Hey, who knows? >> Well, Microsoft All right, the time is now 6:34. Today is Wednesday, March 25th, 2026. Um, we will take a roll call to start the meeting. Jim Franklin is here. Megan
>> here. Kina >> here. >> Dot >> yes. >> Marilyn >> here >> and Brian Payne is absent. >> Please note that we are doing a hybrid meeting with in person and virtual attendance. If a member of the virtual public would like to make comments
during the public hearing, please use the raise a hand function on Zoom and you will be assigned a speaking time. If you are listening in via telephone dial in, press star 9 to raise your hand and then press star six to unmute yourself. This meeting is being recorded
by the local scene and a record of this meeting will be posted on the local scene website as soon as able. Anyone intending to make a audio or video recording of this meeting should notify the chair at this time. Hearing none, we have an announcement. The Kingston Conservation Commission is
seeking a new member. Commissioners are responsible for protecting the town's natural resources, including through enforcement of state and local wetland protection laws. These uh those interested should reach out to the conservation department by calling 781-58537
or emailing Matt Panella uh at uh m pne linkstonmass.gov. Signing documents. Uh Matt, we had a couple of things that need to be signed to walk us through. Yeah, we had a Horesy Whitten group invoice for the
peer review of 20 Marian Drive and Mass Association of Conservation Commissioners for fundamentals courses. >> Okay, any questions? All right, we'll move on to action items. We'll now open a discussion on conservation commission approval of the
purchase of 83 whopping road as conservation land. Matt. >> Yes. I think I've briefed the commission on this uh before and this was one of our CPC articles um for the purchase of Roger Carrera's last parcel um at 83
Whopping Road. It does contain our 10-ft access easement to Haway Preserve. Um, so it is something that has strategic value for wanting to get the parking for Hathaway Preserve to be visible from W whopping
road and also more accessible. Uh, right now you need to have pretty high ground clearance, go down a two-track road through the woods to get out to the power lines and a lot of people can't do that. Um, so it's think it's a way to get that property to be used by more of the public. It's a really good property.
Um, and it's it itself is just shy of four acres, has a mix of intact pine oak woodlands, um, an area just under an acre of like a transitional shrub habitat, and then the rest of it is agricultural cranberry bog, um, with
its, you know, roads and other just kind of grass areas around it. Um, I have a real estate offer that was in the commission's packets for review. I had
town council review it. He made changes to it. Um, I believe what I had shown you was a red line. We have the non- redline accepted version today for signature if the commission wants to go forward with pursuing the sale. Um, it would still need, you know, it still has
several moving parts. So obviously it needs town meeting approval from the CPC article. Um it does not need town meeting approval beyond the CPC article. Uh council confirmed that that is good enough to satisfy the town meeting requirement. Um but also funding. We will need more funding for it and we're
actively working on on that. So any questions or specifics that the commission wants to know? >> Open it up for discussion. Doesn't seem like there's any questions. Matt, what do you need from us? >> Um, a vote in support of the purchase
and then you can sign the as far as how you'd want to sign the the offer sheet. You could, you know, the vote could contain the authority for the chair to sign on behalf of the commission is probably the cleanest way to do that instead of everybody signing it. So,
>> okay. Perhaps do I hear a motion to um I guess two parts. Uh one to move forward with the purchase and sales agreement and two to have the chair sign on behalf of the commission or not. It's up to you. >> I'll make that motion >> with
>> with the um approving the agent the a you signing on >> and not technically a purchase and sales agreement yet. That would be step two. >> So what is it? >> This is a essentially an offer sheet. This is a uh this is a offer to purchase real estate. >> Okay. So
>> So it would be in favor of the offer sheet and then your signature. >> Second. >> Okay. So we have a motion to um sign as a commission the offer sheet and for
the chair person to sign on behalf of the the group. We have a second by Megan to um we'll take a a roll call. Kina >> I Marilyn >> I >> do Dot >> I >> Megan I
>> Jim's an I. So that passes unanimously. >> All right. Um do you have that >> sheet passed down? >> Do you want me to remove them? Um, >> do we want to just silence this another time with one?
