2026-10-06 - Advisory Committee on the Status of Women

00:02meeting only of the regular monthly

00:04meeting for the advisory committee on

00:06the status of women. I'm going to take a

00:08roll call of the members present. Um we

00:11do have a late notice that our chair

00:13Katie Roy will be absent. She emailed me

00:16and designated uh vice chair Stephanie

00:18Silva to run the meeting. So after I

00:21take a quick run through. Are you going

00:22to be okay going through the agenda

00:24while you're driving? Okay. Yes. All

00:26right.

00:26>> All right. So we know Chair Katie Roy is

00:28absent. Vice Chair Stephanie Silva,

00:31>> present.

00:32>> Clerk Aaliyah Marie Melville.

00:36Member Monica Goodwin,

00:39>> present.

00:40>> Member Lauren Morocco,

00:42>> present.

00:43>> Member Kate Norton,

00:46>> present.

00:47>> And member Jenny Cow,

00:49>> present.

00:50>> All right, so we're good to go. Do you

00:52want me to at least run the topics for

00:54you or you're good? Yeah. I think the

00:56next thing is um do do we approve

00:58minutes from is it August?

01:00>> Yes.

01:01>> Okay. So, yeah. Um any

01:06changes or edits for August minutes?

01:11>> No.

01:12>> Okay.

01:14So, I need a motion from someone and a

01:16second.

01:18>> Motion to approve.

01:20>> Who was that?

01:21>> Monica.

01:22>> Okay. Monica. Second.

01:25I'll second

01:29>> Kate. Thank you.

01:30>> Y sorry.

01:30>> All right. So, a brief roll call on

01:32members present. We have a motion to

01:33approve the August minutes. Uh roll call

01:36of those present. Vice Chair Stephanie

01:38Silva.

01:40>> Present.

01:43>> No. I just want you to say yes or no.

01:46>> Oh, I'm sorry.

01:47>> That's okay. That's okay. Thank you. Um

01:50member Monica Goodwin.

01:52>> Yes. Member Lauren Morocco.

01:55>> Yes. Member Kate Norton.

01:57>> Yes.

01:58>> Many member Jenny Cow.

02:00>> Yes.

02:01>> Okay. So, that motion carries

02:03unanimously with the members present.

02:06>> Awesome.

02:08Um so, the next topic on the agenda was

02:11um just a discussion following up of our

02:14guest speakers August call, which was

02:17the Boston Women's Workforce Council.

02:19So, I know we were able to sort of

02:21debrief after the call. We had a really

02:24great conversation. Um, I wanted to

02:26share uh the feedback that I got from

02:30them presenting at the Worcester

02:31Chamber. So, we had them present um at

02:34our business and government forum and we

02:38had about 50 people in the room. We did

02:40have um Patrick Hair from the mayor's

02:42office in attendance. Um, you know, we

02:44had quite a few different people from

02:46different industries that were

02:48represented and it was very

02:50wellreceived. Um, obviously, you know,

02:52they did such a great job presenting to

02:54us on the work that they do and and the

02:57data that they collect and um, they were

03:00able to pretty much go through the same

03:02presentation and then ask um, have like

03:05a really good Q&A conversation with with

03:08the people in the room. Um, you know,

03:10Tim Murray, president and CEO of the

03:12Worester Chamber, was um very much, you

03:16know, in favor of them bringing their

03:18work um to Worcester and did ask that

03:21everyone in the room support it. Um, so

03:24really I think, you know, overall it was

03:27wellreceived. The the the big part now

03:30is also like what we need is like we

03:32need them to be acclimated into the

03:34city. We need businesses to apply to

03:37give them um the rights to get into

03:41their their information. So then that

03:43way we can move forward and say, "Okay,

03:46you know, we want to now take their

03:47information and put together, you know,

03:50something for the city manager." So it's

03:52going to be a little bit of a longer

03:53process until we can actually do

03:55something with them to be very honest.

03:58But I am encouraged that it was

04:01wellreceived. I have a good feeling that

04:03they'll be able to start working with

04:05businesses in the city and collecting

04:07data that we can then also then come

04:10back with them and say, "Okay, where are

04:12we at? What do we need to do?"

