2026-09-14 - Form of Government Study Committee

00:00All right. So, I'm going to call to

00:02order the September 14th meeting of the

00:04form of government study committee. Our

00:06first order of business is reviewing and

00:08approving the minutes from the August

00:1017th meeting. Everyone get a chance to

00:12take a look at those minutes.

00:14>> Anyone have any comments?

00:17Great. Entertain a motion. Move to

00:20approve the minutes.

00:22>> We have a second. All in favor?

00:24>> I.

00:28Next item on the agenda is discussing

00:30meetings with Shrewsbury elected

00:32officials.

00:34I know at least once out of that was

00:37John and I had meetings with all of the

00:40individual select board members. Um I

00:42wrote up some notes that I'm going to

00:44read out just a summary. Uh rather than

00:46going through each of the five

00:48discussions, I just put together a

00:50summary of all of them.

00:52>> Great. So John and I met with each of

00:55the select board members to discuss

00:56their opinions on the form of

00:57government. All five are generally

00:59positive about the form of government

01:01that Shrewsbury uses. Some have minor

01:03changes that they would like to see

01:04enacted to make things more effective.

01:07Some examples of that of those changes

01:09are increasing the size of the health

01:10board and separating the road and water

01:13commission responsibilities from the

01:15select board. There was a common theme

01:17that there could be better communication

01:19from the town government with the

01:20residents of the town to foster more

01:22involvement both for town meeting

01:24members and residents as a whole.

01:27Everyone felt that the board could act

01:28with appropriate speed when needed. They

01:31acknowledged that requiring town meeting

01:32approval for large changes such as

01:34zoning can be slow, but involving town

01:37residents in those decisions is an

01:39important part of the government

01:40structure that none of the five of them

01:42would recommend changing.

01:44uh they said there is good interaction

01:45and communication with the appointed

01:47town manager. There were a variety of

01:49opinions about the process of town

01:51manager making appointments and select

01:53board approving some of those

01:54appointments but not others. And overall

01:57the select board members like having a

01:59representative town meeting, a select

02:00board, and a professional town manager.

02:02And on behalf of John, myself, I'd like

02:04to thank all five of them for taking the

02:06time to meet and discuss with us.

02:11Did anyone else have meetings with

02:14elected town officials in the past

02:17month?

02:18>> The past month? No.

02:20>> So, we had some reports on it at the

02:22last meeting. I didn't know if there

02:23were any others.

02:24>> I don't know if we mentioned Did we

02:26>> We did mention the school committee

02:28member that we met with and

02:30>> uh we also met with the moderator which

02:32we mentioned at our last meeting. So,

02:33that would leave the library board and

02:35then I don't know if you want to count

02:37the housing authority in that. Yeah, I I

02:39think we already gave a report on the

02:40library board,

02:41>> right? So,

02:42>> so I think we're good on that.

02:44>> Wasn't reflected as a elected official.

02:47Did you have anything else to add?

02:49>> I don't think so. I think um housing

02:52authority is slightly separate, so I

02:54think it's okay for us to

02:56>> Excellent.

02:58All right. The next item on our agenda

03:00is discussing outreach to town meeting

03:02members. And I know that there was a

03:05subcommittee that is talking about

03:06meeting with them next Thursday,

03:09September the 24th.

03:13>> Uh so um Bridget Colleen and I have uh

03:18uh discussed this um [snorts] uh we

03:22going to hold a meeting on the 24th at

03:26>> 7 7 o'clock in the select person's room.

03:30Uh we sent out to or through Tanner sent

03:33out two things. We sent out an

03:35invitation

03:37uh to all town meeting members

03:39indicating some topics we'd like them to

03:42address very simply. You know what do

03:45you think are the efficiencies

03:46inefficiencies? How would you change

03:48government? Uh just to get the ball

03:51rolling. Um,

03:53we uh Tanner also sent out a response

03:57uh email and he reports to me that 17

04:01town meeting members have indicated

04:03they'd like to attend this meeting uh

04:06next week. And uh I have we we still

04:09have to talk amongst ourselves as to

04:12actually how we're going to run the

04:13meeting. But uh I look at this as a u

04:17[clears throat] a listening type meeting

04:20and just gathering information about

04:23what these town meeting members may want

04:25to talk about. So um

04:29next next week 7 o'clock on Thursday and

04:33we'll see what happens after that and

04:35we'll give a report.

04:37>> Excellent.

04:37>> Thank you.

04:38>> Anytime meeting members who are watching

04:40feel free to RSVP. There's definitely

04:43room for more.

04:43>> Is there a deadline for when you can

04:46>> RSVP? I would assume September 24th at 7

04:49[laughter] p.m.

04:50>> I think the concern is space

04:52availability.

04:53>> Yes.

04:53>> But Tan with the capacity of that room,

04:55>> I believe it's about 50. So barring a

04:57sudden influx and a double almost

04:59tripling. I'm

05:01>> sure they're all watching us this

05:02evening and uh that may really spike the

05:06interest.

05:06>> Well, RSVP ahead of time if it starts

05:09looking like we're getting to that

05:11level. um Tanner will reach out and

05:13maybe switch the room, but

05:16>> for now we assume it will be at the

05:17select boards room

05:19>> um Thursday, September 24th at 7 p.m.

05:24>> Uh let me know, right?

