supposed to decide
whether or not
we that the subcommittee will work on
these items. I'm just unclear on whether
they're actually going to be working,
for example, to draft a formal comment
letter or is that something that I don't
know the subcommittee is going to make a
decision about whether that's important
to do and then the staff would and
attorney would then draft that formal
comment letter. I'm just a little clear
on unclear on how much
>> it's the latter
>> subcommittee will be doing. It's the
latter that we're expecting the
subcommittee to come back and say
potentially we think that the council
should draft a letter, but they're not
going to draft that letter or submit
that letter
because the the idea is that they're
going to come back at least that's this
is my understanding is the subcommittee
is going to come back and say, you know,
here are our options for looking at this
project and we the subcommittee
recommend and to the council the
following things that we think are
probably the right path and then the
council need to decide what path we want
to take as a full council.
>> But at this point, do we really need to
give any additional feedback than these
six items saying, you know, you should
look at all these six items and decide
if it's something to move forward with
or should we be saying, oh, all right, now I think you should work on the
form that you should maybe focus more on
this comment letter. That's what I'm a
little unclear of.
>> Well, that's the discussion.
>> I mean, I mean, I have some things to
add to this list, for instance, that
aren't on here.
>> So,
>> sort of to create a big list for them
then to take away and decide whether to
move forward with.
>> Sure. Big is a relative term here, but
yes.
Anything on your side? Clarifying
questions. We're not in discussion.
>> Yeah, I have clarifying questions. No
worries. Um
so first of all does um does anyone know
if Midpen wants to work with our
subcommittee potential subcommittee?
>> Uh
clarifying question uh that is open is
that has not been responded to as yet.
>> So Midpen has not responded.
>> Wait I I don't think the council's
authorizing the sub committee to meet
with Midpen. Right. But even even
>> we could have that discussion.
>> Well, it does say
>> joint council and midpend board
meetings, communic community
communications like like and so I just
want to clarify that this would only be
a subcommittee from the portal of and
not to talk to midpen or to talk to
midpen.
>> Well, I think like let's take number two
just I can easily phrase it. They're not
going to draft the letter. They're going
to recommend that we draft a letter.
They're not going to have joint planning
meetings. They're going to recommend
that we should have joint planning
meetings.
>> Okay.
So, there there's no interaction
between the subcommittee and midpen.
It's they're going to go through and say
here's what we think might be the right
approach and then the council needs to
decide how much we want to interact with
midpen etc. Does that help?
>> Yep, that does. So, um C, uh and could
we I recognize that right now could the
sub I mean right now we have
extraordinarily limited staff
so we don't have the staff to or the
money to do this but in case in case
there is money down the road um could we
add for the subcommittee to potentially
look at a parking management opportunity
as Well, that because uh by having
parking a parking management plan, it's
a chess move
which then you can point to Midpen and say
this your parking plan doesn't match the
town's parking plan and that's a
problem. Could we potentially add
another one?
>> Yeah. So I think when we get to
discussion that would be an example of
something that we could add to the list
that the subcommittee could
>> Great. Okay, those are my questions.
Thank you.
>> Any other clarifiers?
>> Is it possible to discuss the two
questions together? Um because for me I
don't know if I need a subcommittee
until I've figured out
whether any of those are, you know,
something we should be engaging in at
this moment. So I I I don't want to go
sequentially myself, but if that's the
way you need us to structure this, we
can.
>> No, you can you can have an alternative
approach.
>> Yes. Okay. Thank you.
>> All right. Any more clarifying questions
before I open it to public comment? All
right. So with that, um I'm going to
open up 5B to public comment. Who would
like to speak in the
What's up, man? Uh what's up is uh
I'm not comfortable with having a
conflicted council in in to issue public
comment on this because uh because if I
understand the concept of conflicted uh
council it means that uh we're not
speaking in we we are speaking directly
to to uh to MRSD and
through through council.
>> May May I
>> Yeah, please
>> have a comment. This is recorded. It's
public. There's no point in
>> I mean she can go look at it. Her her
colleagues who are working on it, I know
Katherine isn't can look at it. I mean
there there is body language. So I I
defer to you Mary, but do think about
>> Yeah,
>> I will go with wherever you want to go
on this.
>> Okay. So you're
>> I I just noticed that it has a sort of a
queasy it has a little bit funny
feeling.
>> Okay. Well, I I doubt Katherine has a
strong view,
>> right?
>> Certainly don't. And I'm I'm happy to
step out for the conversation.
>> And I think my sense is we're we're not
going to ask Katherine for advice, but I
don't mind her sitting here personally.
>> I don't either. It depends on whether
she's on,
>> but it's going to be a on the public
record. There's no confidence here. I
mean it's a recorded anybody in the
world can see this so there's no
confidence here. I mean at least as I
understand the question. So um this is
in close session. So um anyway I I don't
have a strong feeling
one way or another. I mean what's the
>> Katherine? Do you do you feel strongly?
>> I I don't but I think um I'm a big pro
I'm a big uh believer in optics and so I think it's best for me to step out and
you just come find me. Yeah. We're ready
to move on.
>> Thank you.
All right, with that I open up public
comment. Who would like to speak?
You can wait until she's fully out the
door if you want.
>> Okay, cool. Cool. Thank you, Catherine.
