Good afternoon. Welcome to the board of health meeting September 15, 2025. Please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly hereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is interest If anyone else is interested, excuse me, if
anyone else is recording this meeting, please notify the chairman. Pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29th, 2023 signing of the act of 2023, extending certain COVID 19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting
law until June 30th, 2027. This meeting of the Cadam Board of Health is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder that people who
would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling 1508-945-4410 and the conference ID is 33808577 pound or they may join the meeting online via Microsoft Teams through the link in the posted agenda. While this is
a live broadcast and simoc cast on Chattam TV channel 8 and 1072, despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide real time access. We will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. And now I'll turn the meeting over to
our chairman, Dr. Noble Hansen. Thank you. It shall be the policy of this board to conduct its meetings under the open meetings law so as to encourage public participation whenever time permits and as part of agenda item discussions. We have four things on the agenda today.
But first, let's establish a quorum. And when I call your name, please say present. Carol Boyce here. John Beckley present. Ron Bowman here. Ron Weiser present. And Noble Hansen present. So we have a quorum. And first on the agenda is is a variance
hearing for RNS nominee trust William Lichfield trustee 144 Chat Harbor Lane tie-in bond. Um and uh do we have someone here to uh present the request for the variance?
Yes, we do. Uh for the record, Sean Riley with Ty and Bond uh representing the applicant at 144 Chat Harbor Lane. Um, for any of you that were on the board 5 years ago, uh, this had come before the board as part of the real
estate transfer for a a new system u for the existing dwelling. Uh, since then uh we have uh gone through the motions of having a new dwelling um proposed
um and the permit that was issued for the variances uh with the original permit has now lapsed. So, we are back with um essentially the same design, same location, same bedroom count. Um we are getting a little bit better with our
uh variances. I think we're a couple feet further away from the coastal bank uh than we were with um East Southeast um design uh but essentially same location um and just looking for the variances um
to put in the new system to replace the uh the old failed system. And with that, I can open it up to any questions or I can walk you through the plan. Uh, yeah. So, uh, just quickly first, the the plan for the septic system
that's in the current plan, is that the same one you're saying that was approved, uh, for a variance in 2021 by the board of health. It's essentially the same. We have a slightly different configuration. We've got three chamber if you can see my screen. Um we've got uh essentially
chambers in stone same as the last one. Same general location at 60 ft. Uh this was this was the last one uh here at 60 ft from the isolated wetland. Really the the only difference is that we're not um utilizing the existing septic tank.
We're putting in a new septic tank which is now uh further from the resource areas than was previously approved. So, this is the current design here. You can see the septic tank is um to the right of the uh soil
absorption system. I'm just going to highlight this for you in green or purple, sorry. Um and it was located over in this location over here within the last um goround, but
essentially the the chambers are in the same location as they were uh with that last approval. Okay, thank you. Are there uh questions or um anything from the board? Um
okay, so u there's always the same question there. There's a either a wetland or a um coastal bank in what east, west, and south. So, is it possible on the on on the lot you have
that this could be located in such a place that would have less of of variance offsets? It doesn't look like it, but I just asked the question. There is, and they went through um painstakingly uh marking out the trees
that it would take to remove this um and the benefits would not outweigh the the deficit of of moving it up into that area. I think there's uh 140 trees that they marked out. Um it would require a trunk line to get up the force man to get up through the woods up to that
higher point. Um so the case was made that this would be the um the most environmentally friendly. Uh it's only a three-bedroom design. Um it is on the sound. It's not in an estuary. Um so it would be the most
environmentally friendly design. Okay. Thank you. And then it looks as if the existing septic tank is not on the property. Is that is that correct? That's Yes, that's correct. The field itself is not on the property. The tank
is uh the field is not. So that um leech pit is to be uh to be removed. Right. So that's um a big plus. Um that is a big plus.
Uh, and then um does anyone have questions about the the house design and the number of bedrooms and all that? Is the driveway on the property? So, they have an easement across the other property to get to this property.
This is a a pre-existing uh non-conforming lot in that there isn't um isn't access from Chat Harbor Lane uh as there's a marsh that uh essentially bisects the property in the back. So, they have an easement to come
across the neighboring property uh on the on the west side to get through the property. Okay. Thank you. And yes, there's three bedrooms. There's an officer den, but there's a six foot archway
um to it. So, that wouldn't uh count as a bedroom. And then the total house count total room number is not that high in in the there's two neither room in the basement could be considered a bedroom. Correct, Judy?
Um yeah. No, the the the only room in the basement part of it's unfinished and then there's a laundry room wouldn't and they it's labeled entry hall then yeah I'm not sure what that is.