05:26>> So could I just I just want to make one

05:28comment just I know this is a

05:29subcommittee meeting and I'm sure people

05:31on the committee probably have an

05:32interest. However, if too many were to

05:34show up that we would have a quorum.

05:36>> Yeah. Yeah.

05:38that we and that be a violation of open

05:40meeting laws.

05:41>> Excellent point.

05:42>> Um I think we're allowed to attend

05:45events as long as we're not making

05:46decision doing decision-m.

05:49Um but we can also just put that as an

05:52agenda item that we will be meeting kind

05:54of like the way the finance committee

05:55says it's meeting at town meeting even

05:57though they're not going to be

05:58conducting business. We could just

06:00simply say we'll be gathering that night

06:02and

06:04possibly we'll all show up, possibly we

06:06won't, but I'd like to avoid open

06:08meetings problems.

06:10>> Um, and Tanner can go the manager and

06:12confirm all that detail.

06:14>> So, Tanner, can you look into that

06:16issue?

06:18>> I'll take a look into it. town meeting

06:19members in general don't have the quorum

06:21issues, but and yeah, I'll look into

06:23that about the um if everyone's in one

06:27place um for that if if you have a

06:30quorum. So, I I'll I'll look into that.

06:32>> Okay. I could be I don't know if I will

06:35be, but [laughter]

06:36>> I can I have another meeting that.

06:39>> All right. So, Tanner will check the

06:40forum issue, but otherwise that meeting

06:43will be next Thursday. All right. Our

06:46next item on the agenda was discussing

06:49related nearby town government news. Um

06:52I believe audience at least.

06:56>> Um so you guys may have heard about this

06:59but I had it I'd missed it somehow. Um

07:01but Grafton the town just south of us

07:04with about half our population held

07:07there. Uh, and they have an open town

07:09meeting um on May 11th and they had it.

07:13Well, you guys know what I'm talking

07:16about. No. Okay. It was a fiasco.

07:19[laughter]

07:19>> I know.

07:20>> Okay. Some people know it was okay. So,

07:22basically Tanner described it as um

07:25electronic voting means open town. Is

07:28that what it was? So, they had over a

07:30thousand people. Um that was the most

07:34they'd ever had. They did try to prepare

07:36for it. They had two big um ticket items

07:39on the agenda. Debt exclusion for the

07:41middle school roof and a prop 2 and a

07:43half override I think was 5 million. Um

07:47so first they thought 600 then they

07:49increase it to 800 then they increase it

07:51to thousand. So they have to go around

07:52and get clickers because they have

07:54electronic voting but I think theirs is

07:56different from ours because they don't

07:57assign I think they just give you a

07:59clicker. I don't think they connect it

08:01to the person. Um but anyway, so anyway,

08:04they um yeah, 250. Oh, so they did have

08:08Yeah. overflow. They use I think either

08:10the gym or the uh auditorium and they

08:14have overflow in the cafeteria.

08:16Um

08:19yeah, they had tech challenges too

08:21because it was so crowded. So they

08:23had,00 some people and the moderator who

08:27I believe was new had encouraged because

08:30the middle school roof was on the agenda

08:33families to come particularly

08:36students in the eighth grade but so

08:38people brought their whole families and

08:40part of the problem was they just all

08:42packed in. I bet people got clickers who

08:44weren't necessarily registered voters,

08:47but then there was no way to figure out

08:50because they ran out of clickers and

08:51people continued to show up. So anyway,

08:54there were problems. Uh they described

08:57it as 5hour fiasco

09:00and they but both uh I think they ended

09:04up doing a voice vote and both the

09:06override and the debt exclusion passed.

09:10So I just thought that that was

09:11interesting.

09:13And I wanted to bring it to people's

09:14attention that people I've missed

09:15there's an article in the um community

09:18advocate

09:20from right after it happened but I

09:22missed it. So

09:22>> the takeaway is I think Opentown Meeting

09:26has logistics issues

09:29>> and the clickers make it I think more

09:31complicated

09:32>> but but that wasn't but that was because

09:34of it was Opentown Meeting with the

09:35representative. We have a fixed number

09:36of people. We know the clicker numbers.

09:38We know the packet numbers. You know, we

09:40were hearing from the manager of

09:44>> Thank you. Um

09:45>> Oh, and yeah.

09:46>> Yeah, one of the A towns. I'm sorry if

09:47you're listening. Um I'm sure you are.

09:50Uh that they have to do all the mailings

09:53to the hundreds or whatever people. I

09:56don't even know if they do clickers. So,

09:58you know, a baton meeting has logistic

10:00issues. Um

10:03>> I think the other message around that is

10:05that they had a couple of hot button

10:06issues which drove attendance. It's the

10:09same the same thing happened in Holden

10:11because they were doing their MBTA

10:13zoning.

10:14>> Yeah.

10:14>> And that drove everybody to the meeting

10:16who didn't want zoning in in the town.

10:20They showed up, they voted, then they

10:22all left

10:23>> right after that vote. So

10:26>> yeah,

10:27>> I think it's a planning

10:28>> which was defeated.

10:29>> It's a planning problem. If you know

10:31there's going to be a hot button issue,

10:33>> you probably should plan ahead because a

10:35prop two and a half override is going to

10:37be by its nature the most popular thing.

10:40School would be the sec exclusion for a

10:43school, right?

10:44>> Um that's what the end I remember the

10:46end of you know he's like we know and

10:48we're going to have a lot of people

10:49because we know what's on the agenda.