Um, I'm very glad that we have reached
this point. I have been patiently
waiting for today and it's finally here.
So, congratulations on getting this far
uh around. I have uh two perspectives to
offer. Um one is about the composition
of the subcommittee. Several years ago,
the finance committee um met and they
appointed a single member subcommittee
which at the time struck me as quite odd
and unusual but proved its effectiveness
um and merit. And that idea um occurred
to me this week as I was looking at your
agenda. Um remembering that Nidpen has
thus far rebuffed all of our overures.
Um that we are and we and that we are in
very early days with our attorney. Um, I
want to point out that in Judith Hesco,
we have someone who speaks his language,
thinks deductively
while keeping the strategic in mind,
keeps focused, keeps her eye focused on
the clock, which will translate to a
concern I've heard a couple of times
tonight about cost management. So I
think that for the at least this first
step forward given we had six options up
there and were I one of you I wouldn't
have I wouldn't be able to deal with the
matrix of options because I don't have
the grounding information that you need
and so what if we took the best next
step forward with a single person I
think it would be highly efficient and
then come back to the council and decide
whether a supplementary member to that
uh subcommittee is valuable. or whether
it's it's equally valuable to turn it
over to the five of you. At least to me,
that would be very grounding and I would
like to see you um
get the information that you need to
make that decision going forward.
separately. Um I before leaving the
podium, I just want to call out a letter
that you all received this afternoon um
that I got wind of this afternoon and
that that uh was posted by Nuna Cherello
with help from the town staff of course
and I thought it was really a turning
point in the conversation. Um and I
really look forward to talking
strategically with you when that's
what's on the agenda. uh because I was
very enthused and I I hope you to were
too for the pivot point that that that
letter represents. Um so for those
people in the audience that haven't had
a chance to see it yet, um take time to
read. Okay. Thanks so much.
>> Thank you. And and it is in the public
record.
Anybody else in the schoolhouse?
Uh, Linda, Linda Brothers. Um,
it's a little difficult to know where to
start here. As someone who practiced law
in this area, I've done over dozens of
projects that involved land litigation
and public groups. I was part of a group
that kept United Airlines flying. and I
was part of the group that got uh New
Orleans back in action after the after
the Katrina. These are complicated
issues, but I took one look at this
after talking to some people about it,
and there's a very clear legal approach
that you could take right now that runs
a significant chance of stopping this in
the water. Uh, and uh, I don't really
want to get into the technical details.
I'm more comfortable with Katherine
being absent, but uh because part of it
involves a little bit of legal work. It
should fit under the $10,000 that I
think you guys have allowed. And it
involves a a legal standard uh that
involves an element of surprise. I don't
want to go into it more, but it's a
no-brainer. It's like the first thing
that came to my mind. So, number one,
you know, I think that you're missing a
huge opportunity by not getting on it
right away. It's the kind of thing that
should cause midpin if they're well
advised to stop or slow down on this
project. Which brings me to your agenda
item. Uh
I think it's uh uh a big mistake to
continue to study and study and study
this document. First of all, since you
are contemplating litigation because you
have hired a lawyer, all these things
that you say start to develop an
administrative record that will be used
and everything that you say that you're
not well advised on that sounds really
good for one reason or another may be
the very thing that turns a lawsuit
against you. It may just be in the small
print in those documents. You know, we
read thousands of pages a day, lawyers,
and we see all those small print and and
you know, I wouldn't presume to be a
cardiac surgeon, Mary, but you know,
it's it's really important. So, I think
I'm not I would not be in favor of a
more steady groups. I would be in favor
of some really serious consideration of
what your legal arsons are. The thing
that I understand and know would work uh
would happen very quickly, have to
happen very quickly or you're going to
lose the window. Um, I agree with
Betsy's comment. Midpin has been here.
They came to the planning commission.
They came to the council. They didn't
respond to any of our comments. They
didn't respond in the moment. They
didn't respond any other way. And I were
I went to many of those working groups
that they had because it's right in my
neighborhood and they really didn't
respond to those. So, I think uh the the
final reason in all the work I always
did, we almost always had a a local
entity involved. Uh sometimes they were
on our side, sometimes they weren't.
Sometimes they were giving permits. Uh
we would laugh at ourselves.
We would laugh when we were in the room
and the people on the other side were
two elected members of a body because as
much as you all love each other at some
level.
>> So Linda, I'd like to ask you to wrap it
up.
>> I'd like to finish my sentence if I
could. you all will bring different
things to the table and a well-advised
party on the other side is going to that
and they're going to splat splitting you
apart and that's not in the town's best
interest. Thank you for your attention.
>> Thank you.
>> Please.
» Hi, I'm Lana Norris. I live in Porta
Valley Ranch. Um,
>> I was really really pleased to see that
uh we've hired an attorney. I have felt
for a long time that it's the legal
arena where things are going to get
resolved and hopefully favorably to the
town. I have for a long time been very very concerned about Midpan totally
ignoring our town's values, its culture,
uh its its concerns. Uh, and I'm going
to give a little bit about my experience
over the last couple of years that has
led me to believe that Midpen's goal is
access, access access, access access for
the public and not carrying one wit
about our community. They're they are
planning overdevelopment.
The parking lot is probably exhibit one
of the overdevelopment.