Is that an open area the entry hall? Do you know it is Sean? Yes. So that's outside to that plan B. That is you've got to enter through there to get to the stairs to get to the upstairs.
Okay. Yep. Yeah. So, no, there's nothing in the basement I would be concerned about. And um Okay. And then and I'd say um Judy's memo um she hasn't explicitly stated whether she
approves this for the board of health, but I assume that she she is in agreement. Yeah, I don't have any issues with this. My wording was unusual on this one. Should you approve these variances? You recommend it, right?
Okay. Uh, other questions or comments? Any any input from the public? Okay. I think can I get a motion for a vote? I'll make a motion we approve the application. I'll second it. Would you like me to read the condition?
Uh, yes. Could you read the conditions, please? Uh, the there's three conditions. The applicant should restrict the property to a maximum three bedrooms and record the deed restriction on the at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds. The applicant shall submit a copy of the
executed deed to the board. The engineer shall submit an engineered asbuilt plan including asbuilt elevations with a written certification that the system has been installed in accordance with the approved plan and no alteration to the floor plan of the dwelling will be allowed without further review by the
board of health or its agent. Okay. And then uh when I call your name, if you approve of the variance, just say yes. Carol Boyce, yes. John Beckley, yes. Ron Bowman, yes. Ron Weiser, uh yes. Noble Hansen, yes. Okay, so that variant
is approved. Thank you very much. Have a great day. Thank you, Sean. Hey. Yeah. Two copies of this. Two copies of this. This is mine. Did you grab my uh this? Um okay. Um
All right. U the second item on the on the agenda is a board of health vote to reduce or wave short-term rental fines for uh Granger 49 Old Queen Anne Road properties are Yeah. or grain or 49 Old
Queen Road, Sab 6 Sabin's Lane, 28 258 Orleans Road, and 878 Main Street. And I guess Judy can present this. They have been in contact with uh with Judy. Um so we starting with the Grangers. Yes.
Um I lost my Yeah. Um we I've spoken to um David Granger and Evelyn Granger. Um after the last meeting there there's been some miscommunications. Um Mr. Granger had
not received it as we we talked about at the last meeting. He um since received it and paid um paid all the the um not the fines but he he registered the properties and he asked that we could
reduce them or um dismiss them. I talked to town council and town council said we can do that just in a a regular board of health vote. Um that we don't need to go to court and we can just let the court know that we've dismissed it. Um, so
with discussions with Karen, our short-term rental, um, we we feel that just, um, reducing the fines to one day, $200 fine, um, just to cover our costs of the
work we've done to, we think that would be adequate if the board agreed. $200 total or total? Yeah. Um and importantly the uh the town attorney has told us we do have the power to reduce or wave the fine by
at our discretion. Correct. Um so u I think that there was this one of the persons that said he was not aware initially that that um the period had begun.
He he never received the um the letters about the hearing or the t you know the thing where he and his wife were separated and they weren't communicating and and he is on the line if you if you're okay. Yeah, but yes, it's that one.
There was miscommunications between them and us apparently. Yeah. And I I think you know I would just point out that this is our first summer. This is our our beginning this and we're rolling the thing up. So it's it's in a startup process. But I think
the the lack of communication, if that's what it was, to me explains one of the big reasons why we need the short-term rental because one of the things it does when you register, you put the person responsible for the property and the contact number so they're immediately available to somebody like Judy to
straighten all these things out. So, that's a big important thing for the short-term rental. But, I would ask um any uh questions or comments on the board about about what we should do? Uh we started the discussion last time. Um
I mean I'll I'll just start it. I'll say um I think what we talked about was what we're trying to do right now and I think Ron agreed with this was um get people registered and it's a startup process. Not we're not particularly finding
people. It's getting the short-term people registered. And so this man this owner is registered. So, I would I would I would agree with uh Judy and Karen's proposal to have one fine that covers our costs. Um but reduce it just to 200
total. That to me that sounds pretty reasonable. I would agree. I I think our as we said before, it's not we're not trying to be punitive, right? Trying to get people registered. I guess the question I would have is and it sounds like from our last
discussion, you know, we're batting 98% maybe in terms of getting people registered. I guess the question I would ask is so when we finally go case by case on this last one or two%
and find out where the flaws in the system are, get them registered. Will that make the process then I'm getting you're saying noble that'll make the process infallible then right we will have we will have a place where
everybody has contact information everybody is registered I would say it would it will be much improved infallible is quite a strong word I would say I would say it's a stretch it's a stretch goal but I mean I think that's what we ought to stretch for so