04:14>> Steph, can I ask something? Because I

04:15hope I didn't misexplain this in my I've

04:17been talking to Kevin about this. We

04:19really wanted to get somebody over there

04:20to that meeting from HR

04:22>> because I really think that this could

04:24be good for the city too to try and

04:27retain and recruit, you know, people

04:29into the city because we're always

04:31trying to do that with any of the

04:33positions that we post. No matter, it

04:35doesn't matter what the position is.

04:36It's really hard for us to get people,

04:38>> right? Am I correct in saying that the

04:42city wouldn't be providing the

04:44information? They would be providing the

04:46agreement with them to participate, but

04:49each individual employee would give

04:51their information. Is that correct?

04:54>> That's correct. Yes. Okay.

04:56>> For the city, right? And then then they

04:59would and then additionally outside of

05:01the city of Worcester, they would work

05:03with employers to get the information of

05:06their employees to form

05:09>> they're not working with the individual

05:10employees unless it's a government uh

05:13like a municipal government or state

05:15government or something. They work

05:16directly with the employer otherwise.

05:19>> Correct. Yes. Absolutely.

05:22>> Okay. Um I'd love to know you know more.

05:25Maybe one day you got you and I can set

05:27up a call or something so I can try and

05:29get this information. I do think it

05:32right now they're doing workday. They're

05:34trying to get the city moved over to

05:35work day which has been okay. So I'm in

05:38my third year here now. They told me

05:40when I came here that work day was

05:42starting. So um they're kind of very

05:45focused on that at HR to have it up and

05:47running for January. But I would like to

05:49at least have like a parallel, you know,

05:51get the issue out there, even if we just

05:54debrief Kevin enough to take it forward

05:57um to set something up where um you

06:00know, maybe their step into the city is

06:02with the city, you know, to other

06:04employers possibly,

06:06>> right? And he's really keen on it,

06:09Kevin, because of the whole, you know,

06:11the whole um, you know, the the the

06:14facts and figures that I gave him from

06:15the meeting that we had where they made

06:17a presentation and highlighting, you

06:19know, the the race and gender inequities

06:22um, especially in the like executive

06:24positions and higher positions and um,

06:26you know, he would really I think really

06:28run with that.

06:30>> That's that's my take on it.

06:32>> Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. you know and

06:34then you know I think what's important

06:36for us too is that like you know the

06:38data that they're getting is that um you

06:42know there's opportunity obviously for

06:44for women to make money right so once

06:47you once companies employers and and

06:49cities are seeing this and they see that

06:52gap but then you know it just gives them

06:54a chance to look back and say wow you

06:55know who am I not giving an opportunity

06:57to who am I not you know um who am I not

07:00promoting who am I not putting in the

07:02room so there were some good

07:03conversation about that because I know

07:05you know Kate had brought about you know

07:07we our discussion about getting more you

07:09know women in in seats of power in the

07:11city and things. So I think like this is

07:13such I'm so glad like this connection

07:15happened because I think this is such a

07:16good baseline for us to stay connected

07:19with them um to do some more research

07:21and have some bigger conversations.

07:24>> Great. That's great to hear it.

07:28>> Can I ask a quick followup? Um, do we

07:31think is there anything for for us as a

07:34committee to that that we could be doing

07:37in the interim or do you know what I

07:39mean? Do you see a role for us in

07:42between now and and whatever the the

07:44sort of deliverable is on this?

07:49>> I think it would be asking them what

07:52they need with in terms of like the city

07:54of Worcester to to Patricia's point. So,

07:57like if they need a little bit of push,

07:59then we could write, you know, that

08:00recommendation to the city manager

08:02sooner than later saying that we, you

08:04know, we were able to have this

08:05conversation with them. We support their

08:07work. We need to see it. We want to see

08:09it. So, let's Patricia, I'll I'll get

08:12connected with them sooner than later.