I have no experience with SQA. I have no
experience with land use. I have no
experience with any of that. I do have
an experience, a lot of experience in
contract law. I was an attorney. I
practiced for 40 years. I have drafted,
I have interpreted, I have enforced BOKU
contracts. I knew Max Gutierrez really
well. He was a colleague of mine, a
friend of mine. Max Gutierrez is the
attorney who represented Mr. Woods, the
original owner of the Hawthors.
It was Max Gutierrez who was making sure
that Mr. Wood's desires would be carried
out. I knew Max. I respected him. He was
a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful man
and attorney. And he would do everything
to make sure that his client's wishes
were protected. I will say now, it is
absolutely clear to me that Mr. Wood's
wishes are not being followed in what
Mid Pen is planning on doing with the
Hawthornes. As you know,
Mr. Woods left the Hawthornes to Post
Peninsula Open Space Trust originally.
Okay. Then after some time, the property
was transferred by post to midpen.
Midpin has an absolute obligation
to follow the terms of the conservation
easement that Max Gutierre has drafted
on behalf of Mr. Woods, the original
granter of the property.
The problem is not just mid pin. The
problem is also post.
Okay, post. And I'm speaking now
probably to the attorney I presume is
not here but the attorney we have hired
because here's the problem.
Midpen wants access as much as possible
to the hawthors. When midpen wants to do
something it goes to post because it's
post who has the legal obligation to
enforce the terms of the easement.
Now, a few times post said no to a few
things mid pen wanted to do. Most of the
time
>> I'm going to have to ask you to wrap it
up. The times are seated.
>> Uh, may I have your indulgence for just
a bit more, please?
>> Yes, we do try to keep them to three
minutes though. So, if you can wrap it
up, please.
>> I will try to wrap it up. Okay. Let me
tell you about post.
I spent
more time than I care to think trying to
get post to tell me how what MidPen is
doing complies with the easement. They
never did. I scheduled an in-person
meeting. Actually, it was by remote, but
I tried to get in person with the
president of Post and the attorney who
advises Post. I asked them specifically
how what Midpen is doing complies with
the easement. They couldn't tell me. All
I heard from Post attorney was well,
it's for public access. That's the
overriding concern. So what they are
doing, what Post is doing is subsuming
everything, everything, every
consideration to more and more public
access. Why are they doing that? I don't
know. But it's illegal. They it is
illegal what they're doing. They are not
enforcing the easement. And our attorney
needs to, I think, emphasize what post
is not doing and not meeting its legal
obligation. It's not just mid pen.
>> Thank you.
>> All right. Who's next?
» Welcome.
>> Hi there. Nancy Powella and I live on
Canyon Drive
and I've lived in town 46 years and I've
been an attorney for 50 years. Um, and I
joined with the my fellow council here
and I have to say the level of arrogance
that I've seen with MIDI pen is
astounding. And for those of you who
were also at the last um mid peninsula
board meeting where I spoke and I even
commented to the board on the level of
arrogance that I thought they had. One
of the concerns that I have is that I
want to make sure that we try to follow
an aggressive approach like the pre two
previous speakers have suggested. I
think right now Cortola Valley has just
been sitting on the sidelines and Craig
with all due deference to your speaking
at that board meeting. You made it clear
to the Midpen people. In fact, I believe
your words were that the town wants to
work with them. We're all going to be it
was all a happy kumbaya thing. We are
past happy kumbaya.
And and to me, I mean, the question of,
well, why is Mid Peninsula trying to
promote this big parking lot and and
ignoring all of the rule and all the
guidelines of our town? To me, it's
pretty simple. They miss the boat in
setting up enough parking for mid for
the Windy Hill open space. What they
figure they can do is they can have this
big parking lot. They can suggest to
people they park there. They can walk
along Alpine Road. They can divert into
Sweet Springs Trail, loop around to Deer
Path, connect around along Alpine Road,
and voila, they have an even longer,
lovelier loop than they thought they
were going to have. So, to me, it's just
um there it's an offiscation of looking
to have a bigger windy open windy hill
open space parking lot. So
since the issue before us I believe is a
subcommittee issue, what I'd like to
suggest is that the subcommittee be
composed of people who are open to
looking at perhaps some the legal issues
that have been suggested or even
obliquely. And I think it needs to be
someone who is willing to stand up to
mid- peninsula open space. And perhaps
we do a perhaps in the good guy bad guy
framework. Craig can still be the good
guy and be the nice guy who wants to
talk and be kumbaya with mid peninsula
open space. But I think we need someone
who's going to be willing to stand up to
mid peninsula and say we are not okay
with you ignoring our values.
ignoring ignoring the fact that they
have acquired a residential parcel of
property a residential parcel of
property. They are not entitled to do a
huge parking lot under that framework
and I've run out of time. So
>> thank you.
Who's next? Please
» welcome. Hi, I'm Leslie Crease. I live
at One Winter Creek in the ranch. Um,
and I'm here tonight because I'm very
concerned about this council's strength,
ability, and backbone to defend the
ranch in this situation. We are a
community of 200 and some homes, 200 and
some voters and I'm really concerned
that we are going to get run over by the
Hawthorne because this group tends to
come across as a group who is
cooperative and wants to, you know, kind
of sing Kumbaya with with Midpen. And
Midpen, from what I've watched, does not
particularly like you guys. They don't
dislike you guys, but um they're out.