>> Um, you can sign it. >> Where am I signing? Fire >> here. >> Yeah, he's got Just one page. >> Yep. >> All right. Moving on. Uh I will now open
a discussion on the Kingston Conservation Commission joining the Community Biodiversity Institute as an official partner. Matt, can you um walk us through? >> Yeah, sorry typo on that. It's initiative um community biodiversity initiative is something that was put
together um started by the Barnstable Land Trust um and it's it's something that we've been working or my you know I've been working with sort of from the start giving them guidance on their mission. So they had a you know I think
a lot of you know what priority habitat is um and you all know the vernal pool certification process. You've seen in Kingston that priority habitat has disappeared. um the state re >> works those maps every three years and they don't create any new priority
habitat in aggregate. It it stays from my understanding at the same amount and it gets kind of shifted around. Um whether or not that's 100% accurate or not, the way they go about their records is that you know priority habitat is based on observations. Observations time
out after 25 years. Um, so we've had situations in Kingston where a lot of priority habitat was taken away because observations likely of box turtles um aged out and the state does not go out and inspect these areas for new um, you
know, observations. So, it's really up to the public um, and in some cases private land owners. If it's, you know, somebody's private land, they're not necessarily going to go out and and record these things on their own. So this group had the idea of
training people, training volunteers to go out and solve two issues. One is there's a big difference between the number of potential vernal pools out there in terms of the actual GIS layer and the number of certified vernal pools. So in a lot of towns there had not been a lot of effort put into trying
to certify a lot of these. So they want to get people trained up to go certify vernal pools and look for rare species. And I provided guidance from day one just to try to guide towards um you know staying in line with natural heritage
best practices and and you know species safety and and things like that and they've come out with a really good uh good program there. Um and we had never signed on as an official partner. So he asked if if I could sign on or if we needed commission approval and I said if
at a minimum a way to tell the commission about the program and sort of what we're doing with them. So they're they're trying to get towns involved and groups involved in getting volunteers to go out and do these and essentially sign on to say that you're going to do at
least three a year. You got to try to get three vernal pools or three rare species records which is is pretty easy um lift for us. So we have a a whole partner pledge here with organization title signature and
all of that. So I think if there's no conversation on it, it would just be a motion in support of you know becoming a partner of the community biodiversity initiative and giving the chair the authority to sign. >> Just question. Sure. No, no dues, no
other expectations other than >> No, I mean I'm gonna keep working with them in an advisory capacity as is um and on a volunteer basis. This will be something that will fall a lot probably
on Georgiana in terms of um already running the volunteer stewardship program. It will just be sort of a wing of that looking for people who have the wherewithal and the drive to go out and do this sort of work. And um at a minimum we have interns every year and
you know it's it's good to get them out and do that kind of stuff too. So >> and and again Megan we have open space possibly participating. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Any other discussion
perhaps? So we hear a motion. >> So I will move that we approve our joining as an official partner to the community biodiversity initiative. You said >> institute >> it's >> no
>> to initiative. Oh, >> and that we will confirm that by having the chairman sign on our behalf. >> All right. So, we have a motion. Um, do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second by DOT. Um, we'll do
all in favor. All in favor say I. >> Opposed? >> Hearing none. passes 5 here. >> Yep. Yeah, we can pull up. All right, let's just finish up. Um, I will now open a discussion on whether
the conservation commission should allow deposition of dredge sediment from Forge Pond on conservationowned property on Silver Lake. Matt, >> this was discussed uh during the forge
pond fish passage NOI filing. Um but I thought it'd be more appropriate for the commission's portion of this for whether they approve of this or not to be put as a separate action item. Um so during during that hearing you know we heard
from the engineer and also from Jones River Wershed Association that they did not expect that they had sort of changed the plan and the plan was to try to avoid putting any sediment onto that parcel and that everything was going to be attempted to be put on the south side
