--------- Hosting services for fctv.org are provided by Megaet Communications. Megaet offers a wide array of internet services including Mega Backup Cloud Service, server collocation, T1, [music] Fiber, Metro Ethernet, as well as telephone services such as hosted PBX
and digital voice. Their number one goal is to keep your communications network up and [music] running and allow you to focus on growing your business. 877-6342638 or [music] meganet.net. >> Proudly serving the New England area, K and K talent partners provide a
personalized approach to [music] full cycle recruiting services. >> Their level of integrity and empathy is rare and it speaks volumes about who they are as people and as recruitment partners. Our goal is to build trusted relationships [music] and to create genuine connections that
help companies grow. >> K&K Telepartners. kktelpartners.com. >> At Martha's Vineyard Bank, we [music] know Felmouth. With locations in Woods Hole, on Palmer Avenue, and the Village Green, we deliver personal banking
tailored to your needs. Business [music] solutions to help you grow. Flexible lending to move you forward and investment strategies that work for you. Whatever [music] brings you in, we're your local partner.
Martha's Vineyard Bank. Your goals, our guidance. That's request. This is where Good evening everyone. I'm going to call to order this uh regular meeting of the Falmouth Select Board for June 8th,
2026. If you would please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Uh just a reminder if you would all please as I'm doing it silence your cell phones and uh if you are making a recording of this meeting audio or video please
notify uh the chair the placement and operation of the recording equipment should not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Is there anyone recording this meeting? Lynlin, are you recording? No. Excellent. Okay. um recognitions.
Does anyone have Mr. Brown? >> I'd just like to recognize uh another successful year for the Wounded Warrior Ride out North Found. Thank you, chair, for joining us and Mr. Renshaw and uh great turnout by town employees and staff and a lot of volunteers. And uh
Carol Kenny received a recognition from the Massachusetts uh state, was it the state house or the house of representatives? That was really nice. Well-deserved recognition. She's been doing a lot of great work for both the wind warrior ride and also the veteran center. Her and her husband Dean are
always showing up for all those things. So, congratulations to Carol. >> For sure. >> Yes, Miss Klein. >> Just a recognition for the folks who were involved in the um pride event that happened in Woods Hole on Saturday. There was a parade around Eel Pond and a
community picnic, music um and other um entertainment at the ball field afterwards and my family and I attended and it was a lovely event. So, thank you to all those who put that on. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Oscelli. Did you >> Well, just following up on that just for
an announcement, there will be a Pride block party here uh at the outside on Friday starting at uh starting at 4:30. Absolutely. Any other recognitions? I have one. Um, and we have a few people here. Uh, would
like to recognize uh the Mullen Hall School as one of eight grand prize winners in the state of the Mass Department of Transportation's green team awards uh for their composting efforts um at the school. Um it's been a wonderful project to see over the past
few years. A great collaboration between and Mr. Robinson here with solid waste advisory committee um between our solid waste coordinator and our schools uh really reducing the waste um coming from our our food service at the schools. So congratulations on that recognition.
[applause] >> Madam Chair, one more announcement. >> Uh plenty of announcements. Go for it. >> Okay. Uh, next Wednesday, uh, there will be the, um, Steamship Authority community meeting, uh, at the Woods Hole Community Hall starting at 6:00 p.m. Uh,
and once again, we I and I think we, uh, recognize the efforts that the Steamship Authority is making to be interactive with the community, to listen to people and so forth. So, uh, should be a very interesting evening.
>> What time is that at? 6 o'clock, 6 to 8. >> Also adding to the announcements, uh we have the housing forum tomorrow morning at 900 a.m. Um and is that in can't remember now. Is that in the select board meeting room? >> I believe it is. >> I believe it is. Okay. Um
Mr. Mscal, you already hit the Pride Day celebration, correct? Um Arts Alive this weekend and then Junth celebration next Friday. So all sorts of fun stuff happening. the strawberry festival at St. Barnabas. >> Oh my goodness. >> It's it's that time of year. >> Busy week.
>> Um a couple of announcements uh for fellow board members. I know we have a few of us attending the Cape Islands Municipal Leaders uh annual meeting this Friday and a couple of others attending the um new member training. Um I we also I think everyone probably received uh in
your email the MMA webinars uh are really wonderful resource and there's one coming up July 8th on strategic alignment um aligning strategic plans organizational structure and um operations which seemed particularly relevant for where we are right now. Um,
Madam Chair, I registered for that one today. Excellent. Thought it seemed like a good topic. >> And if you're not busy on Friday, it's a great opportunity to see your other fellow Capen Islands municipal leaders on a nice little boat ride down the uh canal.
>> Not supposed to say that part, Doug. >> Yeah, [laughter] it's great. >> All right. Did it last year, too. >> Are there any other announcements? >> Exhausted. >> Sorry. Just a second plug for the veteran center morning program this Saturday from 8 to 10:00 and that's a cyber security awareness training.
They'll have the Massachusetts Attorney General there as well as some other speakers um and Sergeant Massie from the FTH Police Department who's been really spearheading our town's response to these types of um fraud attempts. And last time I attended it was a great event and they had a delicious breakfast
offering. >> All right. Excellent. Thank you all. Um if there are no other announcements, uh Mr. town manager for your report. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh the first is uh a public safety related public service announcement. Hopefully that will make sense to everyone. So, as you
all know, it's not a big surprise. Uh summertime is fast approaching the town of Felmouth where we go from a community of 33,000 to over 105,000 um pretty quickly. Um the message uh that I wanted to impart uh to the community is is
this. Um, everyone knows um the police department and fire rescue departments uh work very hard throughout the year. Um, the summer months are especially challenging uh to both the police department and fire rescue. Um, I spoke with both uh Chief Jeff Lori and Chief
Jeff Lewis uh earlier today trying to get some information. Um, the call volume uh increases three four-fold um during the summer months. Um although they're busy throughout the year, summer months, um it's a huge impact on the staff. Um Chief Lori with Felmouth
Police Department wanted me to let the community know um that he's going to continue to deploy uh the extradirected patrols uh throughout the summer. These ensure that we don't have any issues like we experienced during uh the chief in mind first year uh during the Fourth of July celebration. Uh, Chief Lori, I
wanted everyone to know that these directed patrols are very strategic in purpose and datadriven uh, law enforcement deployments where we focus high visibility patrols in very specific areas throughout town. Officers are assigned to these specific locations or hotspots um, at certain times throughout
the the day to manage traffic enforcement. again, uh, activity that, uh, may may lead to something, um, uh, not, uh, in the in the town's best interest and to build community engagement and community, um, awareness. Um, the chief has also increased and
plans to continue to increase minimum staffing uh, throughout the summer uh, due to this increased activity. Um to accomplish a lot of this, we also rely uh in addition to overtime expenses um on partnerships with uh other uh uh public safety entities such as the
Massachusetts State Police and the Barsell County Sheriff's Office. Uh so we're very grateful to both the state police and Barsville County Sheriff uh Buckley on the fire side, fire rescue side. Chief Lewis wanted me to um explain also in addition to um just the
the call volume increase um staffing the fire department is is a bit of a challenge. Now he currently has 11 uh personnel new personnel that have been onboarded to attend the Massachusetts Firemies. Eight of those 11 uh staff start in June and three the remaining three in August. Um as you all know
that's a process. Uh so once the uh those folks graduate from the academy they won't become fully field strength until early fall. So, the message um is to um that Chief Lewis wanted me to impart is um just be be cautious, be aware um as you're driving around town.
Um certainly observe fire safety, uh use of care of the fire pits, candles, and barbecues throughout the uh the summer months. Do not drive while impaired. Obviously, um take care in the heat and when swimming. And finally, and this is a reminder I think we could all uh stand to hear, um remember to pull over to the
appropriate side of the road and use care when approaching emergency vehicles. They're occupied doing their jobs. And a lot of times they're they're focused on that. And uh so be please exercise extreme caution when coming upon a a scene involving fire rescue and the police department. Um Madam Chair,
the other update I wanted to provide is in regards to the East Felmouth Library. Brian Stokes, our outstanding library director, um has recently reported um that the town was notified that funding has been awarded for the East Felmouth Library project for FY27. If you recall,
um in January of 2025, last year, the town received a grant from the Massachusetts Public Library uh construction program for the East Felmouth Library. The funding for the grant is phased. As you all recall, $100,000 was received for the planning and design upon notice of the award. And back at that time in early January of
last year, Felmouth was weight listed for construction funds. And we were advised at that time the construction funds likely wouldn't be made available until FY28 or FY29. So a couple of years off. Um, as I mentioned, we recently notified that that funding was uh e
expedited or escalated. Um, we rece um have been awarded uh funding for the library project for FY27, so the upcoming fiscal year. uh much earlier than expected because some of the other communities I'm I'm told were were unsuccessful in obtaining local funding approval.
As a uh some background information um and kind of next steps, the town completed preliminary design of the East Felmouth Library on the uh the existing site. We now have according to this new expedited uh funding uh scenario until April 2027 to obtain town meeting approval of the construction funding.
Since a debt exemption will be required to pay this debt, we'll be recommending that the select board petition the Commonwealth to add a ballot question to the state uh ballots uh this November. And uh as you all uh are probably aware, the next step is to uh initiate that formal uh cost study based on the
preliminary designs that have been uh been being worked on and we expect to have the results of that cost study in early July. So there's coming right around the corner and uh that is that completes my report. Madam Chair, >> thank you so much. >> Yes. >> Question for Mr. Wshaw if I could. Are
there uh any revised plans that they've been working on? I've been patiently waiting to see if they going to have another committee meeting. I haven't seen any notifications of any meetings. >> So, I I've been, as you know, u Mr. Brown, I've been working with the
building committee and that that process closed out. So there are there have been no changes to the design since the final design. I say final, it's a preliminary design, but that was the end of the preliminary design process funded
through the state grant. So uh now that we have this grant, the next step is um we have reserved per the state grant guidelines reserved a small amount of money to obtain a formal cost study. So
we're that is now in the works and with that information we go to town meeting to seek authorization to fund the rest of the design. So design development schematic design construction documents and construction funding. All of that
funding request is coming at at the next vote. So, if we are successful with the town meeting vote in November, um, and if we're successful with the debt exemption vote in, uh, sorry, town meeting vote in October, October 26th,
uh, town meeting vote, uh, sorry, debt exemption vote on the state ballot in November, then we would proceed with design development. And at that point, we could um, you know, potentially be revisiting the design um, elements. >> Thank you.
>> Excellent. Any other questions on the town manager report? >> I'll just say I live uh between Gford Street and Ticket Highway near downtown and can personally testify that call volume for our emergency services has already gone up. We are definitely into
the summer season. So, um the the update and the advice to all of us to to be aware is um is appreciated. All right. Uh, public comment. Public comment may be made on routine matters not on the agenda this evening. Comments are limited to two minutes. Please introduce
yourself. Come to one of the two mics, either the podium or the mic in the front, and introduce yourself. And since the matter has not been included on the agenda, the select board may not participate in discussion of the topic. Do we have anyone here for public comment? Yes, Miss Schneider. Barbara Schneider and I'm precinct 4 and
I'm one of the co-founders of the Osprey Project and I just wanted to inform the town management that last week the two co-founders of the Osprey Project met with Eversource representatives and we had a very healthy hour-long
discussion about the pro the progress we have made in the town of Felmouth on taking care of osprey nests as they are starting to impede our electric wires. And to date, just to let you know, we
have a known almost 170 nests in Falmouth. And we currently have had a few osprey deaths, but we have been working closely with Eversource, who this year was extremely responsive in coming out
almost within 24 to 36 hours of our letting them know of building sites going on in dangerous areas and getting them deterred, removing the what they were starting to build, but also deterring them. And you'll see they're
changing the color of the bent corrugated metal that you're seeing as the only deterrent that truly works. It's going to be a little bit lighter color, a little lighter gray, maybe not as um obtrusive to people, but I wanted
to let you know that we're really doing well. They see this whole program that's going on here in Falmouth as exemplary and they wish that other towns would adopt it because they are having many problems elsewhere without people to turn to.
>> Great news. Thank you very much. >> Tomorrow night at Webner 6:30, anybody who wants to learn more about Osprey, we're giving a presentation there and it's about an hour long and a lot of fun and we answer any questions that you might bring. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Sure. If you want the difference in the height, Barbara, [laughter] you need notes. Oh. [laughter] Hi, my name is Deborah Maguire. I'm precinct one. I'm the owner of Liam
Maguire's Irish Pub. We've been here 32 years. 32 years ago this month, we stood here well before the selectman uh with Phyllis and her bridey and uh requested liquor transfer. So, here we are 32 years later back in front of you.
I'm here to ask you to consider the um extending the liquor license till 3:00 a.m. so people can remain in bars, pubs to watch the um World Cup. The House
voted unanimously on Friday to accept it. This town of Somerville's already enacted it. The Senate in in voted today and it was sent to the governor. The governor's in support of it. Many cities. There are a lot of places in
Palmouth that won't utilize this, but the pub is a sports pub. We have seven TVs. And we'd love to be able to have guests remain. A lot of some of the games don't start till midnight. And this is a big deal. This FIFA thing
is a really big thing for the United States. So, this is a administrative procedure for you. I don't know. It's each town gets to decide and we're hoping that you will decide to allow this. The first game is Friday night by the way. This [laughter]
is >> Thank you. Thank you. >> So, so just a question. I mean, what does the town have to do in order to adopt this, especially with a Friday night being the first game and we're not
going to be able to meet before then? And do you have something to add to that, Mr.? No, I I thank you for your question. I don't know, but I I did put a piece in there. The second thing is that Somerville enacted it. >> Okay. >> But they enacted it on Friday. >> I Yeah. I don't want to get into
discussion of an item that's not on the agenda from public comment, but I do recognize the procedural question there. Um if there's a way to if the board does want to take this up to follow up on this, >> gather information permission. >> Okay. Um so, town management will uh
gather that information. and we'll follow up tomorrow morning when we have our our meeting. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Yes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Craig Martin, precinct 9. And this is not why I'm here tonight, but I'll take advantage of the
minute. Um I'm asking the board to um strongly encourage in light of the recent controversy with the Fouthmouth nursing home to strongly encourage the Fmouth Housing Co-op, if they indeed become owners, to perhaps resell it. Um back to the um Walthar from what I
understand the preferred um developer. Um this that building there's no need at all for that building to be >> sir. This is on our agenda. So >> Oh, it is. I'm sorry. >> Yeah, we're we're we're discussing 545 Maine. So this this >> if you had something else about housing
court, but thank you. >> No, I'll I'll just throw my comment in then. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Is there anyone else for public comment? All right, moving on to the consent agenda. And um I'll just make one note
before we actually moved to to the agenda. Um that we have seen both past meeting and this meeting um multiple still one-day licenses coming from our nonprofits. So it seems that some uh that we thought would be targeted for
the cultural institution licenses. So perhaps worth some followup there, but I hope we can go ahead and and move these particular licenses uh tonight without delay, but but do want to follow up on that and see what's going on there. So consent agenda licenses. Uh number one, consider a vote to approve the
application by Mark Pearson for a series of six special one-day all alcoholic beverage licenses for 30 dates for the 58th season of performances of the College Light Opera Company at Highfield Theater, 58 Highfield Drive, Falmouth. Two, consider a vote to approve the
application by John Campbell for a series of three special oneed one-day all alcoholic beverages licensees for 15 dates for the 58th season of performances of the College Light Opera Company at Highfield Theater, 58 Highfield Drive, Falmouth. Number three, consider a vote to approve
the administrative address update for Himalayan King Inc. DBA Old Barn Package Store at 20 Luskam A, Unit A, Woods Hole, as requested by the Office of the Town Engineer. I'm sorry. If we can go back and hold number two, please.
>> Hold number two. Administrative orders. Uh, one, consider a vote to adopt an artificial intelligence policy. >> Hold, please. >> And, uh, I'm going to go ahead and hold. Number two, select board vote to authorize the Coastal Resilience
Division of DPW to submit a grant application to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation National Coastal Resilience Fund for $350,000 to fund Surf Drive targeted nourishment and sign a letter of commitment in support of the grant application with a $30,000 match.
So, I would entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda holding licenses number two and both administrative orders. >> So moved. >> Second. All in favor? >> I I >> Okay. Uh Mr. Reid, you held uh the second license.
>> Yeah, just to um I'm in favor of this wholeheartedly. Um but I think we're experiencing based on some informal feedback from our cultural licenses that it's becoming cumbersome. Um and it requires a lot more paperwork than I
think what we were intending when we uh created it. So I don't know how to proper procedure for flagging this and or discussing this now or later but I think it is something that we should have on our agenda to make it easier for our cultural folks but also understanding we have a license
commission coming up. So >> right so definitely we will follow up on that um and maybe do some outreach to see what's going on there. Um I did have a conversation with with folks at Highfield and got similar input. Um it was well-intentioned effort to make things easier and if it's not working,
we just want to figure out what's going on. >> Absolutely. We have we'll review the process and report back if there's something that we can do to streamline that process. I had not heard that. So, thank you for bringing that to to my attention. >> Okay. >> So, do you want a motion for two now or >> mot? Yes, please. >> I'll I'll make a motion for the second >> to approve the application by John
Campbell for 15 dates uh for the College Light Opera Company. Is there a second? >> I'll second that. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. >> Okay. on to the AI policy. Mr. Mscali. >> Yeah. Thank you, uh, Madam Chair. I certainly support the adoption of an AI
policy. I do have one or two questions. Uh, looking at section 5A. Um, it's it seems to me a little confusing as to whether we're whether we are referring to the same person. Uh, it
says all output generated by AI must be reviewed by a town employee before release. Any town staff member who uses AI to generate content must review the generated content and is accountable for the content. Is is that going to be the same person? Um, and if it is, I think
it's somewhat redundant and maybe we don't need the first sentence. >> Yes, the intent was the the same person and I I take your point. We could probably strike the first sentence. >> Thank you. And then uh with respect to C, the only uh thing that I would see in
doing a little research myself was a suggestion uh and I'm sure it would be in any event, but just that it be indicated that the uh disclosure be prominently located on the document so that people can see it whether it's in bold or some something drawing people's
attention to the disclosure. Other than that, I'm prepared to move the adoption of with the amendments. >> Just for clarification, do you feel that that needs to be added to the policy? >> Yeah, I mean, I think it could say documents documents in electronic
content created with the use of AI must be prominently displayed. A disclosure uh >> must include a prominently disclosure. >> Must [clears throat] include a prominently dis prominently displayed disclosure. Yes. >> Okay. So with those two edits and amendments,
I would move the adoption of the AI policy. >> Second that. >> Is there any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor? >> I I >> Excellent. And uh finally, the last item
is the grant uh for the surf drive nourishment project. Um which I had a couple of questions and I think others did as well. And I know that our uh coastal resilience uh coordinator is here to answer questions. So Mr.
Wrigley, if you'd like to come up first, I'll just say start by saying um certainly wholeheartedly in support and excited to see this moving forward. Um, as I said, just had a a couple of questions um about uh both the where the
$30,000 match for the town uh comes from and then more broadly kind of where this grant gets us to and what the timeline is, where this fits in the timeline um for what we voted last December in terms of attempting to uh create a dune uh along that or nourish the dune along
that part of Surf Drive that's most vulnerable. >> Sure. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, members of the select board. Mr. Town Manager. Uh my name is Josh Wrigley. I'm the coastal resilient specialist. Um in answer to your question, the uh Woodshole Group had completed a 2025
feasibility study for Surf Drive as a low-lying vulnerable coastal roadway. Uh and they had put forward several alternatives for what the town could do to try to ensure um some greater longevity for Surf Drive. Um so the grant application that you have before you tonight for consideration would be
for alternative 3A which is the targeted nourishment uh alternative. Um, surf drive is constrained um as a roadway goes with its uh coastal landforms and uh target nourishment would be a um an
option which the select board had uh endorsed uh last year um that would rebuild the crest of the coastal dune to a height that would allow it to withstand uh two and 5year storms and would help to bolster the overall
resilience of um of the dune system in that area. And in terms of the matching funds, I was under the impression that uh the town did have the uh appropriate uh match that could be used for this. >> Yes. So, the town appropriated I'm not
going to try to remember the amount of the original appropriation, but we did um we do have a balance sufficient to cover this and can encumber it for this purpose. Madam chair. So if I remember correctly, the the total cost for that that that they gave us was $1.2 million
as I remember >> roundly >> roundly for the for the targeted nourishment. Is this part of that and we still have to come up with additional funds in order to do what they've suggested? >> Yes, that's correct. Uh this would be for the design and permitting of the
project. Uh once we have that then uh it would go into its construction phase. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Certainly. >> Yes, Miss Klein. >> Um thanks for being here tonight, Mr. Wrigley. I was curious in the report it shows that this phase of targeted due
nourishment would last until about 2050 if I was interpreting this sort of big picture like how do we move forward diagram that was included in that report. Um, do you feel that, you know, when I was looking at the feasibility of
this particular option, it's going to withstand most likely a two-year and a fiveyear storm? A 20-year storm becomes a question, right? There were some that we that it it suggested it would be resilient enough in certain areas, but not in all areas. Um, so I'm just wondering a little bit to Mr. from
MSGall's question, you know, how is this grant going to well, it fits in as far as it's the permitting and the and the um design, but do you feel that that 1 two I think it was 1.2 something like that number is really going to get us to 2050. Um it seems unlikely to me as
someone who's spent some time thinking about these things that those dunes are going to withstand for the next 24 years. >> Well, that's a great question. I mean the uh weather patterns are very variable. Um but the advantage of this
alternative um is that it is permittable. um you know when when you look at the different um options on the table um there's really uh no solution that would
allow the coastal dune system seawward of surf drive to be able to withstand a 20-year storm and the reason for that is just because the dune as it is now is um is at a very low elevation from the road
layout tapering down to a coastal beach. And in order to achieve the right side slopes um that would satisfy state regulators um you're looking at a a dune crest that's lower that's about 8 to 9
ft um in height. So even though that's not a height that would necessarily um you know achieve the greatest longevity, it's a it's a good workable solution. um that helps at least extend the lifespan
of that area and um uh improve the habitat of that area as well um you know for the uh the immediate future. >> Yes, Mr. Brown. And I did uh ask the lady from I if it was D or coastal zone
management if this permit could be a standing permit so that each time we have one of these two to fiveyear storms if we want to we can probably add some more nourishment if we can afford it or if we feel like we want to continue and the answer was yes we could have this as
a standing permit. So I I hope that's still the goal. >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. The uh the permitting process for alternative 3 is uh is is a slightly um shorter permitting pathway than some of the others that were under
consideration. And uh the order of conditions that would be granted by the Falmouth Conservation Commission would be um a three-year permit with eligibility for extension. Um and then that certainly would be um you know true of of uh other permits as well.
Another question from Miss Klein. >> Not so much a question, but just a, you know, something for us to keep in mind. I think Surf Drive is a great example of um, you know, the beach, it's this isn't a beach problem, right? The [clears throat] beach would like to just move. That's what a beach would do if
there wasn't a road behind it. And so I think we just want to keep in mind as a board as we're looking ahead that um we cannot delay continue starting to think about removing that human infrastructure there because um this is is happening
and it's accelerating and so we just want to be ready for it and um I know that you're aware of that and and starting that was part of this report was that we're going to be planning that but I just really want to mention that um to our board that at some point we're going to have you make some really hard choices.
>> That's a good observation and uh I do have a grant application under consideration right now by EA for um Surf Drive um water main resilience adaptations that would eventually allow for the Surf Drive water man to be shut down in the event of catastrophic damage
to Surf Drive. So we have yet to hear from the state about that but that is uh being considered right now. One final question um which is timeline if this grant is successful. What's our best case and maybe most
likely case for when we are actually getting to the point of putting sand on that that dune because in the meantime we are sitting there with millions of dollars in infrastructure that is vulnerable to either a two-year or a fiveyear storm.
>> I would say probably two to three years. >> All right. Uh, is there a motion for approval? >> I'll make a motion that we approve of the application for the grant. >> I'll second. >> Okay. And, uh, just to be clear, and the
letter of commitment in support of the grant application with the 35, >> which which we all have to sign tonight, I believe. >> Yes, we have it right here. Yep. >> Okay. Uh, any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? I >> I thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks for being here.
just showed up. >> Ah, yes. Okay. Um, yep. We just want to uh let folks know that the uh the one day liquor licenses for college light opera uh were on the consent agenda and have been approved.
>> We went to the wrong building. >> Oh, sorry about that. [laughter] >> Most people do. >> All right. Uh moving on to public hearings. Uh the first to consider a vote to approve an application by Holly Park, Inc. located
at 580A North Falmouth Highway, Falmouth, Massachusetts, for multiple amendments to its wine and malt beverages license for a change of manager, change of officers, directors, LLC managers, issuance or transfer of stock, new stockholder, and pledge of
collateral. Uh this license amendment application was continued from June 1st, 2026. Given that it's a continuation, we do not need to read the the notice. Is that correct? That is correct. >> All right, Mr. Renshaw, over to you. >> Um, just real briefly, uh, the applicant is here this evening. Uh, I just wanted
the board to know, and it's included in your packet this evening, the police department and fire rescue departments have reviewed the application, uh, and indicated through, uh, select board office, they had no issues or concerns uh, with the application. And, madam chair, as you mentioned, this is simply a uh, there was a a continuous from last
select board meeting. With that, I'll turn it over to the applicant. >> Good evening. Uh, so my name is Jeff Nickerson. I'm an attorney here in town and I represent the applicant in this case. The applicant is Holly Park Variety, Inc. Holly Park owns uh Dean's Market up in North Thoth at uh 58A North
Thmouth Highway. So uh the applicant holds currently a package store beer and wine license and Dean Bolton who is here tonight is the sole shareholder of the company and the manager uh the holder of that license. We're here tonight because Dean is selling the business to his son
Brian. And the request is essentially to transfer ownership of the shares of stock from Dean to Brian to make Brian the new manager of the liquor license uh and to make Brian the sole officer and director of the company and also a pledge back from Brian to Dean of all
those assets under the terms of the agreement they have as to the transfer of the uh business. So Dean uh for reference has been open since 1989. It's been in the same location for the past 25 years. Uh Dean has been at the store since the beginning. Uh they sell beer
and wine as a complement to the other offerings. They have a deli, grocery, convenience store items. Brian, who uh will be taking over, has been with the store for 20 years and has been full-time at the store for 14 years. So upon the approval of the board and
hopefully of the ABCC of this request, the only real change is going to be the identity of the owner of the company from Dean who's owned it from the start to Brian who's been there consistently for the past 20 years. Uh Brian's familiar with the business and he's determined to keep Dean's uh the good
positive community asset that it has been and he's the ideal successor to his dad as the owner of the business. So, we'd request that you approve the application and the uh pledge of the license, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> Just one question, Mr. Nicholson. Is it
going to be Brian's going forward or is it going to still be Deans? I >> took my question, Mr. Mali. [laughter] >> I believe that for continuity, it's going to continue to be named Deans. >> Okay. Well, it's, as you say, wonderful community resource. Uh, >> would agree.
>> Yeah, I have no questions. It's a very well-run operation. I think it's fully complete application. I would move approval. >> Somebody has >> Well, it is a public hearing. I want to make give any opportunity for public comment or or questions. Is there anyone?
>> Motion to close public comment. >> Public hear. Yep. >> So move. >> Second. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor of closing the hearing. >> I I >> All right. Mr. Brown, did you have a motion? >> I would move approval. Is there a formal motion or do we just There is There is a few different things there. Motion to
approve the application by Holly Park Incorporated located at 588A Northb Mass for multiple amendments to its wine and malt beverage license for change of manager, change of officers, directors, LLC managers, issuance, transfer of stock, new stockholder, and pledge of
collateral. >> Second. >> Thank you. [cough] >> Any further [clears throat] discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? >> I. Congratulations. >> Good luck. Good luck. Thank you. >> All right. And on to our second uh
public hearing, also a continuence. And so, Mr. Reid, you are again off the hook. Uh uh this is uh a uh shade tree hearing regarding uh 122 Jericho Path. Uh
request to remove uh two town trees for a new driveway continued from our last meeting. Mr. Renshaw. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. And just uh again to as a summary from the discussion, uh the applicant engineer who's here this evening was asked to kind of go back and take another look at the site plan and find out if there's a
way perhaps to uh to move the driveway as I recall and uh and perhaps save both of those trees. Staff recommendation was for the smaller of the white oaks uh to to be removed. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you. Chris Ryberg, 114 Winsler Road, principal owner of Novo Builds and
also the current owner of 122 Jericho Path. Uh thank you for hearing this request again and I promise to be brief. Uh we've decided not to modify the plan as presented last week and we we are going to um uh if it's the uh the board and the tree warden's wish move the
driveway around the remaining tree. Um uh but I I do think with that said it's important and you know I don't I'm not an arborist. Um but we do believe the structural stability and critical root zone of the tree is compromised on the property specifically where the sewer comes from Hudson onto um onto our
property. Um and and we have been advised um that we think will similar to the tree next to it, the white oak next to it that's that's uh you know for all intents and purposes dead um will be in decline over the next 3 to 5 years um long after we are no longer owners of
the prop owners of the property and and we're just trying to proactively plan ahead and improve the street. Uh uh we believe strongly that what we are requesting at our cost uh including removing the tree and being um and and planting new trees, species of your
choice um is in the best interest of the property, the neighborhood, and the town of Falmouth. Um and uh and it's also important to note after one comment last week that we've received nothing but positive feedback from the neighbors on the the house and what was there prior to us uh purchasing it and the house that's uh being built and hopefully be
done in the next couple months. So, um if if it's the uh the board's request to move the driveway around um the remaining tree, uh we're happy to do that. U we just think that this is the opportunity
um for the town to have trees planted along the streetscape at our cost that um will last for many more years to come based on our observation and and feedback that we've gotten on the remaining tree. >> Thank you. questions or comments from the board.
>> Maybe Mr. Pearson would like to respond to the comments with respect to the viability of the large tree that's remaining. >> Well, he does make a solid point about the critical roof zone, but that's because of the impact of all the building and the new the new driveway
coming in place. So, it will further that, you know, it will make that tree decline. But um the point of this is to preserve our shade trees. Um and a tree that size, you know, it's going to take a long time even if we replant trees. I
get what you're saying. I do think that all efforts should be made to try to preserve that tree. And um I haven't seen the schematic of where exactly the driveway is going, but there could be ways to still do some preservation and some root pruning and have the driveway
and the tree together. >> That was what I was going to suggest is maybe there's a way to at least prolong its life somehow and maybe we'd like to see that as a condition. >> There's definitely means and methods to do that. I I have not seen the plan for your driveway. It could very well be
that, you know, a couple years this tree will be in drastic decline if he is on his property. He can, you know, go over the root structure. Um, so I'd have to see that, but you know, it would be in the town's best interest in and the uh parks department if we could try to
preserve that tree, but we would need to look at that plan. >> Mr. Brown, >> would that come in play with the curb cut application? >> Uh, that I wouldn't be looking at it. That possibly could. the engineering department, they could call me in to look at it. But, uh, yeah. And if it's
in the critical root zone of the tree, is how far away from the stem is it going to be? Is the the actual driveway? >> It would be on either side of it, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We would have to to look at the plan to see if there are mitigation
options. I have a question and I'm not sure if this is for Mr. Pearson or town management, but how do we get to this point in a construction project and this sort of issue is is just cropping up. I
mean, this the house has already been built. The plan the the driveway the the garage door is lined up with these trees with the plans for the driveway already in place. >> Right. Well, so when someone applies, we determined due to determination of ownership, they already had everything
in play. And so we stopped any trees being removed on town property. So that's just unfortunately the way it works. We can't really change what they're doing on private property. We can only work on what is in the town right away. >> Uh is there anything else from the board
>> to the applicant? Have you obtained a curb cut permit already? I believe we do. Yeah. >> In the location where the trees are. >> Yes. Uh don't hold me to that because Okay. Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> And just for clarification, over the past several years, we have there is
something in the curb cuts and the driveway permits that say that you have to has to be reviewed by me. So, they might have did that before that was in place, but there is something in place now. >> Okay. Excellent. Miss Klein. >> Um I appreciate um Mr. Pearson's
comments and um I would also be in favor of preserving the larger oak. Um as a shade tree, its function would take a very long time for new plantings to reach that. And uh and I actually took the time on Friday and went through the neighborhood and um it appeared to me
from the street side that that these were potentially like the only two trees remaining on that lot. Um, and and maybe there were some behind the house that I was unable to see, but on my my cursory view past, it appeared as if they were really the the last men standing there
or women or I'm not sure how to gender a tree. Um, and uh, and so I would really be in favor of trying to preserve it. Um because especially as as right we know that trees provide local cooling and we're looking ahead to some very very
hot summers and um you know they are an important component in keeping people healthy and comfortable. >> Okay. Is there if there's no other discussion from the board or we do have Okay. Thank you.