08:14Um because Kate, I think that's a good

08:15point. We could maybe, you know, push

08:17that further along just

08:19>> and we could I mean, we can submit a

08:21recommendation even before we have any

08:23official meeting or anything. we could

08:25sort of set the tone with that like we

08:27kind of want to drive it like that with

08:29um we're very interested to the point

08:31where you know next we could put in

08:33there like a next step or something like

08:34that that you know we you know we're

08:36willing to take on a project if possible

08:39to to push this sort of

08:41>> forward.

08:43>> Okay.

08:44>> What's sort of a process for getting

08:46something like that drafted and reviewed

08:48and like within public records and and

08:50all that? What what do we have to

08:52follow? So essentially it would um

08:56either all of you can send me some

08:58suggested language and then I'll draft

09:00something similar to what I do for the

09:02other boards and commissions then

09:04circulate it to get we won't be voting

09:06on it. What I would suggest tonight is

09:08that we vote on something to the extent

09:10of agreeing that we're going to submit

09:12something and then pretty much with all

09:14the other boards and commissions um we

09:17have like a scrivener's error kind of

09:19like thing where if I made like a a typo

09:21or something that I can fix that I can't

09:24change the you know the the the core

09:26issues that you want to approach in the

09:28in the memo. But you know we do these

09:31things all the time in our office to

09:32submit to the city manager for various

09:35committees. I mean the uh the

09:37accessibility committee, the human

09:39rights commission, LGBTQ, we've done

09:41them for all of them basically now. So

09:43um and that really is one of the

09:45functions of these advisory committees

09:47is to make recommendations. So it's not

09:49anything that's uh out of line or lacks

09:52respect or anything like that. So, if

09:55you all want to send me, we can agree to

09:57a time where you send me some, you know,

10:02uh, blurbs or what you'd like to see

10:04included in it, and then I can put it

10:07together into something that I think is,

10:09uh, acceptable to submit. Um, I would

10:12write it, you all would approve it, and

10:15then, um, it would go through Kevin over

10:17to the city manager's office.

10:19>> Okay. Do you have examples of those from

10:22other committees that you could share or

10:24could I find them online?

10:25>> Um, I'll share them with you.

10:27>> Okay.

10:28>> They're they're public records. So, I

10:30mean, you could make a request, but I'm

10:32I'm happy to share it with you because

10:33there's there's nothing really I mean,

10:34yes, they're controversial, especially

10:36the ones with some of the commissions,

10:37but um they're controversial just

10:39because of the sort of tense

10:42relationship between the commission and

10:43the city. So, um, but there's nothing

10:46there's nothing controversial in the in

10:49the way it was done or anything like

10:50that.

10:51>> Yeah, I'm curious about structure and

10:53format and like what goes in it, what

10:55you know what I mean? So,

10:57>> that I think would be helpful.

10:58>> Yep, I can do that.

11:01>> Thanks.

11:04>> So, Patricia, could we potentially get

11:06that done before our next meeting or do

11:09we need Okay,

11:11>> I would love to do this sooner than

11:12later. ladies, if you agree.

11:15>> So, you know, push keep pushing it off.

11:17Yeah.

11:18>> Yeah. Great. So what I would say is that

11:20if someone wants to make a motion to

11:23submit a recommendation, you know, you

11:25you tell me what your, you know, word or

11:27motion, it doesn't have to be, you know,

11:29long or uh particularly um uh detailed,

11:34but something to the extent of make a

11:36motion that um you'd like to submit a

11:38recommendation to the city manager's

11:40office that the city of Worcester

11:42investigate participating in this

11:45process.

11:47some such type of thing.

11:57>> You want to make that one, Stephanie?

11:59>> Yep. I was like frantically writing.

12:00Sure. Um, so I'd like to make a motion

12:02to submit a recommendation to the city

12:05manager office to support uh the

12:08implementation of the data from the

12:11Boston Women's Workforce Council.

12:16Second.

12:18>> That was Kate, right? Norton.

12:20>> Yes.

12:20>> Okay. All right. So, on Stephanie's um

12:23motion as discussed, Kate seconded. Uh

12:27brief roll call. Uh Vice Chair Stephanie

12:29Silva.

12:30>> Yes.

12:31>> Member Monica Goodwin.

12:33>> Yes.

12:33>> Member Lauren Morocco.

12:36>> Yes.

