such a second all in favor michael ok we have two more things i guess on our agenda one is approval of a bunch of minutes which i confess i'm not prepared to move on we've been ok ok so as my colleagues i'm talking to my colleagues you're both aware we do have a special town meeting that's taking place on august six and it's based on a citizens petition citizens when we got m got two hundred signatures and a copy of the motion and the article are contained in our  our materials ok the motion states basically and i'm paraphrasing that the board of selectmen and other town officials and now i'm going to quote be directed ok end quote to adhere to the plan presented in the belmont center improvement design documents put out to bed and consistent with the concept plans that were shown on the projector at the special town meeting on aug seventeenth two thousand and fourteen where town meeting voted to appropriate two point seven five million to fund the belmont center approvals we have also had two amendments two that article filed ok but both basically do the same thing both are attempting to say  what action what action should be taken you know i can of course you know we'll open it up to discussion but my personal feeling it would apply to all three motions you know the main motion and the two amendments is we took an action that's consistent with our executive function as the board like and we took an action that's perfectly within our authority and discretion and it is not within town meetings jurisdiction so i think on the basis of separation of powers of legislative function versus executive function we have to recommend that that that the main motion and the two amendments not be approved by town meeting in fact dismissed by town meeting because you know again if number one it's completely non binding i don't think town meeting has jurisdiction to be directing us to take this kind of action and and  d number three it sets a terrible precedent you know where every time certain town meeting members don't agree with an executive function that we exercise they go and hold a special town meeting so i would propose we we we recommend unfavorable action on that legal basis rather than delving into the merits of you know you know what do you plan to create you know either more green space or more parking or we deliberated over all those our forum on may twenty somewhat accurately or and accurately tony excuse me i don't think i said was a waste of time and money but so so a couple thoughts one is it's very unfortunate we've gotten to this point i'm not certain how we've gotten to this  point i've been watching with dismay over the past month as to what's been taking place and some of the emails i've received that in a situation in which we should be celebrating the revitalization of our town center we're in a position where it's divided this community and that's really unfortunate and i did comment at the meeting that you and i had that you know there were some comments around process that perhaps you know we should have you know we should think about that a posin that but as i thought reflected upon the thought about that for that we did in fact notify all time media members for that evening and every calls a fairly lengthy meeting in which there was a fair amount of information that was shared in comments that were provided to us so from a process perspective i think we follow the process in fact we have several public means before that tell me to take into consideration points of view i am also just surprised in terms of how divided this has become on you know a portion of the center of the green space that is somewhat significant but that is expanding but the change i believe is  all that significant terms of putting that roadway and at least from my point of view and this is what i experienced and why i agreed to it i remember distinctly a town meeting i think was joel samuels or others that were suggesting for the seniors in town  it provided an access point for them to do to pull out and drop off their spouse and i know my dad to rest his soul you say do that for my mother and so when i came to that mean i had that in my mind when i listen to him there was the first time i heard increase the green space so i think it's unfortunate that we should be celebrating this but it's it's created the vision i think frankly going to tell meaning is really unfortunate as well because it is going to expend resources that we could use otherwise so i agree with you that if i when i read the motion it simply tell says that we should go back to the original design of whatever we've already voted on so my vote at that meeting was not to support that original  which i filed with the town clerk on friday part of the town meeting government and belmont's general bylaws provide for citizen if a citizen obtains two hundred signatures from a from registered voters and this is a this is a business as usual approach i've become kind of a student of town government and i think that this this idea allows an individual if they can collect two hundred signatures from registered voters on a petition to  have an impact on government and so it it it makes it makes the town government very representative i agree with you and ellen cushman i have sent this out to several people and it actually it's in the disclosure form that i filed i talked both to paul roberts about this idea and i talked to will be about this idea both of whom contacted me first on their concerns lydia in terms of the elimination of the of the road and then paul in terms of his concern about the approval that we granted on may twenty eighth and i advised both of them to do the same thing and  because i think if they can convince two hundred of their fellow registered voters to sign their petition then then we can offer a meeting now with regard to that you know there have