>> Sandy Stoes. I'm a resident of Felmouth, a neighbor of this Famouth Heights, 122 Jericho. Thank you for hearing us. It's great that we have a chance to have public comment. I really appreciate the discussion. It makes for a more robust
decision criteria and information for you all. So, I am a neighbor and I walk by all the time and there are the two oaks there and the one of them isn't got the best shape, the smaller one, but it's not dead. And I respect the buy right. I am a homeowner. I expect to buy
right um right of all homeowners to clear their lot, do whatever they want on their lot. And they they exercise that right every day in Fmouth Heights. There's a chainsaw going every day taking a tree down and all the trees were removed except there is one nice oak they left in the back there but
generally speaking they clearcut the lots and they have the right to do that but we also have the responsibility in the town to preserve the few shade trees that we have jurisdiction over that aren't by right. So I would
implore the board to consider that. I looked at that and um personally I know this is just probably above and beyond what I should be saying but it looks like a nice circular driveway would this is a tree go right around the tree to the garage and you have an elegant
solution even that's even better than a straight driveway. So there's options I think that would preserve this tree which is in very good health right now. And a new tree as we all know I see them every day being planted by the town and all their best efforts. Those trees
don't get the water they deserve and they die. And those bags, the green bags, they drain pretty quickly and those trees will be lucky if they make it to the size this one is right now, especially given the drought conditions. Thank you very much for hearing me.
>> Thank you. Is there any other public comment? >> Is it okay to ask for the address? I didn't hear it. >> Sure. You you'd like to follow up? >> Yeah. >> Would you be comfortable sharing your your address? >> My address? >> Oh, I'm a Fmouth Heights resident, 115 Lucern Avenue.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there any other public comment? Any other discussion from the board or are we ready to close the hearing? >> I'm ready. >> Motion to close public comment. Second.
>> All in favor? I >> All right. >> How are we how are we leaning here? >> I would move to support uh the tree warden's recommendation to keep the larger white oak and ask the applicant to work around it and, you know, try to get the driveway far
enough away that the tree can survive if possible. I would hope you would do that. So, that's a motion to allow the removal of the smaller 15-inch white oak located on Hudson Street and uh to retain the 19in and replant additional
trees to replace the 15-in >> correct >> diameter. Correct. >> Yes, I would agree with that. >> Is that a second? Second. Is there any further discussion from the board? >> Hearing none, all in favor? >> I I >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
Okay, moving on to uh our business agenda and uh the first item on that agenda is to consider a vote to submit the draft environmental impact uh report for ocean outfall
project and consider a vote to submit the DEIR to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office. Mr. I really don't have anything to uh to to lead into Amy Low's presentation. Amy is going to I believe it was uh the last water quality management committee. Amy
did a presentation on this very topic and uh the recommendation of uh Amy's office and mine is after the presentation that the board consider approving uh the submitt of this DEIR report to the Massachusetts uh environmental policy office.
>> Thank you. Just a moment. Please take your time. Thank you. Um, I believe you already said I'm Amy Lol. I'm the town's wastewater superintendent and I'm here tonight to
uh request your support uh for sending the draft environmental impact report for the town's ocean outfall project uh to the state to begin the review process. Um,
I will start with an overview of the project. Uh I'm I believe you're familiar with this project. We've been uh over it a number of times over the past few years, but it's an important project. And I'll just go through a summary. In your packet was the executive summary to the
DEIR and a couple of figures. Um both of which are in this presentation, but I I'm going to uh summarize that as well for those who might not have reviewed the packet. Uh so to summarize the project, we're going to we're planning
to um replace the town's groundwater discharge with an outfall discharge. We will the plan is to continue to provide the tertiary treatment and ultraviolet disinfection that currently exists at the wastewater treatment facility.
This figure on the right shows a pipe route from the existing wastewater treatment facility up here um east of 28 in West Falmouth. Um so the plan is to install a a pipe uh approximately six
miles from the wastewater treatment facility down to Kite Park um east of Falmouth inner harbor. Um and uh that pipe would be within existing road rightways between the wastewater plant
and kite park. The outfall is designed for a future average annual discharge capacity of 3 million gallons per day, but the current discharge rate is um most recently about uh 490,000 gallons a
day. So, uh, with the new project and any growth in between, the discharge when the outfall would begin would be definitely less than the average annual flow in our current groundwater discharge permit, which is 710,000
gallons per day. The flow to that outfall would increase as additional areas uh are brought online for sewering. um with with this peak or this future average of PE or future sewer
buildout average of 3 million gallons per day. Um the outfall pipe. So on this zoomed in figure you can show that there's a you can see that there's a dashed line between Kite Park in Falmouth Heights
and the outfall discharge location. The plan is to install that pipe via horizontal directional drilling uh which would be staged in Kite Park and out in the sound um 2300 ft offshore. So the
ultimate discharge location would be about 2,300 ft offshore in Nantucket Sound in about 20 ft of water. The uh these dotted lines on the figure are the um um are the seafloor depth. So here
you see that the outfall discharge location is at about 20 feet of water and um this this green line here is the surveyed edge of the eelgrass beds in that area. Uh and that survey was
performed for this project. A very detailed survey was performed for this project. Um there is a very high water velocity at this location in Nantucket Sound that flows primarily east west u essentially along these contour lines.
when the outfall is available and this is obviously a key part of this project. The plan plant plan the plan is to cease regular discharge to the ground at the main wastewater treatment facility and um then you know switch all that flow to
the outfall and then having that outfall would allow the town to expand the sewer to other areas to meet their nitrogen total maximum daily load limits. Uh just a review of recent progress on the outfall. The town submitted an
environmental notification form for the outfall project to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office uh last September in 2025. And public and regulatory review of that ENF uh occurred from September through October
of 2025. the state issued a the secretary's certificate on that ENF in at the end of October 2025 and that certificate outline the scope for this draft environmental impact report based on the regulatory and public comments
that were received. Uh funds were appropriated at last November's town meeting to prepare the outfall conceptual design and this draft environmental impact report and to begin the initial permitting for the project.
The environmental in evaluations for this project are complete. Uh the and the draft environmental impact report is ready for submission. The conceptual design a lot of progress has been made on that but it is still in preparation. the conceptual design is needed for some
of the future permits in particular. Um, but some of that conceptual design is reflected in the DEIR. This DEIR draft environmental impact report is a comprehensive evaluation of the project's environmental impacts,
alternatives, and mitigation measures. It's based on more than two years of data collection and evaluation including hydronamic modeling, eelgrass and benthic survey surveys, a fisheries assessment, water quality data collection and an anti-degradation
evaluation, aquifer evaluation by the United States Geologic Service, marine borings and the conceptual design evaluations. It reflects three years of agency coordination um with many many uh state and in a
couple of cases federal agencies. Uh this report addresses agency and public comments received during the environmental notification form process in 2025. It documents the purpose and the need for the proposed outfall, its
role within the town's watershed management planning process, and the technical analyses supporting anticipated permitted permitting decisions. So, I'm going to summarize a few of the
um major pieces major evaluations in the in the DEIR. Hydronamic modeling was performed by Dr. James Churchill uh of of he's ameritus from the Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution and he um the figure on the on the right shows really nicely the uh current the differences in currents uh in the waters surrounding Cape Cod. So you can see in dark blue is a very low
root mean uh root mean square of current speed is is a fancy average [laughter] um average it's a fancy average speed and uh the dark blue is is the lowest speed and the bright yellow is the highest speed and you can see that the
waters off the south coast of Falmouth are some of the highest uh currents in the in the region and um many of the exist existing outfalls in Massachusetts are in areas with much lower uh current
speeds. Um the um the modeling also noted that these currents in the discharge the discharge area that we're proposing are um longitudinal meaning they're going par sort of roughly parallel to shore east
west direction back and forth. Um and uh they're vertically well mixed because of those velocities and there's minim minimal density stratification. So you're not going to see that water sitting in one place. Um over time uh
the nutrient contribution from the outfall would not be distinguishable from natural variability in Nantucket Sound. A thousand1 dilution is achieved within approximately 300 ft of the outfall. The United States Geologic Survey did an
performed an aquifer evaluation for the town for this project. They modeled the effect of an outfall on the Sagmore lens, which is the name of the large aquifer that um is uh on the on the this side of the Cape. The evaluation uh
there's this is a photo of the cover of the report. It's on it was attached to the um ENF document that was issued last year and is available on the town's website. It concluded that the hydraologic response of the water table
elevation and the stream flow would be relatively uh small compared to the fluctuation from natural recharge and also noticed that noted that the decrease in septic return flow and treated wastewater flow from the project
is a very small percentage of the total re recharge over the study area i.e. In Felmouth, there is an enormous amount of water that moves through the Sagamore lands on a daily basis. And the 3MGD, which would come from a variety of
locations over Felmouth, primarily along the south coast, um is a very small portion of that water. marine and benthic resources. Um we did two years or a consultant did two years
of benthic surveys and extensive eelgrass surveys in the project area. The benthic survey findings were that the benthic communities are typical of sandy continental shelf systems primarily disturbance tolerant and that there was they there was no evidence of
anything rare or endangered in that area. Uh the eelgrass survey findings were uh as I showed on that initial figure, the eelgrass line compared to the outfall discharge point. The deep the deep water edge of the eelgrass meadow is at least
250 m north or inshore from the proposed outfall location. The discharge is not anticipated to affect water clarity or increase nutrient concentrations at the illgrass meadows due to the level of treatment that will be provided and to
the discharge location i.e um offshore of the illgrass bed in an area where the current is flowing primarily east west and uh gets a lot of mixing due to the construction methods. The construction time of year. So construction man method meaning
directionally drilling under the illgrass bed um so that the ill grass bed are not disturbed during construction um and construction time of year restrictions. We expect um of the many permits that will be issued for this project uh we will have a time of
year restriction and we're proposing that within our DEIR as well um so that it's not within the eelgrass growing season. We're not gonna we will be we won't be constructing doing the drilling within the or the installation of the diffusers during the summer growing
season. Uh and to the buffer from the eelgrass. It's expected that outfall construction will not affect the egrass beds. Uh shellfish and fish or fisheries and shellfish resources. The outfall discharge is not anticipated to impact
shelf fisheries or shellfish resources because of the high level of wastewater treatment again because of the significant dilution at the discharge location by both the diffuser system and the strong tidal mixing and um construction impacts to fisheries and
shellfish resources will be minimal due to those construction methods, construction time of year and the buff buffer from the illass meadows. Um, we are continuing to discuss with the division of marine fisheries and the local shellfishing community uh,
shellfish classification areas. So, it's it's not shellfish classification isn't covered in an environmental impact report. That's a um a step that is that is done by the division of marine fisheries likely after the or at the
time that the outfall is permitted. Um, but we have been speaking with the division of marine fisheries um for a couple of years now and I'm meeting with the division of marine or excuse me the local shellfish the shellfish advisory committee again tomorrow um for this
ongoing discussion of that classification process water quality evaluation. uh we completed two years of background monitoring both at the wastewater treatment plant and at several sites in the sound and concluded that the
proposed discharge will not have a significant impact on water quality. um that this this evaluation uh I'm summarizing very briefly here, but there is a very detailed process for an anti-degradation um evaluation that that process was
scoped out with the de uh department of environmental protection, the environmental protection agency and coastal zone management. And um so we as a result of that process, the we did identify treatment process
modifications that will be evaluated further before we commit before we convert from a surface from excuse me from a groundwater discharge to a surface water discharge. Um including uh potential modifications to increase the
dissolved oxygen concentration and the pH and the disinfection level if needed. um discharging to the ground where we do now um you we have a groundwater discharge permit and it has different kinds of limits. You don't worry about dissolved oxygen concentration when you're discharging to the ground but you
do in the ocean. So we will be looking further. We have stated in this report that we will be looking further at design modifications to make sure that the dissolved oxygen concentrations pH and disinfection level meet the requirements of the expected permits.
[snorts] Overall, this anti-degradation evaluation concluded that this project will have a net water quality benefit because the outfall provides discharge capacity to allow the town to expand its wastewater collection system, which will
in turn significantly reduce the nitrogen load that's currently flowing from all these septic systems along the estuaries in Falmouth um through those nitrogen impacted estuaries and into Nantucket Sound.
The net nitrogen load reduction to Nantucket Sound uh is going to be at least 12,000 kilograms of nitrogen per year. And that's just assuming um sewing what we've been talking about sewing for
since the um the Great Pond TWWMP issued in 2019 and and before it's um so if we just sewer the South Coast watershed areas, those South Coast peninsulas that we've talked about, the net nitrogen um
reduction will be 12,000 uh kilograms per year of nitrogen to the sound land use and recreation. Uh construction related impacts will be temporary and primarily confined to existing road
rideways and to a portion of Kite Park. This photograph on the right is Kite Park as it as it is today. Um and the disturbed areas along the roads and in Kite Park will be restored to pre-construction conditions. Uh they're going to Kite Park is going to be
restored to look like this when it's done. Uh there will be no permanent abovegrade or at even atgrade structures in kite park. So to summarize some of the mitigation commitments here, we're maintaining tertiary wastewater treatment level
despite converting from landbased discharge to outfall discharge. Most existing outfalls provide uh secondary or even primary uh treatment. This horizontal directional drilling uh for the outfall uh installation will
avoid construction um on the beach in the uh and in the marine environment between kite park and the discharge location. Uh the draft environmental impact report includes an inadvertent return contingency plan for the drilling
fluid. Uh this is required for any drilling operation like this. Um, as I mentioned that we expect time of year restrictions for the or we we have are giving ourselves time of year restrictions uh based on the anticipated
permits and we'll have sound barriers around that kite park staging area during that drilling operation. Uh site restoration as I mentioned and a post construction monitoring program of water quality monitoring and eelgrass surveys.
Um we've done a lot of coordination over the last three years with these agencies I and others I don't need to list them all uh for you but this is not in um this is report is not in in isolation
all the regulators that are receiving it um have already heard from us and have talked with us a great deal about this process. There's also been a lot of public communication uh at the water quality management committee committee meetings and at the select board over the past three years. Uh we've been to
the Falmouth Heights Marav Vista Neighborhood Association annual meeting the last two years and we'll be there again this year. Uh Ticket Association last uh they did not have a meeting last year otherwise we would have been there [laughter] but we were there in 2024. town meeting
um the last couple of November. Martha's Vineyard Commission um in uh beginning of 2025, Shellfish Advisory Committee, uh we last spoke uh to the whole committee in March of 2025 and I'll be there again tomorrow night. Um Sierra
Club Capen Islands group uh we presented in May of 2025. envir environmental justice notification uh was submitted in June of 2025 and will be uh repeated and um and built upon when this DI de DEIR
is issued and of course we had a MEPA public meeting um last August 20 2025 when the environmental notification form was issued. So this is a project outfall project schedule. Um where we've been is we did
the preliminary evaluation and modeling. We did um data collection and additional evaluations. There was a town meeting appropriation um that allowed us to do the work that I'm presenting tonight. Um we have not
quite completed the outfall conceptual design, but it's we're much of the way there. The ENF as I mentioned was was that we went through that process last year. We've prepared this draft environmental impact report. So the next
step um is to issue that draft environmental impact report to the state and um and get comments from the regulators and from the public. And uh we expect a final EIR uh we will issue a
final EIR which excuse me which responds to the comments that we receive on the draft and we expect that process secretary certificate on the final by the end of this calendar year. Um that would then allow us to uh move forward
with permitting. You'll see this next town meeting appropriation. Uh we're anticipating requesting a town meeting appropriation at next April's town meeting, April of 2027 for design of the outfall project and
for um the remainder of the permitting work. Um we you know the the main permit here is an NPDS permit which is the dis the discharge permit the surface water discharge permit. Uh but there are a number of other permits which would have to get done. Then there's the state
revolving fund loan process. Um and there's the design and the state revolving fund process. Uh a request for construction funds out here in April of 2028, so a year later. And then we
expect the construction to take um three years. So this this here would be an early finish. and out here 20 so 2031 is an early finish date and 2032 is a late finish date depending on how the
permitting um and the rest of this process goes. The next steps are I'm requesting or suggesting that the select board vote to submit this DEI to for the town's outfall project to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office. Um we
plan to submit the DEIR to MEEPA by the end of June. if you if you um vote so today and that will initiate the public and regulatory comment period. I want to make clear that that that comment this isn't the end of the comment period. This is the beginning. Um so this report
once it's uh issued once it's submitted to the state will be online and we will publicize that and um in a number of different ways and uh that will be available for not just regulatory review but public and other board review and we
I plan to have a public meeting in July uh just on the outfall project. In addition, we we've been speaking every year at the Ticket Maravites Maravista, excuse me, Maravista Fmouth Heights Neighborhood Association meeting, but uh we will also have a meeting just on the
outfall in July after the DEI is submitted. So, that was it. Be glad to have questions or discussion. Well, I want to just thank you, Miss LOL, for this really comprehensive um report and sharing it with us because um we are
investing an immense amount of time and effort as you and money as you well know um to improve water quality in our coastal ponds and the last thing we would want is for those efforts to cause inadvertent other environmental harm. So, I really appreciate the effort
that's gone into this and and I for one I think this uh certainly cleared up any concerns or questions that I might have had. Are there questions from the board? Yes, Mr. Brown. >> I don't have a question. I thank you for the clear presentation. I just wanted to make the comment that,
you know, sometimes people say to me, "What's up with the outfall? We're going to waste all that water." But, you know, the water that we're collecting is on all these peninsulas and these sewer areas. That water's going out to the ocean anyway. We're just improving the condition of it when it gets there.
>> That's an important point and I need to make a bigger point of that at the next public meeting. Not in you know the overwhelming majority of the sewer areas as you point out are south of Route of the future sewer areas are
south of Route 28 in on these peninsulas where as you say that that water is not going up right now back to the top of the aquifer. It's going into people's septic systems and then going out into the estuaries and out into the sound. So there that the water the water on those
peninsulas leaving the peninsulas does not as you said affect the aquafer very much. >> Great Mr. Mal question. Thank thank you again for a good and detailed presentation Miss Lel. Uh u fingers crossed this uh this goes forward
according to what we're expecting but uh and maybe this is for town management uh but do we have contingency plans or are we thinking about what happens if the outfall isn't approved and how we're going to go about dealing with it at
that point. So the town has done a lot of evaluation of landbased discharge over time and the town still does have those options as backup options, but they are not they're not good options. Uh and that's why we're going with the
outfall. this is this is a better option for the environment and for the town overall. But there the town does still have the rem the um the Allen parcel uh off of Carriage Shop Road and and the um
golf club the um I'm blanking on the name >> Fmouth Country Club. >> Fmouth Country Club. both of which were when they were purchased um municipal use and in particular potential treated wastewater discharge was was discussed
as part of those scenarios. I mean clearly agree this is the best option available but it's not totally within our uh decision making. We're up to the state, right? I mean the state has to give us the approval to go forward and
that's always subject to uh to denial. So I just want to make sure we're considering the possibility. That's all. >> Right, >> Miss Klein and then Mr. Reid. >> Thanks for the presentation, Mrs. Cole. I think back fondly to the many times I
visited the wastewater treatment plant for a tour with a bunch of students. Um so just for the purposes of the public in this session, there are some members of the Falmouth community who feel really strongly that an outfall pipe is not needed to solve the wastewater
problem that we're currently experiencing to reduce nitrogen in our um especially in those finger neighborhoods. um you know they point to alternative options that are available at a much lower cost and I wonder if you would just take a moment and respond to
um to that. We're I'm talking specifically about people who are advocates for urine diversion as an alternative measure. What would you know what are your thoughts on that? How does that fit into this outfall pipe picture? So um urine inversion and composting
toilets are um good technologies for people who for individuals who are willing to use them. Um and um and when
individuals who are willing to install and use them, they can remove uh nitrogen. Um but they are not going to be implementable at the scale that is needed to meet the nitrogen removal that
is nitrogen removal amounts that are required to meet the nitrogen load limits for these estuaries. Um and even so the plans so I mentioned that this
DEIR interacts with the town's um watershed man management planning process. The watershed management planning process um will um is enabled by this outfall. We can plan where we're going to expand sewers based based on
the outfall discharge capacity being available. Um part of those wershed management plans will also be um it will it's not just a sewing plan. It will include um innovative alternative or
denitrifying excuse me nitrogen removing septic technology in the areas where we're not sewering and where we still need nitrogen removal. So there will be plenty of places in town that will not
get sewer and that will be required to implement septic nitrogen removing technology which could be a standard a a standard denitrifying septic system or potentially if the D approves could be
um urine diversion or composting toilets for those who want them. >> Thank you. >> I appreciate that response. Thank you. Another question just this is thinking if this is successful um am I correct in thinking then that the land that's currently being used at the wastewater
treatment facility for discharge beds right there's like a significant area that's just used for putting water on um would that land be something that that we could restore and make use of in a different way? >> So we will be looking at that more in
the process. So I've said we would cease regular discharge to the existing beds. The um we will want to keep some portion of the beds as a backup option. Uh this is one of the one of the questions that
comes up is that the public and others ask is what do you do if the outfall the pipe breaks somewhere between the the the plant and and the outfall? Well, there there are a number of things. or valves that you close on either side to prevent further leakage of effluent
treated waste water, but you also can then until it's fixed um have a backup discharge location. Um so we do not plan to have regular discharge to those beds anymore, but some fraction of them will be needed as a backup discharge
location. There are a lot of there is an enormous amount of area and my sincere hope would be that uh much of it would not be required um and that could be turned back to the town for other use. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Reid.
>> Hi, thank you. Um you know, I appreciate the questions. Um, I think we can all agree that at this point that urine is the cause of this and it's the best option to get rid of, but unfortunately the solutions that are not around are not going to be mass adopted given the
current designs. Um, they just aren't unfortunately. So, this is one of our most important and uh urgent um topics that we're going to have to battle with. I would say extremely important urgent that it is happening over the next
couple years. some of our other projects are going to um come in before this, but we as a board are going to have to not just think about whether the um state is going to approve us. We're going to have to do our our darnest to make sure that
a project like this does move forward by the town. Um because this is about protecting our water. Our next uh topic for discussion are our beaches. If we don't have clean water, people aren't going to go to our beaches. If we don't
have clean water, uh you know, we have uh public health concerns, we have environmental regulation concerns, we have coastal water and shellfishing resource concerns. So, this is, you know, this is pretty big. This is pretty big for Falmouth. So, I'll put that out
there first. Um second, I do appreciate the um uh points that you brought up regarding the um hydrodnamic modeling. I know I sent a question in your direction. I appreciate that you did engage with our oceanographic
uh research firms here in town. Uh I think that's we are one of very few places around the world that have this uh kind of ability to tap into this uh experience. Um, but one follow-up question just to make sure. Um, you put
a a graph up, a map that shows a pretty large span of tidal flow in Martha's Vineyard Sound. Is the outfall pipe far enough out there to address seasonal variability and along shore variability? Um because you had a yellow streak that
was pretty large and then not dark blue but there is a you know point4 you know uh change in that. Are we far enough out there to make sure that we are not going to be having some you know for lack of better term stalled out water?
>> Yes. >> Cool. [laughter] >> Thank you. >> We've done a lot of evaluation of that. Um we had not only the HOIE uh with oceanographic group do the modeling but for the division of marine fisheries purposes. We also had the school of
marine science at um UMass Dartmouth uh do do similar do really redo the modeling with the uh a couple of tweaks that they the the division of marine fisheries likes to see and they came up
with very similar results. Um, so yes, we we we could have gone we could have been closer to shore and and met our dilution requirements. Uh, but we move further offshore because of the eelgrass. We wanted to be far enough
away from the eelgrass. Great. >> It's an important question and the answer is yes. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. All right. Important topic. Thank you for the discussion. Is there a motion to send the draft environmental imp impact report for the ocean outfall project to MEPA?
>> Yeah, I would uh make a motion to submit the draft environmental impact report for Fmouth's Ocean Outfall project to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office in order to begin the regulatory and public comment period and allow the town to continue to move forward on this important water quality
improvement project. >> I'll second that. Okay, it appears that we do actually have someone here for public comment. >> I I thought there was public comment. I was told that this >> I I didn't realize you were here for this for this issue. So, yeah, come >> Yep. Come on. Come on up.
>> All right. >> Please introduce yourself. >> I thank Madam Chair. Thank you. Craig Martin, precinct 9. Um yes, this this scares the heck out of me. Um as as well as others. Um just a couple of sentences
I heard her um when in the explanation it was a thorough explanation but I hear um there will not be a significant impact to the water quality. I don't like that sentence. I want zero impact to the water quality in the sound. Um I I I hear that it is
anticipated. I don't want to hear it's anticipated. I want there's no other way. This is what's going to happen. I don't want I don't want good educated um thoughts on the matter. I want fact on the matter. Um I'll be
honest, I'm I'm troubled just by a couple of my little personal experiences um with the currents and what have you. A few years ago when I put this in the enterprise few years ago, some young woman apparently uh she wrote a note in a bottle and threw it out new not old
beach. She wrote that in the note. Um I'm sure anticipating that she was going to get a new pen pal in France. Well, no. She found me and my dog swimming by Surf Drive Beach. Um I didn't I thought because I keep on hearing about the currents that anything
that's going out there is going to eventually hit the middle Atlantic and head out uh to Europe. Um I know when the when the turbine broke in Nantucket, south of Nantucket, it didn't go out to the middle of the Atlantic and go over to Europe. No, it came back onto the Nantucket beaches. and what Miss
Nantucket came over down north onto our beaches. I see the current flowing in. I don't see it. I haven't seen the evidence that it's going to be flowing out to the Mid-Atlantic to disappear. Um and and I I'm scared to death of not the nitrogen. I'm not I'm comfortable with
nitrogen. I understand the n the awful ramifications, but I'm comfortable with nitrogen. It comes out and comes down in the rain. I'm concerned about the draano and the liquid plumber, the tarpentine, all the god awful killers that people flush down their toilets and and should
never be doing and and and I haven't seen that. I seen the paper how we're denitrifying. I want to know what you're doing about the pharmaceuticals, which we have a heavy heavily medicated population aging um and and all the poisons that people throw down their
drains. And I haven't heard that. How does that disappear? >> Thank you. Thank you for your questions and I believe Miss LOL can probably speak to some of those. Um I I appreciate your desire for certainty. I don't think we're ever going to be able to give you certainty about what will
happen five plus years into the future on any issue. But uh what I heard said was that water quality will actually improve and tertiary treatment that might address some of those other concerns. So, two things. One is that this is the beginning of um public
comment. Issuing this is the beginning of public comment. So, I encourage you to submit that those comments um during the public comment process and I appreciate them. The uh the other thing though is I think an a very important thing to remember is that all anything
that is going into the septic systems in all of those all along those coastal ponds right now is going into the estuaries and out into Vineyard Sound. So what we're doing, what we're proposing to do instead is instead of
discharging from the septic system directly to the ground with um no treatment to collect that waste water, take it up and provide primary, secondary, tertiary treatment and disinfection and return it to the sound.
So it's an in many ways an improvement in water quality. But I'll I'll septic systems we do pump out. Sometimes it goes to the top. So I'm not I'm not certain that all goes into the ground. We will we pumping those sub systems up
and setting off to >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yep. We are going to move on as as said if there are other questions or concerns there is the the public comment period. >> So do we have one more uh brief comment?
I'm going to use a podium so I can remain upright. [laughter] >> Watch your step. >> Uh, John Waterberry, member of the water quality management committee. Uh, the water quality management committee and its predecessors have been working on
this outfall project for more than 15 years. As many of you are probably aware, in the 70s the state passed the Ocean Sanctuaries Act, which precluded any new discharge of waste water into
our marine systems. So we convened in with the the coalition for Buzzards Bay a stakeholders meeting uh in over in New Bedford and
worked on convincing ourselves that an ocean outfall was by far the best means of discharging wastewater. and the coalition then uh their attorney
wrote the legislation and Teresa Murray uh who was then head of the mass senate shepherded it through the state government and the ocean sanctuaries act was then changed in 2014 to allow the discharge of tertiary
treated wastewater into the ocean sanctuary. So, this has been a long history and I think as Amy has described, uh, the the town has been working very hard with the Massachusetts regulators
to get their input before we send in an application. Felmouth be is the first municipality to propose to put in an outfall under these new regulations. And so we're
going to get a harder look at than the second guy or the third guy. And I on behalf of the ocean of the water quality management committee, I encourage you to and the rest of the town to support this
project to fruition. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes. >> If I may, and following up on Mr. Waterberry's comment. We do have a letter. >> We have a letter of support >> in the public uh record from Buzzards Bay Coalition. The last paragraph is
very informative. The coalition applauds the town's leadership and effort to evaluate and pursue a wastewater plan that improves water quality townwide. We urge you to vote in the affirmative to submit the DEIR to ME MEA and we look
forward to reviewing the full DEI through the NEA PA process and we know how diligent and careful the coalition is. So, uh I think their support for it is a very strong indication that this is the right option.
>> Good direction. >> Yep. >> We do have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? >> All those in favor? I >> I thank you, Miss L. >> Uh we will move on to hear an update from our beach superintendent on 2026
staffing and operations. I don't need to remind this board that uh worldclass beach operations is one of our strategic goals in our recently uh finalized strategic plan and uh we certainly got a taste of summer season uh the past
couple of days. Uh so excited to hear how things are going. Sure. >> Um, >> where was it? >> Good evening. Thank you, um, Madam Chair and board. I'm Maggie Clayton, the beach superintendent for the town. Um, this
will be my seventh summer in this position, 20th working for the department. Um, so we have been in operation uh, truly for 2026 since January 15th. Um, that is when the beach
department got online. beach division of the community services department got online to help the town clerk's office with uh beach parking permit sticker sales. Um as of end of business day today we have sold 10,368
stickers. Um for comparison we sold 15,956 for all summer in 2025. So, we are doing a lot of work and that is about 71%
online orders and 29% in-person transactions. We've had in-person transactions available since May 1st, either at town hall or at the Surf Drive bath house on the weekends uh
since Memorial Day. Um, so I want to thank the two clerks who have been working since um since January and then those who came online uh in May when we opened the bath house again. Um so those
10,368 sticker users are vying for approximately 1,465 parking spaces. So, please be aware that just because you have a sticker, you are not guaranteed a space at the beach. Um,
but uh besides the two clerks working since January, it takes 149 employees to staff the office and the beaches. Um, we have 73 lifeguards, 60 parking attendants, five clerks, and 10
supervisors. Um, people work a range of shifts. Um, our sunset shift parking attendants are uh four hours a day as opposed to a full shift that's seven and a half or eight and a half hours a day. And people work anywhere from 2 to 5
days a week. So, our senior staff does a lot of work with scheduling to make sure that we are fully staffed. Um, and as uh Mr. Renshaw pointed out in his town manager report with the police and fire.