of um or the southwest side of of Forge Pond. Um, but I think it would still be good to to vote on whether or not the commission would approve that in case it becomes necessary during >> during the work. Um, you know, and it
doesn't have to be something the commission votes on tonight. You can have questions. I can try to answer them or you can have questions that I then pass off to them and we continue this down the road. Um, but I don't see a problem with it. And you know, maybe I
haven't seen a a sense of scale to it or something. I just I don't see a situation where this could be detrimental um to the property from an ecological standpoint. I think everything that is placed there will be used in some
capacity by species um and likely create some form of vegetative diversity where where the stuff is placed. Um I think if it was a huge amount that it's you know a giant mound then that that might be a
a different concern but I don't I don't think that's the case given what I've seen of the crosssections where they're going to be dredging. It's not a huge amount of material that they're moving. >> Okay. And you you're not concerned about the composition of the material? I know I think somebody brought that up. No,
there was testing done um and the only area that had initially shown uh contamination was right up against the dam and the and that area was the intent at the time was to be dredged and uh trucked off site, but
since then there's been some sort of follow-up testing that that >> does not meet the level of contamination where it would need to be moved. So the material that would be placed onto that site from what I can tell from a logistical standpoint would
be the stuff that's closer to Silver Lake. You know, anything that's down near Forge Pond, it's too far away from that property. Basically, the way it works, you have the somebody's holding a tube in the water and then there's a big tube coming off the floating dredge going to the shore. >> So, you're not going to have that much
hose to be able to do it from down near the dam where there could be any contamination. And I think you know up upstream there's there's not likely to be anything at all and there was nothing that showed up in the testing. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Any discussion? >> All right. Um how do you guys want to deal with this? Is there any questions that we want to ask? Do we want to put some stipulations that are subject to his oversight? um
an approval on site just so that we have some kind of >> a monitor or something. >> I think that would be a good idea to say that, you know, with the approval of conservation agent, you know, on site, you know, something that something that gives me the
approval to shut it down. If it if I go there and go like, "Oh my god, this is not what this is supposed to be. You need to stop." Right. It gets >> larger than what we anticipate. Right. >> Yeah. >> Um are we ready to vote on this tonight or is this something that we just want
to wrap up with the uh >> anybody >> with the NOI when it comes? >> How do you want to handle? >> Okay. Okay. I think we can move on it. >> Yep. >> Move it tonight.
>> Okay. Um perhaps do we have a motion? Sure. I'll move that we will allow deposition of dredge sediment from Forge Pond on conservationowned property on Silver Lake with the approval of the conservation agent on site.
>> Is that restrictive enough? >> That cover it >> with oversight. Maybe add the word oversight in there. Oversight and approval. On-site approval. >> Yeah, I monitor oversight. whatever word. >> Yeah, I think that I think that covers it. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we have a motion. Do we
have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second from Megan. Um, all those in favor I >> opposed. Hearing none. Pass that 5. Thank you. >> Welcome. Didn't um authorize the chair. So, you
can either do that or I can pass it down. You can all sign it either way. >> Where are we signing? Everywhere. >> Print it. >> Print in. >> Oh yeah, in the Yes. Print here. Sign down the bottom. >> Do somebody want to do
>> you want another motion that we authorize you to sign? Okay. I move that we authorize the chairperson to sign on our behalf. >> All right. We have a motion. Second. Second. >> Second by Dot. All those in favor? I opposed. Hearing none. All right, we will move on to public
hearing section A, Forge Pond Fish Passage, Old Lake Street, notice of intent. I will now move. Uh, I will now continue a hearing for the notice of intent for the proposed
construction of a permanent fishway at the Forge Pond Dam under Old Lake Street with associated dredging to restore the channel and improve diadimous fish passage. The applicant has requested continuence to May 13. Do I
hear a motion? >> Make that motion. >> All right, Megan second. Second by Marilyn. All those in favor? I >> I >> opposed >> hearing none. Five was there uh to continue to May 13th. Section B, 20 Marian Drive, aka one
Royce Drive, map 75, lot 31-1. Request for amendment to orders of conditions. Uh, I will now continue a hearing for the request for amendment for the proposed installation of a sediment for bay and rain garden within the 200 foot