been all these what i consider to be silly accusations about you know what's happened surrounding this and i want to make a point to the people who are attending here and to the people who are viewing at home that under open access law marc and sammy and i can't talk to each other unless it's in a meeting an open meeting like this so we have not discussed this topic at all until we've been sitting here right now and enforcement the state attorney general is not in and force mn action but rather it's a compliance action in belmont selectman do not cut deals behind closed doors and if you think that's true you're just you're  flat out full stop wrong we don't do that we only discuss these items well we had we just had a closed session for good reasons but on something like this and on something like the five twenty eight meeting we didn't have a meeting before that meeting to decide what we were going to do just like mark the first time i ever saw the reconsideration design was when it showed up at that meeting three i never talked to sammy baghdadi about you know the fact that glen had  created this diagram you know everything that happened happened on camera in that meeting so there is no back to what you say the first time i saw it was that afternoon ok yes well as as chair the chairman works with david kalen the david kalen department heads on items that mark and i don't don't work on but we cannot i can't talk to mark because it constitutes a core i can't talk to sammy because it constitutes a quorum i can't tell geoff luby and what i think and ask him to tell mark because that's against the rules to it doesn't work that way so none of that is happening and anybody who says that's happening is just flat out wrong and they're misleading this community so in my mind what i think about the reap the titian is that i think there are people who are concerned about the decision that we took on five twenty eight they did collect the approvals if i were leading that group i would not have called for a town meeting because again under the rules of our government town meeting law under state law in under the rules of our general bylaws the decision maker in this case is not the town meeting it's the wrong by knew the decision makers in this case happened to be the board if i were leading that group i would have asked sammy baghdadi for another board of selectmen meeting but instead they asked for a town meeting and they have the right to do it and so that's what we're going to do the vote is non binding the voted to advise re only and what what i would like to suggest we do which is what the capital budget committees doing and it's what the warren committee is doing is that we abstain from from a board of selectmen view on this and that that we hear what is going to be said anyway on on town meeting and then and then we decide whether we're going to vote or not but not a town meeting what we're going to hear the many way but i and i and i think it's the wrong venue but you know they're sincere in their concern they want to express their opinion about the design that's really all i'm interested in and if something new is offered you know i'm sure we have open minds but otherwise i think you know we have done what we've done in we go forward with with with that boy i think not taking a position is i'm not opposing that because i like one plan over the other because i want the green to return to the way it was before the construction or not ok i'm certainly going to be at the town meeting and i'm certainly going to listen  but i think we as the leaders of this town have to respect each body's separately thought and to convey a different message it's like we're going to town meeting and directing them to make an appropriation we couldn't do that we wouldn't do that we go and we really quest we make a request of town meeting with any of their legal binding responsibilities and that's not what's going on here i love opposing it because of the precedent it sets because of the door opens and because as a lawyer it's just legally wrong well you can you know under the tent by laws they have a right to require us to have and we're doing that but well we are doing it so if we vote in favor of all against a you know to the article motion for process reasons then you know it's kind of voting against something that they're any citizen is permitted to do and so i would you know respect that we submit that we were you know that what we should focus on more is it's not so much the process because mean as well and i realize that today you recommend for unfavorable action but it's advisory in nature and we might hear something jim at the meeting which are that we i think we should you know we might get something at which we go into the meeting with open mouth i can vote against us mine and if there is perhaps a recommendation or some thoughts about the design you know that could alter it slightly that i think is a good idea that i don't i i would probably support that that would be a change or a change i mean that you know we did hear a lot in put it that meeting it was an either or a meeting where we might hear something different at this meeting but on this particular space that we can still do that and of clinton still here that i would i would certainly take me it's like well i really voted for the other design so in fact i voted against this this this motion right because it's the original design not that well you know jim i mean you can certainly upstate that's what if that's what you're saying but i think it's important for us there are many people who support what's clear is there are people who support doing nothing to the green and leaving it as it is there are people who support the concept plan that was presented at the special town meeting and then i think there are people who realize that our the  you know to to make a recommendation