We prioritize also our hot spots and the weekends and the long weekends. We know that Fourth of July is on a Saturday this year. Um we are aware that schools are getting out late because of snow days. Um but we are out there as much as we can be. Um we were at Old Silver this
past weekend. Uh prior to that we didn't open because of the weather. It wasn't because of staffing. I had staff eager to work and they ended up doing uh pre-season um operating jobs rather than uh surveying the parking lots and the
beaches. Um but we've partnered with human resources and onboarding is going well and um everything good to go with staffing. Um, we had food truck bids awarded at the recommendation of the beach committee and I want to thank the
DPW and the town manager's office for being on site uh to work with those vendors when I was unavailable. Um, we have Chajis, the food truck that was at the heights last year is at Old Silver Public. Beachside Blends, who was at
Bristol and a few other locations last year, is at Old Silver Residence, Surf Drive, Felmouth Heights, and Bristol. And uh Perry's last stand um from or winter bottom ice cream is at Chapa
quite and have the mobile food uh mobile ice cream um truck to go to the beaches that don't have um a fix a a truck in their lot. So, Manat, Woodneck, Gru Pond at Goodwill Park, uh Stony Beach and
Woods Hole, um which is owned by MBL, Meansit, uh etc. Um we've been working with all of our partnering departments across town to make sure that we are ready to go for the summer. Uh conservation authorized our new beach
management plan, which was funded by town meeting uh in November of 2023. um DPW, everybody, every division I think. Uh parks for Goodwill, water for our water stations and our shower towers coming
online. Uh engineering for the GPS um coordinates for our parking attendant booths and lifeguard stands. Fleet services for getting our new truck from uh town meeting in November of 2025 ready. Uh coastal resiliency.
Um Josh was here earlier tonight and he uh handled the beach nourishment for uh Manot um facilities, making sure that the bathous were ready to go and the highway department and everything they do with the beach maintenance laborers.
Um water quality testing of the swim areas has already started. So that goes to myself and uh Scott and the health department. Uh it got us going at the winter office in January and they got us
going at the bath house in May. Um police and fire with their summer patrols and uh they provide staff with stop thebleleed tourniquet training. Um harbor master's office, marine environmental service, the swim area markers are going in Thursday of this
week um with a Friday rain date. animal control um is uh coming to present to staff to make sure we know what questions to ask. But again, dealing with enforcement of dogs on the beach
and last year we had our first um shark sightings during operating hours. So MEES is our go-to partner for that. Um I want to thank Town Meeting for funding the handicapped access mats. Um we were we're adding to our fleet and replacing
a couple of deteriorating ones. Those are arriving in the next couple of weeks from New Jersey. And um our swim lessons uh we will be putting out our save the dates and a blast about registration
being open, but we'll be offering swim lessons again $5 a family for 30 minute lessons four days a week for six weeks. um June 29th to August 6th and we'll have a lifeguard training course to be American Red Cross lifeguard certified
um like I did 21 years ago. Um July 13th to the 30th. And again, we'll use our communication tools to share when registration is open. Um we have the Falmouth alert system, we have a Felmouth Beaches Facebook, we use the
town website. Um and our operation will be seven days a week. the day after schools get out in Felmouth, Saturday, June 27th. And I can now take questions from the board. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Mr. Brown,
>> on the beaches that are not uh assigned a food truck or a vendor, is it possible that like say somebody had a hot dog stand and wanted to go to Manan, as long as they had their license and all their stuff in order, could they do that? So, we now have a a a contract for a mobile
concession for every beach that doesn't have a a dedicated concession. So, no, but there is there is a presence at every beach. >> So, there's a roving just one vehicle that'll go to all the different beaches,
>> right? So, that was correct. That was bid separately. Um, so it's Winter Bottom Ice Cream is the vendor for the Woodneck Beach. the um GRUs. Help me out, Maggie. >> Um Meganet, uh MBL, Stony Beach, the
Milro extension of Surf Drive um >> and Manot >> and Manot. >> But so that means I think I hadn't realized this before. So mobile ice cream cannot go to the beaches that have another food. >> Correct. They do not directly compete
with the vendors who have contracts at Surf Drive. Um they cannot operate there. Okay. >> And that's also the case then at all the partially covered beaches by the one truck doing seven places. It's not going to be able
to really effectively do that. But that the fact that they have that contract prohibits random people from being able to show up with ice cream trucks and stuff. >> Correct. That's that's the way we bid it, you know, and this is a two-year bid. could certainly revisit that um in
the future years, but that's that was the plan that we came up with in dialogue with the beach committee. >> Okay. >> I just want to clarify, Mr. Brent, you said I believe it's one vendor, but they have four trucks and four locations. >> Oh, is that right? >> For Beachside Blends is actually >> Beach Yeah, Beachside Blends is
>> Well, that's different. That those are locations. Yeah, but for I was talking about for the ones that are not fixed locations, >> the one mobile. >> I was thinking I I didn't catch that you have that roving vendor. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, I guess we'll see how that goes. >> Miss Klein. Yes.
>> Thanks so much for your information. I just want to plug for folks who are listening that the swim lessons are an amazing deal. I mean, $5 for like two hours of swim education a week for six weeks. I mean, >> I can't get a coffee at Starbucks for $5, right? Um so so thank you for
offering those. My family has benefited from them. A quick question about the um food vendors because this is still something that we haven't been doing for very long. Are are you and your team making any um are you able to capture any data about how it's going? What's
the, you know, feedback from the public to better inform the process moving forward? Are you collecting any data or is that something that you've considered? Um, we're open to hearing from the community. Um, the beachfalmouth.gov
email address is a great place um to share uh feedback. Um, we've had members of the community um also talk to the beach committee about what they're feeling. Um, this is a the switch from
fixed to the food trucks is not changing the amount of food access. It's just changing the uh drain on facilities in the older buildings and in the event of a heightened weather situation, the
ability to have a truck or a trailer get pulled and removed from an area of vulnerability uh with speed um was is a was a priority. Um and again the DPW and the town manager's office have done a lot of work for um balancing the
electric hookups versus generator use when possible. >> Okay. There any other questions? Mr. Reid? >> Yeah, thank you very much for this. Um very informative. I guess I have a question. Um beaches, travel and tourism
are our big, you know, it's what we are based on in this town. Um right now it seems that we are currently open um when schools let out and then when schools uh go back in, right?
>> Yeah. So um we're in a unique calendar year of Memorial Day being the earliest it can be and Labor Day being the latest it can be. Um staff who have cleared payroll and have had working opportunities since lifeguard tryyouts on Saturday, May 16th. Again, the
weather hasn't been really cooperative on weekends. Um, as we inch closer, um, probably after this weekend, definitely, um, by Thursday, May 18th, we're hoping
to be able to staff more locations daily. Um, we I already spoke to um, Principal Bushy over at Lawrence. they're having a field trip at Surf Drive on Thursday, June 18th or um Wednesday the 17th. Um
it's in my phone. Um and we're going to provide lifeguards that day. And so I will put people out there as much as I am able to. Um we know that schools in New Hampshire get out earlier than some districts in Massachusetts. Um, some
districts in Massachusetts had fewer snow days or observe fewer calendar holidays like Amesberry gets out on Monday, June 22nd, but um, Freetown Lakeville doesn't get out into Lake Falmouth until Friday, June 26th. So, we
have high school staff that isn't available until their school gets out. Um, but we have college staff and retirees who are ready to work. So, as the weather is cooperative and as they are available, we will put them out in
as many places as we can. Does that answer your question? >> Yeah. I mean, following up on that, actually, I guess I'm curious about the decision. You said you have staff who are eager to work. Um, and yet we only staffed Old Silver this past weekend,
which graduation weekend, sunny, gorgeous. Like I'm curious about that decision to to only have the one beach staffed. >> So we have staff who's eager to work, but then when I contact them the night before and I say, "Okay, the weather forecast is holding as it was 3 days
ago." And they say, "Oh, I actually have a grad party I have to go to or um my cousin's getting married." So not everyone who is on payroll is available every single day even though they say they want to start working. and our inseason hours are tied to the public
school calendar. So their offer letters um say you can start on or after the date um and we schedule accordingly. So the reason we only opened Old Silver is because I didn't have parking attendants
that could staff more than one beach. So we put parking attendants and guards at one beach. When I can do more, I will do more. Could we flip that way of scheduling and like have people by default on and if the weather is bad cancel instead of waiting until the
night before to try to because I'm just you know I think um even people in the town of Falmouth let alone those coming from elsewhere are often shocked to learn that we consider our beach season to be from the end of June to the mid end of of August. they're thinking about
it more in terms of the weather or Memorial Day. And I think we need to figure out how we actually lengthen the the amount of time that that we consider ourselves to be operating. And I understand there are challenges there, but I'm just trying to figure out how we tweak the way we approach this to
actually be able to to have our beaches fully staffed um earlier and and more often. We start the weekend schedule on a Monday or a Tuesday, but it's a fluid situation of who is clearing onboarding
and who um has experience in leadership roles, especially if there's not a supervisor available. So, who has keys and who can manage the beach? Um, we're not we're not trying to do anything that
would put anyone at risk. We are the face of Falmouth and safety is our priority and we want everyone to enjoy their beach experience. Um, which is why we will have a presence as much as we
can, but we can't um hold staff for a seasonal job responsible for a shoulder season that they did not originally um sign up for. Okay, one last question for me and that's about beach stickers,
which first of all numbers are terrific. Um, it's it's uh great to already be at 2/3 of last year's uh total sales. Um, and love seeing the the 70% online. We're really getting um uptake on the the online sales. Um, but I've I've been
hearing confusion from people about where can they go if they're in a crunch and looking for a beach sticker that, you know, without the the few days turnaround time of of online. Um, what's our current situation with where people can go to actually get a beach sticker?
>> Sure. So, um, this has been posted on the town website. Um, the LNT Mitchell Bath House is open 9:00 a.m. to 400 p.m. on weekends and um, we process online during the week. We offered weekdays at
town hall um, exclusively at the beginning of May. We currently have two days a week at town hall. Um, again, that's about not burning out seasonal staff because [snorts] if they work two weekend days and two days at town hall,
that's that's their 4-day work week. um the the balancing of um people wanting us to have staff out and then also not wanting um not having a
sticker and not being able to get to a beach. Right. Right now, we only checked at Old Silver last weekend, so every other beach was available for those who did not have yet have a sticker or were not willing to pay a daily parking permit fee. Um so again the roll out is
we balance staffing and requiring with the opportunity to purchase. Um taxpayers have had the opportunity since January 1st. Um but we know a lot of people enjoy um the tradition of going to the bath house um to get their
stickers. Um yeah. >> All right. Yep. Um, I I tried um tried to do this online by April 15th uh to save the five bucks. Uh, and then when I made the application, I realized I
needed again to have my registration uploaded and sent over and so forth. I would think that there should be some way that people who have received beach stickers in the past and submitted all information u be given an opportunity to certify
that nothing has changed from the year before. Their license is the same, their registration is the same, and that there be a process that they could be uh approved a lot quicker and a lot simpler than having to, you know, go through the whole thing all over again. So the beach
parking permit sticker is an annual taxpayer benefit. Um it we check it against the taxpayer roles. So there are people who last year were a taxpayer in Falmouth and this year are not because they've potentially registered their car
elsewhere. >> So they wouldn't be able to certify that they that there hadn't been any changes. >> Right. But there's no way to certify except for providing a valid document that shows that you have an unexpired vehicle registration in the name of a
taxpayer. Um it's it's not um the online process isn't any different than how we before we had online and you could only purchase in person. You always needed to provide your current vehicle registration at the time of your point of sale.
>> Seems rather cumbersome. Madam Chair, if I could, and to uh select board member MScali's point, um Peter's taking notes on that as well. I think it's something that we'll we're going to look into. I've noticed it as well. It is a little cumbersome. Um I I'm not going to commit tonight, but I think it's something worthy looking into uh going forward.
>> Yeah, I think um we are significantly behind uh time on our our agenda. I want to say thank you, Maggie, for the update and for your hard work. And I think um you've given us a lot of food for thought and what you're hearing is a lot of interest from the board in trying to figure out um where there are things
that we can tweak, where there are things we can change to constantly just make our our beach services better and just want to thank you for your efforts. >> All right. Uh we are going to move on to our next uh agenda item. The select board acting as trustees of the Fmouth
Affordable Housing Fund discuss and consider a vote to rescend the financial award from the fund to Bushwood 545 LLC. Um this, as uh those who have have been following our proceedings will know, is back on our agenda. Um and I I want to
just ask before we get started, how many people are here for public comment on this item? And if I could have a show of hands, how many um are here to voice support for the Bushwood project?
All of you. Thank you. Um I I want to before we even get into discussion just reiterate again uh that I think uh this board, this body uh not necessarily this exact composition but has repeatedly um over the past couple of years shown uh a
willingness and in fact an eagerness um to go beyond what has been standard practice um to support a project that uh was felt to be an extraordinary fit for our strategic needs. Um and I think even at our last vote, you heard uh continued
uh enthusiasm for what that project represented. Um we have though received repeated communication um from the seller that uh leaves very little hope uh for uh the
viability of uh the Bushwood project at that location and that is the reason that this is back on our agenda. Um so I think uh this board and we have also received emails um well appreciates uh the support um that and those of you who
who have come to show that support um but I'm going to actually open it to the board first um for for discussion on this. Miss Klein, >> thank you chair um Chairman Goldstone. So I think that no one in the room would question that I'm a committed housing
advocate. It's how I got started and how I landed here on this board. And I firmly recognize the need for workforce housing in the town of Falmouth as someone who's interacted with people in all different arenas of my life here in Falmouth who have struggled with finding
safe and stable housing. And I think that 545 Maine represented an opportunity for that type of housing to be realized. But I would like to read a line from a letter from an email that was sent um to the members of the select board in advance of our June 1st
meeting. This letter is part of the public record with regards to this topic. This email came from Mr. Mamory and it is with respect to this project and in this letter Mr. Mamory writes um we have assured Mr. Gasso his attorney
Mr. Ahmed as well as representatives of international angels in writing that there are no circumstances whether or not falmouth housing corporation succeeds in which we will consider any relationship in which Mr. Galasso is is involved. That's quite clear language from the
seller. And while I am supportive of workforce housing, it is not the role of the select board to interfere with the choices of a private property owner. And we need to respect the sellers's rights in this regard. It is very unfortunate
that we are at this juncture. But I I have no question in my mind unless um I have not received any communication from the seller that establishes anything contrary to the sentiment contained in this email from one week ago.
>> Mr. Mscali, >> thank you uh Madame Chair. Um I as well have been a a firm supporter and advocate for this project from the very beginning, even before I was on the select board. Uh it's something that this town definitely needs. Uh but as
I've said at our meeting, I believe on May 18th, uh we we can't u conflate the two issues uh that that that that are here. One is the project, the other is our responsibility as trustees of uh of
the affordable housing fund. uh and um I I think the continuation of those those funds being uh allocated and appropriated for a a project that as
Miss Klein uh has uh read uh does not seem to have a pathway forward and I feel uh very badly uh for the project but uh but feel that it is incumbent upon us as fiduciaries uh and trustees
uh that we should proceed to uh to to allow those funds to be at least looked at for other uh other possible uh projects in the town. >> Well, I don't agree. I think that we have a commitment to this project and to
this housing type which we've identified as our one of our priorities and and this is a a great project and a great location. If anything, I'd like to see this stand. And maybe we consider an RFP for the town to purchase the property
and do a similar project. I just don't like the idea of caving in here when we have so much at stake and I I just think it's wrong. So, I'm not going to I'm not in favor of it. >> Mr. Reid, would you like to weigh in?
>> I guess I just have a question about that. Would the RFP be a different process than what we currently have? >> Well, I think we need to be careful because this property is currently under contract to another individual and as
Miss Klene or another organization and as Miss Klein already um and thank you very appropriately noted, we cannot and do not interfere um or dictate in any way um private real estate transactions.
Um we have expressed repeatedly um incredibly strong support for workforce housing for uh an innovative concept uh that again we have now received repeated communication does not
have a pathway forward. Um and I guess it's it's in that light um that I view this item before us. Um that doesn't mean that we are in any way obligated to support immediately another project um
of any sort at any location. Um but but it does not seem that this one has a pathway forward. Miss Klein, did you want to jump in again? >> Yeah, I would just follow up because I in in my mind, right, we need to consider these two as very separate
ideas. So tonight's vote is is firmly focused on this one very narrow um agenda item which is specifically related to Fmouth affordable housing funds that have been encumbered for a specific project. It's been conflated a little with the
potential for a second project that it's currently under contract with Felmouth Housing Corporation. And I would really hope that when if and when the Felmouth Housing Corporation gets to a point where they have a project that they're presenting to this board that members of the community come to show and to say
that the type of housing we think is appropriate in this location is workforce housing. And that's a moment where we can have that that discussion about how should this possibly be used. And that's a moment for our also for the select board to say and not necessarily
just automatically support what's being presented to us, but to ask for or request certain types of things, but I just want to make sure we're not conflating those two separate components. >> We keep saying we support this project, but it looks like that support is fading
here. So, >> with all due respect, Mr. Brown. I think that's that's an unfair um characterization of where this select board is. Um you know, we are not the bad guys here. Um not that there is
necessarily a bad guy anywhere, but certainly um we have done everything we possibly could to support this project. uh we made particular funding decisions that were not typical to what had been done in the
past in an effort to move this uh this this forward. So, uh, you know, to the community, uh, please do not consider that the select board in making a a decision tonight, which we still haven't made yet, uh, but, uh, that it is any
way, uh, a showing of a lack of support for Mr. Gasso's project up to this point. But, uh, but as I have said, uh, you know, as as well as Miss Klein, uh, we can't conflate the two. And uh I
think that uh with respect to the matter that's on the agenda this evening uh that that's a decision or motion that we need to uh address. But to uh to say that it is any lesson of our support for workforce housing in the downtown area,
I do not believe that's what we're saying. were saying that we can't uh in good faith in light of the sellers's uh current position to keep those funds uh uh allocated uh for for that project.
So, >> and what if I might ask why is that? >> Why why is what >> why is it that we are under pressure to resend the funding? >> Because we have we have tied up $3.4 million. I think that's the amount uh
that is just you know not able to be considered for any other projects whether it's the founding corporations project we've worried about or or something else. So, uh, you know, I think it's pretty evident that, uh, you know, that that while that money,
because we don't have an infinite amount of money in the housing fund, you know, that while that money is, you know, earmarked and allocated for the 545 Brushwood uh, project, uh, we we can't really look at any other projects.
There's I I think clearly um passion both for the project um and uh for workforce uh housing as a whole um
that is evident and um I will say personally with regard to this issue um coming to a position has not been easy. It is not easy to let go of what felt
like a really unique opportunity. Um and yet I find myself with the [snorts] communication that we have received from the seller unable to see a path forward. And I think it you know Mr. from Mscali to
your point the um the difference between supporting a particular project and supporting a concept, right? And and affordable housing and workforce housing more
broadly. Um and having a vision for how we want um our downtown to function are at times separate things. Um, Mr. Reg, is there anything you would like to to contribute to the
conversation? Otherwise, I will call for a motion. >> Um, I I think my uh question of Mr. Brown's thoughts were a little bit offguard, so apologies for that. Um, I would agree with everything that is being said here. Um, it is the
concept of workforce housing that we have been voting on since day one. the concept of that out of our strategic plan so noted there are many different types of housing we need. I think this select board this iteration and the previous one noted that um workforce was
the uh most necessary and will continue to be the most necessary um sector that we develop in the coming times. It's just very unfortunate that it did not work out between the two principles that
are there and we've heard from uh one that it's possible um and they're trying every effort to make it happen and the actual owner saying that it's just not possible and it it's terrible that we're stuck in
this situation. Um I'm not seeing a pathway to rectify this. I am uh in favor with um uh the other four that have um voiced their opinion, but I I I
I hear me, Mr. Mr. Brown. I I Yeah, it's this is a tough situation. So, those are my thoughts. >> I know we have community members who have come. Uh we also have uh a letter that we received this afternoon from
Farming Falmouth um expressing their continued support for the project. Um I I feel that this board is fairly decided on this issue. Um but I will grant uh members of the public uh if you would
like one minute um for public comment. Uh, good evening, Madam Chair. Michael Glassel. I'm the managing member of Bushwood 545 LLC. And I wonder for someone who spent five years on this project and 500,000 of our own money that could have more than one minute.
>> Yes, you may, sir. >> Thank you. Um, I don't know what the rush is. I think Mr. Brown had a good question. Why are we rushing to to uh terminate a project in funding for something that the community wants, the
community has supported, this board has supported because it's a condition in a purchase agreement. That is why we are rushing to terminate our funding. There's a condition in the purchase agreement, if you read it, that says
that the buyer needs to get 2,500 or $600,000 from the town in order to close. Why are we willing to give up something that we all love, a historic building in our downtown that has been awarded over
$5 million from the state, 3.4 4 million from you um been determined to be a national historic landmark building and we're willing to give that away. We're being bullied. We're being bullied. I've dealt with Mr. Mamry, Jim Memory, not
Jonathan Mamry, Jim Memory for over five years. And yes, we have extended the purchase agreement three or four times with their cooperation. And because someone else steps in and has offered them an offer to to sell the property, of course they're going to say, "Don't
interfere." Who wouldn't? They want their money. We've got the money. Let's use the money to get the project we want, not be bullied by a seller. I mean, that's the bottom line.
Let's let's get what we want. Let's use our money the way that we want to, the way the community wants to. We don't even have plans or or anything of what's being proposed for the site. And you're willing to take $3.4 million away from a project that this community wants and
deserves for our workers. There's nothing like this. There's nothing like this project in the state. I think we need to work a little bit harder. I've proposed that we put together a subcommittee that would meet together and try to find some solutions.
There are solutions besides killing this project. we haven't explored them. We need to take the time to do that. If we can't find a resolution, you know, after doing that and meeting together, we've got to put people together to get we
what we want. It's a little bit of work. So, I would hope that you would reconsider and allow us to continue to work on this and come back with a better solution that doesn't destroy a historic building or housing for our workforce just because it's conditioned in a
purchase agreement. When do we start to award money or even consider awarding money to people who come to the door with a purchase agreement? I had to do and spend $500,000 with plans and permits and and reports and everything. Let's be fair. Let's get what we want.
Thank you. >> With all due respect, Mr. Galasso, I don't think that it is that purchase and sale that is prompt prompting this decision. As you have said, we have not seen a project to consider it. Um, and
we extended, as Mr. Brown reminded me this afternoon, um, have previously extended funding to your project even when stated in the application that you did not have a current purchase and sale. So again, that is also not the condition for this. It is the repeated
communication, at least for me, from the seller that there is no pathway forward for this project and the town cannot and does not interfere in third party private real estate transactions. >> Yes, but you're abiding by one in order
to resend my funds. >> I don't think that's a fair characterization of what we're doing. Well, it says in the purchase agreement that the purchase agreement with the current seller would not proceed if >> that is not the question before us this evening. >> We we we're not there. I mean, we're you
know, as as you know, I mean, you know, you're you're you're assuming things that, you know, we're not sure are going to happen uh in in the future. Uh so, um you know, I think it's unfair to uh you know, to say that we're being
bullied. I think all we're being asked to do or all we're doing is acting appropriately with respect to the funds that uh you know are allocated to a project that unfortunately is is is not
you know viable at this point. Certain things can happen going forward. Uh but um you know to say that we have you know decided to tear down the building or agreed to tear down the building or anything like that. We're not there yet and we may never get there. Who knows?
>> Well they don't send our funds to you are there. >> It's that simple. >> I yield some if you want. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, I'm Ellie Costa with Vermy Felmouth. Thank you for giving me an opportunity
to speak. Um, I just would like to say with all due respect for you and how difficult this decision is, that it was said that the select board should not interfere in the private negotiations, the private affairs of business,
something happening outside this board. And I think in fact that is exactly what is happening. If you resend this funding right now, you have made the decision. You have removed a window of time for a negotiation. And I [clears throat] could understand
if your discussion tonight were h this might not happen. I've heard a reference to a Mr. Mamory. I'm aware that there are two Mr. Mammories and there are some different sentiments. Um but if if you resend
then you're dismantling the project that every everyone in this room including you have been working on for a while and that we all believe in. I could understand if your discussion were about hm okay what sort of window should we allow for private affairs
to roll out? I know that uh when you awarded the affordable um housing funding, I think that there was a a a condition to for for for brown grounds to break in 3 years. So, nobody's saying wait 3 years, but I I
could see you saying, should we wait 6 months? What is the point where we should say now is the time to make this decision? I can't see what's putting the pressure on making it right now. So I that's my assertion that you actually
are interf inter interfering with the affairs by cutting it off here. And the reason I believe that so strongly is that I'm on the board of the Woodsole Community Association and uh you may recall when the Anthony Davis house was um well it wasn't even
put on the market. It was announced that a purchase and sale agreement had been signed. The house would be sold etc etc. So the village of Woods Hole rallied within a couple of weeks. Many many many stages of negotiation took place over a
period of I think it was two months and lo and behold the buyer in that purchase and sale agreement assigned the rights to buy to the whole community association. So when all parties are
allowed to negotiate and their conditions can be met, a compromise can happen, a change can happen. This can take another course. But I think I would hope that we could discuss how
how long that window should be rather than let's cut it off right now. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Costa. over here and then start you. >> Hi, my name is Ann Pride. Um, I strongly oppose rescending the funding Mr. Glasso
received. I do think it sets a terrible precedent. Um, I think rescending the funding after the years of public discussion and planning risks damaging the town's credibility with future housing partners, lenders, and state
agencies. And just speaking from experience, developers and financing partners need to know that when Fmouth makes a commitment, they're going to stand by it. And I really see no reason why this can't continue to stay in place, the
funding until such time as the developer acknowledges he cannot go forward. I don't I think uh this money's been earmarked for workforce housing and it should remain earmarked for workforce housing and um
part of the pro the current project as it stands, the planning for it. Thank you. Thank you. You sir, >> Craig Martin, Precinct 9. I might be playing semantics, so I I understand um Select Woman Klein's um explanation that
we don't deal with private real estate uh transactions, but I'm not so sure we can call this strictly a private real estate transaction. I mean, the the housing corporation is essentially, you know, with our with our funding, the public funding. Um, and
I think we should perhaps wait until the Fountain Thousand Corporation's board says no to our request to could we sell it um to the preferred developer here. I think we should wait till Fountain Housing Corporation says no, we're going to do it our way. Um instead of
preserving the building and and doing the um the plan that we all seem to agree with. Um so maybe shouldn't we send early until we get the no because we should make that approach. We should at least get a yes or no from them. Um
and I think there's a chance. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. We uh believe we had a motion and a a second there. No, >> not yet. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> Um
Madam Chairman, I just like to make a a point based on some of what folks were just sharing. Um this is not the first evening that the select board has taken up this matter. It has kicked the can, so to speak, several times. um on this in past
meetings. Um and again, we're con I I really want to be clear that this decision is not to resend support for workforce housing. It is a very narrow decision and it is based on very very clear
language from the seller that we cannot and should not interfere with. That said, I also just want to make a note that the the balance of the affordable housing fund is quite low at the moment and people will not bring
forward new projects if they do not feel that there are funds available to them. So by rescending the funds back to the for Fmouth affordable housing fund, we are saying to others in the community that we do have funds available and
maybe we're no longer going to prevent them from bringing forward a project that they might have hesitated to bring forward considering the balance at this moment. >> If I could uh I don't think we've kicked the can. We voted four to one not to resend the funding,
>> but it keeps coming back. We never had a vote actually with all due respect. It it it never went to a vote. U so um we never voted at that meeting that I think you're referring to. That was the certainly the sense but it never got to
a vote just to be clear. um you know and and just you know going forward there are a number of things that can happen uh once that money is back uh in the affordable housing fund or available for its use and some of the suggestions
that have been made you know may it may actually come to fruition uh and an application come before the affordable housing uh fund to to support such a project or such an application. So um I
I I don't see that as being um you know determinative of what what what our discussion is this evening. Um there are still a number of possibilities uh out there including you know apparently Falmouth Housing Corporation's uh you
know uh project or at least their u their their contract which is dependent upon this this board uh as trustees granting granting funds in support of it. So we haven't even gotten to that point yet. So >> so I
Mr. Mr. Hargraves, did did you >> Peter Hargraves precinct nine? Um, I just want to get on the record the other side of the story here for for from the citizens comments because it's been kind of one-sided.
And first of all, I'd like to thank my elected officials for the thoughtful discussion and perspective on what we're talking about here. And frankly, if I took the point of the property owner and
and I was at the other end of this discussion, I would consider that I was entering the territory where I would be considering a lawsuit for interference with my rights as a property owner. And
some of the things I've read in the paper lately about the prospective buyer uh caused me to wonder if they're really acting in good faith in trying to move this project ahead by having it declared
a historical site so we can prevent the destruction of the building for 12 months while we further negotiate this. As this funding has stairstepped from a low level to $3.4 million, I see no
evidence that this town is not committed to to affordable or attainable housing, workforce housing, and that's subsidized. Uh, and and that is really
uh not an argument that should be discussed here. We should be concerned about the legal rights of the property owner and the way I don't know how the buyer the prospective buyer can feel
bullied. I think that's more an appropriate statement from the seller. Uh and so we just let it go. I would like you to vote to resend this. I've read the public record. I haven't had an emotional stake in any of this. I'm not
running for anything, but there very clearly is a statement that all the conditions have not have not been met and we have a perfect right to resend this funding and put it into some other project. There's $200,000
left in the in the affordable housing fund trust. And so if it's a crisis in affordable housing, we should invest this in other projects. and the the nature and shape and location of those
projects is to be determined. That's not what this meeting is about. >> Thank you. >> So, I I want to thank the board um for thoughtful discussion. Um I don't feel at this point that
further discussion or further comment is significantly shifting where we are. Um, and so I am going to make a motion that the Felmouth Select Board acting as trustees of the Falmouth affordable housing fund cons uh vote to rescend the
financial award from the fund to Bushwood 545 LLC. >> With a heavy heart, I will second that. >> Is there any further discussion amongst the board? >> Well, there's $27 million worth of
effort here that you're rescending today. So, >> it's not an easy decision for sure. >> All those in favor? >> I >> I >> I >> Mr. Brown.