12:36>> Member Kate Norton.

12:38>> Yes.

12:39>> Member Jenny Cow.

12:41>> Yes.

12:42>> Perfect.

12:44Thank you.

12:45As soon as you guys get things over, you

12:48folks get things over to me, I will

12:50submit them in uh a form that makes some

12:53type of sense for you all to also put

12:56edits on or make comments about.

13:00>> Okay, wonderful. Good work all. Okay.

13:05Um, and I believe the next thing on the

13:08agenda, if I'm not mistaken, Patricia,

13:10was to talk about the women of

13:12consequence, right? And if we wanna,

13:15>> it was actually the goals and projects

13:18for 2026 somewhat based on the

13:21questions, which I didn't get

13:22everybody's responses for, but I would

13:24say of the responses that it's sort of

13:275050 regarding women of consequence. Um,

13:31>> you know, I don't know. I don't want to

13:32tip the scale on this by my own opinion.

13:35So, I I'll leave it to you all to decide

13:38what it is you want to do um with that

13:40or if you want to move on to something

13:42else.

13:46>> Okay. Well, I think since you know we're

13:48such a small group, I think it would be

13:50worthy um just to hear from each member

13:54on on on what we feel. I mean, I and I'm

13:57sorry if we've done this before, but

13:59when you miss a month, I feel like you

14:00miss a year. Um, so why don't we just

14:03kind of start and just kind of share

14:05briefly if you are in favor of proceed

14:09of having and this would obviously be in

14:112027. We wouldn't do it this year of of

14:13having a woman of consequence award in

14:162027. So if you agree with it or if you

14:19don't and then if you have any other

14:21suggestions. So um I don't want to put

14:24anybody on the spot. Would someone like

14:26to start?

14:26>> I don't mind going first.

14:27>> Awesome. Thanks Lauren.

14:29>> No problem. Um, I am kind of anti doing

14:33the women's women of consequence awards

14:35as it stands. If we do do it, I think it

14:38needs major restructuring and maybe that

14:40means we don't do it for 2027 and then

14:43we restructure some of the stuff, but I

14:45think it's not as effective as we want

14:47it to be. And I know a lot of the stuff

14:49that we talked about was sort of um

14:52being more of an advisory council anyway

14:54cuz we are and that to me is not really

14:57advisory and it there's no end means to

15:00an end for this event in my opinion but

15:02again if we do it great if we don't even

15:06better so that's my opinion.

15:10Appreciate that. Okay.

15:13Would like to go next?

15:17>> I can go. I I second Lauren's getting at

15:20too. Um I mean it's been going on for

15:22gods like decades at this point. Um and

15:25I think especially with our attempts

15:27earlier this year of trying to, you

15:28know, expand the scope of university

15:31sponsorships and things like that, I

15:32felt like we kept hitting dead ends. Um

15:35and I think if we were to do it, we need

15:37to start questioning, you know, what's

15:39the value not just to us as a committee,

15:40but like to these people that invest

15:42into it. And I'm not sure if we have an

15:44answer soon enough um for 2027.

15:49Mhm.

15:51>> Okay,

15:54Monica or Kate,

15:56>> I can go.

15:57>> Um, I agree with Lauren and Jenny. Um, I

15:59think there's a lot of room for

16:01improvement with it. Um, especially for

16:03the young woman of consequence because

16:05if you're not going to assumptions, then

16:07it doesn't really make, you know, any

16:09sense. Um, and just with how I think the

16:13timing of the last one, it just I don't

16:15know. I I don't think it made sense with

16:16the young woman of consequence. So, I

16:18don't know if I don't think we'd be

16:20ready for 2027. I think there's just a

16:23lot more to discuss

16:25with it.

16:28>> Yeah, I agree overall with the same kind

16:30of feedback. I'd love to see us continue

16:32to find an opportunity to recognize a

16:35woman of consequence, but I don't know

16:37that the way we're doing it right now, a

16:39reception uh tied to a scholarship that

16:41nobody uses. I just think we can do it

16:43better. Um, and maybe it's not an event.

16:46Maybe it's a maybe it's an announcement

16:47or maybe it is a you know, I'm not sure.