They understand their mission and their
goal is to build their park and not to
worry about our residents. That's you
guys. And I'm worried about the ranch
getting run over from hikers on sweet
springs to people, you know, on trails
to dog doodoo in my yard to people with
kids jumping in the creek in my yard. I
cannot fence off my yard. Um, I cannot
do anything to keep people who let their
dogs through in my yard. I found people
with kids,
right? And um they're like, "Why should
we get out of your creek? It's public
land, your piece of the creek." Um, I
worry that this team is not going to
support us, not going to back us up, and
not going to protect us. Anyways,
thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Anybody else in the schoolhouse? Yep.
Please.
» Welcome. Thank you. Um, my name is
Charles Moroni. I live in Portola Valley
Ranch. Um, I'm not an attorney, so I
can't give you any legal advice. I've
been going to these POG meetings for or
the first Midpen meetings for five
years. Um I live adjacent to the
Hawthornes
and have been talking to Midpin board,
their POG, all the right people, all
their managers for the last five years.
They don't respond to anything. No
suggestion, no, hey, this doesn't look
reasonable.
Something that's not reasonable that
they started from the very beginning was
the insistent on a 50 to 75 par car
parking lot. And if you look at our
adjacent um uh open spaces, Rostadero
and Windy Hill, they both have
approximately 40 to 50 car parking lots.
They both attract
180,000 visitors per year.
So now you're talking about something
that is 65 acres, has a mile and a half
of trails, and you want to put the same
size parking lot there. I've mentioned
this multiple times, and the response is
no parking lot, no project.
So that's what you're dealing with from
midpen. It's sort of a passive
aggressive bully. So they have a vision.
I don't know what's motivating them for
that vision. It may be what someone has
already mentioned, but um it's really
not what they're planning is not really
in the best interest of Valley. If you
look at our general plan from many years
ago, there are trails that go through
and then connect to Sweet Springs and
other places.
They used that and said, "Hey, the town
has already agreed to this, so we should
attach our trails to these trails." That
was when there that if you look at that
document, there was one house on that
property and the concept was to allow
open space. There was also a plan to
have other residential houses built
there that the Woods had gotten approved
when I moved in. something like h a
dozen homes, right? There's a big
difference between a dozen people living
in their homes utilizing all the trails
and 180 thou 180,000 visitors per year.
So that's the concern. That's why when
they wouldn't listen to me at all, we
went to the neighbors. We got
195 signatures from uh Portola Valley
Ranch residents. We've got one over 100
of the 200 homes participated in that um
petition to say, "Hey, we don't want the
connections to our trails. We don't want
a 50 car parking lot next to us." That's
never been the plan. that at least got
their attention, but obviously they've
continued to move through. So I I I
think that's that gives you a vision of
what you're dealing with or what your
subcommittee is going to deal with. And
I think at the end you're going to say,
"Oh, they don't want to work with us,
right? So I don't know what the
alternative is after that, but I don't I
think you're going to get a passive
aggressive response is like, well, we'll
move through. We'll finish SQA and then
we'll come back to you." So thank you.
>> Thank you. Anybody
else in the schoolhouse?
All right. Seeing no no other hands in
the schoolhouse, let's go online. Ed,
you're up.
» Welcome, Ed.
>> Hi. Yeah. Can you hear me? I'm using my
phone and I'm not familiar with Zoom on
the phone.
>> Can you hear me?
>> We can.
>> Very good. Um, yeah, I was expecting
this to be a little more of a practical
discussion meeting uh rather than the
legal discussion. Notwithstanding, I
will certainly echo the comments I've
had and experience I've had in the um
difficulty and challenging communication
we've had with getting any of uh the
concerns or preferences
um or local knowledge shared with Mid
Pen or any feedback from them. Um so I'm
definitely echoing uh what the prior
speakers have said. What I will say is
that in any further consideration
um both the access to the site and the
influence the sphere of influence on the
remaining neighboring parts of Pongal
Valley do have to be considered in terms
of safety and so any working group that
is established or is not um should
include a very strong consideration of
public safety and traffic safety. Um
that's really my comment. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Ed.
Dave Cardinal.
» Sure. Thanks. Um, I was kind of
surprised by the tone this whole thing
took. Um, for starters, I was hoping we
had a town where not everything had to
be a lawsuit. But um going back to the issue at hand um our general plan
says that the reason we get to be
special and not have all the things high
density housing is because we are
sharing our resources and the Hawthornes
is a resource and people want to come
there and it has a lot of acres and um I
don't think we get well I hope we don't
get to just say go away um leave us
alone so that leaves us in into what's a
responsible plan now I think from what
I've been to lots of meetings I think we
pull valley have what in curling has
called the hammer and that they can't do
anything without permits so I don't
think we have to be I don't
nashing of teeth about things. We can
decide what we think is right. Um I
believe their phase one plan is 30
spaces for parking. I also believe the
ASC has strongly recommended it be over
by Los Tranos
um for a variety of reasons. I think we
can if those are both true and we can uh
have the hammer. We should just like
chill and negotiate those and put the
parking at whatever size we think it
needs to be wherever we think it needs
to be. And um I don't know, you know,
mid pen is a megalith and all that, but
at the end of the day, we can hold firm
and just say here's what we want and
that's what a subcommittee or a lawyer
or whatever could do. I don't um
I don't think it's super complicated. I
do think the connection to portal of a
ranch is complicated because some people
want it, some people don't. Um, the
exact scale of the parking is
complicated, but I'm pretty sure it
could start small. I don't I think
they've already scaled it back for a
phase one. Um, and just say what we
want. I mean, just spit it out and say,
"We want you to be here or there or
whatever." And I think we just don't
approve the project unless they do what
we want. Um, but we need to do something
in keeping with the charter because
people want to come here and experience
our wonderful world and that's part of
why we're who we are. So, thank you.
