has been the motion by making a motion to reconsider first and then that or you're welcome to do that in the first meeting of next year next year i am not of his opinion we're going to meet again between now and september of course things happen and you never know and so it's conceivable that we will have to convene but my expectation is that we will be then routinely on zoning are because regardless of the importance of the zoning article and the potential impact on outcomes such as housing values and so forth i think that even the direction is not clear if you can't even say that much then the argument here is not really doesn't really have a need it's not contributing anything by voting on such and so just to be fair i don't expect that we will decide the answer to that and i don't just ask questions your clarification can you just say in a sentence for you what if you want to warn committee to reconsider whether or not they should vote on joining articles i just want to frame it right before the conversation starts oh well let me let me just read it one with confidence what the direction of the effect is even if we can't quantify it but if we can't even state with confidence what the direction is that i don't think there's any i don't know what really actually should say anything because we're not contributing any real knowledge so adam and i may be in the minority i like talking about a lot of people i think a town meeting i've heard after the fact with the last round of kind of things like hearing what we had to say because we didn't really have a dog in the race per se because the play me board is recommending something of course they're going to say they like it i mean so i mean of course our vote was this i think having some sort of quasi independent look at it was helpful i mean there certainly article six was something that we dealt with in like the minutes before and we had i think six different amendments to deal with so it was an extraordinary complex set of things that we had to handle in a very short period time and so as a result i think it we was not incredibly well thought through this is sort of understandable to this because i think the most recent example has to do with something that i have a real problem with the way we have to deal with amendments because they come without any time for us to have any real thoughtful discussion or step back and think about it and any analysis at all and that you know were sources for time remember well that's true but but with the word committee making a recommendation it suggests that we have some way of making a decision about it which is more thoughtful and i'm not sure that we do and i'm not sure there's any way around that if we intend to take positions on amendments that come with only three days left to meet and do something about them but i would be just as happy if we thankfully didn't if we set our policy is that if something comes in with only three days before the deliberation a town meeting we don't take it right i was actually going to talk same fashion or could actually but it seems to me that that is only articles perhaps like some other articles might come free for us that with the short term or long term financial might not be clear you know whether you know whether for example whether large development in the neighborhood increases over a property values or depresses property values for houses that are sitting next to them in the lower twenty i mean that's not clear that's just not clear cut i'm not sure that we don't provide a service though by drawing that drawing those distinctions a little more in our discussions you differ tell meeting members who are watching or for the general public who might be watching  because otherwise it doesn't really come before it and you know here there are no sort of conflicting views or no discussion until it hits town meeting floor and and so i think there may be some value even if we can't come to a sort of  amendments just appropriately last i would we have seven abstentions i think there was a little laughter and a comment like i wish you would said that's because we get this at the last minute and we don't make decisions off the seat of our peers we analyze that's why there was seven abstentions but if that's all that sell if you don't know which way the impact is i expect we'll have a split vote and some of us may have to make a decision on my gut without deep analysis but i think we scope of the of the of the morning committee has expanded in a meaningful way at least i didn't intend it to extend to expand in my tenure as the chair if anything i tried to be clear about when we actually were commenting so in other words very clear that it was in any appropriation we would comment or in the case of anything that has any what we did would we would deem in our judgment to have a meaningful financial impact there i remember going back when originally when the c articles first were done the very first time we had community preservation act articles which are appropriations and we did not actually weigh in on them early so there was some we would had it we were very muddled in that first in that first pass of doing it i think i'm not mistaken i  guess chaired as i was vice chair for the for a meeting and bill which was the chair at the time and it was not helpful i think to anyone in another way that it was actually inappropriate that we did not comment on appropriations and mike were specifically spoke to me about that so when we had no presentation that that would be well again i think we've tried to change that you know even though you know we had only a few minutes to discuss this on the not on that previous night and if you remember their articles that were think perhaps in hindsight the one thing that we could have done and what we can decide this next year will be decided now is i could have perhaps been clearer you know since the why some people abstained or how little time that we actually had i think i did make some comment to that effect but i mean i think there are times when we don't have a lot of opportunity provides reason analysis and i think we should probably be explicit about that others you know i don't agree with you i don't think we've expanded i mean the only thing that i can remember for seven or eight years i've been around this is been the c p a adding the c p a to our plate which we never used to do we actually used to do a lot more of those deep dives special project analyses in years past than we've been doing yeah we did the pension one this year but there were years where we had done time we wondered if it would be possible for the more committee to appoint a liaison as the work committee has too many other committees and it may not be because there's so much work i understand that but but the idea that somebody from the market committee would at least attend the public hearings on zoning articles as they come up we just get a little bit more background a little bit more sense not that somebody would have put on the planning board meetings but that there should