16:50Maybe we can do something that's a

16:52little more closely tied with the city

16:54and it becomes, you know, something that

16:56the uh the city can can recognize and we

16:59can inform or you know what I mean? So,

17:01um, concur with all of the things and I

17:04can never say something in five words

17:06that I should have can say in 10 words.

17:08So, here we are. Lauren, I see your hand

17:10up. Um, I can I piggyback kind of off

17:13what you said? Um,

17:15>> is it something that maybe the the mayor

17:18can give a proclamation to or give them

17:21something for their achievement? I don't

17:24know. Maybe just like throwing it out if

17:26we want to do something.

17:26>> I can't really I can't really

17:28definitively say the mayor would do it,

17:31but we can request it. We make requests

17:33for proclamations for different things

17:35through the office all the time. For

17:37instance, um like the out to lunch, the

17:40ADA anniversary that we celebrate in the

17:42summer, we typically have a proclamation

17:45for that. We have different um

17:47recognition days that we get

17:49proclamations for. The city is moving

17:51off of the recognizing certain, you

17:55know, every month saying, "Oh, it's this

17:57month. Oh, it's that month." But there

17:59will always be room and there will

18:01always be the possibility of requesting

18:02through proclamation anything. So, um,

18:05only, and this comes from really a place

18:07of us saying in our office, we we're

18:10missing things like, so if we're missing

18:12all of these holidays and recognitions,

18:15we shouldn't be throwing out the ones

18:17that were always everybody's, you know,

18:19infinitely familiar with, right? We have

18:22to either do everything or do nothing,

18:24unfortunately, in order to be equitable.

18:26So, um, the city's moving away from

18:28that. You'll notice that on the website,

18:30too. um especially moving forward with

18:33digital accessibility. So um there's

18:35going to be a lot of changes. There's,

18:37you know, the DOJ ruling about um

18:39digital accessibility for all types of

18:41communication styles and abilities and

18:44uh modalities. And this is a huge thing

18:47right now in the city that has to we're

18:50kind of like moving, you know, the sun,

18:52the moon, and the sky trying to get this

18:54done for April because we have literally

18:58posted so much stuff on our website that

19:02does not fit in the within the

19:04guidelines. Um, so it's a it's a major

19:07major project,

19:09>> but proclamations always a possibility.

19:13That's the kind of thing like

19:14brainstorming that I'm thinking about,

19:16right? Is there a way like do we get any

19:19of the delegation involved? Do we get

19:21proclamations from the state? Do we, you

19:23know, is it a an opportunity to share a

19:26written piece in a local newspaper?

19:29Well, you know what I mean? Like

19:30whatever that kind of um whatever that

19:32kind of looks like, but I think fresh

19:34overhaul, you know, think it can't hurt.

19:37>> Anything we would share, we'd have to

19:38get clearance through the city manager's

19:40office, through the communications

19:41department.

19:41>> Absolutely. Y

19:42>> and they would actually be the ones that

19:44share it. We wouldn't be doing the

19:45sharing, but that's also good for us so

19:48that it keeps us all sort of insulated

19:50from that, right?

19:51>> Yeah.

19:52>> Yep. Absolutely.

19:55>> Yeah. And I would agree with with you

19:57all, you know, I think to be honest, I

19:59think that this committee has seen a lot

20:03of changes. There's been a lot of people

20:05coming and going. So I I almost feel

20:07like the event

20:09aside from the a two awards would need a

20:11little bit more substance to to draw

20:14that attention and attraction to it. And

20:17I'm you know we can get there but to

20:19everyone's point I don't in 2027 I just

20:22you know besides people coming to

20:24recognize those two people you know

20:26there needs to just kind of be a little

20:27bit more of what what we've done and the

20:29artwork. Um, so I think,

20:35you know, we can potentially obviously

20:37hear from from Katie as the chair next

20:39month. Um, and then make a formal

20:41decision, right, Patricia? You'd want

20:43something formal for 2027.

20:46>> Yes.