I would say one thing just being around there are renters who have been renting for a while their property and they have people that come back every summer and they have a list of people who might be interested so they can they are able to rent their property for the entire
summer without ever advertising on Airbnb or going on the internet or listing it with a rental agency. I don't know how many we don't know how many of those people there are but I I'm pretty sure there are some because of Chadam and and the desiraability and they and
and a lot of people come back. So, but I think we are in a startup. Um, and and it's going to and this is the problems that we've had here. You know, it should will be solved if there's one contact person instead of a trust or something and you have a phone number and then
Judy could talk to him right off the bat and get things squared away. And I but I do think I think the example you gave is legitimate, but also probably very small. Probably. And you know, I think in time we'll probably get better and better and better. It sounds It sounds like we're
doing awfully good right now. I think so. I would say so. Yeah, that's we're up in the around the thousand. So that and this is the first summer. And Karen didn't start work till when? May. April. Oh, over a year ago. A year ago. A year ago. May. A year ago. May. Yeah. Okay. She didn't start inspecting until this
summer. Right. So, okay. Other questions or comments? Yeah. I'm okay with the concept here. Yeah. I'm curious as to whether $200 will truly cover our out- of pocket, an estimate of our out- of pocket, or is
this kind of a grab a grab number? I I mean, it it's an estimate. I mean, you know, the amount of time it takes her to to produce the letters and get them mailed out. That's basically all we're And the and the lawyer, the legal fees. Well, that you don't really see that.
So, okay. Um, he's on a retainer, isn't he? But yeah, I believe so. I don't um I I'm we're comfortable with one day fine. Okay. Um, so and I think the fact that the renter I'm
sorry, the owner as soon as he was made aware of the situation was very prompt about coming in and dealing with it. So I Okay. You know, I again, not to be punitive, one one day seems quite fair to me. We I think this has also shown us how
important it is to um post the letter at the house. That's the other take away especially at least for the hearing part of it. Um because it the next case too you'll find that the people didn't know even know about the hearing until after it already had
been held. Well, that's that's an issue we have to So, if we can at least post it on the property, then if they if they don't if the owners themselves don't see it, at least the renters will see it and we'll let them know. Gotcha. Okay. And I think there was a good article in the in the Chronicle, the local paper,
um that gets more of the information out to the public. So, yeah, I know if you read the the article, that was a good article. It was helpful. I think it gave a lot of good information and Okay. Now, any input from the public? This is David. Thank you all for the
assistance. I appreciate you uh giving me some relief and thank you very much, Karen. Um great process. Uh I'm glad I know about it and we'll take care of things moving forward. Okay, that's uh Mr. Granger. Yes. Yeah. Great. Thank you very much.
Other input from the public? Um there's one person, Sonia Bartlett. Yes. Hi. Um, I don't believe I'm on your agenda. I had attempted to try to get
on. I am in a similar situation. It sounds like Mr. Granger was in that I received several communications all on the same day. All came on September 11th, but they all dated way way back.
So, I was not alerted to I had no idea that I was doing anything wrong until much much later than intended. Um, and I did call Karen and she helped me to register and all that
and uh she suggested that I join the meeting today, but I'm apparently not on your agenda. I'm just wondering how how I think you are. You're Are you 41? Oh, I am. Okay. 41 Harbor Hill. 41 Harbor. Yeah. Oh, okay. I Great. I didn't see that.
I'm so sorry. Are are you 41 Harbor Hill? Can we finish up the other one? Yes, I am. Okay. Yeah, you're you're the next on the agenda. We're doing them one at a time. I'm sorry. I did not see that and I thought with my wonderful technological skills, I had not sent the right thing
in. So, I apologize and I will be quiet. Just hold your thoughts and then we'll revisit them in a moment. Right. I think the same discussion would apply. Okay. Did we get a motion for I'll make a motion to
reduce the fine to the $200 and the second. Sure. I'll second it. Second it. And this is for the uh Granger Properties. Granger. Um and then I'll take a voice vote when I call your name. Say yes. Carol Boyce.
Yes. John Beckley? Yes. Ron Bman? Yes. Ron Weiser? Yes. And Noble Hansen? Yes. So, um, that is all settled. $200 fine for the for the for all the properties for, uh, Grangers. Thank you.
You need to have a gavvel. You can get them one. I think my wife has that. Dinner's ready. I'm sorry. Uh third on the agenda is a board of health vote to reduce or wave short-term
rental fines for Leeward 41 Harbor Road. And um Judy, you can present. So similar situation. Um we didn't hear um uh and she didn't get notice of the hearing um according to an email she
sent today until after the hearing. Um and um but once uh Karen was able to get in touch with her, she took right at why he got got the property uh registered. So she's up to speed on that. Um right. And what is her last name?