riverfront area of Smel Brook at one Royen Drive, formerly 20 Marian Drive. The applicant has requested continuence to April 22nd. Do I hear a motion? I'll move that we continue to April
22nd, but I think we need to um Well, I'll make the motion and then I have a comment after we get a second. >> Okay. Um do we have a motion? Do we hear a second? >> Second. >> Second. Open for discussion. >> So, I think we need to double check attendance for that night because I know a couple of us will probably not be
present due to school vacation and other commitments. >> Okay. Um what So, we have one meeting between. So on this one, um, and and this was partially at at my request
to, um, given that we've had some coordination with council to do on this one, but uh, council for the applicant said that he's not available on April 8th, so he suggested April 22nd. So, I would suggest that if the commission
feels they may have an issue with availability on that night, you're welcome to continue to the next meeting, which would be that May 13th. And if >> we have not able to do that, we could continue from that meeting to the next
if they needed. >> May 13th might be the more appropriate. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. I would say for those purposes, if we want the 15th, we have to vote no on this and then we can make or you can make a friendly amendment.
>> I would make a friendly amendment in the interest of time. >> Okay. >> To continue it to May 13th, Matt, you said? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we have an amendment. Um the second was Megan. >> I'll second. >> All right. And you'll accept that. So, we'll take a a a voice vote. All those
in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All those opposed, nay. >> All right. That carries 5 to zero for May uh 13 >> 13 May 13th >> 13th. That's how I said it right. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. April 13th.
>> No, May. >> No. May 13th. >> Sorry. May May 13th. Yes. Okay. Let's see. Section C 58 Shore Drive. Map 39, lot 5, notice of intent. We'll now
open a hearing for the notice of intent for the proposed construction of two permeable paver patios, one impervious stepping stone path, and one retaining wall within the 100t buffer zone to the
top of a coastal bank and other coastal resource areas at 58 Shore Drive. This applicant has requested a continuence to April 8th to a hair motion. >> I move that we continue this to April 8th. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second?
>> Second. >> Second by Megan. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose say nay. >> That carries five to zero. continue tape. All right. So, we will step back and
sorry. Yep. We'll step back to enforcement. Matt 51 Main Street um which was continued from an earlier date. Can you update us? Yes, I um recommended continuence for
51 Main Street. Uh we did a site visit. I think it was two days ago. Uh and viewed the site and I told the applicant that I was going to request continuence to have time to put together a solid
staff report for the commission. Uh, in the meantime, they said they were going to be reaching out to wetland scientists now that everything is all melted. So, I believe um I put the following meeting, I think I put
April 8th on for suggested continuence on this one. >> So, you don't need anything from us on this. This is just an update. Correct. >> Correct. >> Do we have any questions from that? >> All right. Uh how about 53R Main Street?
>> Um this is the one where uh their council contended that statute of limitations um had passed and I needed to confer with our council on that. Um and I am still in the middle of
that process. So, I let them know that I was recommending continuence to April 8th, but because it's the same council as uh Marian Drive, he said that he's not available and suggested April 22nd.
Um it is up to the commission how they want to handle that given the last one was pushed to May 13th. Do we want to attempt to consolidate for him to say accomodate meeting or
>> attendance? Are these kind of together anyways? >> So, should they both be moved? >> Yes and no. Um, I was questioning questioning that if like one is moved, should the other be on the same date, but really they are separate properties. >> Um, you know, they came to my attention the same way and that's sort of how I
told them I was going to handle it was I see issues on both property. I'm sending both notices of violation. Um, but I think the right way to handle it from a procedural standpoint is that the way that we've done it tonight is just have each one separate. So if they got separated under different nights, I
don't think there's an issue >> issue there. At least that way we get one thing >> done >> moving along, I guess. Yeah, >> let's open that up to discussion. Um, my feeling on that is that
what is said at one may be beneficial to the other. Um, so I think that because they're continuous that I I my personal preference would be to keep them together, but I don't know what the uh everybody else thinks is the
best path. So >> again, to have all that information together, I I think makes some sense. >> Is is that the consensus agreement? >> I agree. Did anyone feel differently?
