Thread by @shayshinecastle

We're going to briefly talk about when council could resume in-person meetings. Not in 2020, and maybe not in early 2021 either. They talked about a virtual retreat (Jan. 22-23).

Brautigam: Since we're in Safer At Home, there are limits on how many ppl can gather, in what size space, etc.

"We think it's prudent" to remain virtual for council and board meetings "through the end of the year."

Yates on the retreat: It's a mid-term check-in, so a bit shorter. Evening of Friday, Jan. 22 ("building relationships") and morning of Saturday, Jan. 23 (workplan)

Yates, Young on that subcommittee, and they wanted to do the relationship building stuff in person. Maybe.

It would be conducted with masks on, and physically distanced. No public allowed in; it would be televised.

Wallach: Not so enthusiastic about this. "My discomfort at having to communicate through a mask is relatively high."

Brockett agrees: Transmission risk is higher indoors.

Friend, too: "I guess I don't know what the big 'pros' would be, and we'd be requiring some staff to come in and putting them at risk. That's what I'd be most uncomfortable with."

Swetlik: "I defer to the judgement of council members who would be most impacted if something were to happen."

In other words, the old people.

Respect for his elders. Swetlik is such a Boy Scout. (I mean that as a compliment.)

Yates says the retreat facilitator has done in-person meetings recently, with masks, and "found it sub-optimal"

So it sounds like we will be remote at least through January...?

That may not be the final dates, as Nagle won't be here. "You guys can go on without me, and that's fine."

Yates: "I think it's kind of important that we're all together for the retreat."

That's all for this one. @threadreaderapp please unroll. Thanks!