10:51>> I think with grafted they maybe

10:54>> they did they planned for a thousand and

10:56it exceeded that but it really maybe

10:58didn't. It was just that they the family

11:01>> but they didn't plan for that. So

11:03anyway,

11:04>> yeah, I mean it's I've been hearing for

11:06years the problem with open town meeting

11:09even in a small town the small town I

11:11grew up in in the hills of the Burgkur

11:13you have people who come up come in show

11:16up for their article leave or you know

11:20then now that was many years ago now

11:21that it's on TV they'll watch know when

11:24their article is coming up vote on it

11:26and leave and quorum isn't set as a

11:28percentage it's set as a fixed number of

11:29people

11:31>> but I don't see us even considering open

11:34town meeting. I mean we we aren't

11:35drawing our conclusions tonight but

11:37that's not one thing that we're looking

11:38at but I think that's the takeaway from

11:40the Grafton experience is the heart of

11:43that problem was open town meeting and

11:47open town meeting is a wonderful thing

11:48because it's direct democracy and every

11:50registered voter can have a say and

11:52that's wonderful but there are

11:54logistical issues that are very hard to

11:58solve

11:58>> and it's made more complicated by the

11:59clickers.

12:00>> Well that's Yes.

12:03Yeah.

12:07>> Well, thank you for bringing that to our

12:09attention. I also saw Marble Head, I

12:11believe, is in the process of developing

12:14a charter. Um, I haven't looked into too

12:17many details, but I saw articles that

12:19>> doing a charter or a form of government

12:21review also.

12:22>> I believe they did a form of government

12:23review that now they have a draft C of

12:26their charter. I don't know if that

12:28that's going to be moved forward with,

12:30but they at least on their website have

12:32a draft that a committee put together.

12:35So, might be something we want to

12:37review. Just reading some news articles

12:39about it to see how it's [clears throat]

12:41what parallels we can draw.

12:44>> Mike,

12:45>> Mike, I did a little bit of research

12:47into uh Brooklyn.

12:49>> Yes.

12:50and they did not get enough signatures

12:54to get the uh charter review on the 526

12:59ballot. So there were three different

13:02cases,

13:04three different groups. One was a case

13:07for replacing town meeting,

13:10one was for keeping it the same and one

13:14was uh replacing it with a completely

13:18different uh resident le town me uh form

13:22of government. So, one was like a city

13:26form of government, one was to keep it

13:28the same, and one was to change to a

13:32completely different form of government

13:34that I wasn't even familiar with, which

13:36was some sort of

13:38resident le form of government. Um, and

13:42that's just

13:45uh in May. So, we were curious as to

13:48what Brookline's status was, and they

13:50did not get enough signatures. I have

13:53all of the papers here if anybody was

13:55interested in looking at the um you know

13:58what their reasons were and everything.

14:00I'm happy to upload them all. And they

14:02did use Plymouth

14:05and somebody else uh with all of their,

14:10you know, their studies. They talked a

14:11lot about Framingham, the problems with

14:14Framingham before, during, and after and

14:18what they used for their guidelines. So,

14:20there was a lot of good information and

14:22I'm happy to upload all of that.

14:24>> Yeah, if you can get that to

14:25>> Absolutely. I can hand it to him right

14:27now and then he can just add the website

14:31>> or else I can just link it all as well.

14:34>> And just to clarify, um, Brookline's

14:36representative town meeting,

14:38>> right? This

14:39>> Yes.

14:40>> So, that's what that'll stay.

14:42>> Yep. Yep. They they were not able to get

14:44to get enough people swayed to change.

14:48And I just wanted to say one more thing

14:50and I [clears throat] and I think

14:51everyone here knows this but just this

14:54NDAs it's mostly with councils you know

14:58city or town these towns that have uh

15:02have data centers a lot of it happens

15:05without [clears throat]

15:07the citizens even knowing about it until

15:08it's almost until it's too late

15:10sometimes or almost too late and just

15:12with you know I can't imagine our town

15:14knowing and any open or representative

15:16town meeting you have to know what's

15:18going on and you know um they this just

15:21couldn't happen in our town. So I think

15:24it it kind of gives a you know the less

15:27people who are in charge the more risk

15:29there is of something like this

15:31happening this you know this in

15:32influence um

15:34>> if you need to influence the legislature

15:36our legislature is 240 people.

15:39>> Yeah.

15:39>> It's a lot harder

15:40>> and you're not going to get 240 people

15:41to sign an NDA or something like that.

15:43It would be very difficult anyway. But I

15:45just think that's interesting.

15:46>> Yeah. That was one of the things they

15:48did bring up was that switching to a

15:51city form of government was one of the

15:52concerns was more political persuasion

15:57>> that was uh reiterated in between

15:59Framingham and then that was one of the

16:01big concerns with Brooklyn

16:05>> and I guess I'll stick in the Amherst

16:07thing there even though they're not

16:08nearby. Um,

16:11it was asked that a couple meetings ago.

16:12I reached out to the town manager in um,

16:16Ammerst. They are they they came after

16:19Framingham, so they are the most recent

16:23community to change their form of

16:24government. Um, I spoke with him. It was

16:28a pretty interesting story. They had a

16:30referendum issue that caused a big

16:33uproar in town that led to the change in

16:36government. Um the town manager there is

16:40uh also on the form of government

16:42committee for the Mass Municipal

16:43Association. He said he was willing to

16:46speak to us if we have the stomach for

16:49another speaker. Um

16:53and uh you know it was a pretty

16:54interesting story he told uh of how they

16:57got to where they are and and how it's

16:59gone since and some of the issues they

17:02had. Their town meetings went on

17:04forever.