>> Thank you. Our next item of business is a presentation and discussion of long-term fiscal planning with summary tax impact estimates uh for upcoming operating and capital budgets. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh as you all
recall 6 months ago, literally almost to the day, um I gave a budget FY27 operating budget presentation to the select board. Uh in that presentation, I talked at a very high level about a forecasted 5-year uh gap revenues versus
expenditures. Um that generated a lot of discussion, rightfully so. Um leading to an April 27th presentation by then finance director Laura Citroen. Laura spent an enormous amount of work putting together uh some really detailed uh data to show that gap and some of the reasons
for it. Um tonight, Peter has followed that up with an equally, if not more so, um a strong effort to compile a bunch of data in a relatively short period of time. Peter's going to take a look at again these uh gaps in the operating and and capital budget, but importantly talk
about some mitigate ways that we can mitigate these gaps through the use of uh property tax exemptions exemptions. So, I'm going to turn it over to Peter. And again, Peter, I want to thank you for the tremendous amount of work that you put into this presentation. Thank you for the record, Peter Johnson Stab, assistant town manager. Um so, as
Mr. Renshaw just outlined uh we are tonight building on the considerable work that finance director Laura Citroen um presented at a meeting in April um which we collaborated on but she really
did the bulk of that work. Um I I will also say that you know this we're viewing this as an iterative process. So, we have new information to present tonight um that you know hopefully is helpful and informative and fully expect
that it will just prompt more questions from the board and perhaps the community and so fully expecting this to be an an ongoing conversation with more information and more analysis uh in the months to come. Um so the point of emphasis tonight is
identifying the tax impact um of all of the operating and capital shortfalls um if they were to be addressed by tax increases. And that [clears throat] of course is not our plan. the town manager and I are not proposing that we simply
look at the long-term forecast and do it all as as uh as estimated and raise all of those shortfalls with tax increases. Not at all what we're intending, but I I think it was uh select board member Colin Reed that asked, you know, what
does this look like in terms of tax burden when we put it all together? So, that's what we're doing tonight is we're putting it all together for illustration purposes um so that you can see what it looks like again with the understanding that as we move forward with our
operating budget plans and our capital budget plans that we will be exploring a variety of um alternatives including tax increases. Yes, but including belt tightening, budget cutting, grants, fee increases, um all
sorts of opportunities to meet the community's needs and objectives while uh limiting tax increases to the greatest greatest extent possible. And on that last note, mitigating tax increases. Um tonight, we are going to
continue that conversation about residential tax exemptions. So, this is something that the board has been strongly supportive of, has already voted um to implement a residential tax exemption for fiscal year or beginning in fiscal year 28. Um and tonight we're
just going to um get a little bit of a a closer look at layering what are the tax increases like and then how would the residential tax impact um affect that for um various categories of residents.
So, uh, this slide and I I tried to, um, come up with slides that has it had as few numbers in them as possible, but there are still a lot of numbers that we need to take a look at in order to have a thoughtful conversation. So, these first two slides are going to be looking
at the operating budget forecast. So, that forecast itself is unchanged from what you saw in April. So, the top line here, the top row, total expenditure forecast. um that's unchanged from what you saw in April. Total expenditures
based on a a series of assumptions um that went sort of in broad categories applying a percentage increase um to various categories to estimate what our operating budget looks like and then similarly a set of assumptions. What do we think our revenues are going to look
like? And the the sum of those two is that you know we expect to have a gap. So that's the top line, total expenditures. Second line estimated deficit shortfall. As I just referenced the difference between those two forecasts, revenues and expenditures. I
do want to point out that second line estimated deficit shortfall that is cumulative. So if we look at fiscal year 29 for example, it says 3.9 million and we look at the year prior 28 1.4 million.
When we close that gap in FY28, the shortfall going into FY29 is reduced by that 1.4. So we don't add the 1.4 to the 3.9 to look at what would the shortfall be in FY29.
That 3.9 is the sum of the shortfalls of 28 and 29. So I I I did want to make that point. Um, so the next line tax rate uh impact cumulative. So again, that's going if we
were to take that 1.4 million gap in 28 and solve the entire thing only with a tax increase that would result in an increase next line down tax rate impact 6 cents. And then we're applying that tax rate to the median tax bill. Um, and
the single family, the median single family home is assessed at $791,880. I will mention briefly that the state uh division, Department of Revenue, Division of Local Resources, um, their
uh, the reference point that they use in a lot of their tables is average single family tax bill. We're using median because it's more common. There are a lot more people at the median level than there are at the average level. That median that average number for reference
is a million28,000. >> Do you mind if I interrupt? I don't understand that. >> So um median represents the uh the number that is you have a you have a statistics I I'll do my best to define
it. Um you have a series of data points, right? And if you add them all up and divide by the number of data points, that's the average. So for single family tax bills, that's a million28,000. If you look at um what is the the
middlemost value of all of those values, the middlemost is the median 791 in this case. >> Okay. Excluding the extremities, >> it's sort of it's Yeah, it's better. It it it's less skewed by the extremes.
Exactly. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Yep. >> So the um the bottom line, it looks like my slide is not quite fitting on the screen here, which is unfortunate. Um,
we're taking this all the way out to 2037 and the cumulative uh tax rate impact is 1,58 here. Let me just there. Now you can see it on the screen. So the um the median tax bill impact,
you know, it builds up from $47 in 28 to $499 in 2032 and up to 2037. Again, in this fictional illustration that all of these shortfalls are addressed with tax increases, the the cumulative tax
increase would be $1,251 by the year 2037 on the median value home. Now, I do want to also point out I did not include in this calculation the tax increase that's within the levy
that doesn't require a debt exemption or an override. So that 2 and a.5% annual increase in the tax levy that's allowed um that's not included here. So the actual taxing crack increase would be greater than the amount shown here. >> May may I ask a question then? Does the
791880 stay constant throughout the 10 years in your projections? >> Correct. Yes, it does. >> But it will be increasing no doubt >> over time. >> Yes. But bear in mind that the way Prop
2 and a half works, it regulates the amount of total real estate tax revenue that the town can raise. So if values were to go up 20% next year, the town cannot collect 20%
in additional revenue. the values go up, the rate goes down, and you're only and the town what's regulated is the town's allowed to raise total revenue of 2 and a.5% more. So the the increase in real
estate values will not increase the the tax the average tax bill. Actually, the what increases the average tax bill is >> taking that 2 and a half% uh tax rate increase that is allowed by law. >> Okay. Sorry, that was my question is so
is this model of sorts um adding in that two and a half% growth? >> It is not. >> It's not. >> Right. Okay. >> Right. And happy to come back and do that. But for >> totally understand that we're doing a rough look at the numbers. Just want to understand what
>> Yeah. And and specifically wanting to focus on these decisions, these forecasted shortfalls. What do they look like? What's the order of magnitude? and then you know begin to talk about what do we do about them.
>> If we take this um slide in isolation um no other data we're not going to let's just say we in a fictitious world we're not going to do any capital projects this is just the slide >> where do we what is the um
uh approval process for um these tax increases? Is that an override every year? >> Yes. Well, it all of the all of these tax increases would have to be approved via override. So, you could, you know,
the town could theoretically say, "Okay, we're going to we're going to balance 2028 in a way that's not structurally balanced, but we can get away with it for one year." raise revenue estimates um and close the gap with o sort of an
overly optimistic revenue estimates which would totally work for one year but you keep doing that and you have a structurally imbalanced budget and ultimately it's it it's unworkable. But the point being um it wouldn't have to be an override every year. You could
potentially say, "We're going to do a $4 million override in 2029." And that would that would address FY28, FY29, and then you could say, you know, maybe we're going to do another another $10.5 million override in 2032.
>> I'm going to just step in for a second and should have said this to be at the beginning, step back. This is the I guess second um in a series of deep dives or deeper dives into town
finances. The goal tonight is to look at how big are the gaps, how big are the needs, and without any mitigation, what would that mean in terms of tax rates? That's not as Mr. Johnson stop what any
of us are thinking we're going to do. But I'm not sure that with this data in front of us tonight, it's productive to start spinning on what would the all of the mitigation measures be and what would all of the scenarios be because these are some pretty rough numbers to
just wrap our heads around what does operating look like, what does capital look like, what does that look like together in terms of total demands. Um, is that a fair summary of of what's here? We are going to talk about the residential tax exemption. So, we're
going to start waiting into what are some mitigation measures. But, I think we're going to have another conversation in July. We'll be looking at actually kind of prioritizing and and looking more deeply at our capital expenditures by September. We were talking about
looking at FY uh 28 operating budget and starting to really get into revenue models. So, we're we're kind of taking this in in bits and pieces, and I know we've got to get to a holistic thing, but I just want to for the board to kind of constrain
our conversation tonight a little bit. >> Thank you. So, one one last point I wanted to make on the operating budget is what's missing here. Uh it's going to get worse before it gets better. Um so not included in any of these shortfalls
is what are the unmet needs that the forecast didn't look at. So you know we have some staffing needs that we've talked about police station facilities um senior services programs have grown. There's a need for
succession planning. There's a need for some staffing there. That those are just you know some quick examples off the top of my head. Schools is a really big one. We've identified special education spending. We have a, you know, a big shortfall there that we um we addressed
partially um in FY27 with the budget just adopted in April, but we've recognized there's more of a shortfall there. Those those shortfalls are not included yet here. Okay. So next we look at the debt
forecast and these um as a reminder of what was presented uh by the finance director in April. These are projects what what we've done is we've taken all the existing debt and then projects that are proposed on the 10-year plan um
based on you know basically the best available information from nearly a year ago now. um and we've run the debt on all of those proposed projects um and come up with this debt forecast. So, just walking you through it really
quickly. The first line is the sum of all of those capital projects if they were to be approved. Um and uh so that top line 8 8.9 million and it goes it goes up and it actually um it starts to
come down by 2037 because we pay a declining um we pay declining debt. So over the course of you know the the first year is the highest principle and interest payment and then each each year thereafter the interest is a little less. Um, so the second line is the e
estimated debt increase. So we've got all of our existing debt and that again is being paid down and ultimately starts to fall off at various points after the debt is fully paid. So the estimated debt increase is less than the new debt
because of debt drop off because of old projects coming off. So that second line shows the estimated debt increase. The third line, the tax rate impact of that, the net new debt. And then again, the median tax bill
impact of that net new debt rising from $213 to 918 by 2013. Um, which is actually the um it starts to go down and then it goes back up again in 2035 to 942 before starting to come down again.
So, we're going to ultimately sum all of these things together, but I'll pause there. Any questions on the debt slide? >> So, when I look at the tax rate impact, the first few years, the first two, it's smaller, but then when we get up into
all the the following years, it's relatively similar. Is that a permanent uh trend or are those incremental increases? Yeah, great question. So, those are all a a running net total. So,
as a homeowner, um many of us have a mortgage, one mortgage. Think of it as the town has, you know, maybe 15 mortgages now and we're talking about another adding another 15 mortgages, but some of the 15 are going to get paid off before the new 15 are paid off. The to
answer your question the tax rate impact is following what's the total new debt that's going to raise. So current are the the found taxpayers are currently paying for all of the existing debt.
Right? So to that the net new debt that we add to that is a tax increase. The increases that we're showing here is the sum of all of the capital projects. So it's not if we look at um the year 2030 the tax rate impact is a$12 cents
and the next year is pretty similar$ dollar4 that impact in 2031 is not a dollar2 plus a dollar4 it's it's staying right at that dollar $1 point. >> So that's very informative. So, at least
that gives us an idea that we're going to have a somewhat of a stable number that we need to target. Hopefully, it'll be a smaller number because we'll find some efficiencies along the way, but I think that's pretty good. Uh, good to know.
>> Miss Klein, did you have a question? >> I just want to make sure I'm interpreting correctly. Um so when I look at the capital projects this debt forecast includes wastewater projects because in that first presentation wastewater was separated right we had like projects not including wastewater
and then let's add in the wastewater and I'm just looking and it seems like those number use numbers including wastewater projects correct >> you you are correct yeah my my brain is too small to try to separate it all out then there'd be too many numbers on the page I couldn't fit on one slide
Okay. So, uh this is the third of three slides showing um the different fiscal challenges that we have. This is cash capital. So, first of all, let me define what we're talking about. Sometimes it's referred to as pay as you go, but it's essentially all of the capital
improvements that we would not plan to fund with borrowing. So the the biggest funding source for those is free cash. Uh but there are some other funding sources. Um transfers from prior projects. Um it could be
grants. It could be um community preservation. Um trying to think cap capital and debt debt stabilization fund. Um we're going to be doing some um proposing some golf course capital improvements funded from
a special reserve account um that comes from uh lease revenues. So these are all of those non-borrowing capital projects and showing total total estimated expenditures again on the top line cash
capital estimates. Um and in this case actually the highest number is 2027 and then the numbers go down from there and that's fairly typical for what we see uh in the capital improvement plan. And then the estimated shortfall is
based on um assumptions that we have $15 million in free cash available each year and then there are some drawdowns that are assumed here for the first three years from the capital uh and debt
stabilization fund. Um so this chart is um showing again the the tax rate impact and that impact rises from 13 cents or $103 on the median home uh to uh peing
at in FY 2033 a shortfall of 6.5 million and $222 tax impact on the median home. And then because the the requests tend to we know more about requests in the coming five
years than in the coming 6 to 10 years. So uh oftentimes those requests are a little less. So that shortfall uh goes down. Um so in this case they're not these numbers are not cumulative. This is one year at a time planned spending. Any questions there?
All right let's add them all together. >> Question. Excuse me. just >> because it makes more sense. >> Mr. Duby, can you please come to the the microphone? >> And it's the same way with the tax rate impact. It's still averaging, not
incrementally. >> They're e they're individual one-time increases in this case because it's it's one-time cash capital. So they're not building. So you wouldn't in FY29 you don't have the taxpayer wouldn't be asked to pay 22 cents plus 13 cents on
the rate or 174 plus 103. It would literally be in 28 103 for that year only. 29 $174 for that year only. >> Okay. >> Richard Dubie um precinct 6. I think you
just answered it, but if you can go back to your debt forecast, estimated increase in in exempt debt and resulting tax impact. The median tax bill impact 2028 is $213. Am I understanding that your tax bill
would go up by $213? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, in 220 in 2029, it's 356. Is that on top of the 213? >> No. >> No. Okay. >> That's the total. So, the maximum amount
that we're seeing on this would be $942. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, now we add up all of those tax increases uh on an annual basis, you know, well, each year 2027 to 2035.
Um, and in 2027, the sum of all of those tax increases is 5.6 million. 24 cents on the tax rate, $190 on the single family home. And you see those dollar amounts um rising to 1,00 you know to
$1,800 in years 20 2034 and 2035. And and again I you know I put the note on the slide there just to make sure I didn't forget. This does not include the 2 and a half% um increases within the levy limit. This is just this is just the impact of the shortfalls. if we were
to address all of the shortfalls in all three categories only with tax increases, which we're not proposing to do. >> And it also doesn't include debt exclusions because they're excluded, right? So, >> it does include the tax impact of debt exclusions. >> It does include. Okay. Thank you.
>> So, if I may, if I may just So, where does the the overall number come from in 2027? $190. it it comes from the sum of the operating deficit, the debt um impact
and the capital impact. >> Right. So, but in 2027, the median impact was zero if I'm right on the >> operating budget forecast. >> Yeah. >> And then the next one is $213.
In the next slide, >> I just want to make sure I'm understanding. So the debt forecast, >> uh, Mr. Mscow >> operating budget FY27, there's no shortfall,
>> right? But in >> the debt forecast, the next slide. >> Yeah, the debt >> that's 28, not 20. >> Okay. So I'm sorry. So So let's look at 2028. So the median tax impact on the operating is 4751.
>> Yeah. >> Uh it's 213, >> right? >> Yeah. >> The next slide and then 103 >> and that should equal >> 26 >> 364
>> 263 >> but I don't think it does. 350 >> 2028 to report. >> So 364, right? >> Yes. >> If I can still do mental math at this hour. >> 2847
28. >> So that's where those numbers are coming from. I just I didn't want to I was trying to just ballpark the the math, but that's where those numbers on the third page are all of the correct >> median bill tax impacts from those other
three slides. Correct. >> Should equal what's in the summary slide? Okay. >> What what would it take to include the tax in increase within the Prop 2 and a half levy limit?
What would it take >> on? Yeah, it does. You note that it does not include it. >> Yeah, happy to happy to come back with with those dollar figures. That's easy enough to do. I just don't have it >> helpful so that we know >> again this is do everything and fund
everything in every possible way. >> Yep. >> Um just so we know with that two and a half is also coming out of the wallets. So we should know what those are. >> It's a great point and we can do that. We're what Peter's trying to show here is just the impact. He's trying to strip
it down and just showing the impact of doing the >> Thank you. >> Yeah. So, you know, I I guess I would just comment these are big tax increases. They, you know, and some some might say, well, maybe they're not that big, you know, 1936.
um you know put in the context of uh and this is probably a good point to mention where Falmouth stands in terms of tax burden relative to other communities. We're in the bottom third for Massachusetts. So, if you take the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts,
we're, you know, we're just um we're we're right about at uh the point where onethird of communities, slightly less than one-third of the communities have a lower average tax bill and twothirds have a higher average tax bill. Um
we the Falmouth tax bill for example is less than Barnstable uh sorry greater than Barnstable less than Mashp born and Sandwich just for reference. So, you know, if the some might say if the total
tax increase is $400, $5500, you know, still in line with other Cape communities, still, you know, well below average for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, maybe that's doable. But this board has talked a lot about attainable housing and, you know,
certainly tax burden is a part of what uh what makes it affordable or not affordable to live in a community. So, it's not something that we take lightly. And again, these increases are on top of the regular 2 and a half% increase.
So, now we're going to um thankfully uh we we get to stop looking at the dizzying numbers um and talk about the residential real estate tax exemption for a moment. I know the board is well familiar with it, but for the public benefit, I'll go um through some of the
basics very quickly. Uh this is a tax exemption for which property owners are eligible if they are if they apply. First of all, it's an application process. So the homeowner has to apply and submit a tax form and certify that
you know that it's an actual um federal tax form showing that their primary residency is in the town of Falmouth. If they document that, then they're eligible for this residential real estate tax exemption. The effect of the
town adopting this uh exemption is that it shifts a portion of the tax burden from those who can document that their primary residence is Falmouth to those who cannot you know who do not have Falmouth as their primary residence. And
there are two ca two categories of taxpayers who will pay more um you know who relatively under the under the residential exemption than they would if there were no exemption. The first category is those who don't have Falmouth as their primary residence or
didn't apply. And the second category is those whose property values are very high. What do we mean very high? Well, it's over a threshold. And the threshold will is determined by two things. one, how how many residents are eligible and
and apply for and receive that residential tax exemption. Um, our analysis, we don't have precise um data, but we estimated it in two completely different ways and came up with 52% um
we believe is roughly the number of residential property owners who have a might have a primary residence for Falmouth. So that percentage is going to determine is going to be a big factor in determining where that um that threshold
is. Um using 52% the state has a a calculator um that it offers to communities and it's specific to Falmouth. So we we plugged in that 52% assumption that assumes all 52% apply for and receive that residential
exemption. And in that in that scenario, the break even point for those who live year round in Falmouth is $2 million. So that if you're right at $2 million, you're not going to pay any more or less under a residential
exemption um with with adoption of the residential exemption than that property owner would if there were no residential exemption for the entire community. Meaning for those anyone who has a real
estate value of less than 2 million, they will benefit if they're primary residents in Falmouth and their property value is less than 2 million. They're going to benefit from that residential exemption. >> So if your property's worth more than 2 million, you likely will end up paying
more. >> You will. Correct. >> Right. Um, I did want to mention that 93% and I want to thank Peter Hargraves for uh asking this question a couple of months ago um so that we have the data handy.
The um the number of residential single family properties in town that is below $2 million is about 93%. So it's the vast majority are going to be below that threshold. Is that both primary and not?
>> That is both primary and not correct. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> So, can I just say something? >> Mr. Huggers, if you come to the microphone if you have a comment. >> So, this is really going to require as you know a lot of education because people have to apply in order to
benefit. But one thing that's not clear unless you study it is everybody is entitled to everyone who meets the qualifications of having their doicile here is entitled to an exemption. But some people over
the break even point will pay more taxes because you're not allowed. You just shift the burden and you're paying at a higher rate. So you have to still apply and get the exemption in order to take advantage of the exemption even though
your taxes might be higher. So it's confusing but if people think well this isn't a good deal if they read and understand what you've prepared here they'll know they'll ask where is the line where I can sign up for this
exemption I think so >> that's correct >> but the education and having participation is the key to making it successful >> agreed on all counts. So what we're showing here is at various property values if the board were to
adopt a 10% residential exemption um what that impact is on the median single family property uh sorry on uh on various property values from 500,000 uh 791 the median the benefit uh for the
residential homeowner there is $344 and so that's that we're showing the effect of the residential exemption both for the eligible resident homeowners and the non-eligible property owners. So for the median priced
eligible resident tax bill shifts down $344 the non-eligible median value single family property um that non-eligible property would see a tax increase of $230.
So, at the end of the day, what we're looking at is what's the greater impact on our on our people who are non-residents or people over $2 million, right? I mean, at at 10%
residents are getting x amount. At 35%, we're getting a lot better deal. So, we're when when we talk about changing the exemption amount to be higher, we're really talking about shifting more of the burden to the
second homeowners and $2 million plus property. >> Right. The Exactly right. The residential tax exemption is revenue neutral. So, the town doesn't get any more or less revenue. So, the the money shifted from one category has to be paid by another category. So the I mean we
knew or we know when we started talking about it that I think Mashbby and Sandwich had gone in with 10%. Everybody was kind of figuring we start low and I'm I'm just wondering you know do we really want to start low or should we
believe you know thinking about 35% and what it especially in light of what our you know tax situation and revenue situation is going to be. So, if I could um just go to the next slide. I know you've probably already seen it in the packet, but but for the public um so
that we can compare the 10% [clears throat] and the 35% and then continue that conversation. Uh at 35% the you know the benefit to the elig eligible resident homeowners uh is quite
a lot larger. Um, and we'll see in the coming slides when we layer that, we go back to the cumulative tax increase of of the shortfalls. Um, how this can can really have a pretty >> we're not even talking about 50% as a seasonal community possibility,
>> right? But but before they we go there, I think what we really should do is look at the shortfall. We saw that that the uh tax rate impact levels out. So, we know we can kind of get a target there of that one $180 or 40 cents, whatever
it was, and then work backwards and see if the 10% works for us because it might. We don't know yet. Yeah. No, that's that those that's exactly the conversation that we were hoping to um foster with this
information. >> Mr. Reed, did you have a question? >> No. Miss Klein. And so I'm interpreting correctly here um that it also shifts the break even point higher. Am I correct in that interpretation? >> Right. And it's not a lot higher, but
you're right. It's it's a little bit higher. What's going to shift that number a lot more is the number of of eligible property owners that actually come in and file for that exemption. So that 52% number. Um, if that if that
changes by 10% that's going to move the uh move that $2 million number quite a bit. Okay. So, you know, I I probably don't need to walk through um all of these numbers. Obviously, at 35%, you know,
you're looking at uh eligible resident homeowners um receiving a a reduction of up $1,700, you know, at at $500,000. And the median, maybe that's the better one for
discussion purposes. At 35%, the median has a reduction of 1,380. And at 10% that number is $344. So now we now Mr. Brown to your point, we start to look at the layering um
looking at the cumulative tax increases that we identified from the three forecasts before and then how does it look with a 35% exe residential exemption and I did want to illustrate both sides, right? So this
slide shows the benefit for eligible year-round residents. Um, and you know, we're talking about a net reduction in taxes for the first for FY28, 29, 2030 for the median single
family home. Um, and then after that point, the tax increases are greater than the the the shift the reduction caused by the residential exemption. Um, so that the net uh is a
tax increase of $22 in 2031, rising to $457 in 2035. So that's the residential exemption cumulative effect um with the other tax increases for eligible year- round
residents. Now, for non-residents who will have the increase from the um from the the operating capital and and debt uh tax increases plus a residential exemption increase on top of that. And
and that's what this slide is showing, that uh increase going from 1282 in the first year up to 2755 in 2035. Can I ask a question about this? >> Come back to the microphone, please. >> So, this is the education part and maybe
I need to be educated. But if a person would otherwise be eligible, but they don't apply, so they're not in the program, then their tax rate would actually go up as just as the non-resident homeowners would because
they haven't applied for the benefit. >> Exactly. and their taxes will shoot up, >> right? >> Yes. >> This is the edge. That's why the state says start at 10% because people need to figure it out. >> Yeah. >> And people that are wealthy
>> not even notice. >> Yeah. >> Oh, do we have people like that in town? >> You do. >> They're not in town. Don't worry. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Actually, I have a question. So Dan Walsh, um you mentioned something a
minute ago about the sensitivity around the number of people that participate and how it impacts these numbers. Do you actually have a feel for what that sensitivity is? I mean, if it drops to 42% participation, what happens to the numbers?
>> I'm going to take a risk here and see. Well, I I probably won't be able to find it quickly. >> That tax increase gets less for everybody for the for the non >> What's that? >> I don't know. I don't know how much but the tax increase for non-eligible is not as much. They don't
have as much to make up. >> So if that number drops then >> so >> there's it I think that the concern is if that number goes up >> the other way around >> right then the impact is greater on those who do not are not eligible or do not take up the tax exemption. If that
participation number goes down, >> then that your taxes can only get better. >> Yep. So, it's on DLS's website. >> It is. It's right here. So, you can all play with the numbers yourself. I >> would Would we actually have to factor that in if we've set the rate?
>> I think that would just be a surplus to the town. >> And again, to [clears throat] Mr. Harra's point. I think that's part of why some of the recommendation is to phase it in >> so that that sticker shock
um is is less but um >> it's also one of the reasons madam chair why we uh in discussions previous why it was recommended that we uh delay till FY28 so that we could do the education piece so that people are aware. >> Madam chair I have one more question. Do
we have >> Peter? Yes. >> Do we have any indication of what other towns have experienced with respect to people who have signed up or percentages of people who have signed up? >> Miss Klein, do you have any familiarity
with that? I do I do not either and I'm only putting uh select board member Klein on the spot because she was on a working group for the affordable housing committee that that researched this. Um so we don't have I don't have that information at this point. So, I'm going
to We don't This is purely for our own education and discussion purposes tonight. There's nothing that we're we're trying to decide on. Um I'm curious because as I'm going through this, there's a lot of oh, I would like to look at X, Y, and Z extra. Um would
it be useful to gather that information from the whole board of what additional information having seen this um would you also like to see? Um I I mean for for me I'll say one thing is actually looking what a phased approach
not just 10 or 35 but over the course of several years what does phasing in a residential tax exemption look like. Um what does what is uh the participation rate in other towns at different rates um is is something Mr. Mscali you've asked to potentially see. Um if there's
other discussion um happy to obviously field that but but otherwise would would love to hear from the board what additional information or analyses in the future would be helpful. >> Would we also take comments from the public as far as what >> additional information I'm happy
>> additional information they would find helpful. >> May I recommend we do this activity momentarily? Peter go through the next couple slides because we do have alternatives to tax increases considerations listed in there as well
as next steps. Um I've been holding withholding observations. Um >> go ahead >> just on some of this. So go for this and then we'll we'll maybe go down the line and then get more comments from um the folks in the audience.
So Dan Walsh asked what the sensitivity is. Um, so I've used the calculator here and put in 20%. So instead [clears throat] of 52% eligible residents applying for and receiving the residential exemption,
what if only 20 20% apply for the exemption? Um, and this is a 10% residential exemption. The break even point goes from 2 million to 5 million. So, as I said, much more sensitive to
the percentage of uh of taxpayers that apply for the eligibility. >> What happens if it goes up? >> Um, well, I don't think it's going to go up beyond 52% because I think that's that's our estimate of how many there are.
>> Of how many people? Our estimate of the number of residential property owners that are primary residents in Falmouth is 52%. >> I thought that was an estimate of the number of eligible people who would Okay.
>> No, but but to answer your question, if we're wrong, because it's not perfect data, right? If we're wrong and that number is is 60 60% instead of 70 instead of 52, sorry, that $2 million number is going to go down.
>> Right? So when when we were talking about seasonal communities, right, and we were talking about at what level you became a seasonal community, there was discussion about whether Felmouth was at 30% or 35%. That would seem to indicate
that the year round is more than 52%. Right? It would be 65%. Or if 35% or season >> again all I can say is we you know we we looked at it two different ways. um we used um if I if I'm remembering
correctly, one method was simply taking those residential tax bills that are sent to an address other than the the address of the taxed property. So about 48% of the residential tax
bills are going to not to the property in Falmouth where that's being taxed but to some either some other Falmouth town of Falmouth or more commonly some some uh taxpayer or individual who's paying the taxes um to an address not in
Felmouth. That number came to about 52%. We then looked at the Cape Cod Commission data and their estimate if you you know if you tease it out their estimate wasif was 52%. >> Okay. Um so just quickly I'm
this is the last scenario I'll I'll run here at that 60% you know if the best available data isn't isn't right um and it's 60% instead of 52 then the break even point goes down from 2 million to
1.7. >> Okay. >> Excellent. >> All right. So um last slide. alternatives to tax increases, reducing spending, um seeking efficiencies, deferring capital spending, consider
sale of surplus property, um which has a you know a two-fold benefit of um or you know arguably maybe a three-fold benefit. Um you've got no it's two sorry twofold. You reduce the maintenance costs. No, it is three-fold. You reduce
the maintenance costs. um you get one-time revenue from the sale and you potentially, you know, unless it's a nonprofit um you're getting tax revenue from that property as well. >> And you might need less uh employees to manage those assets,
>> right? Reducing the the maintenance costs. Exactly. Yep. Yep. Um seeking grants, considering fee increases. I'm sure there are other um options here, but those are the ones that quickly came to mind. uh next steps. So, sorry I said that was
the last slide and I lied. Um the next steps as we said this is an it iterative analysis and community engagement process. Uh so we have a 10-year capital improvement plan that will be submitted to the select board and the finance
committee in early July. Uh we talked briefly with the chair about potentially holding a capital planning community forum in August and doing a deeper dive on the fiscal 28 operating budget much earlier than we normally do. Um
normally, you know, that is submitted to the select board and the finance committee in December. Uh so we're talking about doing an earlier look at that in September of this year. and then a long-term fiscal planning community forum uh in the [clears throat] winter
uh 2026 2027. And with that, I'm happy to take further questions. >> Mr. Reed, >> thanks. Um thank you very much. I think this is an a a great second step for where we're trying to get to, which is,
you know, driving at something to look at things holistically. In the past, we've always looked at things in silos, and this is nice to start seeing it, you know, in one big picture. I do want to caution our group while the news looks okay.
Um playing with considering tax overrides is is tricky because um we are lucky that we have been able to vote on and have the ability to look at some um uh tax rate incentives to minimize the
impact on many of our folks. It's a double-edged sword because uh to your point earlier, we're shifting and there's a threshold. There's a threshold for how many overrides we our folks have the appetite to to do. Um, I'm worried
that if we continue to come to them for overrides, our our taxpaying residents here, that eventually we're going to run out of ability to override. Um, without, you know, tightening our own belt a little bit on some of this. Um, because
it seems that on surface level there, we are not putting any skin in the game. or just going ahead and doing it and being able to raise the taxes with these beautiful um incentives to drop the numbers down to just go at it and not do some of the
hard work. So, my concerns are um that my concerns are with the the double-edged sword aspect of it. We are we cannot forget that there's a large portion of people that pay taxes here
that do not use the infrastructure. Um and we need to be cognizant of the threshold of those people. >> Can you say more about who those people are? >> The people that um pay their fair share of taxes, but they only come here for a week or two at a time.