>> Does council have anything to say about that? Not our council, the properties council. >> They haven't um suggested. I mean, essentially the council for 53R is saying that there is no enforcement issue for for his client. Um so
>> so that could make it short. >> There's certainly nothing wrong with keeping them on the same night. So, we could revote 51 to be on the same night as as 53R just to keep every because you're going to you may duplicate
some conversation. >> I don't think we voted on anything. I think it was just a general, you know, we'll see this on 48. Are we in agreement that we'll see them both on 513 instead? >> Sure. >> I missed it. There was no vote on on 51. >> No, because it's an enforcement update.
>> Okay. So again, in order to accommodate council to have the night, it'll all be gone. >> Yeah, I think it makes it probably makes the most sense. I mean, >> the way
council review has been going timing wise. >> Yeah. >> Um I have had initial feedback from them on this, but I need more. Um, and so if that process drags out and >> so pushing it out is >> and we're not ready on April 22nd
anyways, then it would probably be pretty annoying for him to have to come in for that that night and then I don't know, we don't have to consider things like that. But I think it makes there's nothing wrong with us pushing that to to the first meeting in May.
>> Do we have to make a motion or no? >> So, okay, go ahead. >> No. Do we have to make a motion? We don't >> you don't I think we typically do just >> okay >> there's certain things I don't know necessarily sometimes whether there's certain things because we're outside of a public hearing if you do or don't
>> technically have to vote on >> continuingly we don't have to do it but yeah >> do we have a motion perhaps >> make a motion to continue both >> 51 and 53r Main Street to May 13. All
right. So, Megan uh has put forth a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Marilyn. Uh all those in favor say I. >> Oppose. Hearing none, we will say 5 to zero in favor.
Um moving to 513 both 51 Main Street and 53 R Main Street. All right. Meeting minutes. Looks like we're going to uh review February 11th, 2026 meeting minutes.
>> So, I I just sent a couple of typos to Georgia. >> You got them, right? >> Okay. >> Getting pretty close to the present with these minutes. >> All right. Do we have um let's see just typos? >> Okay. Are you comfortable proving
otherwise? Yes. >> Uh absent was Kina. Uh so we will uh perhaps hear a motion to approve. >> Make a motion to approve February 11, 2026 meeting. >> All right. That motion by Megan. Do we
have a second by D? All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Zero. Abstain. >> Abstain. One for cleanup. Um so that um we approve the meetings um minutes for
February 11th, 2026 401. Um just a a question if we think that we may have a quorum issue for April 22nd. Should that be
discussed? Right. Now >> I know there was it's a different issue with like when you have an ongoing filing, right? >> Right. Where you know you may have an issue with with voting. Um, but
are you okay with keeping April 22nd open? >> I should be >> Do do you have the um potential >> or do we already have something on there? I didn't even check that. >> Yeah. Did you check?
>> Yeah, we do actually have >> Yeah, we have a couple of RCOC's. >> Mhm. >> And an RDA. Never mind. I retract my statement. >> So, you're good. >> I'm good. All right.
>> May I ask if there's an update on 44 rabbits? >> Cuz they have a deadline. >> Yeah, cuz they were supposed to be on for tonight. I thought >> they were supposed to be on >> their deadline is today, March 25th. >> We moved it from February 1st to March 25th. >> Okay. I will have an update for the next
meeting. They weren't told that they had to be here tonight. They were told >> No, I just They had a deadline. our our initial February 1st deadline was moved because of weather to today, >> right? >> And we had continued it to today. >> We did. >> That's what I wrote down.