17:07months.

17:08I'm not joking.

17:13>> Yeah, I think we would all be interested

17:15in hearing from him. Our next two

17:18meetings are October 5th and November

17:212nd.

17:21>> All right. I'll see if he can make

17:23either one of those if if that's what

17:24the committee would like.

17:27>> Seeing no objections. Yes, that'd be

17:28great.

17:29>> All right.

17:31>> All right. Then our next item on the

17:34agenda is discussing the results of the

17:37outreach survey.

17:40Tanner, did you want to give any

17:44uh any notes on that?

17:46>> Yeah. Um the I passed out to you all

17:49some um sheets that have the um results

17:55question by question of how um how many

17:58folks answered um each of the various uh

18:01multiple not multiple choice but I guess

18:03liker scale would be the more correct

18:05term for me to use. Um questions. Um, so

18:09this gives kind of a a good sense of uh

18:12and then when it says agreement

18:14disagreement that's breaking down the

18:16strongly agree and agree and the

18:19strongly disagree and disagree columns

18:20putting those um together. Also in the

18:24drive I put the survey findings document

18:27for you all as well to um see some of

18:30the kind of highle takeaways that aren't

18:33always um super obvious to see on the um

18:38raw data. I think um some of the

18:41interesting things is you see throughout

18:43the data a wide um a wide set of

18:47perspectives and you see um one of the

18:51interesting things I think is you look

18:53at like municipal uh services provided

18:55by municipal staff is the highest rated

18:58category 72.6% 6% satisfied across the

19:02board. Um whereas you see something like

19:05um land use satisfaction

19:07is if I recall correctly a little bit

19:10around somewhere around in the 40s

19:12percent. So you see residents throughout

19:15the data you see residents like nuanced

19:17opinions on various different um issues

19:20which I think is uh very interesting to

19:23look at uh for the committee. Um and I

19:26think also some of the um interesting

19:30um findings for some some of the

19:33informationational deficits um there is

19:37um let me pull up the exact uh

19:41statistics for you.

19:44So for example like advanced agenda

19:46awareness is the primary determiner of

19:50fiscal understanding. So among residents

19:53who are aware of the agenda postings

19:5671.1% said they understood the budget

19:59process whereas those um who are unaware

20:03of when the agendas are posted had they

20:06fed budget comprehension was at 5.2%. So

20:09for that's a bigformational

20:11deficit. Um and then for example, you

20:15know, uh the awareness steadily

20:17declining as decision-making detail

20:18deepens, right? 66.9% of people were

20:21aware of the meeting schedules, but then

20:23when you get to the question of are they

20:25aware of the agendas, you're at 51.6%.

20:28Then when you get to are the do they

20:30understand the budget process, 41.1%. So

20:33getting deeper into the proverbial weeds

20:37with um you know um the governmental

20:41process the awareness um declines and

20:45where's one other um data point here. Oh

20:49for those for the neutral group um they

20:53exhibited also additionally they

20:55exhibited the lowest agenda awareness of

20:56any group at 24.4% and budget

20:59understanding at 17.8%.

21:02So there's also an information gap for

21:04those who kind of don't feel strongly

21:06one way or the other if they you know

21:08really are satisfied with the current

21:10form of government or unsatisfied with

21:12the current form of government. So, um I

21:14think that was also interesting to note

21:15that some of the survey findings show

21:18that um sometimes it's an information

21:20deficit or um you know residents not

21:23knowing where to go to find the

21:25information or how to you know get you

21:28know sort of um you know easy access to

21:31what what's on the warrant you know

21:33what's being voted on how does you know

21:35the budget work things like that um so

21:38yeah there's feel free to discuss I can

21:40go deeper on anything um But, uh, that

21:43is in the drive for you all to take a

21:45look at at um, some of the various, um,

21:49different statistics. I just figured I'd

21:51throw two main ones of those out there.

21:53Two maj two themes that, um, you know,

21:56really stuck out to me um, for the

21:58committee to think about, discuss. Um,

22:01yeah.

22:02>> Okay. Thank you.

22:04>> Yeah.

22:05>> Um, just a first of a couple

22:07observations. Um, I like I I I compared

22:11them. Um, one group of questions were

22:14awareness questions and the other group

22:16of questions were opinion questions. And

22:18I was kind of trying to um, cross tab

22:22those and I think what Tanner brought up

22:23is is a great way to do it. So, I

22:24stopped looking at it because Tanner had

22:26already done that. Thank you, Tanner.