>> They don't put a they don't put the year round stress on our infrastructure. No, but we have to build a police station for 110,000 for 10 weeks. >> I I think there's different ways of of looking at whether or not you're using
infrastructure and the >> roads, >> the the benefits that one receives um from town services and infrastructure. >> So, >> appreciate your counterpoint. We can go back and forth quite a bit on many
different things. we won't um just because we can doesn't mean we should do a lot of things. So um one thing I would like us to do in the near future is look at the operating budget deficits as a
team here to see what the compounding effects would be if we were to say nip the 1.4 in the bud without doing a tax override. what those implications would be in the far on the outurs. My my
um guess is that it will have a compounding effect that it will drop those numbers down significantly and that's something that would be great to bring to our taxpayers um to say this 1.4 actually yielded 5
million in year six, you know. Um I don't know if that's true, but it's what is that compounding effect? So I encourage us not to put our >> where where are you nipping that 1.4 from what what is that? >> I think there are uh we
have income that we have not received is my understanding that we can get we have re outstanding receipts. I don't think we need to do any budget cuts on anything right now. I think we need to look at all the avenues that we can make sure we're getting all the revenue and
paid receipts in for 1.4. I think there are we do a lot of I don't want to say overbudgeting because we're not out of compliance legally, but there is a lot that goes into free cash that I think if we were
to drop it by 1.4 or a couple hundred thousand to get to 1.4, before it would bring us down to a level budget at 2028 and a level budget at 2028. I think we would see a compounding effect of positivity
in, you know, as an example in 2032 that maybe we [clears throat] don't have to go as many times to get an override approved. But the conservative budgeting and the the the avoidance of using free cash in that way is part of the reason
why we have such a good bond rating. It's just good bookkeeping. So the money's got to come from somewhere at all. >> I'm saying there's pockets of money available that we could 1.4 is very very small in our budget overall that we can
find 1.4 and have that be a cumulative compounding positivity for us. I think we can do it. >> It's a lot easier to find 1.4 than it is 3.6. >> Sure. I just thought I'm just trying to get the concept of how it's going to
>> increase. So, I'm hearing that you would like to see and I think we started to see this in the spreadsheet that um Miss Cetran presented to us at our last conversation where she could play with one year and
see how that rippled out. And so it's seeing some more of those scenarios of how various different levels of cuts to um >> different parts of the budget play out in out years. >> Yeah, I would like to see 2028
balanced at the same time that we're looking at the bigger game picture over many many years. I think that's should be our priority number one. I would be uh comfortable making a motion to say as
such and ask town management to give us options for consideration as a board to consider what it would take to get to a balanced budget in 2020, a balanced operating budget in 2028, but I don't think we're there yet as a group.
>> I I I don't know that we have the information yet. And I think those are the conversations that we're looking to have in July and then in September with the FY28 budget. Um I see some desire for public comment. I don't know if there's other comment from the board. I guess I would
just I would like to see us take less of an us versus them. We're taking their money tone to the conversation and more of a
consideration of the fact that what we are asking of our residents is to invest in our community and none of this money stays with us. It is we are we town government is are the mechanism by which
that investment gets turned into services and infrastructure return on investment and not we have a history of underinvesting in our community and it has landed us in a
very tight situation here and I would not like to see us fall back into a situation where we just cut to make sure that we're we never have to look at taxes without thinking about what it is that we're giving up and forgoing in
order to do that. So, >> Mr. Duby, >> just a quick observation. Um we heard um during the presentation um by our finance director that inflation was a main cause of but our operating
budget far exceeds inflation. We're we're outpacing inflation by a good deal. So I think however creative all this is, we're trying to solve a spending problem by taxing our way out of it. And that's that's just not going
to work in the end. Um we're going to lose people as was suggested here because they don't want to come to Falmouth because of the the tax situation here. And that doesn't do anything to to curtail our spending
problem. We don't really have a massive revenue problem. We have a massive spending problem in Falmouth. And however much work was put into this and however creative it is, we're still taxing our way out of a a spending
problem. And I just don't think that they're ever going to meet I I don't think we're going to be able to to tax our way into being um um cognizant of the fact that we're spending too much
money. When we look at the fact that we all of a sudden um have a a need to take care of a roof that that started to cave in on a school. That's going to happen over and over again. That's that's the
personality of a town. That's what happens in towns. And taxing your way out of this is just not not going to work. We we have to curtail our spending some way, shape, or form. I know it's one of the suggestions that um the assistant town manager made. I think we
really have to focus more on that than creative taxing methods. Um we're just not going to catch up. Thank you. >> Um oh Mr. Madam, which one of these was a Jon precinct 9? Mr.
Reed [clears throat] made a statement that was right into why I was going to come to this podium tonight. And Mr. Dubie just said something that I think is very very important that you got to give a lot of thought to. So if I may, I'm here tonight as a town meeting
member and I appreciate the effort and planning and awareness. I mean it was last August when Mr. Lenshaw spoke to the town of Heights Association and said we have some financial problems. So, we've known about this. [gasps] As a town meeting member,
before we meet in October, I would like to know what you're going to do for FY28 because if you don't have a plan for me at the October town meeting, I might just be one of those guys that just hell of it. I'm not going to vote for
anything. I'm not going to buy anything. That's a reaction. That's a negative reaction. And you don't want that. So what Mr. Reed just said as I was sitting there and I think it makes sense. It's just like when you get a
mortgage, if you pay off extra in the first five years, you're way ahead of the game. Your very first and most difficult year in the deficit is what Colin said, that 1.4 4 million
in FY28. And if you can fix that, then that lowers everything for the years after that. And and just think about that. That's the instead of it's great to look ahead
from now in 10 years, but the next year is where you should put a lot of effort. And that leads me to what Mr. Dubie just said, and I agree with that. We didn't get here. I know the reason why we got here according to the fin comp because we spent more money than we took in.
Yes, inflation has a factor, but that's not why we're millions of dollars short in an operating budget. And when I spoke at this podium two months ago, whenever, you have to start to learn how to say no. You if you think
you're going to get out of this by taxing, what happens when the taxpayer says no? I I think you have to have some alternatives in place and you have to look at other ways. And
I'll throw this out again because it was missing from some of the things We pay an extra 3% for CPC. We want to do something extra for wastewater because we just say the normal tax rate is not going to build
the sewers and maintain the sewer system. Have you thought about reducing that to 2% and giving CPC one and the sewer abatement or excuse me fund that you want to do because don't forget that 3%
is again on on top of the total bill. I think you really Mr. Doobie made a very you don't want to hear it. No one wants to be in the position, but you have to look at the spending. That's what got us here. When
you spend more than you take in, that's the reason why Yes. blame some of it on inflation. That's no, not debatable. But look at that first year and put a lot of effort into that. And I think Mr.
Reid is correct. and that will lessen the impact of the other years. Thank you. You're uh hard nut to crack. That's for sure. >> Mr. Mccskelli, >> just just an observation. It may also have resulted from the fact that we
didn't take in enough money to cover the spending by keeping the taxes as low as we have in this town for the past as long as I've been here. So I don't think it's just a spending problem that we're facing here. I think we're facing a
problem that we were not collecting enough revenue possibly to meet you know the the uh the expenses just just an observation >> and I think we've also been neglecting our infrastructure and now we have a
clear picture in front of us of what we have been doing and also not doing So, we have to face up to whether or not we want to really continue the level of service and continue the number of buildings that we have. And the first that's the first thing I want to start
with is the inventory of properties because I I just think we have more than we need. And so, I'd like to find a lot of efficiencies there before we start talking about taxes. This is right now just an overview of where we're at. And I'm not personally ready to decide.
We're going to increase taxes arbitrarily, but we got to figure out what we can do to streamline and then decide if we want to still have all the services. Do we want to have trash service? Do we want to take it away? I mean, there's a lot that Felmouth provides. We asked our DPW to do so
much, but this year they asked for what, four or five more people and we had to say no. So, we are saying no. >> Yeah. >> It's not easy because everybody expects so much, you know. I don't think it's a I don't think there's one simple answer and that's why
we're trying to look at it from all of the different angles. Um, and that's not something that we're going to manage to do in one night. So, we're trying to break it down into pieces. So, um, are there additional requests for uh,
information or analyses as part of future conversations? Um, >> like I said, the the building inventory and the the analyzing of what it is we have. I drive by the pump station building every day and I it seems a shame to just have
the building sitting there. Probably could sell it or who knows what. >> So, just I see our finance committee chair here. I don't want to put him on the spot, but um it would be nice because the finance committee does this
day in day out when they're in session reviewing all these numbers. Any questions, comments or concerns from them from the previous um financial update that was given by the team to them, but also um going forward any
questions or concerns because in my one year here, we haven't really had that full circle feedback. It's the board comes, you know, we we we pass the um budget on, they discuss, there are things that are made and then we go to
approve. There's not often that kind of feedback circle of like questions or concerns or things that they should flag for the select board. I know we get it sometimes. I didn't see it this year. I don't >> Yeah. Is there a reason why we haven't
had a meeting, joint meeting with the finance committee? because I've been asking for that for a year and is it like not appropriate or why haven't >> we've we've discussed it. I have I have discussed it and it's still something that's on the table. I think it you know
recognizing the roles between the finance committee and the select board and its role in in in adopting the budget and moving it forward but we have had those discussions. >> Okay. So >> yes, >> Keith Schwegel, chairman of the finance committee. Um, we haven't had that. Uh,
it's been discussed with Mr. Wshaw. Um, be careful what you ask for. That would be the first thing I'd say. Uh, we're 15 strong. Uh, we do budgets, we do numbers, we know it inside and out. Uh, but having said that, um, when I talked
to Mr. Renshaw. Uh I said, "Give us a very clear defined um agenda so that we're not sitting around just back and forth, 15 of us talking, five of you. It wouldn't be productive." Uh it would be good if you could if if we had and I
think that's what we were having that conversation for a while and then it kind of dropped off until we got more further down the road. Uh we're not opposed to it. It would be productive. I could make many comments about the
discussion here, all positive. Um, but I I think that we could do that if there was this agenda that was very clear, very defined, that it wouldn't just be a hodgepodge of 20 people sitting at the tables talking around each other. So that
that's what I could not get clear on at all. >> Yeah. And I agree completely with Chairman Schwaggel. And I think what uh what's happened over the past 3 or 4 months has been this focus rightfully so on the long-range financial plan. Um beginning with Laura Citron's presentation in April. And this those
discussions and this one tonight is going to allow us to kind of shape those those discussions and and and the and and shape the the agenda for that future meeting. >> And and and speaking of the role of the finance committee, um it it it is different than your role. uh and and uh
we get a budget and we look at that budget that the executive branch provides to the legislative branch and then we make our recommendations to town meeting. Um we and I personally have told Mr. Wrench, we stay away from
constructing that budget because we would be reviewing our own work if we were involved in your job. Uh, which is to construct that budget, do it your work and then pass it on to us and then we recommend uh to town meeting. U so I
I'm very mindful and I've talked to Mr. Renshaw about not crossing that line. Um uh you can view us more like the state uh ways and means committee. um uh when you when the governor hands their budget off to the legislators,
then they take it and they do what they want and they vote. That's more what we do. Uh so um I I would be very hesitant to start helping construct the budget. That's why we pay these guys all the money and you guys review it. Um so I'm
not oppo we're not opposed to it. It just it was never kind of I think we were waiting uh to get further down the road. Um I just didn't want to cross lines that was all. Um and and start stepping into your area. Um that's why
we avoided um if I could expand a little bit on um for what this very good what was presented. I'm glad of it. Um and uh but I will say what a couple people have commented on. Um uh why did we get into this problem? all of a sudden we never
had deficits and all of a sudden we had deficits and and and so you do an analysis and you say why is that happening? Uh what what went what changed? And it uh uh what was the cause of the problem? It it wasn't because we
lacked a property tax exemption program. It was because we were outspending our revenues. Um, when you track your revenues back, you see it revenue increases year-over-year of 2.7 2.8%.
And suddenly our budget jumped from 2% to 2.1% to 5 and 6% a year. And you say, well, what the heck happened? And and I mean, it's almost it's anybody could say, well, we spent more money. That's clear. We are spending more money than
we're taking in. uh you have to analyze the budget specifically for activities to figure out where that's happening and and it is very clear where some of this is happening that you can I put your finger on it very easily. Um
as what Mr. Reed said, if I could comment on that briefly. Um, yes, if you can fix a permanent decrease in your budget in 2028 or 2029, that has a ripple effect. Once you do a permanent
increase of that 1.9 or 1.4 and you stick to that, um, that ripples out through the rest of the years and you don't have the seriousness of the deficits that you will be confronted with that you see here. uh uh we're assuming that the dev that that the
spending is going to stay at the same rate and the revenue is going to stay the same. Um you have to change that dynamic. You have to get those back even again to avoid these deficits. And it is possible. It is possible uh without
major cuts in services. We can still invest uh uh in the infrastructure but you got to do it more carefully and more over more years. Um, so it is possible. I I I know Mr. Brown, you said, "Oh, we're we're you know, where's it going
to come from?" Um, we It's there. It is there. Uh, we have $15 million of uh a combination of turnbacks and actual revenues over estimated revenues every year. That's just that's
the average. And so you can use that money. Um there is possibilities and that's why these guys they're doing I think a a great job of of bringing us into getting this fixed. Um
tax increases are not necessarily inevitable in my opinion. I really don't think so. But uh uh it's a tough decisions and Peter's done a great job and hopefully our next finance director I'll be able to do it as well. So thank
you. I could share with you the idea that I had was uh I think we need to look at our capital budget and how it imp the implications of our operating because right now we're doing each separately and I don't think we're putting the two together. >> Yeah, we're we're the only community in
351 towns I guess 350 um that we bifurcate our our capital and operating budget. Uh everybody does in in private industry everywhere they do one budget. we bifurcate this over two periods and and I just learned why uh just a few
months ago. I never knew the answer to that, but I did learn it. But so it is what it is. We're not going to change. Um I think that um it, you know, we we we had a capital budget and uh uh Mr. St
said this uh last one of the precinct meetings. Um, we had a 8 to10 million use of free cash for capital budgets and all of a sudden that jumped to $15 million. We year-over-year our capital
budget was running um roughly, you know, uh 10 12 $15 million. That's free cash uh or below. And then all of a sudden it exploded to whatever it is now. I think it's uh uh we're up over this next year.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Peter. Um, you promised only four items, but I don't think you're going to stick to that. Um, uh, we're up over hund00 million almost. Uh, or no, what is it? How much is our next 2029
capital budget? Um, it exploded. Um, we have to start spacing projects out. Every project's important. That's a given. I understand that. uh the police station, the uh $150 million for schools, but we can't do it all in one
year. Um we we're all stovepiped. All these projects are stovepiped. People are planning these projects, the committees um and they're going forward. Peter Hargraves was at the um water quality management committee and he says, "How are you going to afford this
outflow pipe with all these other projects?" And they said, "That's not our concern." >> Well, Mr. Schwiggel, that's what we're going to take up in July. >> Exactly. Thank you. So I So I'll stop there. Thank you for listening. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. I I know the hour's late
and I I don't want to sort of continue any debate. I do want to just make one clarification for the record. A couple of folks have said we're spending more than um our revenue and that is false. the the forecast shows we have
challenges in the future, but we are spending far less than our revenue, which is why we've been generating $20 million in free cash. So, just for the record, we have not spent more than we've taken in. Quite the contrary. >> Thank you. Um, are there other
uh action items or Okay, see nothing. Great. Then we will move on. Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Johnson Stub. Um, next on our agenda as we talk about uh revenue sources, perhaps not the
largest, um, a discussion of a proposed uh, revision to the fee waiver policy. This is not an action item. It's a a first read and a direction from the board on the draft that is in your packet. Mr. Renshaw, over to you for >> Thanks, Madam Chair. And I feel guilty. Peter's been talking for the past hour
and a half, so I'm I'm going to take this on, although Peter did, uh, the majority of the work drafting, uh, the draft that's in your package tonight. Um, as you indicated, um, Select Board first started looking at this issue, asking staff to look at it back in April. Um, as you also indicated, um,
the the, um, amount in waiverss, um, the the loss in revenue, if you will, um, is not is not significant. Um, and we looked at this, we we use FY25 as a baseline year. um and that uh special event fee waiver amount um to um
resulted in foregone revenue in the amount that year of about $1,500. So it's not a tremendous amount impact uh to to the revenue streams. Um again, board asked staff to look into um certain fee waiverss that would avoid um
well quite honestly spending hours of select board time. you all as the policy makers. Um I feel that that time is better spent setting policy versus considering these waiverss. So what you have included in your packet tonight um and again I want to thank uh Peter for
for taking a shot at drafting. It's a rewrite. It's not it's not uh red line. It's pretty much a rewrite of a policy that in my opinion um was was inadequate um to begin with. Um, so Peter has provided again um, uh, some collective
thoughts between he and I in the draft that's in your pocket in your package tonight. And quite honestly, uh, uh, we're not looking for a decision tonight, but we would certainly appreciate any kind of input, feedback on the policy as we currently have it drafted and then we'd bring it back in a subsequent meeting for for a vote.
>> I'd be Mr. I'm in favor of the uh 100% affordable, you know, waving the fees for the nonprofits that are doing the 100% affordables, but not so sure about the 40bs. I mean, there's a lot of work the town staff does. Those are big projects, a lot of inspections, a lot of
resources. So, I think I might cut back a little on that. A clarification though if I'm interpreting the policy correctly that it would only apply to a 40B project in which 100% of the units are deed
restricted and that is not true of all 40b projects. >> Correct. >> So I believe um it may actually be a formatting issue that there's another category >> halfway down [clears throat] but it looks like it's some bullet for mixed affordable market rate projects.
Um, the select board may wave a percentage of building health and conservation permit and inspection fees for developers in cases where the percentage of units that are deeed restricted at 140% of area median income or less is greater than 25% and less than 100%. So that's
I think it's um in the the first bullet point there um Dr. Goldstone, it actually does reference um waving permit and inspection fees for nonprofit developers and for profofit developers under a 40B comprehensive permit. >> Right. >> But that's for 100% affordable.
>> That's for 100% affordable. >> Right. And I think Mr. Brown's point was for the mixed affordable market rate. >> Correct. >> Consider um a cap on is that what you're saying? A cap on the >> It says may we have a percentage. Do you want it more specific? You just want a
cap. I'm just saying I don't know that we should be cutting those fees. I mean that's a lot of work. >> Yeah. >> So just eliminating >> it's part of the project. >> Waivers for anything other than 100% affordable.
>> That's my idea. >> I I certainly think giving Mr. Wrench or the town manager the ability to deal with requests [snorts] uh of a certain nature would would take a you know take take that burden off the board. So I certainly support that
aspect of the policy. >> I guess as long as it's discretionary and you used conservatively, if it's an incentive to, you know, make the project better, maybe then I just >> I I'm wondering if we would want to differentiate between LIP projects and
non if it's a if it's got the support of being a local initiative project that we might consider that. >> That's a good point. but not otherwise for those for the mixed projects. [clears throat] >> Madam Chair, if I may, so you're
absolutely right. There was a there's a formatting glitch that um made made it more difficult to understand what was being proposed here. Um so the 100% affordable projects was intended to be a different category from mixed affordable. And what I had in mind there
was yeah you know maybe it's even a nonprofit that comes forward and says look we can do you know 14 units of um deed restricted affordable but we need four market rate to pay for them and um maybe you know you probably wouldn't
wave 100% of the fees but allow some waiver of the fees. So that's that was the thinking. You know, the lip idea makes a lot of sense. You know, maybe you want to say, look, only if the you know, if this is a project that rises to the level that the board is endorsing the project, then that might be a good way to measure it.
>> Well, so maybe then you'd say that uh you would cap the the lip projects at maybe 50% and then the other ones at 25% reduction. >> We could talk about that >> and it, you know, I'm not opposed to having it written this way. I'm just giving the feedback.
>> Yeah. Yeah, good. >> Okay. >> Anything else on the the top half, the building fees? Otherwise, are there thoughts on special event fees? Um, I I would say here I also like the differentiation, the kind of tiered
approach. >> Yeah, I like that. I like the rest of it. >> Okay. Yeah, I appreciate that you pulled out a difference between a nonprofit and a for-profit entity. I think that's an important distinction for us to make.
I'll second uh Mr. Mscali's point of uh we're um allowing the town manager to wave things before coming here. So I think that's you've done a really nice job in in crafting this.
>> Okay, great. >> Thank you. >> Um that's sufficient direction. Uh then we will move on to the next item which is uh consider a vote to send a letter to FAT's uh state legislative delegation uh to petition for them to take up
changes to the 40B law. Uh this is an idea that was first proposed by Mr. Richardson uh but uh has gotten significant input uh since his departure from the board by from from Mr. Brown. Um there is I will note uh there was a a
cut and paste >> uh casually here um and there's a repeat uh paragraph that should not be there. The one two three fourth paragraph is redundant and should be stricken but otherwise.
So, you know, certainly it's it's a good first effort and u you know, kind of sets the tone, but um were we were we thinking more of actually giving some suggestions as to uh what we would uh
suggest that they take a look at. I I'd note we have additional considerations on that page that I just confirmed were Mr. Brown's ideas. Um I'm I'm just wondering, you know, of what benefit is it to just say, you know, please take a
look at 40B, uh you know, or reconsider safe harbor criteria, but and do what or you know, so um you know, I'm just wondering if we want to take a you know, a further look at the letter and actually offer some suggestions as to
what they might do. Well, that was what that was my intent with the additional suggestions because I think they need a little more guidance on what we're asking them to look at because we've had the occasion to identify these problems especially the Kunameset River the conflict there. So I think it would be
helpful to give them this example of why we're giving this request and then also the I think they must know that the AMI fig uh figure is not working. It's certainly not working on Cape Cod. Maybe it works better in other places. I don't
know. >> Miss Glenn, did you have input? >> Yeah, I um I appreciated the additional points that Mr. Brown raised. Um in particular, I wanted to bring up two items regarding the letter. I think um
that one thing to mention is that the way that the law is is designed, it creates a moving SHI target for us, right? So, it's it makes it very hard for our town to make progress and I think that that could be better emphasized. I also think that there may
be um a potential to add in a component about a attainable housing threshold. Could it be possible for a um for 40B law to have an affordable threshold, capital A affordable threshold and potentially a capital A attainable
threshold as well on top of that? that would potentially include more housing that is within reach of Felmouth residents. Um, and because it's attainable housing, you're in a slightly different income bracket, right? Slightly higher income bracket, may not
hurt a developer's bottom line in a way that makes it a non-starter for them. >> Then this Oh, sorry. >> Go ahead. And then the structural issue about the uh SHI credits expiring one year after award of the ZBA decision,
you know, that's that's come back to bite us twice. So another re it's another good example of what's not working in that >> law, you know, >> and it's my final point was that I think we should ask him to have an agricultural exemption. So agricultural
land is treated like chapter 97 protected land if it's actually you know agricultural land that could be used for agricultural because we've lost most of our farms to housing development and a lot of it's
been 40bs. Well, I was just going to say, I mean, certainly the u the conundrum that uh we faced with the Easterly project and how they computed the one-year, you know, from the uh amended or or didn't >> didn't
>> compute the one year from the amended u comprehensive permit and um you know held it to the original date. I think that would be a a good fix that we should look at suggest.
>> So I think um part of the input that I had gotten in drafting this letter was to keep it high level given that there's not currently any review pending and that the more detailed input should come at a later date. Um
>> but then they might not take it up >> if they don't have they don't have some motivation to >> but we need to get our you know state delegation behind and we need to get you know Dylan and and Thomas and uh uh you
know whoever that third person is going to be going forward uh you know behind it as well. So um you know maybe um you know maybe the letter is addressed to them with some you know concrete specific ideas as well.
>> Um well I'm happy to take this feedback and uh come back with another [clears throat] draft. Um I forgot during announcements earlier um to announce that I will not be here for the next meeting. So um I can bring that
back in July. Yeah, that's that's true. >> Okay. Um, for our last item of business, uh, given the hour, I might suggest, uh, a slight amendment. Uh the plan had been
to uh essentially take the um the parking lot of future agenda items and also gather um everyone's ideas for uh disc topics that need discussion. Um and
then we were going to do uh buted up against some constraints with open meeting law. Trying to do an exercise to actually prioritize those and create um a fullear tenative plan understanding that you know things will change. Um but
trying to get all of those um topics that um are of importance to the the members of the board kind of onto a calendar so that we have a little bit more um advanced warning of when major discussions are coming and and ability to plan and prepare for that. Um what I might suggest given the time is that
instead if I could ask every member of the board to send those discussion items um to town management and we will compile that list and then um whether it is by survey um or at a subsequent
meeting we'll go through that um exercise of of getting input on priorities from each board member. Um specifically what I'd like to ask each board member to do is to rank that once we have the complete list of topics um
on two different criteria. Urgency so time sensitivity regardless of the the scope of the matter and then importance. So how important is this? What is the the scale of the impact of this discussion regardless of the timing? And
then we put those two together. um and the things that are urgent and important will be the top priority in the the near term. The things that are um important but less urgent, you know, might expect to see in the second half of the year and and so on. Um so and I think we can
still with doing this as as homework um through the town manager uh still have that by mid July and given that we are going to be discussing finances in July, we already know I think that that works for the the board. I would encourage us to try to minimize our wish list of
agenda items and try to just stay focused on the finance for now. >> I mean, agenda items are going to come up by natural occurrence anyway, but >> right, these are for the the larger discussions and and topics and issues. somewhat related though, but we should
also be thinking at a upcoming meeting either the next one or the one after about committee layers and and who's going to who wants to be where and and and so forth. So, >> right. So, we're shading into future agenda items, but um yes, we will also
uh we need to to tackle town managers evaluation um as we're I think a little overdue on getting started on that. So, um okay. So with that uh we will you know any future agenda items make that part of the the
communication to town management for that planning and uh we have minutes to approve >> the the one credit edit I would make to the
minutes if I can find it it's on page 18 uh where in the Third, fourth paragraph, it just says Kevin broker representing that should be Kevin Murphy,
>> broker representing the owner. >> I had the the same suggestion. Uh, are there any other amendments to the minutes? >> Not that I >> If not, I would entertain a motion to approve as amended. >> So moved.
>> So second. All in favor? I >> I >> I will abstain from that vote. >> Okay. Uh any select board reports? >> The Wonder Warrior ride was great. >> Yes, it was >> very uh positive event. Those guys
looked so happy when they came back. So uh I I as you uh chair Goldstone uh was at the Falmouth service center uh and there was a meeting uh at which the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority was
there, Mr. Kennedy and his his associate uh and um you know there's consideration for a new route possibly uh that the transit authority is looking into that might u loop in Gford Street and and the
senior center and so forth. So hopefully that'll come to fruition. >> Mr. Um I just want to second this um World Cup after you review it. Our next meeting is not till late late in the
month which would put us >> late late into the World Cup >> or afterwards. [laughter] So >> it's an interesting request but it's so timely. Should we consider a quick meeting on Thursday or >> I don't know. >> Do we need it? >> Talk about it tomorrow morning. And >> so yeah, so you're you're correct. It
would require um if you want to take action, you know, in time for the World Cup, it would require a special select word meeting. >> Yeah, >> I'm I think I'm hearing interest uh from the board. >> I'd be interested. I think it's a rare unique opportunity.
>> Yep. >> Excellent. All right. >> I wish we had a little advanced warning. We could have maybe tackled it tonight. [laughter] >> Would have been nice. Any other reports? It was just approved. Um 15 minutes into our meeting.
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> thank you. >> All right. How much money do I owe my baby? >> Oh boy. >> I just wanted you. >> This is an expensive job for you this
entire time. Thank you for [snorts] that. All that money that you make coming Hosting services for fctv.org are provided by Megaet Communications. Megaet offers a wide array of internet
services including mega backup cloud service server colllocation T1 fiber metro Ethernet as well as telephone services such as hosted PVX and digital voice. Their number one goal is to keep your communications network up and running [music] and allow you to focus
on growing your business. 877-6342638 [music] or meget.net. Proudly serving the New England area, K andK Talent Partners provide a personalized approach to full cycle recruiting services. >> Their level of integrity and empathy is
rare, and it speaks volumes about who they are as people [music] and as recruitment partners. >> Our goal is to build trusted relationships and to create genuine connections that help companies grow. >> K&K Telepartners. [music] ktlepartners.com.
At Martha's Vineyard Bank, we [music] know Felmouth. With locations in Woods Hole, on Palmer Avenue, and the Village Green, we deliver personal banking tailored to your needs, business [music] solutions to help you grow, flexible
lending to move you forward, and investment strategies that work for you. Whatever brings [music] you in, we're your local partner. Martha's Vineyard Bank. Your goals, our guidance. Part: 2
um to order. Um on our agenda, our um open remarks and public comment um would uh is anybody besides our health agent and FCTV recording this meeting?
No. Um uh I can never remember the >> you you have I'm going to turn to Kevin. >> Okay. Sure. Sure. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, public comments are are welcome, uh, at the discretion of the chair. Um,
public comments will be limited to two minutes and, uh, must be, uh, presented in a way that's respectful to others. >> Would somebody like to read our >> Yes. Mission. >> All right. Charge. The mission of the
Felmouth Board of Health is to protect and promote the health, safety, and well-being of the residents and visitors of the town of Felmouth. The primary functions of the board of health to achieve our mission are to prevent and control disease, enforce state and local
regulations, promulgate local health regulations, identify and protect from environmental hazards, and advocate for a healthy community. >> Thank you. Um, does anybody have any public comments on items not on the
agenda? All right, hearing none, we'll move to our first hearing. Uh, two 212 Ticket Highway, Cumberland Farms hearing on the second violation within 36 months of fless tobacco sales regulation.
>> Yes, Scott. >> So, just to go over it, that occurred on 41826. Um, and the report was a sale to minors. Um, the second one was on April 23rd of
2024. So, that's two two within 36 months, which is a $2,000 fine and a 7-day suspension. So, I just want to start that off with that any details about it. Bob Klette was invited, but he had some an emergency. He could not make it today. So Bob Klet is the regional
tobacco control who did the uh the sting to begin with and you are the enforcement body for the county's tobacco control. So that's why it's here. >> Um is there anybody from Cumberland Farms? Yes. >> Um
want to speak? I mean >> because we have a letter. If you do, you're welcome to. Um uh >> so normally we just um assure the town that we do everything we can for training. Um the team member was
unfortunately employed by us less than 30 days. I understand all that. >> Happens. Yeah. >> Yeah. [laughter] Um she has been since terminated. Well, she was terminated before the offense even got to our level. Um and that's about it,
>> right? Um yes, we have a letter from from you or from your headquarters um indicating that and saying fine and not contesting it. So >> yes, >> just through through the chair, can you can you identify yourself? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Jenny Raver, district manager for Cumberland Farms.
>> Thank you. >> Um so, uh I don't >> Do we need a motion? >> Do we need a I can never remember motion. Yes, George. uh asking the agent is to the board to decide uh there is a suspension of activities or sales
>> for how many days? >> 710 up to >> seven days. Is it the board's uh usual perview to set those dates? >> Yes. >> When it begins. So that's why basically >> um so the uh so the normal the the
tobacco sales would be suspended for seven days. Um, and we could uh start that clock presumably tomorrow. Um, or when does the board have a >> Is it possible to start it like the beginning of next week so that we have
time? >> Sure. >> Yeah, it's fine with me. Yes, >> we'll start it on Monday the 15th if that's okay. So, seven days from today. >> Is it? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, >> it's fine with me. >> Do we need a >> We do need a motion. Yes.