>> Thank you, Dave. All right. Anyone else
online?
One last call. Anybody else in the
schoolhouse? All right. I'm going to
close public comment.
I might like to go first.
>> All right, Mary, why don't you go first?
>> That way, maybe I'll get two bites at
the at the cake.
>> How are you going to get a second one?
This is it.
>> I'm just telling you, I'll be as good as
I can be. Uh, and I don't have a three
minute limit.
Uh I have been the leazison to MRSD for
the last 18 months. I've taken this
responsibility extremely ser
» still off trying to make connection with
uh with MROD in in many many ways uh
including attending including bringing u
multiple uh
board members to the site including um
writing letters asking for uh feedback
back asking for specific information. Uh
and uh of course they and I visited all
the sites. I certainly heard all the
stories that we've heard thus far. Um
and including the story of um
we two things there's no project if we
don't have pro of parking and two uh we
will not reconsider the historic uh
project. So the position of MRST has
very been clearly been from the very
beginning that the Hawthorne's
of historic district was not on the
table for this conversation or for
any foreseeable time from their point of
view. So um that has led to considerable
amount of frustration. The current
status for me what my ask was uh is I
have asked how many what their standard
is for number of miles of trails per
parking space. Uh and I'm still waiting
for that number. I thought that was a
reasonable number to ask and I I'm
seeing shaking of heads and I don't know
which of uh which of these are incorrect
but uh I feel that I have done both the
uh nice guy thing and I've been uh
strong when I thought I needed to be
strong with them. Uh and I've always
only spoken as an individual. Um my uh
hope is it first of all I think there's
two things about this. Uh I was assigned
to be the lison. I was honored and
excited about it. I could have gone back
and said and so what does it mean to be
the lison and how hard do I have to
work? uh and I uh would say that going
forward the less on MSD needs to have a
very specific limits to their authority
and interest and not they have any
authority but to the the an
understanding of what the time
commitment is is uh and what uh what
they can do in the setting where all the
meetings conflict the town council
meeting. Um
so that's one thing that I would ask. I have uh a specific ask that I have
thought of over today actually which is
that um
that the leison
uh continue as such and it could be me
or it could be someone else but that
there would be an agreement or request
to MRSD that that person be allowed to
meet weekly
uh with MRSD and would report by monthly
to the council as to what kind of
information is coming coming back and uh
that would make this job doable. Now,
it's not something that I would have
designed myself and I don't believe I've
done that, but I've been darn close to
it. Uh although I haven't reported back
to the council uh but I try at least
weekly to make a contact at MOSC.
>> So So Mary, is this a
>> comment?
>> Well, right, but is this a you're making
recommendation that the subcom
>> I'm trying to inform you as a
>> I understand, but I'm trying to keep
this on the agenda item. So is this a
proposal for the ad hoc committee to
consider?
>> I think this is just information. In my
estimation, this is information that you
need to have on making the decision
about whether we need to have a
subcommittee or not and whether there's
room for a subcommittee to operate in
this context.
I personally believe that and I could be
dissuaded by I'm looking forward to
hearing all the comments of uh the rest
of the uh committee the uh council but
um
I pretty much feel like it's not time
for a
subcommittee
that isn't any help but I do think
there's a t it's a time for us to have a
clear mandate as to what the llays on is
supposed to be getting out of MSD and
that needs to be communicated to MSD.
>> Okay.
So,
>> so what I think I'm hearing net netted
out is you're not in favor of creating a
so
>> I'm not at this point because we're
talking about a threemonth uh basically
it's just going to stall us. We're not
going to be able to do any of the big action things that we're talking
about because we're we're not going to
even return for till three months, which
is the thing that happens. Nothing
happens for three months. Um you get I'm
talking about every two weeks you're
going to hear back from the Lison what's
happening when do we need a subcommittee
now? Do we need to do have an action?
But right now there's there's no there's
nothing happening. We haven't gotten any
of the basic communication lines set
yet.
>> Okay. Thank you. Who would like to go
next?
» How about you?
» Um
I actually have a question of staff
first. Um and I know we were supposed to
but
>> Oh, good. Um, Darcy, I need to ask. So,
for instance, if we requested a joint
council and midpin board meeting, um, if
we wanted to write a letter, it would
not need to go through a subcommittee.
Is that correct? Or
I don't think you could request that as
part of this agenda item because this
agenda item is just to create this
subcommittee.