22:28What I was surprised was that we had um,

22:32for f I believe that people who filled

22:34this out self- selected. they took the

22:37survey not because they were told to do

22:38it, not because they were paid to do it,

22:40but because they uh chose to do it. And

22:42yet, despite the self- selection, um we

22:46had a lot of neutral opinions, a lot of

22:48folks who just said, "I don't know. I

22:50have no opinion. I have no opinion." Um

22:53or and then when they we had an

22:55awareness question, there were uh eight

22:58or so awareness questions. We had plenty

23:01of people who still said neutral on an

23:04awareness question. So if you say uh

23:07let's just say I'm aware of the work

23:08done by recreation preservation boards

23:10and committees etc. Um some said neutral

23:16but some said agree or strongly disagree

23:20and I don't understand like how am I

23:22supposed to process um the difference

23:25between you know one piece of data in

23:27there and the other piece of data. I

23:29just kind of started grouping the in

23:31those cases I would group the neutral

23:32and the disagree cuz you don't know you

23:34don't know doesn't matter how how you

23:36don't know. Um so I thought that was one

23:39takeaway um I had. And then on top of

23:42and then as far as the opinion questions

23:44which I thought were really I thought

23:47they were very very interesting. I got I

23:48got a lot out of it. Um, I again didn't

23:52know how to place the neutral

23:55opin the neutral votes, if you want to

23:57call them that, um, in there. So, for

24:00example, I'm just picking one out. I'm

24:03satisfied with day-to-day services

24:04provided by municipal staff under the

24:06town manager.

24:08And we have plenty of people who say

24:10they agree or strongly agree. Just lump

24:12lump that together.

24:14But we have a few people, 38 of the 248

24:18who said either disagree or strongly

24:20disagree. Okay, great. That's a good

24:22percentage to to crunch. But do we take

24:25the 30 people who are neutral,

24:28do we do we say that all of the neutrals

24:30and the agrees, do we put those together

24:32and say, "Okay, those are people who

24:34aren't negative."

24:36Is that is that what we're really

24:38looking for? The not negatives. And I'm

24:41sorry if I'm going Uber stata stat

24:44statistics on this,

24:46>> but

24:47>> it's an interesting discussion. My view

24:49on things like I'm satisfied with this

24:51type of services. If you know what the

24:53services are and you like them, you

24:55either agree or you strongly agree. If

24:57you're aware of them and you don't like

24:59them, you disagree or you strongly

25:00disagree. If you go, you know what, I

25:02don't know what the town manager does. I

25:03don't know what those services are. I

25:05think that's probably neutral.

25:06>> I don't care. I know what it is and it's

25:08not something that affects my life. So

25:11neutral

25:12>> could also be like the triangulation

25:14between the middle say cuz I think it

25:16lists like you know DPW police etc.

25:19Someone could say I like what the police

25:22does. You know I'm kind of indifferent

25:24on recreation cuz I don't go to

25:26recreation programs and maybe someone's

25:28like I don't like the trash pickup. And

25:29when they look at the three they kind of

25:31go well

25:32>> I guess it's in the middle. So that's

25:34also another potential option to

25:36consider that someone likes one service

25:38isn't, you know, too fond of another and

25:40kind of isn't really affected by, you

25:42know, another service that they may not

25:43engage with. So it could also be that

25:45some of the neutrals are, you know, that

25:48just want to throw that out there.

25:50>> No, not that we have any definitive way

25:52of knowing that, but something I've

25:54noticed in survey design.

25:55>> Neutral. I think that's a good point.

25:56They just not want to say anything

25:58strong in either direction and just

26:00decided this is the

26:01>> Yeah. And if people have leave a

26:03question blank, does that that counts as

26:05neutral, right?

26:06>> Neutral would be

26:07>> if someone leaves a question blank, it

26:09doesn't count into the total at all.

26:10>> Oh, because we have 248 answers for

26:12every single question.

26:14>> Required.

26:15>> Oh, they're all required.

26:16>> Yeah, I think everything was required.

26:18So,

26:18>> so it won't go past. It's like, nope,

26:20you must answer.

26:20>> Yeah, you can't skip.

26:23>> Thank you. Yeah,

26:25>> what about the uh comment section?

26:30Yes. So, I uploaded those into the drive

26:32with the full file. Is there any

26:34specific like themes you were wondering

26:36about or questions?

26:38>> I I didn't look at I didn't know there.

26:40>> It's in the raw CSV. Um I'd say maybe

26:4450% of people thereabouts gave a

26:47comment.

26:48>> Yeah, we have more here. I can um let me

26:50see if I can get the

26:51>> number. I was just reading through them.

26:54There are a few common themes. Uh I

26:56would say there are a lot of people who

26:59are generally satisfied. There are a lot

27:01of people who are very dissatisfied.

27:04Uh some comments saying don't change

27:06anything. Some comments that say switch

27:08us to a city right now.

27:11Some comments are very similar to what

27:14you will see on Facebook. Um

27:17yeah, there's a generally a good mix of

27:19comments. Some people wrote several

27:22paragraphs and had really thoughtful

27:23thoughts about representative town

27:24meeting versus open town meeting.

27:26There's at least one in there that I

27:28really appreciated about that.

27:32>> But if Tanner, if you did any statistics

27:35instead of just the eye test of what it

27:38looked like.

27:39>> Yeah, let me just uh It's loading right

27:41now. Give me

27:44>> It's worth reading through. Is it is it

27:46>> like in a different tab than the

27:48>> Yeah, if you go to the CSV, it has the

27:51raw data of all of the

27:54agree all the answers to all of the

27:56questions and then there's a column that

27:58is the comments which is a little hard

28:00to read in Excel, but if you format it,

28:02you can.

28:04>> It's titled dduplicated survey

28:06responses.

28:07>> D what?

28:08>> Dduplicated. There are some like

28:10duplicated responses that uh where some

28:13are exactly the same. for example,

28:15submitted it as like a um

28:18>> like for example, someone hit submit and

28:20like their web page refreshed and it

28:22submitted the same survey like the same

28:24exact questions twice for example.