>> Oh, yeah. the product should be removed. >> Okay, so that was my next question. It has to be >> the product in the back. So like you're gonna have to somehow get it. So it's clearly clearly somewhere where it's not going to easily be accessible. >> Can it be in sealed totes? Some of the towns will allow us to keep it. We have
uh zip tied totes is what we normally use if that's possible. >> Zip tied totes located where? >> They would be in the back room of the location. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. We'll take everything off the shelves, but they'll all go into zip tied totes if that's okay with the board. >> That's
>> What is the date next Monday? >> It'll be the 15th or the 22nd. >> 15th. >> 15th. >> A motion to begin the U period of non- sale of tobacco products at the property to begin on the 15th and proceed for
June 15, 2026 to proceed for the seven full days. Right. >> Second. Okay. Motion a second to uh accept the fine impose the fine which we've already received um and begin the no sale of tobacco from June 15th and
proceed for 7 days with the product to be removed from shelves and sealed in totes um that are zip tied shut. >> Thank you very much. >> Y sorry this there's a motion second. I I just wanted to um to point out I mean
you you know how serious >> absolutely >> this is sale to minors that's really serious problem and we take it very seriously here and um as you surely know looking at the regulations
another uh another violation like this and and I believe that's withdrawal of your of your permit [snorts] to sell tobacco No, >> 30 days. >> 35 days. Okay.
>> I think we should have I should have We were too easy. I think it should be that. Anyway, four is a lot, but um yeah, it's a big risk to your business. >> Understand? And we do take it very seriously. We train and retrain and
anybody who's caught selling to a minor is terminated immediately. Um, obviously because they broke the law, we can no longer keep them employed by us. >> Does anyone recall there was a a system that we've talked about in past meetings
that goes beyond just telling people not to sell the products, but a way of um >> it was a lockout lockout system on the register. >> We've already done that. So we took away they have um we have an of age key so that when somebody comes into the store
if they clearly are over 40 the team member has the ability to hit of age and not scan the ID. We took that ability away so they have to scan an ID every time someone comes into the store at this point. >> So that's new. You just did that. >> Yes, we did that with this violation.
>> All right. Okay. Thank you. >> We do take it very very seriously. >> I know. Yep. >> We don't want to lose our license either, >> right? >> Yeah. Yeah, because in Falmouth you don't get it back once you lose it. >> Yeah. Once it's lost, that's it. >> Yeah. So, no, we took that ability away.
They cannot even question it. They need to scan an ID. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Have a great night. I have a question for the chair of the or Scott or that didn't last year or something
the town council tell us that the inspector had to be here when we did the >> the in well the inspector was invited he's had an emergency so I mean >> I couldn't hear what you said before there was there was an emergency he was invited but something happened [clears throat] last week that he he's
so it's >> he should be present but he's had you know if they if they If you certainly could continue it if you felt so inclined, but um >> yeah. No, not if they if they >> nobody appeals, >> right? If they contested it, then we would we would continue until we >> got it. Right.
>> So um uh all >> So the motion we have a motion second before we continue. We need a vote. Um all in favor? >> All right. Um we have another tobacco violation hearing. 302 Palmer Avenue, Garrett's Family Market. hearing on a
second violation within 36 months of from tobacco sales regulation. >> So this one also occurred. Sorry, let me get to it. >> Also on the 18th >> with the with the sale to a minor and then the previous one occurred on
January 22nd of 2025. So >> do we have a representative from Garretts here? Hi, I'm Megan Jacobs. I'm the VP of operations at Garrett's Friendly Market. And this is Aaron Warren, who's our
store manager down at 302 Palmer F. Um, we are not contesting. Um, but just to kind of re reiterate what our peers at Cumberland Farm said. We take this very seriously. One item of note I'd like to bring to the board is back in January 2025, it wasn't for an underage sale. So
that first violation, unfortunately, we had product delivered to our store from our grocery wholesaler who delivers our cigarettes and tobacco items, that was a flavored product that was banned. Um, and when the inspector came in, we had that product on the shelf. We understand we shouldn't have had that product, but
I just wanted to bring that of note that this is our first violation that we've had for underage sales. Um, and I do know in the regulation it says up to seven days. So, we're just asking um that maybe the board would consider this is our first age uh verification
violation that there might be some um some leniency there with the uh length of the suspension. Um we're not contesting that it happened uh since the violation. We have retrained all of our folks. Um we also lock the register
down. So regardless of age, you could be, you know, 90 years old and you come in and you'd like to purchase an age restricted product, we must scan the ID. We must validate that the person in front of us is of age and is the person that's in front of us. Um the other
thing we do to protect um the community and as well as making sure our employees are doing the right thing is we have a program called the bars program. So, we have mystery shoppers come in twice a month and shop our locations um and ensure that we're carting and we have
not had any failures failures there. We also terminated this employee um because we have zero tolerance for uh for this type of um action. So, >> I think you have a cover. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Any comments from the board? Yes. According to what's written on our document here, it doesn't say up to. It just says seven days, right? >> But I'm not looking at our regulation. I'm looking at what's on here. >> Um, does anyone have that handy?
>> I do not have the regulation handy. >> It should have been handy. Sorry. >> On [clears throat] the just one item of note, excuse me, that's interrupt, but um on the January of 2025, it does state that our second violation would be um up to seven days.
Well, that's that's important, but what really matters is what's written in the regulation. >> I did ask staff to include a copy of the rag that in the packet. They should have >> Oh, give me a second. >> Oh, is it in the packet? No, I think >> you said it's in the
>> It was supposed to be in the packet, but maybe Katie from missed it. That's all. >> Give me a minute. Just I'll double check. >> Yeah. So, it is a question as to whether or not our regulations say um shall or may or what the range is. And I'm sorry I didn't actually double check that.
>> Um health department. It's under the health department, isn't it? >> Oh, I think the chair. >> Yes. >> Uh it's really the provisions, the regulations which were violated twice.
And before we go into any whether we can or shall y >> maybe a feeling of the board of health the rest of board members whether that's appropriate to be lenient in these situations. >> Yes. >> Since we have not been that lenient in
any other situations despite the fact of products different products being on sale found on sale. It's not just sale to miners. It's the products. It's the provisions of the regulation.
So you could rather than spend a lot of time and homework just what's the feeling of the board and >> I will state for the record my feeling is there should be no lean on it. We've been going through this. They're well aware of what they should have on the
shelves, who they should or should not be selling to. and two provisions of the regulations have been violated within the 36 months. >> I agree. >> So do I. >> Okay. >> I have a motion.
>> Okay. >> Yes. >> The regulation does say shall >> Okay. Uh section S1B. >> Okay. That previous discussion then is moot. >> Is moved. Yes. Right. Yes. So >> if could the last motion that was voted
on be read back to us and copy pasted? >> Sure. >> How much for the zip locks >> part? How do you how do you plan to store the products? >> We would take it all off that back bar, put it in totes, seal those totes, and place them in our back room
>> with the totes and the and the >> identical. >> Identical. Uh, can I say I move the identical motion with the name of the business changed? >> Sure. >> Because I don't remember it exactly, but we spent a lot of time making >> Could have the recording secretary read it right back to you.
>> Yeah, I can read it back to you. So, you uh made a motion to the board made a motion to begin a period of non- sale of tobacco products on um June 15th, if that's the ex agreed upon date for and to proceed for seven days. And then that
was also included that um all tobacco products would be removed and stored in bins with zip ties. >> And the fine >> and the fine $2,000. Okay. >> Um uh does next Monday.
>> We would like to do it sooner. So Wednesday, this Wednesday, starting this Wednesday through the weekend >> on or before the 15th. How about that? >> Well, we can say Wednesday. You'd like to know a start date. >> Exactly. Start date. Yes. >> Wednesday. >> Wednesday. >> Wednesday the 11th. Wednesday the
>> No, 8th. 9 10th. >> 10th. >> The 10th. Wednesday the 10th through the 17th. >> June 10th. >> Okay. >> Um, what is there a second? >> So, a second. >> Okay. So, a motion and a second to um uh
impose the $2,000 fine and a uh 7-day tobacco sales reg um suspension to start Wednesday um June 10th and just uh with the product to be removed and stored in sealed totes. Um and second
>> seven consecutive days. >> Seven consecutive days. Yes. >> Second. >> Are there any other comments from the board? I just make note that tobacco control Bob Klette was invited to both, but he's see appears to be out for an extended period of time. Just to let you know in case you wanted to know that that
regional control does get invited, but I think we should have >> normally normally he's here um to to provide comments or questions as as needed and I I do apologize that he's >> on his behalf. Um uh so um all in favor
>> I >> so all right um >> thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Before we move on, can I ask the health agent a question because I'm not familiar? >> The product is the same generic product.
>> What's the deal with it? Is it particular >> tobacco pouch? >> Yeah. Is it particularly whatever? is just >> it's just so they seem to >> popular. >> Oh, >> it's >> it's a pouch. I mean, you know, we've
seen we've been as a board and I know the agent has been here for a long time. I've not seen that in the past when we've had tobacco regulations being as prominent in the violations as
say vaping or >> it's sort of I would say in my opinion kind of replaced vaping for the newest generation. So that would be something likely that the younger group would want >> whereas 10 12 years ago it would have been Babes, right? And then so on and so forth, right?
>> The 20s it was pipes. I don't know. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. So it's a more popular thing and I think they've been out for maybe five, eight years. >> Yeah. Ask our ex third baseman who they used to show closeups of him as >> George Brett. >> No. No. I mean, the guy would
>> in some sense it was um my understanding is that it was initially intended as harm reduction. So, it's it's pretty much straight up nicotine um and whatever else um that's in pouch form. And it's it's commonly it was
popularized in uh I think in Sweden or Norway. Um, >> if you go to their website, which I did because I had no idea what this was, you have to have a photo ID to be able to enter the website
>> because it's age restricted. >> So, they take it pretty seriously and they're >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, that is our tobacco hearings. Um, now we have septic systems. So, our first septic system is 380 Wild Harbor
Road. local upgrade approval request and IIA technology approval request. Three bedroomedroom raise and rebuild. Um, is there somebody here for >> there is coming. >> Just keep scrolling. Just keep
scrolling. >> There you are. >> All right, there we go. >> Nope. Nope, that's not where we are. >> There we go. >> Well, we all have it in front of us. So, >> all right. Uh, good evening. For the record, Tim Santos from Merill Engineers
representing the applicant of properties located at 380 Wild Harbor Road. um currently developed with an existing three-bedroom home serviced by town water and a uh sewage disposal system which is a pressures do leecher field in the backyard. Um the applicant is
proposing to tear down his existing home, construct a new home, three bedrooms meeting uh uh building code and FEMA standards. Um we're here tonight looking for your approval one because the property is located in the Falmouth uh nitrogen regulated area. So, will be
incorporated in the clean two system into our proposed septic modifications. Um, and then two, in order to do so, we're going to need a few uh local upgrade approvals variances
that are shown in the lower left hand corner of the uh the plan. Uh we're looking for a waiver from the coastal bank to the septic tank from 21 ft or from 25 to 21 in accordance with title 5
setbacks. And then from for your local regs from 21 from 50 to 21 for the septic tank, 33 for the nitro tank, and 41 for the pump chamber. Um the existing tank pump chamber is in
the same location as the proposed tank. So, we're no closer than what currently exists. Uh, this project has been before conservation last week. Conservation has approved it. This is our last stop. Looking for your approval so we can file for a building permit.
If the board has any questions or concerns, I'd be more than happy to address them. >> Uh, I do have a question. Um the details on that pressure dos thing you don't have was it uh it's not on the plans and
>> so the field itself exists so we're just tying into the force main >> right um do you just for completeness it should be I would hope that it's in our records >> it is >> it is okay
>> system I believe is installed in 16 Yeah, >> that was approved in 2015, installed in 2016. >> Yeah, because because there was going to be my question was going to be what the what the depth to um presumed groundwater is given that um there is a
revision there was a revision to ground presumed groundwater. Uh but I think our our assumptions on on on our initial assumptions Kevin can refresh my memory
were were actually conservative and in line with that revision. Uh I just did not look it up. So that was just my question. I know you'll you do note that you will be
confirming that position. >> Yes, George. >> And a naive question, is it pressurized because it's uphill? Why is it pressurized? >> It it it exists as a pressurized system. >> Why? I believe it was probably
pressurized because of the setbacks to the wetlands and to the coastal bank back in 2015 when it was originally. >> So it wasn't the kind where we've had uh pumps to add gas and oxygen
>> because it was failing. It was at a time when we have we have a tiered approach as you approach the wetland and if you're within a certain distance you just make sure you're as high as you can off the groundwater. If you're closer you go to pressure distribution because
it's considered better treatment. It uses the entire leech field instead of gravity which progressively fails and uses a leech field. So it wasn't because it was failing at the time because Got it. >> Thank you.
>> So am I am I missing it or is is it's not shown anywhere on the plan. The leech field is right there. >> It's shown. I can show you right here. >> Oh, I thought the reserve area. Okay. Okay. I see. >> And but we don't know the depth to water on this plan
>> to groundwater from the SAS. >> It's it's a it's mounted in the backyard. It is mounted. And it was approved by this board back in 2016. >> 2016. >> Yeah. So it's a it's it would be a modern system, modern pressure dust system. So
>> I'm just curious whether we're approving the whole thing or we just approving what's being added new. >> They're just approving the DNA. >> Just the DI >> and any changes to the tankage. >> There's no increase in flow. They're increasing. >> They're increasing the treatment. >> Treatment. >> Yeah. Yeah. I get that.
>> Yeah. And by our current standards, there is [snorts] a quote unquote increase in flow because it's raised and rebuilt. >> Uh, no, I think we took it out. >> It's defined as new construction. >> New construction. Thank you. That's that's what it is.
>> That's why it has to have this >> raise regardless of an increase in flow is considered new construction in your regulations. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> That's why he's here to do the D9 because he's raising rebuilding. So, he has to put the D9 in. >> Right. Make a motion finding that there is no
increase in any of the variances to the wetland or critical resources. Finding that the applicant has increased the environmental protection by the use of a nitro system which meets the banner is on the banner list for provisional
approval. provided that the owner is aware of all the consequences of a provisional use system and the monitoring requirements as well as the maintenance prove the use of the system at this
location. Second. Um, a second. Uh, a motion, a second to approve the use of an IIA system at 38. Well, >> the local upgrade. >> The local upgrade. I'm sorry. >> Local variance request. Yes.
>> Variance request um and the use of an AIA system um for 380 Wild Harbor Road. Um, finding well I can summarize his findings, but finding I'll restate them. finding um no increase uh to the variances to the wetlands or other
resources. Um and that it is an increase in environmental protection for the by the use of the banner system. Um provided that the proponent is a aware of the provisional status of the technology and the requirements for operation and maintenance to a
>> and monitoring >> and monitoring. Yes. >> Any other comments? Um all in favor I >> I >> thank you for your time. >> Our next hearing is 34 Bonito.
Um >> advanced treatment uh approval request BSS design. >> You can just scroll down. >> Do you have them in front of you? >> Yeah. >> All right. There's not much to talk about.
>> Yes. >> Gotcha. >> Was that >> What do you think? I can't tell. >> He's not BSS. >> Even though that's what this says. Uh, >> he's Felmouth Engineering. >> Oh, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members
of the board of health. For the record, Mike Borceli from Felmouth Engineering. May I represent the applicant? We teamed up with BSS design on this >> where the PE of record for the septic design and BSS did the site plans and
drafting. >> Oh, right. I see. >> Uh this is number 34 Bonito Avenue. It is an undeveloped lot. This will be proposed new construction for the first time. There's a four bedroomedroom house
proposed and the septic system has been designed to incorporate a um nitro by clean tube because this obviously constitutes new construction and um balance of the system was designed to
meet title five and your local health regulations request for any setbacks or variances or anything. We're simply here because your regulations require us to come and you approve and issue a letter that
describes the monitoring and testing regiment and u discharge requirements for the wastewater. It's a proposed 1500gallon tank, a uh nitro unit capable of u treating for
four bedrooms. It's a um SAS with uh three 500gallon chambers surrounded by stone. And um that's pretty much it. I'm happy to take questions. Are there any questions from the board? >> Any motion from the board?
>> George. >> Yes, George. a motion to approve the use of uh the nitro system in this situation. It's on the banner list. Uh provided all the uh requirements in the letter of approval which is for
provisional use approval and with our standard set of conditions. >> Second. Okay. A motion and a second. >> Yep. >> The two Georgees. Um >> and I just had a comment. Yes. just because we're in discussion. Um,
this lot is like as we look at wastewater development and our whole in all our areas, this does the best it can. But four bedrooms on, you know, 11,000 square
feet, that's a small lot. >> Small lot. I am actually >> my only comment is like as we're we're struggling with the whole wastewater >> sort of planning process and you think well
less nitrogen in bigger areas is what you generally think about and now this is like just the opposite. This is probably the smallest lot you could fit this type of system on and not require variances. >> Yep.
>> But it's just a comment. It's >> this area would probably benefit from sewering. >> Yeah. >> Um because of >> uh it is relatively dense. It's relatively dense and it's just north of 28. >> Um but we just we just aren't there yet.
>> Yeah. >> And it's a 11,000. You said >> 11,000 square feet. I I'm familiar with that actually. I was surprised they were going to that it was a separate lot and they could squeeze a house in there. >> Yeah. >> They had a good engineer I guess. >> Yeah. [laughter] why they pay you the big bucks.
>> That was good. >> Another related to what uh the smart George just said, I want to point out nothing to do with this. There is a uh ballot initiative in Massachusetts to for 5,000
square foot lots. >> All right. >> With and sometime we ought to talk about that. >> That sounds good. We can with no ability. We can discuss that at the end of the meeting when we talk about future business. Um uh so we have a motion and
a second to uh accept the use of the approve the use the the IIA technology for 34 Bonito Avenue um find uh approve the use of the Nitro finding that it's in the Banner system um Banner system
list um provided that the applicants are aware of the provisional use requirements um the monitoring requirements and appending the standards that missions. All right. Any other comments from the board? Mike. All right. Okay. All in
favor? >> I I >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Have a good night. >> All right. Our next hearing is for 227 Edgear Drive West. Um local upgrade approval request.
existing five bedroomedroom. >> We have it in front of us. So, >> oh yes, this is for TV. I don't like it is what it is. Our regulations mics, guys. >> All right.
>> Ready for me? >> Chuck Roland, Capen Islands Engineering. I'm representing the owner of 227 Edgewater Drive West. Um just to give you a little background on the property, um we're doing a fairly um small
addition on the north side of the lot um with um some decks to be rebuilt um and uh built [clears throat] on added to uh on the west side. So, as part of this, we are proposing to replace the
existing uh septic system or rather leech pit with a new title five septic system. Uh we've proposed a uh tank uh the reserve area, the pump. Uh we're going to be pumping it around to standard 500gallon leech pit system in
the front yard. We've pushed the uh leech field in the front yard, we believe, as far as we can away from the resource. Um, and so, uh, we've pushed everything we can as far as we can away from the, uh, coastal bank, which runs
right along here. Um, there really isn't a ton of room. The only thing we could ever improve on is maybe shifting the tank and the pump further away, but besides that, we left the room just for construction access um, and not interfering with any, uh, footings for
the deck. Uh this project is filed with the conservation commission under a notice of intent. We also are located in the FEMA flood zone. Um so we have to stay underneath the 50% value. So this
is not um a demo rebuild and we're going to be staying under under half the value of the house so that way we don't have to bring it up to current flood code requirements. Um so with the new title five septic we have five u variance
requests. Uh so the setback distance from the SIS to the property line uh obviously is required 10 ft. We're proposing 5.4 which is a 4.6 ft waiver. Uh the distance from the SAS to the foundation is required 10 20 feet and we're
proposing 6.2 [clears throat] with a 13.8 8 foot waiver. Um setback distance from the SAS to the water line is requires 10 and we're proposing 5.5 with a um sleeved water
line. The setback distance from Coastal Bank uh to the tank is uh 25 ft requirement with proposed 133 which is 11.7 foot waiver and the setback distance from the pump to the coastal bank is 25 as well. We're proposing uh
12.6 six with a 12.4 foot waiver. Um so under uh the regulation your regulations uh 15.42B uh with no increase in flow bottom elevation is less than 10 ft but at least 5 ft from the adjusted seasonal
high groundwater where the maximum achievable achievable horizontal separation of the SAS and the wetland or the surface water is at least 75 feet but less than 100. the applicant shall demonstrate that they have achieved the maximum separation between the SAS and the resource area which we believe we
have done. Um and then uh this area this is mapped inside the uh Falmouth uh nitrogen regulated area. Um and per your requirements online best available IA systems are only required
for new construction which is a new house, a demo rebuild or adding bedrooms. Um and as the building uh with the additions is without any increase in flow uh we uh we do not meet the requirement for an IIA system. With that
I'm happy to take any questions. >> Yes sir. >> I' like to just make a comment that if no variances were required then the statement made about not being required to do anything as far as I systems go
that would be a true statement. But when the board looks at variances to the title five or to their local regulations, certainly doesn't tie their hands for requiring an IIA to compensate for any deficiencies in the environmental
protection that would be afforded by full compliance. Just a statement. >> Yep. And this is Keel Pond, correct? >> Yeah, because I think I think you might have buried the lead there. Uh that's
the renovation. It also involves the addition of the second floor, second story. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you. >> But there is not an in clarify there is not an addition of bedrooms. >> Uh it's currently it's five bedrooms and
it's proposed five bedrooms. >> Just a second. Could you tell us the floor plan of the house as it is now and the floor plans proposed and what other rooms there are in addition to the current five bedrooms?
>> I don't have the uh current five- bedroomedroom floor plan. I do have a copy of the proposed five-bedroom floor plan. >> So, what floors are the bedrooms on in the new in the in the proposed? Um,
>> so they are on the >> uh lower level there's um a bedroom and on the first floor there's uh two bedrooms and on the third floor there's uh two bedrooms. So one, two, three,
four. And then >> that's in the after the renovation. >> Yes, sir. And how about now? >> Uh, I don't have those. >> Do you can you actually identify yourself and actually come up to the microphone because it is being recorded,
>> please? >> Amanda Hunt, the owner of 227 at Georgia Drive West. Um, currently the home has three bedrooms on the first floor and two bedrooms in the basement apartment um downstairs with a full kitchen. >> So that's four. >> Um, no, there's three upstairs and two
in downstairs. So, five. >> And what other rooms are in the house? >> Um, there's a full family room upstairs on the first floor. Uh, bathroom and kind of like a dining room area. So, and a kitchen on the first floor. And in the basement, there's a family room. So, when you walk in downstairs, immediately
to the left is a bedroom and then a full family room. To the right is um kind of like a dining room, eating area, and then a kitchen and then a bathroom in the basement. And then the first floor when you walk in immediately you walk into the family room and then the dining room kind of overlooks the back deck and
then the kitchen and then you walk down the hallway and there's a um bathroom to the right and then there's a master bedroom and then immediately to the left there's the second bedroom and then the third bedroom next to that. >> Yes, Kevin.
>> So Scott, >> yes. Um, so oftentimes, uh, staff will do walkthroughs. You'll do walkthroughs. >> It's it's in their paperwork. >> Yeah. We had two walkthroughs. >> Yeah. So, but how do you handle that for new construction where you can't walk
through? >> Well, it's not new. Oh, no. We Well, we could look at the floor plan of the new construction. We have to look at the existing for the number of bedrooms and the exist. There was a walk through. It should be in the paperwork. Um, >> yeah, that's the walk. >> David David did a walk through. Should be in there. There's just a list,
>> right? >> Yep. >> And so a and he determined that there were five rooms that met I don't have in fact. >> Right. Sorry. So I'm just thinking about Yeah. So I shouldn't say new construction. I'm just thinking about the the new build of the the renovated house. So the new
>> How do we evaluate how many bedrooms are in >> the building permit submitted to me? If there's a den that has a door and privacy or an office or a sewing room. I actually saw a wrapping room. >> Uhhuh. Okay. >> Everybody needs a wrapping room. So I'll look at bigger than 70 square feet private and door and so so I look at
that when the building permit's submitted. So what I don't remember what the floor plan looks like for this job. So when the building permit comes to me I'm going to look at how many rooms are private bigger than 70 square feet. So and and if they're more than five rooms then I'm not going to sign the building
permit. Um >> so you've already done this one in five bedrooms. >> I don't have the Well, I that's going to be caught when the building permit submit submitted. the building permit wouldn't have been submitted yet because she's going through the process. >> Gotcha. >> So, >> I do remember coming to the office and me looking at the floor plan. >> So, we
>> that was six months ago and that's like 3,000 jobs later. [laughter] I don't remember it quite well enough. Um, so, so >> if you were to approve it today based on a five bedroomedroom, I'm going to make sure that even though the house is getting going up that it's clearly five bedrooms. Okay.
>> Five rooms that let's I clarify five rooms that would look like bedrooms. >> Right. Right. >> Okay. or quack like a duck, we call it a duck. >> Um, as far as that, so we did a walk through, then we also that also does work in a resident's favor. When we go to an older home, if the room it could
have office furniture in it, if it's got a door, it's bigger than 70 square feet and a window and privacy, it's bedroom one. >> And so David did a walk through and measured the rooms and came up with what he came up with in the list. And if it's if if they're just making the house bigger and the rooms are getting bigger
and they're all going upstairs and then having an open floor plan on the first floor for us, it's not an increase in flow. I mean, we do this game almost every day and you don't see most of them because they're not they don't require variances, >> right? >> So, >> we have a >> Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, sir. If you um you
may speak, but please go to the microphone and identify yourself. First of all, my name's Joe Bournestein. I live across the street, 226. Um, the two bedrooms or actually the count on the bedrooms in the basement.
Where's the permit? There's no permit. >> Well, conversely, there's no permit on the house from 1954 either. So, I mean, I don't have a lot to go. I don't know. You're right. the tax records on the house, call it a three-bedroom. >> The assess I believe the assessment's
for five. >> And so, so when so if I may answer that question, I don't know your house or any house >> inherently. If we walk through a house and it's got, you know, the old paneling from the 70s or naughty, we're not going to know exactly, you know, were they bootlegged in in '92 or 82? I don't know
that. We're just calling what we see today is what's there. And so I'm just letting you know how we do it every day because it's hard for us to determine building permit records. Things were done in the old days with handshakes and back of napkin work at Jake's Tap, right? That
kind of a lot of stuff. That old sort of school thing that sometimes we can't walk in and necessarily tell age or so forth, >> right? >> I'm just just letting you know how we do it. So we just go in, we measure the rooms as they exist. If we do have a record, we could certainly go by that. Lack of permits. I don't have septic
records that go back into the 70s hardly or even to the 80s. So it gets kind of fuzzy and I don't necessarily hold it against somebody for for the lack of stuff. And so obviously we could do more digging if the board wants us to do so. Um but it's really hard for us to tell
when something may be reconstructed if it's been a long time. >> According to the tax records, this house has one bathroom, three bedrooms, >> six rooms. I mean, >> well, let's look. >> Uh, the tax records for my house are
wrong. >> Mine, too. [laughter] >> So, it they are kind of what they are. And this house on a cesspool. Okay. >> Which means Well, well, that means that it was built quite a while ago, right?
>> And so, we recognize that to be honest, anything would be better than assess poolool. Assess poolool is a fail system. Why wasn't it done when the additional rooms were done? Some somebody circumvented. >> Okay, so I can answer that question. If
the rooms were put in in ' 68, they wouldn't have had to. If the rooms were done in the in 76, they wouldn't have had to upgrade the cessible because there was no regulation. Title 5 didn't exist until 78. So, so if I just may say, unfortunately in Falmouth, it's very unfortunate
because I have to deal with it every day. Septic and building records back that far are horrible. And so we look at it. I'm just telling the board we counted five today. Whether those five were put in, three of the five were put in in '92 or 2002 or last year. We'd be
able to see last year, but like it'd be it we I could definitely if you'd want if the board wants dig into the building permit archives further to try to find something that did showed that it was always built as a free. I just won't be able to give you a date at which maybe
this apartment was put in at some point in time. I don't know. >> Yes, George. Scott, can you repeat something you said before about what qualifies something as a bedroom? Because I thought I heard you say that
if it's a room with one door and more than X and I think >> title five I'll say so title five is larger than 70 square feet. >> Yeah. >> Chapter two >> privacy a window also. >> Yeah. So it's privacy bigger than 70
square feet. So privacy could be doesn't necessarily mean a door, but almost always means a door. Electrical service in a window, right? So that is that's >> so building permits are actually irrelevant. >> No, >> that is to say, if what qualifies is
what Scott just described and you get a building permit, you could change your mind after you build it that it's not going to be an office, it's going to be a bedroom. Certainly things over >> sir I want you to know I completely agree with you and I think this whole
thing and I don't mean you I mean the way we do stuff here >> it is just absurd >> that we anyone who has a house that was built more than 20 years ago can have as many say it's as many
bedrooms as there are doors and rooms that are more than 70 square feet. quite that >> well pretty no it is if it's got a door a window and it's more than 70 square feet it's a bedroom >> and so whatever the text records say >> it works both ways it works both ways so
a lot of people real co a lot of people wanted home offices >> they didn't get them they meet the definition of a bedroom generally by nature offices are private so it works but it also can work in somebody's favor who's got an older home that things might have occurred over time >> what do you mean they didn't get an office
>> because it counted as a bedroom you have to upgrade your septic If you wanted an office, it's bigger than 70 square feet, private. >> Oh, you mean an office that you could deduct from your taxes as a business. >> Right. So, what I'm saying when I look at building permits, I'll just let you know when I look at building permits, I do not look at the label. >> Yeah.
>> I look at structure >> bigger than 70 square feet, whether you call it an office or what. So, a lot of people who wanted to construct an office during CO could not construct the office during CO without a septic upgrade. >> But does it work both ways? Sure. Sometimes you walk through an older
home, North Falmouth is notorious for this, like Aby's Lane. Those little homes, those big homes have many, many little rooms, and sometimes they're getting the benefit of rooms that were built in the 20s or 30s or whatever as bedrooms and getting credit for that. And when they demolish the house, they
have credit for that. So, it it is you are correct in older homes sometimes get a benefit of us not necessarily knowing how all that morphed into a five-bedroom over time. And then we look at the assessments. But that is the assessor >> disregard them. The >> assessor would assessor would tell me
that we shouldn't be looking at her. Well, not her, you know, her records anyway, >> at least when Trish was here. >> Sorry. I do the best we can to determine what we have. >> George, let's focus on the project. >> Yes, >> there is a project. Let's say it's not
new construction. >> It's just a project. It's >> it requires an environmental variance. Our duty is by requiring full compliance with the code. Would it manifest in
justice? I doubt it in this case if we denied that variance because we could say just go back make the project smaller. Or does it offer equal degree of environmental protection? So we could insist on something that we
believe would be equal degree of environmental protection as affordable compliance with the code which might be in this case they have a dite system proposed in there at some point. It may require that to be put in now because
they're closer to this very fragile pond that we're all concerned about. So, I'd say forget about whether there are four bedrooms there, five bedrooms there. It's a project. >> It's it
>> it's using more of the the lot. It's probably going to increase the use of the property, >> but our main focus is is there a variance required that is an environmental variance and there is.
Well, they they do this is an improvement on the existing conditions or this would be it's assess pool. >> Yeah. >> So, >> but is it enough for the board to say, okay, you're going to you're encroaching
upon the environmental resource. Do you take that just the fact that they they would have had to upgrade anyhow at some point? It's a cess poolool, >> right? Well, it's failed, >> but now there's an enhancement of the
property. There's an increase in the size. There's more lot coverage. There's a lot of things there. And they're encroaching upon the coastal bank. >> Yes. Good. >> Is there any sense for whether and when this location is going to be sewered?