>> But I meant for down the line. down the
line
>> we can do it without a subcommittee
right once it was
>> agenda. So as you know there is a
process for a council member to request
through the town manager that an item be
agendaized. That's essentially how we
got here tonight. There's also the
colleagues memo and for those of you who
need a little more clarification that's
an adopted resolution of the town
council that lays out how a town council
member can request an agenda item. So
again, how we got here tonight, that
would be an alternative
to request, for example, that specific
item that be on the agenda and then the
council gave direction to
tackle that discrete item. This item
came about because there were lots of
ideas out there and so agendaizing kind
of each one of these separately or kind
of in a group might be challenging.
>> Okay, thank you.
Um
okay so a couple of things um I will go
back to
um I'm not you know I am concerned that
what we can do it um you know I want to
build good fences with our neighbors
right um and our neighbors are mid pen
however that said you know their annual
budget last year was $94 million
and um and you know
10 times plus what our annual budget is.
Um they are a large
uh open space agency. I appreciate them.
They do a lot of good work. Um but their
mission is to provide open space access
to to
the you know to the anyone and everyone.
Um, and I will also say that along with
that, when I've talked to them about
parking situations,
they are all about driving
like having big parking lots to provide
free access. Um, and that, you know, um,
and I have appreciated that, but also
have been concerned by that stance. Um, so should you know
and then the idea of the Los Tranco side
which I thought seemed reasonable. My
understanding is the Los Tranco side to
do an access point at that is unsafe
because of sight lines. Um, so how do we
make this work with the town and with
Midpin and what pressure points can we
potentially apply? Right? Obviously
litigation is one of them which um and
then we would go to litigation that we
don't have much money and we'd probably
end up at the same point right if we do
go to litigation potentially. Um so that
concerns me also because of our limited
financial
um
uh u situation.
So, you know, obviously I would prefer
something like a, you know, to do a
formal letter to them to do a a the soft
or um
uh joint board meetings. I'd really, as
you I keep beating a dead horse at this
point. I'd really like a parking master
plan because then what in my experience
in dealing with mid pen is when there is
something in print that you can point to
that says this does not match this your
idea. Um
so so because you know I personally want
a park a parking master plan. So, I'm
not in I'm not in favor of an ad hoc
committee because I think that we could
do this just um the council can work on
these areas without an ad hoc committee
personally. So, that's my opinion. Thank
you.
>> Thank you, Helen.
Rebecca.
>> Um so, I've taken a bunch of notes while
I've been listening to everybody's
comments and thank you for coming to
provide them. Um,
I I guess I tend to agree a little bit
with Helen in her last comment about the
need and the necessity for a
subcommittee to go away and explore
these six options plus a few more um and
then come back.
>> Oh, what did you say? I said I agree
with what Helen just said that the idea
of having a subcommittee to go to one or
two people from our group of five to go
away and spend two to three months
talking about whether or not we should
move forward with these six plus three
or four more items to me doesn't make
that much sense. We're not talking about
huge numbers of things. I mean, it seems
like the five of us could just agendaize
this um for the next meeting or whenever
we have time on our agenda and talk
about what we think the next steps might
be. I've heard a lot of people saying
that M uh MRS OSD has been very
difficult to work with. They are huge um
Goliath, if you will. they have a ton of
public money. Um,
and that it's difficult to get them to
um,
communicate with or to to listen um,
>> answer questions, right? I mean, I
haven't had that experience personally.
I mean, I I have had um, discussions
with some of the board members and
they've been pretty open to things, but
that was on other projects. So,
>> so Rebecca, I'm just going to ask. We
have less than 15 minutes to wrap this
item up. Judith need to speak and I need
to speak. So,
>> how come I'm always the one that gets
cut off?
>> Because it's now 13 minutes till
>> you should have said that, you know, two
minutes, five minutes ago when Helen and
Mary were talking.
>> Okay. So, Rebecca, I thought I heard you
say that you weren't in favor of this.
And so, if you're not in favor of it,
then I think we can move on because you
sort of stated your position. So, I
mean, finish up, but just understand
that we're we're getting close to
running out of time.
>> Um, well, let me rethink my my thoughts
since you interrupted. Um,
I I think the subcommittee raises
problems in the fact that we have a
liaison, we have an alternate liaison,
and now we're talking about adding
having an subcommittee that may or may
not include those two individuals. So
now we're talking about possibility of
having four out of the five of us being
somehow already involved with midpen. So
in that respect, I don't um I I would
say no. I'd say agendaize this as an
item to come back and talk about it. I
do want to mention one thing is I'm a
little concerned about um Commissioner
Brother's comments about there being an
urgency in terms of our legal options.
And so I think we need to understand
What needs to happen for us to consider
these options? Does the does Linda need
to sit with the town staff and this town
attorney to kind of discuss that to see
what these are? Whether it is an option
for us to discuss or you know what is
the next steps for for kind of providing
some urgency outside of our discussion
on these items. So that's kind of one of
my comments.
Um,
yeah. I mean, that's where I'm not in
favor of it to be honest. I am in favor
of
come back to us.
» Thank you, Judith.