28:26So I still had concerns about the

28:29comment sections that this would become

28:32more of a that many people did like you

28:35said had very um contributo comments but

28:40then it was a lot of a complaint

28:42session. Um, [snorts] and my question is

28:46what's within our purview and how much

28:49of this do we have any

28:52um I don't know how how much of this can

28:56can we do anything about at all? And

28:59then how much of this do people feel

29:01they took this survey and they're not

29:03going to be heard because their comments

29:07simply are going to fall on deaf ears

29:09because I took this survey. I wrote all

29:12of this down and nobody heard my comment

29:17because

29:19for one it has nothing to do with this

29:21committee. So I wrote a few of them

29:23down. The website is down. The streets

29:25are a disaster.

29:27The cost of the parks building was too

29:29much. Um when the new Celco headquarters

29:33goes in, where's it going to go? Um that

29:36the VFW is being evicted. So none of

29:39those have anything to do with this

29:41committee and people took the time to

29:43wrote the write those comments and that

29:45was my concern with the comment section

29:48that people were going to take the time

29:51to comment and now that has nothing to

29:55do with this committee. We can't do

29:57anything about that and now people are

29:59going to say look another committee that

30:02doesn't hear me. So that's one of my

30:04concerns.

30:05um that comment that you said did take

30:08the time. That was a great comment. Um I

30:12like the fact that they took the time to

30:15say about the separation of powers.

30:17Should the board of selectmen also be

30:19town meeting members, executive versus

30:22legislative?

30:23Um

30:25set the agenda and vote on it because

30:27they both set the agenda and they also

30:30vote on it. I thought that was

30:32interesting. Um, another positive

30:35comment that I took out of the comment

30:36section, um, was suggesting an online

30:40dashboard with brief updates, but again,

30:42that's not

30:45within the purview of this board. We're

30:48we're looking to see if we're changing

30:49the format of this government. One that

30:52w is within the purview of this board is

30:56somebody that said they grew up in

30:57Worcester with a city form of

30:59government. Now, they've been here for

31:02years. And the biggest thing that she

31:04felt or they felt that town meeting can

31:07do is vote on debt exclusions, which is

31:10an important thing to keep in mind. So

31:12[snorts] those are just a few things I

31:14took out of the comments section. I was

31:17I was reading through a lot of the

31:18comments. So

31:19>> yeah, um first stats actually your your

31:22guess at half spot on the money, go buy

31:25a lottery ticket. It was literally

31:2750.0%. It was 124 open-ended feedbacks

31:30for 248 total survey participants. Um 73

31:35of which were operational suggestions.

31:38Um 37 of those, so about 30% um

31:41expressed critical or dissatisfaction

31:44um sentiments. Um 14 expressed positive

31:47or generally satisfied sentiments. 16

31:50responses

31:52um discussed transitions to city, mayor,

31:55or council form of government. Um, nine

31:58respondents um

32:01explicitly discussed the retaining

32:04representative town meeting. Four

32:06respondents dis outright discussed

32:08adopting open town meeting. So really a

32:10lot of different um opinions from a lot

32:12of different folks. Um like you said a

32:15lot of it was you know like you said

32:17naen a lot was things that weren't in

32:21the purview of um the form of government

32:24study. Um let me see if I have some more

32:26here.

32:28>> I think we should continue as a

32:30committee. We want to read these

32:31comments just to get a good sense. Is

32:34there any other mechanism Tanner through

32:36you to get these to other parts of the

32:40actual elected or not elected the

32:43official government that just so they

32:45can if there's any like

32:48>> any comments about the roads I know

32:49we're not going to change but if there

32:51are specific complaints that can somehow

32:53get to DPW and maybe they can take that

32:56feedback so it doesn't completely fall

32:58on deaf ears I think would be helpful.

33:01Obviously, we're not going to fix the

33:03roads. I know there are comments saying

33:04a certain people in town should be

33:06fired, that's definitely not in our

33:08power, but anything where people are

33:10saying city council, representative

33:13Tammy, or just that general vibe, we

33:15want to keep that in mind as we're

33:17continuing to do outreach to the

33:19community throughout this whole process.

33:23Yeah,

33:24>> I think my comment was more just about

33:27keeping in mind going forward with

33:29surveys that when you do have an

33:31open-ended comment section,

33:33>> yes,

33:33>> that you're going to invite comments

33:35like that and people aren't going to

33:38feel that their comments are valid,

33:40validated, and they're important.

33:43>> So, whenever whenever you have a comment

33:47section, you know,

33:49>> you invited me to say it. Why did you

33:51ask me to say it if it doesn't mean

33:55anything?

33:58>> Going back to Mark's comment about how

34:00to interpret the neutral responses. I

34:02mean, I think if we analogize it to an

34:04election outcome, the neutral responses

34:07are people who didn't show up to vote.

34:09And if you think of it that way, the I

34:12feel that town meeting adequately

34:13addresses the needs of the community one

34:15is a very interesting one because it's

34:17an extremely narrow win for the Yes. So

34:20if there were an election and a vote,

34:22you know, let's keep representative town

34:25meeting or not, these surveys results

34:28suggest that it might be a very narrow

34:30win, which is something I think we

34:32should think about.