for one reason or another but i'm telling you the reason that the reason why i would vote i would vote for unfavorable action isn't because i support this plan or this plan simply because this is not efficient town government if you don't agree with the branch of government and the way it performs its duties you don't try to usurp that using another mechanism yes we have to call the town she did not request a town meeting so it depends on what the petitioner requests in this case the petitioners really i think it was a question from me right now lydia was not a request for tell me and she had enough signatures to call a town meeting but is is not perfect and you know for me the fact that the call tommy is more about it's unfortunate that we have to get to this point and spend time on a matter that perhaps we could have worked together on i don't know whether there could have been a for the compromise we already  exclusion there was a certain design that's changed you have a change ordered by the building committee for the building committee has authority to change design very recent changes no ok and this is this is no different or so so i'm you know i'm happy to make the motion and i'm you know from my motion is that you know we're not going to take this is this is our deliberation jim and and and we have already received comments so i think we'll have an opportunity to  heard and then i want to speak to the elderly issue i appreciate deeply mr williams attitude on this that vote neutrally which went on a neutral vote is saying a neutral vote is not saying from your perspective that you don't have the right to do this what a neutral vote is saying is that you will continue to be open minded as you were open minded when you listened to lydia's petition we thought we had it all figured out with it with the exception of a couple of differences in the may twenty eighth meeting glen clancy talked about well there are just be a few details putting the street in where there was no street is not a detail it's not to manama's you know it's a big change you are saying that you had the right to make that change all we're asking is we would like to be heard i i would give you the benefit of the doubt that mr paley low when you voted you thought you had all the information you needed and you thought that you were respecting what from what i've read a lot of this was on the you were respecting the elderly of the town and i am i will tell you that i am one of the elderly and i have spoken to many other people my age and older and most of the people i spoke to don't care about where exactly the parking spaces are some someone can be dropped off on common avenue on concord avenue just as easily as in front of the back what most of the elderly i've spoken to have said is they want the the the full green the beautiful green that they can get to safely they can they can walk up the side rock go to the green sit on the green with little children near them and be a part of the community think this is my opinion and i know i'm reflecting more than just myself that it really matters to us to have a safe large space where we can not as we grow older and older  isolated the green as it has now been reconfigured as maybe one that the elderly would feel comfortable using and i think that this is what got lost in all the talk about some of the elderly want to be dropped in front of the bank  so i just i i would just urge you please to stay open minded and a neutral vote would say ok we realize we there are more there obviously a lot of people that feel passionately about this and sir when you took your vote you maybe didn't know that what you the three of you with say by a neutral is that you are open minded you can claim your prerogative as the executive branch but you're saying as the executive branch that you are wise and you keep your mind open and after you've heard all the information part of which will be not only in you know the input that you hear from both sides but the other part of which will be that you have a sense of how town meeting feels about it you can your project of can be easy to say it's still our decision but we're going to keep our minds open until we hear from town meeting so i would i would urge you to please vote neutral order violence lack of civility speaking up from the audience it's not going to help your cause you are on camera belmont is watching you ok we are deliberating  i'm going to listen to the comment tell moderator we'll run the town meeting ok but i still feel personally that we all went to town meeting to make a an unfavorable unfavorable recognition recommendation based on the legal point that this is not the way town government was designed to govern itself when every body does not agree with the decision that another body makes with end its executive powers to run and hold a town meeting and direct them to change their mind doesn't say request that they change their mind it says you change your mind because we're telling you to it's not good governance and i'm going to recommend i'll make my own motion i'm going to recommend unfavorable action on all three on the main one all the other one and other two amendments so oh ok so there's two of that reason well i mean let's listen to those points of the something comes up that makes sense then i think we need to consider that i have to tell me because it divides arena and i will keep an open mind about  motion is the first first the amendment offered by don mercier ok which would in fact reinstate the existing green make no changes to the green that's done mercy it's the same as article one directed again be directed to draw up documents pertaining to belmont center restoration project to preserve and altered the layout of the tell to and the road in front of belmont savings bank with its angle parking spots as it's existed for years so that