>> Okay. Um,
preliminary comments. Um, this is
extremely complicated given that we're
getting out of the box on our own legal
advice for the town and don't know
exactly where that's going to lead. Um,
this is a complex negotiation and I view
it as a negotiation because they are our
neighbors and they will impact us. Um,
you have the woods intent, you have
post, you have MOSD, you have many
documents and and authorities with with
which the town may be able to create
leverage, but we do not know what they
are yet. So I and I take the comment
that every single thing we say in public
right now is going to come right back at
us if we're unwise in letting the scope
of these discussions get ahead of our
knowledge base right now. So for me it
boils down to taking time to better
define what do we want. The open space
committee has has done a lot of work on
concerns of what we don't want and we've
got some thoughts on what we do want.
What are our um leverage points? What are our legal points of of
leverage? Even if you don't assert them,
you you should know what they are before
you engage in discussions with somebody
else so you you don't waste time among
other things. Um, and then how do we set
up the best discussion with MOSD today?
I can't say that forming a subcommittee
is going to help. I think a lot of the
comments that have gone on before make
sense to me. Um, I want to I think we
should come back. Um, I think the
liaison should continue that role.
There's no reason to disrupt it. I would
caution that um being careful with what
we say until we are well advised legally
is critical. So we have to be very
disciplined. Um so I would not form the
subcommittee right now. I would once the
council in whatever way it does gets
their bearings on their legal rights
visav that um uh parcel. Um, and I don't
want it to take forever. We should
reconvene and discuss because these are
good ideas. They're just premature and I
can't support them yet because I just
feel like I'm supporting a a concept,
not a strategy. So, I would wait on it
myself.
>> Thank you.
Um so in listening both public comments
and my fellow council members
I actually still think the subcommittee
is important to gather information and
put it in a form that we can understand
it. Um I not happy with two or three
month that takes too long. I would like
it to happen sooner than later. Um but I
think it's important if we're going to
move thought if we're going to move
forward that we do it thoughtfully. And
if we're going to do it thoughtfully, I
think we need to gather the right kind
of information. And one of the places I
would start is we had a town manager
committee that was working indirectly
with the POG and they have a lot of
correspondence that go back and forth
with questions. We've got, you know,
letters from the trails committee. We
have letters from the open space
committee. So I guess my hope was that
we would have a subcommittee that would
help sort of bring those things
together.
Come up with it. So that's one piece.
Come up with some timelines to really
understand when are the important times
that we need to weigh in. One of them
may be Linda's point about you know
there's an urgency. So maybe we need to
do something with staff. then there's
going to be some other sort of periods
where we're going to need to make sure
that if we're going to weigh in that we're there and sort of um dealing
with it. The next one is, you know, what
is post responsibility? Really
understanding, you know, to that
question, you know, what should Post be
doing and should they really be
enforcing this easement? Um I think some
of us feel like maybe they're not. Um
and then the last public comment I heard
was, you know, should we consider what
are the public safety concerns and
getting those things
put together in a more coherent package
so that it could come to the council and
we could have an informed discussion. I
think it's important. I'm a little
hardressed to see how that's going to
happen by just us meeting and and
chatting about it at the DAS. I I don't
find that to potentially be a very
successful. So I I think I'm hearing
four nos and one yes, but but it still
doesn't feel like the right answer to
>> um
so how do we get there? Um, we've done 2
by two by one consults with experts
before. I think we do that with the
council members. I have a number of
questions. I'm sure everybody else does
so we can get our own thoughts clarified
before we come together. If we do not
understand the legal framework, you
reaching out and you're publicly talking
with all these people. Getting
information is one thing, but frankly, I
feel like I've gotten information
overload and I've been paying attention
and I have a decent amount of feeling.
That's that's why I'm not sure that
effort is really worth it. And to
Rebecca's point, I think four out of
five of us being already engaged is
probably unwise at this point. I would
probably be open to it once I have the
ability to consult and get a better
understanding of the legal parameters
we're dealing with and you know I would
ask that attorney to give us a sense of
you know what's appropriate public
comment what where to be watching on
your public comment um people need to be
reminded of that and I would benefit
from that from him so that's the reason
um I'm not saying never I just think
right now it's Not right.
>> Okay. And I actually wasn't Can I
actually finish my com?
>> Oh, I'm sorry.
>> No, that's all right. I I just, you
know, No, no, it it happens. Um, so so I
think there's some other important
things here. I
>> I think making sure that we follow the
general plan and Midpen follows the
general plan. I think it's important.
>> I think I think what I'm hearing from
you is understanding, you know, kind of
what our legal leverage is with Midpen.
you know, like if if we're going to go
forward, you know, what approvals do
they need from us? What are those
situations? Um, so I think I appreciate
all that. I also think that there are
neighbors and I that's the other thing
for us to remember. So I think that
working hopefully with them, but I I
mean I listen, I talked to them. I felt
like they didn't really give my
conversation much, but that's the way
you still work with your neighbors. You
don't just decide that you're going to
attack them. You still try to work with
them. That doesn't mean that you just
say, "Oh, well, if you don't want to do
what I want, I'm not going to do it."
You can, we can press them. And I think
we actually have a lot of leverage to
press them. So, I'm comfortable. If we
don't want to do the subcommittee now,
I'm I think Judith, what I heard you say
is when you say get your bearings, this
is mostly legal bearings. Is that
correct?
>> Right now, yes. because I have been
following it and I' I have a good sense
um of you know the more social um impact
issues the town is facing which aren't
legal but they're important
considerations for our residents.