34:33>> I I Yeah, actually that's why I'm going

34:36to think about it. If I can just amend

34:37it, wouldn't be so much didn't show up

34:39to vote, showed up to vote, but didn't

34:41vote every item on the ballot, which

34:44again, these are these are self-

34:45selected. These are people who chose to

34:47take this survey, but you know, they

34:49have no opinion about the parks and

34:50recck department. They skipped that one

34:52or whatever.

34:53>> But there's only one election. The

34:55election is keep it or not.

34:56>> I've actually

34:58>> I've actually looked at the votes. We

35:00had a one-off election several years

35:02ago, which we had. It was a special

35:05election for a special event. We had

35:07basically uh you vote for this or you

35:09vote for that. And there were plenty of

35:11blank votes.

35:13>> Okay.

35:13>> I don't know why. Maybe people felt well

35:16I think I think it's great because it

35:18shows people felt a duty to come and

35:20show up and they looked at the ballot

35:21and like ah I don't like this answer I

35:23don't like that answer but I'm here and

35:26I don't know what happened

35:27>> voting present

35:28>> voting present

35:30>> and that's okay that's you know

35:31wonderful but does it really give you an

35:34indication how do I interpret this

35:37>> yeah I don't know

35:38>> I don't know that we can interpret any

35:39anyone's thinking yeah you know without

35:42>> but I really love the cross the way that

35:45Tanner mixed the the awareness and the

35:48opinion question. I think that

35:51>> people who voted this then also voted

35:54that type thing. You can kind of

35:56>> learn a little what's going on there.

35:58Yeah.

35:58>> In some cases, not at all. But yes, that

36:02was very helpful, Tanner. Thank you.

36:04>> Sure. Happy to vote.

36:06>> Again, I'm just not agree with the uh

36:10moving of the stuff.

36:14Does anyone else have any questions or

36:17comments on the outreach survey? And do

36:19we want to circle back and discuss it

36:22some more after we've had more time to

36:24digest it at our next meeting? I know we

36:26can all look through the comments, look

36:28through the cross tab,

36:30>> analysis, kind of an open agenda item.

36:32If someone

36:34>> as you read stuff and decipher it

36:37better,

36:38>> fantastic work there.

36:40>> [laughter]

36:41>> But I do agree with what Denine said

36:43about when you ask an open-ended

36:44question that people feel,

36:47you know, like, hey, you asked me

36:49>> what's happening.

36:50>> What are you going to do with it?

36:50>> I mean, obviously, you know, you have we

36:53we can only treat what we can treat, but

36:55still.

36:56>> Yeah.

36:56>> Um, this is a separate question, but

36:59John and I are going to meet after this

37:00meeting to talk about our meeting with

37:03um town meeting members and how they

37:06feel about our formal government. And I

37:08know at one point we talked about

37:10educating people about different forms

37:12of government. So I just wanted to get a

37:14sense what people think if this when we

37:16you know have these 17 folks at the

37:19select

37:21uh selection room select select boards

37:24room.

37:24>> Yeah.

37:25>> Should we because may people may show up

37:28and say well what does council mean and

37:30and I don't know. I mean I'm not sure.

37:32Or do we just solicit their opinions or

37:34do we talk about different options and

37:38what that would look like?

37:39>> Cuz if you're saying should we keep

37:41representing a town meeting or switch to

37:43alternative their first question

37:45probably be well what are the

37:46alternatives?

37:47>> That was one of the comments is that

37:49yeah

37:49>> well you're not even telling me what the

37:51options are. I don't make sure

37:54>> would a fivem minute overview before the

37:56the discussion starts of the charge of

37:58the committee followed by summary of the

38:01different forms of government.

38:02>> Yeah, maybe we could use what

38:04>> Kevin used that first.

38:06>> Yeah, maybe we could actually use Kevin.

38:08>> Yeah. Okay, that's true.

38:11>> That may that may clarify things for

38:13them before

38:14>> maybe just but remember how he presented

38:16this is what we have. This is these are

38:18the other options.

38:21Um, you know, Tanner, do you think

38:22that's possible to get those slides? I

38:25think they're all in our folder anyway,

38:26right?

38:27>> Yeah, I'll take

38:28>> maybe we could do something like that.

38:30We can talk about it, John.

38:31>> And even maybe in the people we had

38:34talked like for instance, example would

38:36be handover

38:38would be was a gentleman from Franklin.

38:41>> Yeah.

38:42>> Franklin, right? That was an interesting

38:43one too.

38:44>> The town council one,

38:45>> what's that?

38:46>> The town council one.

38:47>> Yeah.

38:47>> Yeah. Franklin.

38:48>> Yeah. Franklin. Um,

38:50uh,

38:50>> and then Charlie.

38:52>> Yeah.

38:53>> Yeah. [laughter]

38:55>> And I think maybe even some historical

38:56data because I think the like the

38:58gentleman from Franklin was saying

39:00actually that's the that was the

39:04average town in America has that form of

39:07government even though in Massachusetts

39:09it's actually a minority form of

39:11government, right? But, uh, it's

39:14actually a popular form of government

39:16most places. That would be where in New

39:19England town meeting is.

39:20>> Yeah, that's town meetings.

39:24>> Never heard of it growing up.

39:25>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's not a thing

39:27anywhere in New England really.

39:30>> Okay. New England.

39:33>> Yep.