Mark. Bartlett. So this is Sonia Bartlett. Bartlet. So it's our owner is under Leeward Mark LLC. Yes, I have it in an LLC currently. Right. Good luck.
Okay. So, it's it's basically the same discussion. I again, I'd say it points out once the short-term rental thing gets up and and going. Um, we'll have a contact person and a phone number and then Judy can call directly and get things like this squared away. So, it's going to be it's going to get improved as we go along. And Judy now, do you
have a recommendation or the same thing? I would I would recommend it just be reduced to to the one day fine, $200, basically cover expenses. Yes. Yeah. I I would agree with that personally. Um do we know why where was the flaw in our
communication system? Right. Sonia, can you answer that? Yeah. Um so it's interesting a couple of things. It's really weird. The mail is so bad. I I got a bunch of mail on September 11th and then a bunch more
um like when I came home last night. So it must have come on Friday because I went away for a couple of days or Saturday. But it all it's really weird because it's all over the place with when you mailed it. And so I looked into it. I have on here for my mailing
address is 25 Hilltop Place, but I actually live at 23 Hilltop Place. And um believe it or not, a year and a half ago, I moved next door, but I changed my address with the town. So, I uh called around today and all the departments in
the entire town have the correct address except for your department and I really I don't I don't get that. So, that's that's one. We go by the assessor's record. So, did they have you at 23? Yeah, they do. All right. We'll have to check that.
Whack. The other wacky thing is just with this certified mail, like why does it seem to go around in circles now that um I'm in there with my email address, obviously things will be much easier. But um I think somebody one of you had
previously said that it would be good to have a a paper notice on the door. Um if there had been a paper notice on the door, I would have definitely gotten that right away. And I I'm a total rule follower. like I was telling Karen like I couldn't sleep that night when I got that letter from you guys. I was in such
a panic that I had uh missed something. Um so I I apologize and I I I respectfully um request some relief with this issue. It was out of no other uh no malice on on my end just um
communication problem. Okay. Thank you. And what town do you live in now? You do you live in what town do you live in? I I I'm in Chadam a lot and then I also Yeah. Then I'm I'm off Cape in Westchester County, New York right now. So So the mailing address is Ry.
It's 23 Hilltop Place. Ry, New York. Ry, New York. Ry, New York. Right. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. All right. And we have her recorded now. So we have all the updated information. Okay. Okay. In the port. Um questions or comments from the board? I think it same thing applies and I
think this comes in in you know one of the one of the unexpected things that we're working out as we get started. So any input from other input from the public? I'll make a motion we proceed with u
reducing the penalty to $200. And that's for um Leeward 41 Harbor Road. Correct. U okay and no no input from the input from the public. So, we'll go ahead and take a void a vote and when I call your name, please say yes if you agree with
the v the reduction. Um, Carol Boyce, yes. John Beckley, yes. Ron Broman, yes. Roniser, uh, yes. And Noble Hansen, yes. Okay, so I think that's all settled and, uh, you're all set.
Thank you very much. I I really appreciate it. I I think it's more part of it is just the uh startup process that that yeah I think I think people know that this is very well intentioned. I just think word for some reason hasn't gotten out completely. That's all.
But hopefully now Judy will have direct contact with you number in case anything comes up. Thank you very much. Thank you on so much. Okay. All righty. All right. Uh, fourth on the agenda is
um right a discussion review of the bedroom format for our um nitrogen loading regulation which we put together. So, this is an ongoing discussion. Uh, it's been
discussed a couple times before. I have that. Um, and I think Judy has enclosed a copy of the current wording in the Chattam Board of Health regulation determination of bedroom count and residential dwellings. And then
Nope. Nope. No. Judy put together the new one. So, actually what I gave you this week, just to clarify, was the policy that we worked on that we copied from basically from Hangingham. we kind of discussed at
length which is more of a narrative format um and we kind of had agreed upon that. Did you find it John? And then I put together I took this the policy and I converted it into a regulation.
Um our town council felt that we couldn't do this as a policy. It has to he felt that it should be um codified, right? And um I was kind of struggling with how to because as I told you before
it goes it's two of our regulations have a definition of a bedroom in it. The this nitrogen loading regulation and the subsurface sewage disposal regulation which is basically our t our local title five rig. Um and it's an awful lot to
put into a regulation. So I thought make it its own separate regulation. I mean, we don't have to do it this way way, but I just figured it's pretty cut, you know, short and clear. And so this this document you've g us given us here, Chattam Board of Health
Regulation, determination of bedroom count and residential dwellings, that is the written in regulation form from the preliminary document we had before, policy for determining the the the thing that mimicked Hingham, right? and a lot of these things. We need to look at this final one and
see if it if it goes along with what we were talking about with the the rewrite of the hanging policy, which was pretty good, right? Uh, one question, Judy. Um, on this draft
on the back page at the top, it says, "However, such rooms shall not be classified as bedrooms if the detached structure lacks any one of the following domestic features. Why shower?"
