This folder demonstrates what the toolkit can produce for a moderator after a town supplies a read-only body of past Town Meeting working files.
The synthesis is public-safe by design: it includes aggregate patterns, article leads, procedural signals, and local evidence record IDs, but no raw extracted text and no source files.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Meetings | 13 |
| Source records reviewed locally | 1837 |
| Extraction statuses | extracted (1674), metadata_only (122), no_extractable_text (39), error (2) |
| Source categories | recommendation_book (669), article_writeup (559), warrant (539), other (421), motion (259), financial_material (155), agenda (149), questionnaire (145), presentation (71), minutes_or_transcript (64) |
| Topic signals | governance and committees (1451), procedural floor management (1393), zoning and land use (1176), budget and finance (1114), schools and education (887), community preservation and facilities (677) |
| Procedural signals | amendments (648), referrals (567), debate and decorum (481), consent handling (128), reconsideration (96), indefinite postponement (69), procedural motions (38), substitute motions (5) |
- procedural floor management: 1019 article-level signal(s). Prepare motion sequence, scope review, debate management, vote threshold, and possible points of order.
- governance and committees: 986 article-level signal(s). Review charter/bylaw authority, appointment mechanics, committee jurisdiction, and whether the motion changes a standing practice.
- zoning and land use: 777 article-level signal(s). Expect scope, map/text amendment, referral, and vote-threshold questions; verify the exact motion against the warrant and any planning-board materials.
- budget and finance: 698 article-level signal(s). Check motion amounts, funding sources, transfers, related articles, and whether the Finance Committee recommendation text matches the floor motion.
- schools and education: 467 article-level signal(s). Expect budget, capital, regional-school, or enrollment context; verify sponsor materials and likely member questions before the article is called.
- community preservation and facilities: 418 article-level signal(s). Review eligibility, project scope, funding mechanics, and whether multiple project motions need separate handling.
- amendments: 416 article-level signal(s). Check whether substitute or amending text is likely, confirm scope before debate, and prepare an order-of-consideration plan.
- referrals: 354 article-level signal(s). Prepare language and vote handling for referral motions, including what body would receive the matter and what happens to the main motion.
- debate and decorum: 288 article-level signal(s). Review speaking order, relevance, tone, and point-of-order handling before the article is called.
- reconsideration: 34 article-level signal(s). Be ready to identify timing, notice, and eligibility requirements before allowing reconsideration to proceed.
- consent handling: 28 article-level signal(s). Treat archived consent materials as prior source examples only; do not infer that a future article belongs on consent.
- indefinite postponement: 23 article-level signal(s). Prepare to explain the effect of postponing indefinitely and how it interacts with the pending main motion.
- procedural motions: 4 article-level signal(s). Review precedence, debate limits, and voting threshold before the session.
- substitute motions: 3 article-level signal(s). Confirm whether the substitute is in scope and how it will be presented against the main motion.
Run the local question prototype against the public synthesis:
python3 tools/answer_natick_history_question.py "What prior examples should I review for a zoning article with possible amendments?"Example questions this layer can answer:
- What Natick history should I review before a zoning article?
- Have referrals appeared often, and where should I look?
- What should I watch for if an amendment is expected?
- Are there past examples involving reconsideration?
- Which recent meetings had consent-handling materials?
The answers are preparation leads. They do not state legal rules or final moderator rulings without reviewer confirmation against official sources.