20:46>> Oh, yeah. Um, so let's let's

20:48>> as much as are we going to push this off

20:51or what are we going to do? I mean, I I

20:53understand completely what all of you

20:55are saying and you know, I don't

20:56disagree with anything that's been said

20:57at all. you know, possibly something.

21:00Again, I my problem with the the main

21:03thrust of this was the lack of um we we

21:08didn't give a scholarship. We haven't

21:09given a scholarship in a while. So, why

21:11even have that? Like, it's kind of

21:13useless because it just sat there. And

21:16it's it's kind of sad because

21:18>> because it's only for that one college

21:20or university. some other student could

21:22have maybe used that at one of the other

21:24colleges or universities but of course

21:26assumption is not going to finance that.

21:28So um the the lack of you know

21:31flexibility with that which is not

21:33something from us something we did we're

21:35just sort of the facilitator the

21:37intermediary um maybe we do focus more

21:40on an actual woman of consequence only

21:44one person one time a year based upon

21:47like maybe people that come before you

21:49in your in your monthly meetings and

21:51make a presentation on the projects

21:52they're doing or the work they're doing

21:54or something like that. Maybe that's a

21:57better idea.

21:58>> Mhm.

22:00Yeah.

22:04Okay.

22:05All right. Well, good thing is that we

22:07all feel the same. Um so, uh yeah, we'll

22:10just bring it back up briefly, uh next

22:12month with with Katie, with Chair Katie,

22:15and and we'll go from there. Um,

22:18yeah. And I think too, you know, it the

22:21biggest push will just be to Patricia's

22:25point we were talking earlier is is to

22:26try to get more interest and involvement

22:28in this committee itself, right? I think

22:31that if the more people we have on here,

22:35um, the better. Um, and we we had two

22:39people ready to send over to the city

22:41council and they both relocated during

22:45the process.

22:46That's crazy.

22:48>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I literally had the

22:50appointment letters and everything

22:51already. We were all locked and loaded.

22:54Um, which it's rare that we get two

22:56people from one of our committees or for

22:59one of our committees in our office at

23:02the same time. So, we were, you know,

23:03pretty excited. In fact, the committees

23:06that we have, we had maybe five people

23:09in total drop out from various

23:11committees in the last, you know, month

23:13to month and a half because of leaving

23:16the city or, you know, just not deciding

23:19they don't want to do it um

23:21>> or unresponsive. They they go through

23:23the um CAC meeting, they get the

23:26interview there, they come to the

23:27interview with us, we decide we want to

23:29appoint them, and then they go sort of

23:31like it, you know, it go crickets. we

23:33don't hear from them.

23:37>> Okay. So close.

23:41But you know, I guess I would just just

23:43encourage you all too to just think of

23:45who um who you think would be interested

23:48in serving on this um because that would

23:51that would help us, you know, and then

23:53it would help obviously in the the

23:55cadence of of us. So if one of our two

23:58of us can't make the meeting, which life

23:59happens, we can still keep having great

24:01conversations. Um but also because you

24:04know more people more work that can get

24:06done. So

24:07>> definitely.

24:08>> Yeah.

24:11Okay.

24:13Was that it on the agenda?

24:16>> Yes, that is it.

24:17>> Still on my phone so I don't want to lo

24:19God knows I press the button be gone.

24:21Yeah.

24:21>> Um really quick. What is um Pat, do you

24:24know off hand what's vacant on this

24:26committee for districts? I'd have to

24:29look because I don't really remember

24:31what district you all live in. I have to

24:32always look that up. Um, it's sort of

24:35one of my fights right now about the

24:37committees is that this whole thing of

24:39requiring people to come from certain

24:40districts is one of the things that's a

24:43limiting factor because we're getting

24:45we're turning people away. Let's I'll

24:47just randomly say I and I I can't say

24:50this is true by the data, but I'm just

24:52going to say district one. We get tons

24:54of people from district one. Well, we

24:56can't have everybody be from district

24:57one according to the bylaws and the

24:59ordinance. So, that's one of the things

25:01that, you know, we're sort of looking at

25:02internally too to can that be changed.