39:35>> All right. And then the last item on our

39:38agenda is discussing upcoming meetings,

39:40which we're kind of doing already since

39:42we have the upcoming meetings I know of

39:44is on Thursday, September 24th. There's

39:48that meeting in the select board room

39:50with town meeting members. And then our

39:53upcoming meetings are on October 5th and

39:55November 2nd, both of which are Mondays.

39:59Let me check the ball and get back to

40:01you pretty quickly. if he can make

40:03either and if one works better than the

40:05other.

40:06>> All right. So, we're reaching out to

40:08Ammerst.

40:09>> Ammerst

40:10>> Ammerst to see if they can join us on

40:11October 5th or November 2nd. Were there

40:14other officials we were still looking to

40:16reach out to?

40:18>> I know Brooklyn had been

40:19>> I was making a jump for Brooklyn, but it

40:21sounds like we have an answer from DE.

40:22Thank you for making that a very short

40:24answer. We didn't have to do an hourong

40:26>> interview.

40:28I brought my short game tonight.

40:32All right. Um, does anyone have any

40:34other comments on those upcoming

40:36meetings?

40:38>> Um, I do have a question actually about

40:40the town meeting forum. Is there a plan

40:42to have like a paper survey or something

40:44for

40:45>> like as a followup?

40:47>> Yeah. Could we um hand out those if

40:49people come to this meeting on the

40:51flight didn't actually do our survey,

40:53can we hand out like paper copies like

40:56Carlos just said so we can capture their

40:59opinions?

41:00>> Yeah. Yeah. What do you mean? What do

41:01you mean?

41:02>> Oh, this is the

41:03>> just capturing more feedback from town

41:05meeting members who might not have taken

41:07>> I don't I don't understand what you're

41:08saying. I'm sorry.

41:09>> So, you're going to host a town meeting

41:11forum next week with town meeting

41:13members?

41:13>> Yeah.

41:13>> So, just finding a way to capture

41:16information from them, capture their

41:17feedback. So, if there's like a written

41:19survey or

41:21>> we sent out uh a detailed email,

41:24>> yeah,

41:24>> listing three topics we'd like them to

41:27address.

41:28And uh we haven't really talked about

41:31how we're going to run the meeting, but

41:34um in my mind the we limited it to like

41:38three general questions so that they

41:40come up and say anything they want and

41:43that that we uh on the committee would

41:46capture it by writing it down.

41:49>> Okay. So, similar to when we meet with

41:51other people,

41:53>> but we could just have it there and

41:55maybe at the end say, "Hey, if you

41:57didn't do our survey, here's an

41:59opportunity to add to

42:01>> I don't know. We've already we've

42:02already done the survey. We cut it off.

42:04We done with it." I figured if folks

42:07look that 248 answers, all of those

42:10people are going to be at

42:11>> are going to be at that meeting anyway.

42:14Um, you know, we really tried to milk

42:16that participation in that survey and I

42:18think we had a good number.

42:19>> Yeah, they may be same people repeating

42:22their response potentially.

42:23>> And I'm really happy with the with the

42:25turnout we got for the survey. Uh, I

42:28don't think that that was disappointing.

42:31>> The only thing I was going to suggest is

42:34if we did any more survey with that

42:37would be at the Shishbury uh spirit of

42:40Shushbury Festival. But then

42:43that's the only large event that we're

42:45not capturing for the fall. We had

42:47talked about doing community outreach

42:49and that's our only fall event that

42:52we're not capturing at all any type of

42:54interface with the public.

42:55>> Can you remind me what is the date of

42:57experience?

42:58>> It's in a couple weeks

43:0127.

43:02So

43:03>> we have no time to get anything in

43:05unfortunately. It's too bad we didn't

43:07think

43:07>> Yeah.

43:08>> ahead.

43:09>> Like, hey, we could have sat down at a

43:11booth and

43:12>> um

43:13>> Well, then doesn't the town have a

43:14booth? Like, I mean, isn't there

43:17>> our committee? You know what I mean? Our

43:18committee. Hey, we're in a form of

43:20government study committee.

43:22>> Would we want to try and grow together a

43:24subcommittee that

43:26>> would do outreach at Spirit of Shbury or

43:28is it too late to get a I assume it's

43:30too late to grab a

43:31>> What would we do? Like

43:32>> Yeah.

43:34Well, I I will be there [laughter]

43:37>> at the select work group. So, I don't

43:39>> Oh, there is a select work group. Well,

43:41I mean, I wonder if we could have it

43:42there. Would that be a conflict?

43:45>> I don't think you can.

43:47>> Let them let them do their thing.

43:49>> Yeah.

43:49>> They're going to catch a lot of

43:51compliments and goodwill at their booth.

43:53And uh [laughter] I don't think it's

43:57fair for us to uh to tread on that.

43:59>> Okay.

44:01happy to be support in whichever way.

44:05>> All right.

44:06Well, with that being said, our next

44:08meeting is on Monday, October 5th,

44:12possibly with Ammerst. Possibly not. To

44:14be determined and we'll get it on the

44:16agenda when we find out at this point.

44:19>> I will be in Arizona, so I will be

44:20zooming in.

44:21>> Excellent.

44:22>> Oh, nice.

44:24All right, take note of that.

44:29And with that, I would entertain a

44:31motion to adjurnn. So move.

44:33>> Second.

44:35>> Second. All in favor? I. All right. Have

44:38a great night, everyone.