be some sort of just a little bit more perspective context whatever to bring to the table because they are very complicated and their implications are not always clear and it's it's a little hard to bring something for you know a twenty minute discussion and make an informed judgment make it work but i made a legitimate effort to make that happen so i would say that one of these that we'll try to we'll try to over the summer as we think about new appointments which is obviously much broader to determine who to appoint would be to think about that as a potential benefit if you want to comment on this issue at all  mean i was the first planning board member to be appointed on the warrant committee and you know i in both capacities found it very helpful and i think members of the warrant committee you know found it helpful in getting more in depth presentations or reports on zoning articles that were coming and you know it's the decision of whether to weigh in has largely been on a case by case basis and you know i don't think that's been such a bad approach you know there may be some zoning articles that do have a bigger financial impact than others so i don't for what it's worth i tend to lean towards the position you just in bob and adam and bob i hear you and i think that roy and i think that and what we know we can do revisit it next year if if we don't have the value to add to town meeting i mean that's our job our job is to help advise them and so if we don't have value to add then we should be talking about that and not weighing in on an article i don't think that just because something is a zone of article necessarily means that we should be weighing in on it i think we should make that judgment as a group but your i think your the three the one hundred twelve abstentions i mean i think well again as i said i probably could have explained that one better so moving on are there any other any other topics that people would like to talk about publicly here as opposed to just you know filling out the piece but believing that there are any particular summer projects and the one that i will throw out there is the longer term financial forecast which is the one thing that i think we really didn't get to this year that i would like to there is a draft of that that has been generated  taskforce type modeling i also think that we should at least have some more communication with the people studying the pension and open questions and school departments that you know the romance is growing faster than with you know with the secular trends might might have suggested so it's i think it's i think it's really time to try to to try to focus on that collector of thoughts and and then those who want to look at it can it and then they can sort of funnel feed back to that sort of central collector of thoughts so any thoughts about what i  to honor belmont veterans men and women in military service unfortunately due to the weather very unfortunately the ceremony and the parade were canceled on memorial day so  we are holding this ceremony in lieu of all of what was rained out number one number two i do want to say i want to thank the warren committee i think you've had it phenomenal year done a lot of good work your report on the pension obligations of the town i think was very useful your analysis on minute man we had many important decisions that votes to consider on the minuteman and i and i thought the analysis that was done at the table was very helpful very helpful and very useful and then lastly our chair after three years has it been you know it will not be in the running for the chairmanship in the coming year and i just want to say it's been a pleasure to work with you i think you've been a wonderful chair i think you take in this war of committee in a  a more comprehensive the policy that we had was just one sentence about the schools not really recognizing or having advertising and so for or fundraising or things like there's nothing really and those are all things that happen at the school so and or maybe develop more in the coming years if there are financial you know there have been approaches to the school committee and to the administration about advertising and asking for things to be named or things like that so we've developed a more the policy isn't is based on the massachusetts association of school committees puts out you know policies for school committees to adopt or not that's primarily what we based it on and then we also implemented procedures for and the guidelines for the ministration to happen for people to have to see what would be accepted or not there something a little bit more for people requested an extension of the m s b a process they've been granted extension until november thirtieth which raises a perspective of the referendum vote perhaps tied to the presidential election that's got the issues unto itself is at work and i think there are differences of opinion i think the people expect belmont to be brought to the woodshed beaten in a submission i don't think that's going to  happen but what will come of that which will involve this committee is they see it is one of two votes either they'll come back under sixteen d again and in the woods of the superintendent he'll try to change thirty one moves because he claims he lost fifty one votes and maybe another town meeting and will be involved in that process for sure on a more positive side of things i personally would hope would happen is a we may be called upon to advise a town meeting on whether or not the belmont should withdraw from the district  and has and shaped up yet how do we withdraw how do we withdraw so was not to be curing the debt but that's a very real possibility coming as soon as a template because all this has to take place before the november timeframe  oh i want to end up with jenny said when we had this discussion a town meeting there were lots of questions about what are the alternatives and i'm kind of loath to go back to town meeting to have a discussion about maybe whether to withdraw without having more definition about the alternatives one of which is sending the kids back to minivan but there were a lot of questions about what could we do in house and i know that that's not something that would happen that would be offered next fall but i mean if there was some framework for thinking about what with the options d i think that would go a long way to making the town meeting go much more which is debt which is the school committee votes the debt the administration since knows to the selectmen though the member towns member towns can and must call a town meeting within sixty days to we if we well not necessarily because of the first one to go ok but the problem and if we do withdraw is we have to withdraw before the new there's no risk to the current order next year students anyway in any way shape or form so we're looking at if we can talk about you know whether we're we try to look into a plan b we need to find out we really have a sense talking about kids who might go there starting in the fall of eight