>> 10 years. >> That we don't know for certain. Minimum. >> We don't know. That would be minimal. We >> we'd hope it might be less >> might be sooner than that. >> It is it is a number. It is a top priority. >> It is a top priority.
>> It isn't going to be less than that for the outflow pipe to be completely done and operational. >> Yeah. >> And then for the process to go >> 8 to 10 years, we'll say. >> I agree. At least 10 years. >> Yeah. There's no way it's going to be eight years. I think I'd I'd lay a few
bucks on the bet that it isn't made. [laughter] >> I'll bet it isn't then. >> Anyway, betting is irrelevant here. >> Um, >> uh, so the >> right on the shoreline, >> right? Yeah. So, one thing I wanted to
to note actually if um I could have the uh is it Chuck? I'm sorry. I missed your last name. >> Uh, Chuck, can I have you back to the microphone, please? I'm sorry. Excuse me, sir. >> Sir, were you done? >> No, not really. I've got a couple more questions. >> Why? Well, while you're I'm sorry, while
you're standing there, if you have some more questions. Yeah. >> Also, there's tanks being put in in the near the coastal bank with the variance. Okay. If you look at the original uh footprint
of the house, there's a place to put the tanks beside the house, probably 60 70 ft away from the coastal bank if they don't if they stick to the original footprint. >> Yep.
Um that's pretty much it. All right. >> Thank you, sir. Uh, sorry. Um, you did note that this was in has not been to Comia. >> Nope.
>> Okay. Um, I do want to observe to the board that often in these circumstances, Comcon will require an IIA. And the question would be, if we were to figure out a motion, would we
condition it on con or would we prefer to wait? >> I'm a little confused at what your question is. Would we do we want to actually tangle with this right now or do we want to wait for concom to to come
back to us because concom may require an IA that we would not by our regulations necessarily require. >> So wait for them to do it. I think that's uh it's doing it. >> So just so just so you're clear, we we
were asked to continue to talk to you first. We were actually >> Okay, let's not do that. >> Then we won't do that. We're not going to punch it back to >> again. Focus back in the project. >> The encroach this way. Tanks are this way. I think that
gentleman made a very good point that the tanks could be placed further away if it wasn't for the fact that there's an encroachment of the new addition, the new decks. I get it. You don't want to sink pilings right next to your tanks
because you could cave your tanks in on the side unless they're age 20s. >> So, we can shift them the tanks over if that would appease this commission. Um and then like I said earlier um we felt that we met all the regulations um under
uh 1542B that uh you know as long as you're um at least 75 ft feet but less than 100 the applicant shall demonstrate that they have achieved the maximum separation between the SAS and the resource. um you know the the the separation of the tanks and the pumps I
I really don't think that that has very much environmental impact for what you guys are considering. Um the tanks don't really spill. I I don't think it happens very often. Uh I'm we're happy to take some special conditions that would
assure that you know the pumps don't fail. If you want, we can we can have a a redundant pump out alarm system. So that way uh we can have two alarms if that's what um would appease this this board. But the pump the pump and the
tank aren't what um add any nitrogen or any you know um anything bad to the resource unless there is some sort of emergency. Now with the leech field, it's as far away as we possibly can get it in my opinion. Um and so we've we've
kind of demonstrated that the SAS is as far away from the resource area as possible while staying within the strip um strip out within the confines of the property. So um >> just a >> yes >> a detail on here but I just want to
generally agree with what you just said but um your table here with the state required in the proposed to this doesn't list our local regulation which in some case has farther setbacks. >> Um
I I believe I believe that those setbacks are only uh in 15.4 42B if I'm not mistaken. >> I don't remember. >> Um I'm trying to look. So this is in terms of setbacks. >> Yeah. >> State required.
>> You have other all that matters. >> This I mean this does not meet the technical definition of new construction, >> right? >> It's not a razor build. It's not increase in flow. And so uh in that case it we as far as I can tell we don't have
a difference in our setback from for the tanks >> from uh >> from a resource area. >> Is that right? I thought ours were farther than >> I read it like three times and I couldn't find one. So >> the coastal bank is title five.
Resources were 100 from some things that title five is 50. The coastal bank is 50. Both in title five. Well, from tanks it's 25. From re from leeching it's 50, >> right? But we got a salt marsh and an estuary here. So those are resources.
>> They would be resources. So they would need to be 50 for a tank and 100 for the leeching from the water. >> And we're at 75 from the salt. >> There's also a section of your code that has a sliding scale. If you're 75 to 100 but and you have but you have suitable vertical distance, you're considered to
meet it. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Right. And that would be done over the counter and it wouldn't be done by here per se. >> Um, knowing the bottom elevation is less than 10 ft but at least 5T.
What's your separation to the wetland here? >> So you you referring to the coastal bank? >> No, the wetland. >> Let's see here. So, um I believe so >> 88 is that what I see
>> border bordering vegetated wetlands >> VBW. Yes. 88.3 >> no to the SAS. >> Um uh okay. So, sorry. I was just looking to see whether or not we required pressure dosed. I should know this. I
don't know that. >> Yeah. George wrote these to have those in front of me too, >> right? >> So I believe that when you have this separation that's and that's what I just referenced is that Yep. So our closest resource and it's not a wetland is the
um coastal bank. If So I mean bottom line is there are some variances required and we have to decide whether we're willing to allow them or if we want to require
>> concession. Well, >> it is couldn't be more sensitive, >> right? Not saying where I where I fall on that, but it is this is exactly what we're trying to >> exactly we're trying to do. And the the
challenge is that our regulations don't >> the regulations are regulations except for variances. >> Right. Right. >> And they're minimum standards. >> They are minimum standards.
Um >> excuse me. Is it take a hardship to get a variance? >> Sorry. Can you go up to the microphone? Sorry. >> What does the board uh want as far as is it the hardship
that you have to have in order to get a variance? >> There's two standards for a variance, sir. One is that by denying them, you would deny reasonable use of the property. In other words, you would manifest injustice.
>> And so they they couldn't use the property. >> Excuse me, sir. Let me finish. >> Yeah. >> The second part is that you show that you have equal degree of environmental protection as is afforded for compliance with the regulation. However, on a
repair situation, D does allow the fact of us looking at the financial implications here. I don't think that applies because financially there's a whole lot more going on in this house
than is is going to be uh sort of could be shortened for a better septic system. So, that's what we're grappling with now. Well, my my one of my questions wasn't necessarily one of my questions
was the nitro system, but my other question is the location of the tanks versus the uh coastal bank. And based on the original foot existing footprint of the existing house, the the
tanks can be placed beside the house up in the driveway and there does not need to be a variance >> for the setbacks from the tanks to the coastal bank. >> We heard it. >> Yeah.
Thank you. I mean, yes. Just just to clarify this is they're not proposing an IIA. So we are >> correct >> contemplating imposing an IIA. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> At a minute >> to compensate for any environmental risk
that we believe granting the variances would impose. So just to ask the question of the board, were this merely a failed cess poolool and there was no addition proposed,
would the board approve this upgrade to a to as compliant a title 5 system as could be fit on this system on this on this lot. Then I would say, and it's just my
opinion, then we would revert to what D says about a simple repair and we could then look at the financial implications of imposing an IIA system. However, in this
instances, in this instance, I'm going to say that we can't look at the financial part of it because there's a pretty big financial outlay going into improving the property. So in that instances I think that part
of title five which D vaguely references consider the financial implication that goes away. So now we look more clearly at the environmental impact imposed superimposed upon that is the
fact that Felmouth is going through a huge plan to reduce nutrients into the environment. We as a board have been looking at focusing on those that are right by the shoreline. I don't think it can get any closer than this.
>> Yeah. Just wanted to if I could if I could ask the owner, have you considered an IIA? And and if not, why not? >> Well, through all you could come up. Yeah. >> Through all of the research and everything when I was speaking to different um septic companies, we just said because we're not increasing the
flow and then having the 2,00 um tank um already there for when if we have to increase and then with Towns are coming in with like seven to 10 years and right now we're not going outside of like the footprint of the home. Um we are going up. Yes. And then we're going to the driveway, but other than that, we're staying in the footprint and then just
increasing the height. Um and then staying with the five bedrooms, we figured this is like the best um we're increasing it per like the regulations that we had looked up and um we figured it would be the best system per the regulations that you guys have put in
place. >> So you figured it would be the best system what >> um available. Um >> the standard system would be the best available. >> Yes. because we're not increasing flow in the home. >> So, because cost because it costs more >> cost as well. Yes.
>> Yeah. And at least we're getting it ready because they're we're required to put the 2,000 um gallon tank in the middle to be prepared and ready for it if if need be >> because it's a big it's a substantial difference for the IA. Yes. Yeah. It's a substantial difference in price. M
>> but you're not putting the 2,000gallon tank in that you're just reserving the area for it. >> Right. >> So in an awareness of the potential for sewering on some time relevant time frame, >> right? >> Okay.
>> Banding it. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. I have a motion for at a minimum the purposes of getting the discussion moved on that this not be approved unless uh a
banner IIA system is incorporated in it into the building not just the plan >> that isn't before us however right >> that's not >> well I'm bring I'm bringing it before us >> that the um I don't believe this should
be approved at a minimum with that. >> Okay. So the motion is not to approve. >> The motion will be not to approve. >> Right. Because it's not being so so the >> before we do that. I' I'd rather ask for a continuence than just an outright
denial. I mean everyone has their own prerogative and by any by all means you can do that. Uh before you make that official. So, I'm just requesting a continuence so that way we can kind of go back and consult and try to come up with a solution. Uh, additionally, I
just would like to mention that when I look at the website and I read what I'm supposed to be doing for Leechfield, um, that I'm, um, meeting, uh, uh, the regulations for not new construction and whatever else, that, you know, by your
regulations, in my opinion, I have met all the requirements that uh, are listed both in the town bylaw, title 5, and uh, the regulations that are um, pretty plainly ly noted on the website that it doesn't mention anywhere that you you
would be denying a project of this nature um by requiring us to put in an IIA. So by by everything that you this board has laid out, we believe that we have met all the uh requirements to not put in an IIA. So I mean with that you
are always allowed to ask for whatever you want. This is an independent board obviously, but I'm just pointing out the fact that, you know, we're just consultants here. So, when we go uh to the town website and we see that we're not required to do that and then of all of a sudden that we have to we're
required to do that, it makes it very very difficult for people in my position to have to go back to my client when we're like on the 20 yard line saying we have to like totally redesign this and blah blah blah. Uh so so um I would like to remind the board that he is correct
that our regulations and the state law do not require and it goes beyond our it goes beyond regulations and law
and to require and we have typically not required without a regul an IIA system without a regular regulation if we wish to res to revise our regulations which we did we talked about it
extensively but we did not so I I mean we are a board we're it's we're not a we're not a singular judge >> so u for the record are there variances
required here >> clearly there are variances required So if there are variances required there here then that calls for a board of health to either grant the variance
finding that the client has or the applicant has demonstrated equal degree of environmental protection and we're not manifesting injustice. Those are our two standards for looking at a variance. >> Well, but but let's be very careful
though. equal to the present conditions. Correct. >> Equal degree of environmental protection as is afforded full compliance with the regulation >> which we believe we've met.
>> And that's the belief and you can believe what you want. >> No, no, I know >> that's why there is a board of health, >> right? I mean you opine I appine he appines we we give our opinions >> and then the board deliberates and
decides that's the process >> right >> and right now the board is having a little bit of difficulty with that process that's all I mean and this we've faced it before
you know what do you do well what have we done in the past we've said, "Okay, you want you want a continue," which is it's a good move. [laughter] It's a good move because you don't want to go back to conservation having a denial, >> right?
>> And I'm all for that if we need to deliberate further, but every time there's a variance, every time there's a variance to our regulation or title five, this is the process. And what we've done in the
past, what have we done? Take a look at it. We've said reduce the project to the point where you can meet full compliance with all our regulations. That's one thing we've done. Second thing we've done is imply that an IIA system would smooth away and we would be more
comfortable with equal degree of environmental protection is met. That's the other way. The third way is more draconian. Says we'll deny the variance. But often we've been at this point where we said a cross continuence.
>> George, >> I just again they're minimum standards. They're not everything that meets the minimum is okay. >> And the only time he can say that the only time
>> because there's a variance request. >> Yes. I'd also like to note that um even if we were not to propose the addition, almost every one of these variances would also be required if we wanted to
do this without any sort of expansion. >> About the location of the tanks, >> it would still need a variance. Since to be honest, if we put it over there, it would be deeper than the required um D depth and I'd have we'd have to ask for
a variance on depth to tank. >> And >> yes, George, >> excuse me. Uh, aren't they required with the asking for the variance to uh have the plan, have the u even if they're not
going to put it in to have space for the fair. >> Exactly. Yes. So saying that it's already on the plan that it can be done. It's not like we're requesting something that can't be done. It's already in the plan, right? >> How to do it? Well, there's a place on
the plan to show where it can be installed. That's a far cry from us um actually designing >> installing it. >> It's not only >> if it doesn't meet that standard, >> let him finish. >> It's it's it's obviously more design
work. We'd have to uh figure everything out to actually put it in. Um and then obviously running running all the uh other utilities to it. So, it's it's it's not just it sounds like it's just, oh, Chuck, go back to your office and sketch it in,
but it's it's a heavy lift on our part and then obviously it's a heavy lift on the uh client and it's a >> I didn't mean to imply that it wasn't, but what I'm saying is the if the meaning of our regulation is that you can just draw the box, but it doesn't
have to be able to actually be done, then it's kind of pointless. >> No, no, it's your regulation. >> That's your regulation. We do that all all the time. All repairs show that. Every repair shows this. >> What I'm saying is if that's if showing
a drawing that can't be built fulfills our regulation, then it's not a very useful regulation. >> No, our regulation says that uh that there has to be area reserved for it. Not necessarily in those circumstances,
not necessarily that the full design has to be performed. >> He's correct. The re the reason why you did that is there are people that will repair their septic systems all the time in a nitrogen sensitive area that'll get a letter 10 15 years from now and 5 years from now that you need to put the IIA and we want to make sure that you
had sufficient pitch and room to add the IIA so you weren't changing the leech field and this would have fit that reason is that if we don't sue a C coast show us and everybody on COS has to put the IIA that you that they're not reconfiguring the leech field and everything that that's set. That's the only reason why in the regulation that
you revised a year or two ago that's in there. >> Well, I think my motion went without a second. So, >> it went without a second. That's correct. >> Motion to continue to what's our next meeting? >> 22 second
>> to June. Like to just add on to what Chuck said, if we weren't doing anything, because we're really not expanding outside of the footprint at all, except for just the addition over the gravel to the driveway. If we weren't to do anything, we would still have to upgrade the system, and it's a five- bedroomedroom. So, like he had said, we'd have to be
like this. So, I just don't know what else there is to do. I guess like we this is basically what we have to do for the design. So, I feel stuck as to what else would we do. Um, so I don't know what is requiring it to be continued in a way
because this is basically what we have to do even if I don't do anything to the home. It's it's a cesspool essentially. It's been our family home. It's been in our family for years. Um, and so it it needs some updates because right now it's it's not good for the environment what's there now.
>> Um, but I guess if there's any input on that because I don't know if there's anything. >> Does the board want to provide any guidance? beyond the discussion that we've already had. I mean, for example, are we okay with the variance for the
location of the tanks or would we are there additional guidance that the board would like? There is a motion in a second. So to continue this >> more concerned about the SAS than the tanks
>> and I guess I'm not totally clear and I I would have to go look at our regulations on whether or not you're meeting the local regulation on the SAS. >> Yeah. >> But um but there's nothing you can do about that. It's as far back as it can
be, I think, >> unless we gave a variance to the lot line on the SAS to get it farther away from the uh from the estuary. >> Yeah. And conservation had taken a look and they said everything looked good on their end. And just to talk to you guys
first >> and it's, you know, I think totally agree with everything you just said. It's just that it's this particular estuary is in bad shape and it's it's this kind of system right on the water is the kind that would have the most
impact if it were mitigated. >> So that's all >> understandable. >> Yeah. >> Well, we have a motion and a second to continue. >> We don't have a second. >> I second. >> Yeah. But we still >> we talked at the same time so you didn't hear it.
>> But sorry Kevin seconded. >> Yeah. >> Um are there do you have any more comments? >> No, I think I pretty much have >> covered it. >> Uh is it that's it would be to the board if you want to talk chat with him then
you guys can chat. >> Looking looking at the diagram question for the board. >> You'll have to go to the I'm sorry you'll have to go to the microphone. I too apologize, but >> I realize you guys depend on your engineers to do most of the work,
but you assume everything is accurate. Take a look at the plan and tell me how wide the street in front of the house is. >> We This is stamped by an engineer. It's and so the width of the road is what the
engineer has certified. >> Well, it guess what? It's not what it's not as certified. I went out there and measured it this afternoon. It's 20 ft. It's >> no >> what which if I may. >> Yes. >> Road layout by by survey is nothing to
do with the width of the road. The width of the road is not the actual width of the roadway. So each there might be I don't I don't have it for I just folded it up. A lot of roadways are 40 feet but it might be 28 feet of pavement. >> So So I'm saying the lot lines are generally >> curb to curb.
>> Yeah. That wouldn't be a lot. That wouldn't be the width. >> That wouldn't be the width of the road. The road would probably be anywhere between 3 to 5 feet onto each person's property is the actual road layout. >> Just generally just generally speaking that's >> Can you find me 20 feet? >> 20 feet.
>> Yeah. >> Well, I guess >> sorry. What's What's the relevance? >> What's the re question is accuracy? Looking looking at the plan. >> Okay. He's telling me that it's a 40 foot wide road >> and I go out and measured it and it's 20 ft wide.
>> So that's what I'm saying. That's a road. Sorry. Road layout. >> So the road layout is typically 40 ft. Where the pavement is on that road and how wide the pavement >> is. It's random as far as I can tell. This
this property was surveyed and presumably staked. >> Y um and this plot is to scale and so we do trust the engineers on that. Okay. >> They have stamped it and signed it and
um that is why they are engineers and sign it. >> Yeah. Very r just very rarely does the road actually meet the layout with the actual paved surface. So, oh yeah, there's >> that's why we require well land surveyor that's why >> that's why surveyors >> there. So,
um right. So, we have a motion and a second to continue until June 22nd. Um >> is there any other paperwork that you need for the continuence? Did you want floor plans or anything of that? >> Um would do we want floor plans or we okay with
what? That's I'm asking the board. So >> I'd just like an examination of whether the SAS distance can be improved. >> Okay. >> And there are also alternative SAS
designs as well like drip. >> Correct. >> So >> and and the existing floor plans and the >> you would like you do >> they don't have Yeah. So >> they don't have to be engineering.
So, an existing and and a um and a in a proposed plan. >> My name is Jake Freri. I'm a professional land surveyor with Cen Islands Engineering. My understanding is that the existing and proposed floor plans were submitted as part of this application. >> I I personally I personally sent them.
>> Okay. Okay. Well, that would be Yeah, then >> Well, that would be staff. I'll I'll talk to Katie this year. >> Thank you. Then I'll um apologize. That's that's our fault. Um and um any we do we do recognize also just to let you guys know that we um you guys are
professional engineers and we do appreciate the work. >> I I apologize if they weren't put on there. I'll talk to staff who puts the packets together. >> Okay. A motion second to continue. All in favor? >> I Okay, we'll see you in a couple weeks.
Um I think Scott may be able to provide you some more guidance >> perhaps. When do you go before conservation? >> Um, that's a good question. >> I don't know when we continue to >> Okay. >> 22nd.
>> Staying up here because I have the next hearing as well. >> Oh, you also have the next one. Okay. >> I'm just holding your ground. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> All right. Um, let me put this to the side. Um, okay. Uh, let me make notes.
Continue to second. Um, uh, we have 18 Woodrift Lane IIIA technology approval request. No increase in flow. Um, yes, Chuck. >> Good evening. Chuck Roland, Capen Islands Engineering. I have uh a little
more straightforward project for you this evening. Um I'm representing the Buzzards Bay Coalition. Uh we are actually proposing two uh clean to systems for this property. Um the first one is the uh sixbedroom residence uh
which has a 1500galon tank leech field consisting of uh five 500gallon chambers which will remain. Uh so the clean two will be added to the system after the existing tank piping debox uh and will be replaced uh leading to the existing
leeching field. Uh since this area is not subject to vehicle loading, the nitro tank will be H10 rated and the debox will be H20. And if you don't mind, I'm going to flip ahead to the next. Here we are. Um the proposed system for the barn is a
totally new system which replaces the existing tank and leech pit. The existing tank and pit will be pumped out and removed per 310 CMR15. Um system will include uh two compartment tank uh 2000galon uh H20 nitro
debox and a leech field. All the components are located under the driveway and will be rated for H20 rating. Uh the leech field be uh prepped with the strip out to the C1 layer which consists of lomi sand and had a perk rate of less than five minutes an inch.
Uh this request is for uh using the IIA systems at the site and no variance is being requested. Additionally, this project is not uh required at this time as the new construction is defined under title five and website. Um rather the Buzzards Bay coalition feels that this
is uh the best interest of the Buzzards Bay and the surrounding tributaries. Um so uh we're not proposing any work except to put in the nitro systems. >> Yes. I just have an administrative
question. I thought that if all the if it's on one lot, it has to be one system. I keep hearing that and I'm and I don't care. I have to say I don't understand why that's true but I thought it was
>> it's on one lot the whole system has to comply with the recent regulation >> and so >> it has to be up to title five >> but it doesn't it doesn't have to be a single system >> not necessarily >> oh okay great that's fine I >> mis got confused with my Hway project
where I just tried to tie in my structure >> and we had a very spirited conversation about that one as well >> and so and we came back and proposed uh both structures to be tied into the IIA. So that's I can understand that confusion. >> Correct. >> Right. Okay.
>> Yep. >> Motion to approve the plan for 18 Woodruff. Finding that it's using best available net technology and the client doesn't really have to do it.
>> Second. Okay. Motion and second to approve the use of the IIA system for 18 Woodruff Lane finding that is the best available technology and not required. >> All in favor? >> I I >> Well, gentlemen, I always like a
spirited conversation. I had a good one tonight. So, I look forward to seeing you guys at the end of the month. >> Same. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. Um our >> well >> next
uh septic issue is the autocamp [clears throat] >> view of the system performance. >> Yeah, it looks like it's doing pretty well except for minor burp. Um I >> think I saw one after they pumped their
tanks they went to like 16 but it >> um where am I seeing >> I'm just trying to find I read it this >> I have I only have a summary table is there was there >> no was an email um George had requested this last week and I sent out an email
to Stantech the other George >> yeah operational >> and that's what they sent I just got what they sent it was like an email to us >> I mean this This is fine. I I mean I I'm not um given that their their total nitrogen the TN max they have so far is
only is 4.7. So right >> um that's >> um you know last year they averaged 3.9. >> So the 2024 was before all the repairs were completed. Is that they were right after >> while it was still
>> 245? Yeah I'm trying to remember. Yeah. Yeah. >> It was during that when they were coming down. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And the but the in-house measurements with the little kits are much more variable than >> lab tests which so there are some higher numbers for those. >> They're not they're not official
>> but the lab numbers look pretty good. And I was referring to the fifth uh bullet point down there. The Noxic tanks were pumped in May 26 which result in TIN measurement in organic nitrogen to
16 for the past two weeks. This should be recovering as soon as biomass recovers. >> That makes sense. >> Okay. >> And only one time did it exceed its design flow. >> And also the trend is good.
>> Yeah, it is. No, I mean >> it's it's it's decreasing in terms of average >> if they you know I'm I'm just I'm impressed for for last year. Um I mean it's 12 it's only 12 lab samples but still I mean >> right >> if they can keep it that's
>> five >> man I mean three is is what they should be >> that's as good as the wastewater treatment plan. >> Yeah. >> Really good. Yeah. Um, >> we probably should ask for another summary at the end of the summer just to
see how it's going. >> Yep. >> All right. >> So, I don't know. One day I was thinking, I wonder how that goes because of course we have approved
uh the same technology for those 40 houses, >> right? And I just want to make sure that it was working right. >> If if that those houses work as well as this one does, then >> yeah, >> it'd be really >> it'd be really nice. It's not 100%
removal. Well, it wouldn't be 100% removable anyway if it were >> right. >> What's total nitrogen rainfall these days? >> Gosh, I don't know. >> Probably a milligram, right? >> At least. I think it's at least a milligram.
>> Yeah. So, not that much worse. >> All right. Um, we have our next item. >> Irrigation. >> Associates Road irrigation well variance request. >> You can roll down 2G. >> Oh, yes.
>> Indeed. >> So, we've gone from uh From zero information to a full engineer. >> Yes. >> Well, Associates right. They're going to take him. They can have >> they can afford it.
>> All right, gentlemen. >> You're on your George Floyer, you're on your microphone. >> There we go. All right. Uh, good evening. For the record, my name is Jake Fricky. I'm professional land surveyor with Capen Islands Engineering. Tonight uh for your review is a plan for an
irrigation well on a property on Associates Road. This is number eight Associates Road at the intersection of Chapel Quite Road and Associates Road. And uh we are here tonight to review this because we are asking for relief from the minimum setback to this
property line uh which is 50 ft. And in this case we are showing a setback of 5T to Chabakquoite road and 12 feet to Associates Road. The rationale for this particular location is twofold. Uh one
is simply that uh installing an irrigation well in the uh uh so for reference purposes the house and basically all the development is above a coastal bank and below that bank the land form is much lower. the elevations
are uh 8 to 10 ft lower below that uh wall. And so we are we are proposing to put it up above the wall for two reasons. One is that we are trying to maximize the elevation to keep this well
up as high as it can be. the entire basically the entire parcel is in the flood zone but um but but it is much lower down below and in in order to reduce the potential for a 100redyear storm event flooding this well we're
putting it up higher and also in order to gain access to the lower portion of the lawn due to the location of the septic system on the left and uh and you can't come in that way. So you would have to come through a naturally
vegetated band and conservation is loathed to uh to go for that type of thing on the first pass. And so we are we're proposing it in a place where the work can be accomplished easily with a minimum disturbance to the naturally
existing vegetation and uh and also meets the setback regulations from the various existing septic systems on the lot and on the adjacent lot. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. >> I have a quick question. Um, there's
like you note there's a hydrant within I don't know, looks like 8 ft. >> Yes, >> you're good with that. There's I don't know where the I don't know where the uh >> the line the line is out in Chabquite Road. Um >> Oh, okay. So, it's just a lateral
>> and and there there's a lateral that comes into the hydrant. There's another lateral that comes in for the for the water meter pit which is further south. Um and >> Okay. We we believe that this is suitable. The the the driller does not have concerns about that at all.
>> Any comments from the board? I didn't get this one. I have two copies of a different >> Okay. So >> I see approximate location of septic system from tie card that shows a tank is inside the 50 ft. >> Where
>> is that right? >> What? >> Right here it says >> yes. >> So there's a septic tank within the 50 foot zone but not a >> le field. >> Not a leech field. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Oh, I see.
>> The pit is it's a it was a former cess Cool. It's It's right here. >> Oh, he's >> They did a a diversion maneuver to get to get it. So, it was a cess pit and then they went out and back and that's why
>> Sorry, I'm walked away from the way and that's why they uh that's why the arrangement is what it is there. >> Okay. And that's okay with our regulation. It's >> not the SAS. So, >> right. Okay.
This is definitely the best irrigation well plan we've ever had. >> Thank you. >> We've had some that were a lot harder to read. >> The bar is low though, Jake, so don't smile to me. [laughter] >> The bar is low. >> Yeah, the bar is low.
>> Scott Scott advised me to make sure that the plan was really nice. >> Yeah, [laughter] >> it's got color on it. I get a motion to approve the variances [laughter] for this uh well >> second. >> All right. Motion a second to approve
the variances for the irrigation well request for road. Uh any other comments? >> All in favor? >> I I >> Thank you, gentlemen. Have a good evening. >> Thank you. >> Um
do we want to continue with I'll give you a choice. Do we want to continue with Wells or do we want to go back to IIA system monitoring? >> I don't believe well IA system monitoring this time. So, >> okay. >> I saw a pretty busy agenda. I took a
little hiatus from putting together letters to >> uh owners, but we will probably start with draft letters to owners that are really very high on that like 60 and
above on their right performance. >> Okay. Do we >> No, I have a draft letter by next year. >> Okay. Scott, have we hit any other correspondents or comments from >> No. >> Okay. No, but I think I'm gonna if you like keep us on the agenda every week as you decide whether you want to talk to
or not. You might as well have a continue. >> We'll just That's fine. It's good for me to keep it on. >> Yeah. >> I think one of the things that just very briefly we could discuss is just to say that what we heard from the uh providers
was that often times when they request that a system be pumped and it's not pumped. uh they expressed some desire for us to be somewhat enforcement in that regard. So we set it up and said look if you make a recommendation
send an email uh and it would be just under that tagline recommendation. Uh, and then if that recommendation isn't met within the period, they could send an email referencing the same property and say not completed or
something like that that you could flag them all and say, "Okay, give us all a not completed or not adhered to kind of things because that would help us out, >> right?" >> And I think a couple of them said, you know, he's tell them to pump, they don't
pump. What are you going to do? Well, if they let us know, we recommend on this date they pump. We came back 3 months later, it wasn't pumped. No record. So, that will help us even find even lower apples on the tree.
>> Right. Yep. That's what I That's what the hope was from that discussion. >> So, that's all I had on that. I knew we had a pretty full agenda tonight. >> All right. Um well let's go let's come let's talk
about the well regulation process and then come back if we might I'm sorry I to the uh water superintendent um we um I'd also like to note um just as a quick note going ahead looking
ahead we're gonna um continue the discussion of the waiver form um until we get Amy back. Okay. Um and so >> and just on that you're all going to be getting from me some proposed things to actually think about in particular on
the form people use and I'm going to actually for >> the plastics. >> Yeah, for the plastics that for Scott then we could um >> we could actually have that for uh >> I may send it to you ahead of time. Just >> send if you can send it to me and I can
share it with the staff staff as well. Actually, can I talk to you when we're done and visit one? >> That would be very That would be very helpful. >> So, do you want a motion to take the well regulations? >> I'm going to Yeah. Can we take the W regulation out of order? >> I'll make a motion to take the well
regulations out of order. >> Okay. Second. >> All right. Motion second. Take the well regulations out of order. >> All in favor? >> I Is that right? >> Yeah. I It's just we have three new attendees here and if they're waiting for us to get to a particular item, I
don't want to >> No, we were just interested in here. You've never attended one before. >> Oh, [laughter] it's just what you're talking about. Isn't what we thought we were going to hear. >> It's a standing room only event as you can see. [laughter]
>> I thought there'd be a lot of people here, but obviously not >> only people that have to be. [laughter] What is this? >> Board of Health. This is a board of health. >> If you want the >> If you want the select board, they're meeting in the senior center these days. >> Oh, the senior center.
>> Yeah. Sometimes the >> restaurant up the street. [laughter] >> We want to hear about the bus depot. >> You're not in the right place. >> No, no. They the the board the the select board moved in January >> month as well. [laughter] >> Just so you know, it does get exciting
in here some [laughter] more exciting than this, right? >> Probably. >> No, we're we're winding down. Really? So, yeah. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Feel free to you don't have to wait for
an intermission or >> [laughter] >> Sorry to disappoint. >> We could probably find something to entertain you with, but >> you had a feeling. >> Nice. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for I was about to ask.