25:05Um, is that like a I don't know if

25:07that's a political hot potato because

25:10frankly, I don't know if this would be a

25:13point of contention to the different

25:14counselors in those districts thinking

25:17that their area is not being properly

25:19represented, but their area already

25:21isn't being properly represented if

25:23there's nobody from that area. Right.

25:25So, um, I don't know. I don't, you know,

25:28I try to avoid politics at all costs.

25:30So, um, but practically speaking, it's a

25:34barrier to us filling a lot of these

25:37seats.

25:39>> Yeah,

25:39>> I'm on the site right now, so I can tell

25:41you which districts in theory are. Um,

25:44Amarus is still up, so I'm going to

25:46assume

25:47>> I've already I've

25:49sent the corrections in for Amarus like

25:52one million times. Esther's still on

25:54there. I'm like, could you please take

25:56these down?

25:57>> Yeah. So, in aory,

25:59>> it's district one, district four.

26:04>> I think that's it. And then we can have

26:0615 people.

26:08>> Wow.

26:08>> I actually think it's nine people.

26:10That's incorrect. I think it's changed

26:12by

26:12>> total. 15 total not counting us.

26:16>> I No, I I actually believe that it's

26:18nine total. I think that that I think

26:21that that is wrong is what I'm saying to

26:22you.

26:23>> Okay. Okay, I understand what you're

26:24saying. Yikes.

26:25>> Yeah.

26:26>> Okay.

26:27>> I think that the city reduced it even

26:29before me, but it never got updated.

26:32>> I'm curious if we have if there's like a

26:35minimum or if like those district seats

26:40are maintain or retained, but we can

26:43build up to a bigger Well, no, I I was

26:48Yeah, I don't know. I that wasn't the

26:51more I said it out loud, the less it

26:52made sense. So we can just move on.

26:56>> So I figure out how do we like get

26:57people

26:59or they just you know what I mean? But

27:01>> right right

27:02>> how they how they handled that when they

27:04did changes to the AAC was they made an

27:06associate member.

27:08>> But the problem is you still need people

27:11that to come to be a member. So it's

27:14it's now I'm like trying to beg some of

27:16these associate members why don't you

27:17don't you want to be a full member?

27:19Right? Because they technically don't

27:21vote. Well, you know, by appropriate

27:23Robert's rules, we elevate them when we

27:26need to, but like we need to elevate

27:29people every month from meetings because

27:32>> there's not enough regular members. So,

27:34it's like

27:36>> you got

27:38Sorry, we tapped into something there.

27:40>> I know.

27:44>> Another recommendation. No, I was just

27:45kidding.

27:49>> So, do you want to at least agree to

27:51like get me something? It's only

27:53Tuesday. Let's say by Monday. Is that

27:55enough time for everyone to get me sort

27:57of a couple little snippets of what

27:58you'd like the recommendation to say?

28:01>> Well, are you still able to send us an

28:03example and then from that we will all

28:06send Yes.

28:07>> Yes. Yeah.

28:08>> Okay. Even if somebody wants to go so

28:10far as to draft what you wanted to

28:12actually say, um then I will review it

28:15and make sure that it's appropriate to

28:17go over there because they have their

28:19own like you know chain of command slash

28:23um things that we have to follow

28:26internally. So

28:31>> okay.

28:32>> Okay, we will do that.

28:35So, if we're done, I'll have a motion

28:37and a second to adjurnn.

28:41>> Motion to adjurnn.

28:43>> I'll second.

28:44>> That was you, Steph.

28:45>> Mhm.

28:47>> And Lauren for a second.

28:49>> Lauren. Okay. So, we have a motion to

28:51adjourn at 6 PM. That's really good. Um,

28:55Vice Chair Stephanie Silva,

28:58>> yes. Member Monica Goodwin,

29:00>> she's having connectivity issues, but

29:02she said yes through text.

29:04>> Okay, thanks.

29:06>> Um, uh, member Lauren Morocco,

29:09>> yes.

29:10>> Member Kate Norton,

29:12>> yes.

29:13>> Member Jenny Cow,

29:14>> yes.

29:15>> Very good. The motion carries and we are

29:18adjourned.

29:20>> All right.

29:21>> Thank you all.

29:21>> You guys,

29:22>> thank you everyone. Thank you.