Right. You can have a bedroom without a shower. Exactly. Or a toilet. That's up to you. Um, you know, that was in the Hangingham. Um, I agree. You know, usually in a my when I've reviewed these in the past, if it's a
detached garage and it doesn't have a bathroom, I don't count it as a but the functional part of the bathroom is the toilet. Yeah. You don't have to have a shower in order to have But Right. You don't. You certainly don't.
And so why would you want to knock out what would otherwise qualify as a bedroom? because the facility doesn't have a shower, but does have a shower. This is just in detached structures, right? So, we're talking about detached rooms over garages that are detached.
Um, I still I don't see why the absence of a shower would kick that out. We can take that out. That's just totally for discussion. Reasonable. And this is just their
subjective idea of a detached dwelling and what you need for call it a bedroom and they're saying they think you need a shower, but it's very arguable that you don't need a shower if you have a toilet in heat, right? Um I think if somebody came to us with a detached structure that looked and
smelled and felt like a bedroom and had a toilet next to it but no shower, we'd call it a bedroom, I think. So that's the point I was making. Yeah. So So we'll take that out. Y um Right. So, usually oftentimes we'll get like
unheated pool houses and things which can be difficult because people will go in and add add that in after the fact or they'll put a one of those split things. Yeah. Well, we Yeah, we never can control that looking at a plan, right?
What they do later and there's probably some of that. Mhm. Um, so if it if it doesn't have heat, but it has a toilet and it's a pool house, usually, you know, I mean, it gets it gets kind of
tricky. Um, I I think we're going to end up having to live with a couple of small exceptions and that may well be one of them. Yes. Yep. I mean for for the greater good and there's always some element of discretion when we interpret this at the
end of the day but let me just clarify the uh a door opening of less than 72 in which is six feet or if greater than 72 in is adjacent to or includes an on suite full bathroom. What what's the thinking there?
room should we go if it meets one of the falling gra I get uh so if it has less than less than the 72 in um yeah that we that's we that doesn't create privacy right or does create privacy right
does create privacy if it's greater than it we've seen rooms with 72 inch openings that have full on suite bathrooms in them right so if they have an opening that's greater than six feet It goes there's an adjacent on suite full
bathroom. They were gonna say what Ron would say. It looks and smells like a bedroom. Bedroom. Yeah, it looks like a duck. Okay. Right. Okay. But what if it has the What if it's 72 in but it has the bathroom, right?
It would be considered a bedroom. Less than 72 in. Less than 72 in. It is a bedroom. It is a bedroom. But what if it's 72 in with a bathroom? That's right. There's no there's no it's still a bedroom. This is less than and and above more.
What if it's exactly 72 in 72 in or less one way or the other? 72 in plus a bathroom is a bedroom. 72 in or less. Well, you talking about right now, how do you how do you interpret a a
a door that's a room that is exactly 72 in? You're not capturing that in your definition. Okay. Yeah, but that's an Yeah, I agree. That's an easy change. Just just say change it to or less less than or equal to.
That's or equal then, right? Or less. Yeah. Okay, I'll fix that. Um and then the other thing that comes up is on the last in that list, degree of privacy.
Um how how do you define has a degree of privacy? one one way is if the opening is less than 72 in then you have privacy. Um but I think there are some other qualifications in
in the previous document. It comes up it comes up quantify a degree of privacy. it comes up with. Well, I I think that this is where we're seeing these bonus rooms, you know, off of a mudroom area
that they may have a open stairway and open at the top, but a judgement, but it's a Yeah. So, and I think that's what we're trying to get at here is that these rooms are going to be counted as bedrooms. Yeah. Um
um the uh on on the Hingham document in the very last paragraph, take a loft for for instance. So it would be second floor and it might be open for the downstairs as a loft. In the Hangingham document, it says a loft accessed by a
stairwell less than five feet wide or a spiral staircase which must be five feet is a separate room regardless of its openness to the room below. So that further defines the loft, but it points out it points out what a what a
loft a loft can be a second floor room that is open with a rail open to the floor below and accessed just by a regular stairwell that would be considered to have enough privacy to be a bedroom by the Hangingham document. So
when when when in what Judy has written in this new document, it says lofts with limited access. So do we need to define better a loft or limited access? That would be my question. Yeah,
because it get it gets to this thing a degree of privacy which is I mean we this it's always subjected to some to some extent but I think in the Hingham document it was it was defined a bit more. I think if you were to I think if you were to put in those additional
items that were in the Hingham document, it would make it easier, right? Yep. I think I think it would make less subjective need to arbitrate. Yes. Yeah. So So I I would be in favor of adding those additional comments.