>> Okay. So, I mean, I guess from my point
of view, I'd be comfortable if that we
did that, but I'm still looking for
pulling all the things that we have, you
know, everything we got from the town
manager, everything we've gotten from
open space, get them in one place so we
as a council can look at it in a
consistent, informed manner. I think
that that in my mind is critical. So,
maybe this isn't the time, but I'm a
little worried that we're going to get
our legal bearings and then we're not
going to do anything more and it'll be
September or October before we actually
>> get to it. Well, that's I don't know. I
think we're saying that there's more
urgency. So, I don't know. It it doesn't
feel quite right to me, but I I think I
get the the gist.
>> I I have a comment. Um I feel like
Craig, what you're asking for the
subcommittee to do is different what we
are being asked to talk about to form
the subcom. I mean, my impression was
that the subcommittee was going to go
away and decide what the 10 five items
that we think that that they want to
recommend that the committee work on
that the town council work on. And
you're saying that you want the
subcommittee to have a task of actually
collecting all this information and
putting it into one place and kind of
creating a timeline and understanding
where the important points are so that
we know where there's urgency. That to
me are two different things. So
>> well I I think the
>> scope is different but I think you bring
that stuff together and then I would
hope the subcommittee would say we look
through this stuff here's our
recommendation based on the information
that we have of a way to move forward.
the subcommittee is not in a position to
make this decision. At most, it's going
to recommend and yeah, I would expect
them to give us the data and also give
us an opinion. We don't have to take
that opinion as a full counsel. So, so I
guess I see both
>> that's much more indepth than what my
understanding is of what the
subcommittee. So I don't have an issue
actually with having the subcommittee go
into that kind of depth and actually
collect more information that you're
saying, but I don't think it's useful to
have a subcommittee just say, "Oh, let's
come back. I think, you know, the top
things we recommend is the letter and
the the open space committee and the
legal option." I mean, that to me is not
useful. But if the subcommittee's job
was to go and collect all this
information and make sure it's all
contained and observed and and evaluated
and reviewed, you know, that I would be
okay with. It's a bigger job than
>> Yeah. No, I mean there was no discussion
until 10 minutes ago of this collection
of information.
I mean, I'm not sure how that how would
a subcommittee make a recommendation to
the council on what we should do if they
don't do some research. So, to me,
research is implied in gathering the
information.
>> Um,
>> so in the back in the back, if I could
just ask you guys because we can hear
you up here. So, just we're almost done
with this. Thank you. No, no, no
worries.
>> So, I mean, but let me just go back.
Obviously, staff capacity is limited,
but
who where where does where do these
correspondents live? I'm assuming in our
archives, right?
>> So, they live with the committees. So,
we have open space, we have BPTs, um we
have people in the town who were on like
this ad, you know, the the town manager
committee advising the POG. We have
those people in town. they have that
information. So I mean both in our
archives and you know we have the
resources here in the town to gather
that and that was my only point is I
just feel like we should be starting on
that process because otherwise it's
going to be November before we start
thinking about it and that that was my
concern.
Well, I actually I mean Rebecca and I
were elected after the last time Midpin
presented and uh so like I am definitely
feeling not up to speed. So I would
appreciate that more background
actually.
So I don't know if a subcommittee would
want to do that background research
>> or if it's neat with Darcy. I I I just
asked that question.
» I think it depends on what the council's
interest is. But I'll just advise you
that the subcommittee needs to have a
clearly defined task or tasks. That was
the goal of this list. This is just
ideas. But if there was a subcommittee
for example to research
past
uh it sounds like town manager committee
conversations
meetings notes and gather that
information together they could and then
that I would envision that that that
subcommittee would then come and present
that back to the town council at a
future meeting. So if the town council
believes that that information would be
helpful that could be the scope of the
subcommittee.
Personally, I feel like the most
important thing is to explore our legal
options with our our newly hired town
attorney or the project attorney. I
mean, that that's for me what I feel
like is most important. But
>> I don't know where that task lives.
And and I should add that that should be
not a public task. That should be a
private task.
>> Is it possible for me to call the vote?
Can I make a motion? Are
>> you sure you can make a motion?
>> I mean, we we're definitely pressed for
time and uh it seems that uh it the idea
of doing a subcommittee
I'd like to make a motion that uh we do
not at this time make a subcommittee.
I also would like him make a motion as
part of that that the leazison be uh
tasked to give a report every two weeks
to the council.
» Okay. Is there a second?
>> I would second that.
>> Okay. We have a motion and a second. All
in favor?
>> I
>> Okay. Those opposed? Nay.
>> Oh,
I'm an I'm an I.
>> Okay. So, passes four to one.
>> All right. So, I think that closes up
5B.
>> Does it though? Can I just say I my
direction here, my takeway is that I
will agendaize a future item and I will
coordinate two by two by one meetings
with outside council Bill Celigman. I I
don't know when this will come back.
July is
we're working on July agendas now. So I
will bring it back for a more robust
discussion and then you can provide
direction to me if onto which items that
you would want me to work on.
>> Now u the the idea of being able to get
on the agenda for my report. How does
that happen?
>> I think that comes under subcommittee
leaison reports. Okay.
>> Thank you.
Okay. Thank you. With that, I'm going to
adjourn the special meeting. Thank you
everyone.