>> What's that? >> Could I leave women voters? You never know. >> Um Okay. Um >> uh well, current well regulations. Um so last time we discussed the possibility
of changing these regulations in order to empower the staff uh so that for for for most of these uh distance setback variation variances. >> I think the lot line one was where we
really focused on >> a minimum of 50 feet in unsuited areas. Yeah, if I may. >> Yes. >> Yeah. You also have a section that you have to just decommission any well that's affecting the abuter's ability to put in a septic system. Makes to me the
50 ft moot, >> right? Because the whole reason for the 50 ft was the spite well thing and affecting the neighbor's ability to develop. But you also have a section in there that say you can you have to decommission your irrigation well if you affect the abuter's ability to put in a septic. So you have it in there so you don't need the redundancy of 50. And I
thought 10 like a like a drinking water well would be a sufficient setback for an irrigation well. >> That was what my thought was >> which would be section three
>> as usual. No idea. >> 3B. Yes. >> Yeah. >> So it's it's particularly the minimum striking the minimum of 50 feet from a lot line and unsorted area. >> Make it 10. just want to make it 10. >> I think you should have some setback people. You know, just like a septic system, you have to have the ability to
get in and dig and you don't want to affect the neighbor's property to dig. That's why title >> sure if the survey the >> right >> received lot line is a little sloppy. >> Yep. >> Okay. Um this is uh this is a regulation
so we would require a hearing. >> Y >> um it can be brief and you just have to post it two weeks in advance, right? >> Yes. So, >> we only have free well drillers in all of Cape Cod, so it's pretty easy to let
them know. Um, and you know, there's also anything else you think you might want to change for that hearing as well. You know, that was my suggestion. I don't know if there's anything more um that you want added or removed from the existing. Well,
>> what what's the argument for not um providing the the ability for the health agent to to make these decisions? >> Well, I think they don't need to be codified in a regulation. So, my my me making the decision would be much like
you gave me the ability of the flow neutral bylaw referrals recently. >> Uhhuh. >> But the regulation still needs to reflect. You don't want me granting >> No, no, no. Yeah. Yeah. the reg. But >> yeah, >> I think I mentioned the idea of letting
the health agent make these decisions previously, but I I thought I got pushed back on that. Is that >> I mean, I just they seem pretty straightforward to me. >> I think where we there are a couple occasions where we're thinking about
people just banging wells in down like a Marav Vista and spraying holes. >> Yes, you don't want that. >> Totally agree. I mean, >> you have that in. >> Yeah, I am concerned about these things, but we don't have >> Well, that was the 50 ft from the W lot
line simply because we we kind of felt that nobody be putting wells in down there at 50. You couldn't get 50 ft from >> Yeah. So, I mean, I think I think there does having these having a couple other extra
sets of eyes and and Scott's got, you know, like on some of the more complicated ones, thoughts about like do we really want uh irrigation wells in certain in certain locations where where we think about a plume or something like that.
Mhm. >> And that is the other one that came up when we had way back. We had the assumment area in that area in there. We were say people were putting down wells and bringing them up and there was no testing to them. So there were
aerosoling that who knew knew what they were doing. Were they marking the wells that these are nonp potable water? What sort of safeguards were in place that kids weren't walking up and turning the thing on and drinking from it?
>> Same with wastewater treatment plant too plume. >> I don't know how deep it goes, but it's right under my yard. So, I'm not going to put one in. >> Not that I ever water anything anyway. [laughter] >> I mean, okay. >> And the other thing to think about too is you have a finite amount of time
every month of year, right? And do you want to be doing that stuff or do you want to be doing more time on IIA or something? Like that's the other reason why I'm thinking let's layer off stuff that you really don't I don't think you really need personally like right that's that's you know >> used to get a ton more septics before
you had that sliding scale that you put in there with the 75 ft and 100 ft that took away a lot of you getting local upgrade approvals. You used to get four three or four local upgrade approvals every meeting which ate up your first hour and a half or hour. Yeah. And >> so I think the more you've got to
consider, the more you get time to look at other things that may be more important. >> So, all right. >> Do we are there any I mean we uh the 22nd is too soon for a hearing? >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> I think we should read them uh over make sure that that's the only change. I mean, I've looked at them enough to say, "Yeah, I think that's really the only thing that I'm concerned with." We have a lot in here about marking the wells,
irrigation, well, not for drinking. Uh, and we have some other far as requiring a permit, things like that. So, at least we'll know where they are. >> George, Dr. George, did you have any?
>> Uh, uh, no. No. Okay. So you'd like on the 22nd to have it on again. Everybody's going to took a look at it and then you go to a public hearing at some point after. That's fine with me. >> Yeah. >> And if anybody do you would you want us
to if we have some writing on it to send it to you ahead of time so you >> Sure. I'll give you the scribe because you signed. So, if anybody anybody wants to do anything other do anything other than strike that line in
um 3B um or change it from 50 ft to 10 ft. Um Senator Scott will collate them and look at them next time. >> Do we know how many uh drinking water wells we have in town? I mean that are private drinking water wells.
>> 200. That many really They add up. I mean, that's maybe a little less. The Schum uh still some on Courier Road. >> Yeah. >> Still some on Carrot Shop. And I had I made up a little map one time when somebody asked me that information. I did the best I can because
>> I have to go on GIS and look at an absence of a water account. >> Yeah. In order so by to look at whether that was >> subtract maybe, >> but two 100 I would say no less than 120 to 200. If there's water, are is there a requirement you have to connect to water
on the street? If there is water on the street, like a septic system and sewers. No, >> no, >> no. You're not required to hook the town water. We just had one on Sea Coast Shores, come to find out, had a well. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> How often?
>> That was an oddball. Um, so very rarely, um, do you find, but some people chose not to tie that up? a lot of Sorry. >> How did you find it out? >> Well, this one >> the engineer messed up. Um, so the
engineer stated town water and come to find out when they did the title five there wasn't town water. Um, there was one person there was um some people who especially Woy does have a fair amount of wells here and there. There's some streets that don't have town water like there's a section of carrot shop, there's a section of uh when you go down
Red Brook Road, go down Red Brook Road, there's some wells still left the tox um >> okay >> you know so there are you know when they add up slowly but surely as you piper >> so for example in sec shores how often do they have to have the water >> well they should
>> they don't we could require it if it's a known area contamination. >> Yeah and that's in the regulation. Yes, you could do that with definitely at transfers of title they get tested. Um they're not generally tested. >> Most people do it on average maybe yearly or every three to four years.
>> Well, I would just think on seco shore first it should be done in August or early September not in >> that he was healthier >> March or April but requiring that to be tested >> your regulation could require it if you'd like. Now the thing is is
>> how would you put a a quantification on who that would apply to as opposed to just everybody >> generally the regulation as it stated says in an area of known or suspected >> right >> which was originally
>> so I mean you could declare it at a meeting that that is an area and then any wells in those area you could mail out to people and have them do it. Sec code shores. I cannot imagine that person >> couldn't really grow some serious >> Yes.
>> vegetables with that water. >> Well, it depends on >> It's really nitrates. It's nitrates. >> It's nitrates that you worry about. I mean, >> well, there's fecal contamination. >> All about nitrates. I get more looking at a hot dog
>> or a bag of spinach. It's the other stuff. >> Yeah. It's the fecal contamination I'm worried about. We don't see it too often. >> People throw down their Yes. >> Yeah. >> Sodium is generally sodium. I would say
>> personal care products and fungicides and >> Yes. Uh so >> uh how do we >> So how do we make this straightforward and and rational? >> Yep. You see all all people with a drinking water well have to test their
water annually. That's it. All you can't you're not gonna be able to specify if you live here here unless you want to say 300 feet from the water but then again each water body is different they don't have the high >> I don't think caulifform is going to be the issue with colifform is it's going to be nitrates is going to be your issue
sodium is high in just about every >> but even if you found a high nitrate you I mean the portable water standards are for public water supplies there's no regulation for private water >> no
>> so unless The only private wells private are those that that are regulated. If you're serving the public in any way, shape or form people or >> something well people can do what they want to themselves. >> Yeah. Um >> and if there's no access >> Okay. I I it just seems like a public
health issue to me, but I'm happy to let things be as they've been. I I guess as >> I think I think in this case >> okay >> it's it's probably better to be just slightly lighter on the regulations. >> That's fine. I I'm happy. I'm okay with
that. >> It gets into what somebody does. >> Yeah. >> By their choice. >> Yeah, it's fine. It's fine. If you could just give me a list in case I visit them. I [laughter] want to know. I always look at like chapter two of the
state santory code is for all places of habitation within the commonwealth but we don't go into everybody's house and you know you might see somebody from the street you'd say man that house has got to be a terrific
wreck but we don't go into those >> houses I'm start renting them >> y and we have them at earrings here. >> All right, get them corrected. >> Um, Zikos Shores is weird. I'm sorry,
just looking at it. >> There are lots There are actually lots that have a water service, but no house. >> No, it means that they have an account. >> Account. >> They preet the account. Yeah. >> So, anyway, okay, let's uh in the interest of time, let's keep moving a
little bit. Um, so we have a correspondence from the water superintendent. >> Oh, yeah. I don't think >> in response to our queries. >> So, um, I'm going to go through them. We can toss these points um,
>> and decide what we really want to do. Um, so we requested information on the lead letter followup that particularly um, >> uh, George T. Um >> I I sort of un I don't clearly
understand his response. Um there are 13,000 homes initially that were unknown. Um and I can't tell whether or not they
um they still have 13,000 homes. No, I don't think so. The way I read it, they they basically eliminated they they believe we have none with lead. >> Well, we recently received permission to
perform a statistical analysis in which we need to identify approximately 320 water service line materials, >> right? So, so that would imply that they have far more than 320 that they don't know. >> That's what how that implies to me. I
think what I could be wrong, but with the way I I read it, I just reread it, was they they looked at what the materials look like based on that survey and eliminated the vast majority of those 13,000. Then they went and looked
at a few and decided that we have only a few iron and mostly copper or polyethylene. And then I don't understand that 325 materials or whatever it is, but maybe there are certain materials that it's
not clear whether they're going to leech lead or not. >> I don't know. That's the way I read it. >> Well, right. But this is the problem. It's not it's not clear. And so these are question. This is a question we submitted to the water superintendent. >> And the answer that we got to me don't
understand. >> We would I would like to check >> if you were here. If you were here, you could ask him. >> Yeah. Okay. So that's so that's >> point number one. We're still uncertain as to what our number status is. >> Um drinking water protection status of
the monitoring wells. Um um in terms of the monitoring well near the high school. I did actually go reread the the um reread the water supply protection plan
and it does say that the DP only required those to be monitored for 2 years following the 1988 removal of the uh the the the two 13,000galon fuel oil tanks. So that does make sense that
there is not um additional monitoring of that. Um there are um on the plan there are a number of other monitoring wells um and
uh and and um in around Long Pond and I'm not completely certain why um those are not being monitored >> occasionally. Anyhow, >> the high school ones,
>> not the [clears throat] high school, there's additional monitoring wells because so for example um where there's self storageages or the sun storage is out on the east side of Gford. >> Um there was uh several junkyards. >> Yeah.
>> Um and um although there were not monitoring wells continued there, their moning walls are actually on the west on the west side of Gford Street. >> Okay. and at least noted on the plan. And >> yeah,
>> um although he doesn't say that he's not aware of them being monitored, >> I just it would be great to chat with him a little bit about that. >> Um there were recommendations in the plan that there be continued occasional
sampling of some of the other those other wells. Um I do note that now you know, the big chunk of zone B is is um is conserved by actions of town
meeting. Um um the we we asked about cyanobacterial blooms. Um and um
okay so first of all the the drink the the uh apparently the management plan does not need to be updated until 2030 >> 2030. >> Yeah. So that that would be why we haven't heard from them about it. >> So um >> which is
seems like the state ought to be checking closer than that. I guess the D feels that the protection plan as outlined is was adequate. Now look, I guess we you know in in some sense making sure that the protection plan is
implemented is not part of that, >> right? >> So they just skipped >> they skipped >> they skipped around in 2020. So it'll be a 20 year instead of a 10y year. Um and
um we asked about implications of cyanobacteria blooms in the freshwater ponds given that there are whales adjacent to those ponds. Um and that long pond south could potentially have a
be subjected to that. those we would hope that the conservation protection on the surrounding land is sufficient to reduce the possibility of an incident. Um
I don't know whether or not the D require requires uh monitoring for cyano cyanotoxins. Yeah, it's a little bit of a >> a little um >> it's unclear to me.
>> Well, says we don't >> they don't monitor for cyano bacteria toxin toxins D requires us to monitor for a bunch of contaminants but I think what's not said in there is that none of
them are cyanobacteria contaminants. Right. So they just don't monitor. Yeah. >> Right. >> Um, >> and you know, if there's no regulation, then you don't, right?
>> Well, I don't know. I don't know if it's on the list of contaminants that should be monitored for or not. >> Should be I I don't know. >> He seems to be saying that they don't, but they monitor for a bunch of other contaminants.
>> But Right. But I'm it's again from this answer to me in any rate it's not clear. >> Right. >> We can speculate but it's really not clear. >> Is there a reason he didn't want to come to the board?
>> Mystifying mystifying to me. >> So this has been six months. We've been asking for the water superintendent to come and chat with us about some of these questions for six months now. So,
we could, and I have some approximate wording in mind, write to the town manager and copy the select board. Um, and more strongly request
that the water superintendent come to the board of health and >> her questions. Interest and and and have a conversation so that we can properly perform our
uh our role as the board of health in terms of protecting in addressing any potential uh concerns >> and as required in that >> and as required in the in the water
protection. >> Yeah. Remind me what is what does it say there? It says the board of health will be consulted on certain things. >> Um I had it up just a minute and I think that >> just an hour ago
>> there was also just a uh a length of time that every x something. >> Yeah, I think you're right. There was a regular sort of >> Yeah. implication that there should be a regular meeting and you talk about these things
>> every hundred years or so at a minimum. I mean, I I totally agree this is strange and it indicates some sort of a disconnect within town government and um I think I think I understand where that
disconnected occurred and it's not the water and superintendent. I think he was told that he didn't need to come and see us and um because of a perception within town management that this board has nothing
to do with drinking water and it's not in our purview and therefore we should not comment on it. We were told that by by town council. So um I think that's what's happened here. I don't know why the ongoing reticence
to actually speak physically with us. This letterw writing thing is pretty weird in the modern era. >> Um for somebody that's five miles down the road. But but um but I don't know, Jed, if you make a bigger issue of it
and call him before us, then we just should make sure that we have some really interesting and important things to talk with him about when we do that, right? I would suggest. >> So >> I mean the question would be you know given
uh >> I think the focus should be around the long long pond protection area plan. >> Yeah. you know, just sort of I mean D says, "Yeah, you're good till 2030, but a lot of stuff happens at a local
level." Like we already said, we had we approved a septic system, right? Up gradient, >> right? Yeah. >> And uh you know, I would like to hear a little bit more detail what water concerns would be there so that we could
dovetail with our requirements for them. I mean the whole thing with decllorination tablets, okay, >> how does that work, >> right? >> You know, does somebody monitor that? Is there some record of it? Is it kept on site?
How much should we be concerned about that? I mean certainly chloromines are >> didmethanes >> are going to be generated once you crank a lot of water with chlorine into the ground if it isn't decllorinated. So
>> I mean it does say the plan says implement communication procedures between the water department, board of health, planning board and building department to confirm that all new construction expansions and change and use projects in the zone of contribution are reviewed for potential wershed impacts. >> So
>> so that's pretty much like the why. >> No, just the zone of contribution is much larger than that. >> Yeah. The big question to me is when do we when should the red light go on? At what area? Show show me the map where
anything in this area here we should be consulting with both board of health and the water department >> because I mean even when I was thinking I saw that storage area cuz I'm old enough that it wasn't there when I was
driving by it every morning and then it showed up and I thought I wonder if there's special stuff for storage areas that requirements >> I'm sorry what storage here. >> The the storage >> sun storage. >> Sun storage >> next to
>> cuz what if somebody goes in there and stores a bunch of stuff they should be storing >> and it leaks or they just want to get rid of it. >> Yeah. >> So they go there, sign up a fake name, put the stuff in there and disappear. You know, is it in the writership?
Should we be concerned about it? Is there something we should be doing about it? It would be good just to bounce it off somebody who has a primary concern, their primary responsibility. >> The main reason I was thinking would be
just like like we had a chat with the uh septic >> Yeah. >> the IIA septic folks. I'm not trying to play gotcha. I don't I don't want I'm not I just it's it's actually talking
and having a line of communication that maybe everything is fine and that this is you know all these monitoring wells and whatever else is just a super abundance of caution because it's our primary drinking water supply and it's just you just be careful and from his
perspective if things are good >> and as long as we you know especially now that there's it's all conserved land immediately above having the water the water supply. Maybe it's not a big deal. But he did
note in here that they weren't talking about um they're they're talking about putting the issu well back online or at least conceptually putting it back online because presumably Long Pond is
under a lot of strain in the summer. That is something I think we would really want to pay close attention to. There's big blooms there. I don't know how deep anything is where they, you know, they may be far shallower than that well would be,
but >> short story is it would be nice to have a face-to-face conversation as opposed to trying to guess >> how to interpret this >> and and I think yeah, open line of communication. And I think you're right on the mark there. We just h we have to
have that. And uh we I think we already made a mistake because we didn't have that open line of communication. I I'm regretting that we approved the YMCA. >> I you know um but everybody
everywhere else in the system um failed to note that that was in the the zone B. The zone B was never part of the discussion. Um, and it this letter here notes that well we've protected all of zone B, but that's only because the
mistake was made in the first place and we almost made another one with the police station. So, um, would have been better to have more communication before any of that was ever proposed, including the police station. >> So, so
to draft a letter or write just plain write a letter. >> Yeah. um and provide a couple of dates for the water superintendent to come. Um does anybody have any preferences? I don't know how busy [clears throat] we
anticipate being on the 22nd. I could see if he's available. >> We prefer sooner rather than later. I mean, it may be your last meeting. >> That'll be my last meeting. Yeah, sounds good. Yeah, >> you'll have nothing to lose [laughter]
>> as I've demonstrated. Um, >> leave a like. >> And just to clarify since we're on the record, I don't regret having approved in any sense the YMCA there. I think it's a great thing, but we should have required that it connect to the sewer system, which it could have easily done.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> The pipe runs right by there. To my understanding, that would have been straightforward to do without having talked with with anyone further about it. >> Is this an irrevocable decision?
>> I think they're digging now. >> And we required a What kind of system is it? I'm forgetting. >> Nitro. >> Nitro. >> Nitro. >> Mostly going to be P probably. >> Yeah. Well, I think they >> always is >> the disinfection [laughter] if they're
chlorinating the pond. I mean, chlorinating the pool. >> I don't know if they're going to dispose of that through the septic system. >> No, but they'll have to dispose of it somewhere, >> right? Generally, >> if it's a big dry well or whatever,
>> did we require disinfection on the effluent from the So, it could have >> Well, I mean, the pond the pool better well be disinfected. No, I'm so sorry. I tell you about the septic system. >> I'm sorry. >> It's a little sketchy on doing that. I
mean, you require disinfection in a leech field that you're hoping the bacteria will finish your job. >> True. >> True. >> Unless it might not be better. >> Unless you're UV lighting it is. I mean, UV you're just killing what's going on
to it, but the natural biionic still take care of it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, yeah. I will make that request. Um, >> all right. We have >> Thanks for the response, but it would be nice to >> face to face.
>> Yeah. >> And didn't Amy make a list of the items in the uh water protection plan of the things where we were supposed to talk get reports.
>> Those are the questions that were on the minutes. Those are the questions that were on the minutes. I have a list just by search. >> Yeah, that's okay. Yeah. >> Um >> Yeah. >> Um >> water department management actions that
do include uh discussions >> with the board of health. >> Um >> presumably some of those things have happened in the past many years >> maybe. I mean I don't know if there are sewage discharge How many sewage discharges of 2,000
gallons per day or greater are in the water resource protection district for example? I think there's probably very few. >> The Y being one of them. >> The Y we have a development up in there too. >> Yeah. >> So um >> which is on a nitro system but combined
that's got to be over 2,000 gallons. >> Right. So, so there are a number of them and the the water department, it says the water department should continue to request that the board of health identify all sites within the water resource protections district with a sewer discharge of 2,000 gallons per day
or greater. System inspections conducted at these sites should be reviewed by the board of health to identify potential threats. Now, that's on us clearly, but >> system inspections. So, periodic inspections >> presumably. Okay.
>> Well, we're they're going to be monitored quarterly anyway. >> They're going to be monitored quarterly anyway and we should actually take a look at those >> like particularly and and so that is on us, but this is something the only reason is because I requested this plan, not because the water department asked
of the board any information. >> Right. >> Right. >> So, yeah. >> Um, okay. We will continue to push on this and I will perhaps not be quite so [clears throat] obnoxious with the letter, but I will
>> I think it's nice to hear from you written. We'd like to talk to you basically. >> Yeah. >> Um okay. >> Um >> I would um I would like to um continue the discussion on the waiver form. Um I
we did not vote on that. So could we please >> oh move to continue it >> until uh the next meeting on the 22nd. >> Okay. >> On which one? >> Until discussion of the plastic production until until we have at least until we have Amy. I'm presuming that
she'll be here on the 22nd. >> I don't know for certain but >> well we can continue to that if we have >> motion second to continue the plastic production regulation discussion until second. All in favor? >> I >> I
>> Okay. Um, we have future business. We've just put a few things on. Uh, we've continued a couple of things. There's anything else that anybody want to talk to? Oh, we do need uh we it would be great to try to identify
any future members. If anybody has any thoughts, >> um, you don't necessarily need to talk about it in open meeting. um you can communicate it to me perhaps and I will reach out. Um I did have a there was a
retirement that I know of that I might reach out to the individual throw them. >> That's a good thought. That's a good thought. Yeah. >> Um actually there have been several retirements that I know of. [laughter] So
>> Emily, anybody at USGS come to mind? >> I already asked somebody and they said no. Okay. So yes, >> a future item um the uh possible uh
>> oh >> ballot question [clears throat] in Massachusetts that is now uh being sought petitions are being gathered for the 12,500 or whatever the signatures necessary and
it is to uh have a statewide 5,000 square foot lot size that is not challengeable by towns or that is not restrictable by town zoning.
Um and uh I think this would be >> what's the motivation? Is it affordability? >> Yeah. >> Uh it's more housing. Yes. Uh and um uh there was a oddly enough a New York Times editorial board
position on this Massachusetts legislation. Yes. Yes. >> What was their position? >> Oh, that it absolutely ought to be done by you blue li blue state liberals up there. >> They said that but they did say blue state.
>> Sorry, we can talk about that. >> Let's talk about that. Let's talk about this next time. I will forward the uh editorial to people. It's got useful information public. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Um I uh >> Oh, that brought to mind um Oh, I there
is the also the question which we did informally vote informally acknowledge. um uh the [clears throat] creation of a septic or wastewater affordability working group that would have a member
of the board of health amongst several other it's a relatively small membership in order to keep it nimble. It would have a term limited it would be a limited not a not a continuing ongoing working group and uh
they want the response to um yes, they would want the response to um what what it would do within a within a few months. Um and so um it's not on our business and so we can't
>> I didn't know you wanted to know that. >> I didn't really think about it. >> Point any fingers. >> Well, they they're the select board is discussing it, I believe, tonight if I'm not mistaken. I I've requested the a copy of what they actually passed
last Monday. >> Okay. >> But I haven't gotten it yet. >> Okay. Um so I'm sorry. I should have put it on the agenda for us to discuss it. >> Well, they're going to request it, I assume, as some >> we have. We don't know what it what the it is yet. You may know. >> No, I don't.
>> We don't know. Um I don't actually know. >> Well, I put it on the We'll put a discussion let's put in a discussion item for next time. Yeah. Um, and I don't know is there anything else anybody wants? Nope. Okay,
then let's items for future business. Um, first minutes. Um, we can do the 22nd. That's trivial. >> Motion to pass minutes of the 22nd. >> Second >> motion and second to pass the minutes of
22nd. All in favor? I >> I >> I uh 27th >> Yep. specific >> I'm going to hold on to these usually just sort of put them to the side, but
>> uh any >> I had no problems with it, but >> I get a motion to accept the 27th minute. >> Sorry. Thank yep. Was I actually here? >> Was here on the 27th? >> On the >> You're absent, >> huh? >> Absent. >> Says you're absent. >> 27th.
>> 27th. >> Oh, okay. >> No, it says he's here. >> Says I was here on the 11th. >> Says you were here on the 27th. >> Maybe I was. I think I was. >> That was the >> Do you have a different version? >> So you you might be, Emil, you might be looking at the 11th. May 11th.
>> Oh, >> April 27th. I was probably here, but I was gone for most of that month. I just want to make sure before I vote on it. May 27 uh April 27th. >> Yeah. >> Are you looking at 427 or 511? >> 427. >> I have you list in my version. I have you listed as
>> Yeah, I was here. I was here. Sorry. I just wanted to make sure. >> So, you were present on the 27th. >> Yes. >> Apologize. >> Yes. >> No, you have it right. >> You have it right here. >> Yeah, you have it right on the 27th. You have me on there. >> April 27th.
>> You got it right on both of them. That's 51. >> Yeah, your tab. You must saved over it or something. Yeah, you saved over. Okay, >> it's okay. Copy. >> Sure. >> Send [snorts] you back your >> No, I approve those. >> Oh my god, Emily made a mistake. >> I arrived late at 4 51.
>> Do that all the time. [laughter] >> I don't remember that. >> Norfield arrived at >> I do remember him being late. >> I came in on fire. [laughter] >> I was just late. It's just traffic and I >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Said there's no freaking way I'm going to make it.
>> All right. So, >> motion and to >> a second. >> Okay. Motion and second to accept the minutes for April 27th as printed. >> All in favor? >> I >> I
>> and the May 11th Zoom meeting. >> Uh Kevin, you were not present. >> Correct. But we do have three members here so we can go through it. This was a really useful meeting. >> Yes, it was. >> I thought it was very well represented.
I didn't say any words. >> I this I read it and it sound looks great to me >> and I have to say I did not read it so I >> nor the last one actually.
>> Hell yeah. Do you want to spend a minute? [sighs and gasps] >> Sure. [laughter] >> We we should stay. >> We can see if we can finish in four minutes. How's that? >> I'm a slow reader.
>> Meet the rapidity rule. >> No, >> that' be great. >> Raphy rule is two hours, right? >> 8:00 is the referee. >> Oh, 8 o'clock is the rapity. >> Okay. >> So, we had four of them not present. four companies.
>> Yeah, they did. One of them, a couple of them did say that they were going to try to attend another meeting, but um did you hear >> the biggest one who owned all owns all the fast or sells them all? They just said, "Yeah, we'll take pretty much blew it up."
>> Really? Yep. >> Okay. Well, >> well, they're the ones their customers will be the ones getting the first letters because those are the worst ones out there. >> Y >> and as I said, you know, there if you
looked at the same technology, but this scenario, all of his are really good. I mean, he's got a few outliers, but most of them are below 19 and some below 10. and he gave reasons why he thought that was good.
>> Okay. >> He had a couple neat little strategies to make them work better. >> Yeah. >> And I thought, yeah, I think, you know, that makes sense. I've seen exactly what he was talking about. Recycle back to the first chamber. And
he said he goes in there, he breaks that up with a shovel each time. >> So instead of just leaving the mat there, so when it recycles, it actually gets >> mix. instead of just sitting on top of this >> sort of stub layer.
>> I mean, he had had suggestion on the design of the deboxes. He had suggestion on >> uh the not using speed levelers >> and making sure the tanks stayed. >> Be good to socialize those strategies.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. I wonder if we uh maybe maybe there's some summary we can >> Yeah, I I'll put one together. >> Yeah, >> because I thought it was really good, particularly his advice. >> Yeah.
>> And that's where it came about uh to the other guy was talking about it. Um Winston uh said, you know, we tell people to pump. They don't pump. But you know, uh, Billeri said, "I don't have that
problem. I tell him to pump and, you know, he's got a good relationship with them. They pump it." He says, "You want your system work well, you need to pump it. They'll pump it." The other guy said he's fighting them all the time. >> Right. George um George would you um
consider for the for mast tech to I mean these are like practical installation practical engineering installation things that are not directly related to the design in
>> yeah I've talked with the staff about it you know about the particularly construction stuff and >> you know I know some people just drop a tank and go and they don't early. I mean, how many times do you see a level straight level compacted,
>> you know, stone base? >> You do it on site because we demand it. But, you know, in the real world, oh, that's that's natural. Just bang it a few times at the, you know, with the bucket and >> and that day.
>> Yeah. >> Well, by law, it should be 6 in of stone. Mhm. >> It does. It does matter >> compacted base >> for the functionality because of the where the bioolids end up floating
>> potentially >> and the recycle if it's off level because that's just a little air lift pump and there's a little tube that comes back which is basically half inch PVC cut down the middle and it can warp.
It can do a lot of things but if you're really off level it doesn't go there. it just goes up and dribbles back. >> So, I mean, so we're talking about managing the existing systems like installs. We're hoping we're not going to install any more of these, right?
Unless they upgrade the >> It's optimizing the legacy systems. That's the That's the goal. >> Can you make them work any better than they are now? And like I said, I thought this numbers look good enough to say,
>> well, he's really attending to them. and this other company who sells the model. You look and you say, you know, you've only got like 30% of your systems making it, >> right? Yeah. >> So, either they just got a whole bunch
of people who don't flush the toilet that much and concentrate their waste or they just don't watch as as much. >> So, we will follow up. We'll get another round of sampling and um start sending letters. >> Yeah.
I scanned and >> looks great. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Motion to approve the minutes of May 11th. >> You can't vote. >> You stay quiet. >> Uh >> I'm sorry. What did you just say?
>> I motion to >> We needed >> Oh, second. Second. >> Motion second to approve the minutes as printed for May 11th, 206. All in favor? I >> I abstain
>> and one abstain. Okay. Our next meeting is the 22nd. >> Um come up with some names please. Um yeah I just a a future business item if we >> I would like to have a discussion about
how bedroom inspection reports are done and how we think about that. Uh I I just the reg the health the reg the health best choose its health regulations >> and if we want I I mean I just think
those aren't serving the public interest >> if somebody can just say any house and that if we don't go by the >> anyway let's here's the thing just go by whatever the assessor says is assessors
and if you've always had four you're taken by some towns will do that. They're yanking bedrooms based on the assessors. But I've had the assessor tell me, "Well, Trish, who was there forever, said don't go by that." >> I'm not saying what you're doing is wrong. I'm saying we ought to discuss it.
>> Yeah. It's just hard to figure out because you you're trying to go back in time. >> Let's let's hold this because it's not on the agenda. Let's hold this for uh a future meeting. You can add it um on the bed. We want something on the effect of what? Bedroom determination. >> Discussion on bedroom counselor.
discussion of general council determinations. Sounds good. >> And and I just an administrative question. If we were going to write something, would it have to be a regulation and that required public hearings and all that stuff or not? >> Yes. Okay.
>> If we're going to change the definition purpose of local regulation, >> yes, it would have to be a local reg because you define it in your local reg. Not well, but it's defined, >> right? >> Oh, it is. Okay. I'll have to find that. >> It's not under definitions. It's under a
section of the code for whatever reason. It was written a long time ago. >> Okay. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Motion second to adjurnn. All in favor? >> I >> I