Yeah, I would. I think too. Uh the other thing that comes up is are there other people have other Okay. The other thing that um was covered in the earlier document, the Hingham summary that Judy did was handling great rooms and that it
and um I don't know if I can find the exact language here, but it it um you know we see many great rooms with a kitchen area, dining area and some other area and the Hingham document said if there was any kind of pillars, partition, partial partition, rail,
anything cabinets that define the areas is um as separate areas, then it's not a great room. You it's counted as two rooms. That gets to the whole whole house room count. Um and I think that's probably good language because the
great rooms are are a way to architect your way architect design your way around home numbers. Right. So I'd have to add that to uh final bedroom count the greater of um whole room count. That's where I would
add the um the part about the yeah you know okay it says this is the this is the third down on the last page of the Hingham document in an open concept design where the large space has a small dividing wall half wall pillars built-in cabinetry or other architectural
features that protrude into the space or obstructs normal movement within the space and produces a defined visual demarcation shall be considered for title 5 purposes a sep sepate rooms. Yeah. So that gives us discretion to look at a
great room that's labeled as one room but say, "Well, no, that's really two rooms." Didn't we have an instance where it was a large room and at the far side there was a bed,
right? But there was there was no defining features between the one end and and the bed. Was it a bed was like 30 feet away from the other a great room? A great room. And do you remember this?
I remember I remember a a bedroom, not a great room, but a bedroom that for all the world looked like a bowling alley. Is that what I'm thinking of? Yeah. And it was counted as one bedroom. Yeah. It had a double bed at each end and the middle
hallway that was more than six feet. So it was like maybe eight feet. So, it had the appearance of two separate, but by our rules, we considered it just one. Although, it's, you know, it seemed it's close. It ought to be two bedrooms.
I I just think that if somebody brought that again, I I just think we ought to hold the line and say, "Wait a minute. What? This dog ain't gonna come on. He'll be in again." Yeah. So, I I think we can deal with that without it without having to deal with it being cod codified.
Okay. But what what do you think about the this further explanation of the open concept design where it talks about small dividing walls, half walls? No, I I I for the same reason as the thing with the loft, I think it would be good to drop that in.
I just definitely I thees can add that back into the whole I think I I like I like this concept. This is very nice, very simple, very straightforward. So the one that Judy sent out this is she tried to simplify it so it can go into the
I would also add the next point about conversely the lack of any distinctive bumpout projecting case work or pillars even though there are regions within the large space serving different
functions would be generally considered as one room. If you've got a Well, that's what space in a kitchen, dining room. Yeah, family room, great room, whatever you want to call it, how can you count that
as one room? Well, that's saying that you can if there's this this is saying that you if it's one room without these bumpouts, right? Um, even though it's kitchen, most of them have I mean, again, you have to take them on a case by case, but
usually when you have a big open space, dining room, kitchen, there's usually a big bar, like a big half wall, either a half wall or a big um countertop, you know, but between the dining room and living room, there may not be.
Yeah. Well, I mean, but we don't, you know, dining rooms don't get used. If it's one big open room, it's not like they're going to separate that off and use it as a separate function. I think the way it's written is you have to have some bump in
to to for us to consider it as two separate rooms. So, there's a way to that's for and that's just for the purposes of the total room count. Yeah. So, and then and then Judy, if I get this straight, then once we
um pass this into code, then those two other codes that you talked about will then by reference that's what we're going to have to do. So, I got to figure out how to Yes, you have to either have to back those or I'll Yeah, I'll say by
reference to this one and then reference this one as for the definition of a bedroom. And I can share this um or this with um you know all the designers and okay but but the process correct me if I'm wrong or Judy process from from this
point forward is we we sort of agree with the changes um and Judy rewrites this a bit and then we have to have a public hearing with the actual document and how Judy's going to make it fit in to the new regulation right that gets posted. Then we have a meeting
where everybody can come in from the public and and make their comments or complaints or whatever and we revisit the whole thing again and then then we make a vote after the public hearing and then then it's bylaw that goes in. Right. Is that correct? Yep. So we have to have a public
hearing. So right now we're we're modifying this document that Judy has made up and then do do we need to see that one more time or schedule public hearing? what should you be doing? I I think what let me let me do one more
draft so that you can see it. Um and then we'll schedule a hear public hearing and you know I think we can shoot by the end of the year. Um it's already almost for short-term uh rentals is uh March 1st. That's not till March. Yeah.
March. So we have plenty of time to get this done before the next renewal period. But this doesn't this really relates more to septic variances and Right. Yeah. I think that if we can get it done by to get it effective by January 1st, it would be
it would be good. Okay. And I I think I can Okay. Okay. Right. Yeah. Um Okay. So then the final discussion about any changes Judy might make to this and then she'll bring back bring back another one another meeting
and then we'll move ahead with the public hearing. Correct. Yeah. So let's see. Um our next So this is just a a discussion. October 6th. Nobody we have we have you think we have um we're gonna on October 6 we're going to do more um short-term
rental hearings if they have a register. Yeah. Um so I'll try and get this for that date. If not, it'll be the next meeting which is probably the 20th of October and then we'll plan a hearing for November.
So, how many uh current short-term rental actions remain before us? Um, I'm not sure. Maybe like 10. Yeah, I think she said there was 15, but she's going to do five at the next hearing in batches. In batches.
The next batch will be fine. Yeah. I think it's just easier to handle that way. Yeah. Um, and hopefully with all the, you know, coverage we've gotten people, maybe it'll shake free some of those. Yeah. And I like we've discussed as we've kind of learned a few things too. So
Okay. Um it's a it's a process. All right. Good. I'm glad this is I think that's forward with that. It's um more explicit. It's better. It's a 10-year project getting this right. Right. Oh, we're doing pretty good. We've done
it a few times. We've had some of those, but uh yeah. Okay, that's good. To wind up that one. Um, so I would uh do we need public any public comment or discussion uh on the uh review of the bedroom format? No, I don't think so. No,
no, there's no one on. So, all right. And then we have a uh we've done our um agenda items. U public comments, future agenda items request. We're going to talk about lead in the airport again at some time in the
future. Um but uh we'll that's to be determined when other items. Judy might give us a followup uh if we can on Milh Hill. Do we know Oh yeah. I didn't get a chance to ask Greg today
uh if they've scheduled it yet. So um would you let us know by email? Yeah, let us know by email what the developments are on that case so we all are aware of what the timing will be. So Right. And my recollection is that
by the contract it would it it's supposed to start September or November. It's it should be it's short term. I mean it's not next year, right? Hopefully hopefully supposed to be and that was part of the whole proposal. So yeah. So and will that be open will that be open
to the public if they ask or it would be it's a public event, right? What is it? The cleanup or clean up? I have I have people I have a lot of picnic demand. I have people asking so is it something
we can give when we get the date? Can we give that out to people and they I think it's all public record. Yeah. I don't Okay. All right. That's all. All right. Anything else? I just a comment about the the lead in the airport. You know, I think if we're going to have that discussion, there's a
few things we probably need to have come to us before we have that discussion. And one is, you know, there is an OSHA level of lead in the air that is available. So, I think we, you know, if we're going
to do anything significant there, we're going to have to measure what the lead in the air is. I'd like to know if there's been any precedent for a small federally regulated airport shutting down before we do anything with
it. Uh because I mean this this just is going to have s would have significant impact on the community, right? if and I know there is an option out there for the lead free fuel but as I understand it it's unbelievably
expensive and has very limited availability right so it's not really an option right so I just I think before we have a real discussion about that those are some of the things that we really need to think about and and put in play be aware Ron that the OSHA regulations
only apply to workplace settings and and only addresses worker exposures, not general public. I understand that, but you know, I mean, I I don't even know if there is any
lead. I agree. Uh I agree in the air around there. And I don't think we want to take any action unless we have some sort of an analytical assessment of what the air quality is. The problem is if you sample that, it's going to be different today than it will
be tomorrow. It'll be a base. It'll be based upon a gust of wind this way or that way. I mean, there are I'm sure there are SOPs out there for how to make an accurate and effective assessment of lead in the air. Maybe it's on multiple days, maybe it's
at different times of the day. I don't know what it is, but I'm sure I'm sure there's an SOP out there that we would need to Yeah. I think what they do is they they measure lead in the ground at the ends of the runways and in the warm-up areas. That's what they've done. What whatever it is, I'm just saying we
agree. I agree with you. You can't do anything without any kind of an it's the EPA and the FAA which are controlling this thing, right? And I for me my my thought is it's not so much that we're going to close the airport or give them a date, but it's to keep the the the discussion
in the public view and to put pressure on the airport or whoever is running it um to move as quickly as possible to get in this 100 octane ABG gas with the infrastructure in the airport as quickly as it can. And that gets you get
involved EPA, FAA and and there's a lot of information out there. I can tell you I've looked into it somewhat and there's a lot. Um I I'm I'm not I'm not opposed to that. I I agree. I think it ought whatever we're not discuss I agree it's difficult to have the discussion when we don't
really have I mean data data on our airport. You can look at data on other airports. Yes, you can. But and what and what the feeling is in general. Uh Felmouth airport I don't know if they banned it but they have um it's the 90 octane ABG gas which is one level lower.
Not every one of the old piston aircraft can use that gas. But yeah, so it it gets complicated, but um I I think it's worth pushing to get it done as soon as it we can. And I would agree. So and it's worth everybody can can can
look can can research it because the EPA and has has lots of information, very specific stuff just like what you're talking about. And the other thing I've always said is from a public health standpoint um and I think John agrees with this because he said before um it's not it's
not that there's a level of le a level of lead above which is is dangerous or bad for children nowadays from a public health standpoint. The thought is that no there's no lead is good. No lead. It's zero. So that
that is changing too a little bit, but it gets to So we we need to and what testing would be, I don't know, but I'm sure it's been done places. That's a good comment. Any other um thoughts for future agendas?
Uh yeah. So that's uh Milh Hill followup probably if we're if it's not already gone, but it probably would be done by the next meeting. Wouldn't that be nice? Okay. Um, and um, all right. Any u
I can tell you our did I tell you our new uh sanitarian started today? You haven't told the board. Our new sanitarian started today. No kidding. Andy Grover. He today was his first day. So he's a RS and um a soil evaluator. So
he's got good handle on septic and um a lot of engineering work. And what is an RS? registered sanitarian, which is a requirement for our job. Um, it's a state certification. Does he come to us with fresh out of school or is he
No, no, no. He's worked he's he's been around a long time. Um, his father was a designer. He's worked for Ryder in Wilox for many years. I've known I've known him for many years. Okay. Lives in town. Has a young family. Perfect. Um, very nice nice young man. And um, so
we're looking forward to him. Did you recruit him or did he just appear? He saw the advertisement and he came in and talked to me. Why did But you had already dealt with him before. I've known, like I said, I've known him for a long time. So, it's it's really good. So, we poached him a little bit from
Ryder and Wilcox, but he came on his own. We didn't go after him. So, what happened to Lucas moved on. He was having a hard time finding a place to live on the Cape. He'd been trying to buy a home. He's been living he was living in um
Plymouth for the last year, year and a half. I know that. And um he you know just he needed more money and more How long had Lucas worked for the town? Three three years full-time and then part-time before that. It was a big
loss. I'm telling you. I was hoping he was going to step into my job. He was the air parent. Yeah. Clearly. Yeah. For you. But he's not an RS yet. So he's um he's not he's he's working on that and um he went to
a a engineering firm so he'll learn a lot there and he may end up back in public health but so where's he going to work next? He's working for an engineering firm in um Plymouth up in Plymouth where he lives. Gotcha. Okay. So all right. It sounds like this person is somebody
who could grow into uh your job maybe. Well, we got we got a couple people good people now. Karen and him are they're gonna start um working both doing a lot of different things. Does Karen have an RS? No, not yet. Inspects, right?
She's she's going to start with the food and the housing stuff and Annie's going to focus on the on the septic and then we'll get a cross train. So, she can she can legally inspect retail food establishments without an RS? Yes. Okay. Yep. She's got she went through the
state training and she's they're going to both do the SERB safe training. Um so yeah, the RS credentiing is required for your position. Most health departments, health inspectors, they want you to be an RS within a few years. Yeah. And then for
for the directorate position or the health agent, whatever it's called in different towns, it's um definitely an RS and most most the town the states now pushing towards master's degrees. Yeah. So, okay. So, is it appropriate to say uh
something about when our favorite local breakfast uh it was in the paper today will open? Oh, was it? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Last week, I think Wednesday 17th, but everybody everybody can't go the same day, you know.
Yeah. So, what time does it open? 6 a.m. So, okay. All right. All right. Uh, now we have minutes of September 8th. Anybody have uh revisions or um additions? I'll make a motion we accept the draft
minutes of September 8th, 2025. Second. We're on a second. Okay. And uh if you approve, say yes. Uh Carol Boyce, yes. John Beckley, yes. Ron Bman, yes. Roniser, yes. Hansen, yes. And then can I get uh I'll make the motion to adjourn.
Second. Okay. And we'll take a vote. Um, Carol Boyce, yes. Beckley, yes. Ron Bman, yes. Ron Wiser, yes. Noble Hansen, yes. So, we are adjourned.