>> Let me follow up on that. That may be a uh that may be a staff oversight. >> Okay. >> We'll have a follow-up and an update at the next meeting on that. >> All right. Um, should we open it up to the public to see if there's anybody online that had anything they wanted to speak with? Is
that >> I mean, we don't really have open forum. >> I have a uh >> there's somebody. >> Yeah. >> And we didn't have anything. >> Okay. All right. >> Um, I have a quick update that's not on the agenda for the commission. Um, and
I've I've kind of I think already briefed this a little bit, but we put a public hearing notice out for the April 8th meeting for the commission to discuss uh updating the regulations
KWPR. We've talked about that a lot. We even did a red line years ago that we never kind of followed through with. Um, but since we rewrote the bylaw, talk since then was to make sure that the regs match, take care of any of the nonsense that's in there or the typos or
links that don't connect. Um, but also just discuss if there are any needs in terms of things always evolve, right? And you always have new things that pop up. One of those things is alternative technology, septic systems. Um, it doesn't really speak to that anywhere in there. So, there's a lot of different
things I think that um can be looked at. My way of just trying to get this done um given that our office doesn't usually have time to dig into something like that and I don't want to be responsible for making a mistake on something that should be perfect when we're done with
it >> is to contract it out. So, my thought was start a public hearing. If anybody in the public wants to come discuss it, they're welcome to. Uh we can put up a couple of flyers places if we if we want to do that. Um otherwise I'll have information. I gave you all a copy of
KWP. I know you already have it, but I just wanted you to make sure you had a a print copy of the most updated one and you have some notes um on some things that I've been tracking that I know are either wrong or things that you know we might want to discuss. um as well as the
standard conditions um and some suggestions on standard conditions. I will provide more of this to you in the coming week or so um for the commission just to kind of absorb all that before the meeting. Then at the meeting, talk about everything. We'll take notes.
We'll come out of that meeting. if you want to continue it a few times, whatever, however long you need until we have marching orders from the commission, which is we're going to fix all the things that don't make sense and we're going to make these changes and
then I will um get a contract out for a consultant that I trust that we already work with on other things to update that document for us at that. So, we'll continue the the hearing down the road
until um the commission can vote on that and approve it at a hearing so that it's done the document back. >> Hopefully, going forward, we'll have, you know, the solid bylaw with the solid regulations and no more little tricky things that don't quite make sense. Um,
so I think it's a good opportunity just to get that done and not rely on me saying like, "Hey, I have the time to do this now." Cuz it's probably never going to happen. >> So, that's my be good to get that Solid. >> All right. Well, thank you for the update.
>> Question. >> Were you also going to bring up about the deadline of submittal of materials tonight? We were going to change it to >> We were going to discuss that and I didn't put it on the agenda. Yeah. I
talked about wanting to change the information receipt deadline. Um and and similarly to so the I talked about the standard conditions. The standard conditions aren't really in KWPR. So I don't know that we need to do that in a
public hearing or tie them to KWPR, but I think maybe it gives them more strength if we do. Um so rather than just my office change it or have the commission randomly vote on a couple of things, I think it makes sense to tie it to that. um with information receipt
that may be something we should have also in there but in the meantime the commission probably could just vote that I don't think there's anything wrong with >> I think it would be good to vote it but I agree with you I think it would be good to have it in enshrined as it were
in >> we'll put it on the next agenda that's that's my bad I did I brought that up and then didn't put it on the agenda yeah I think what I was saying was we have the three-week for new >> Mhm. business and then we've typically had a one week
>> in between and that doesn't work out terribly well with the 4-day work week. >> It doesn't give my office the time to get information to you and it doesn't give you enough time to review the information before the next >> meeting. So, I think >> I don't know if we want to change that to two weeks or if it should be
something like 10 days. I mean, two weeks, two weeks basically guarantees that it's a month for every continuence. >> Um, and the commission always has the
ability to wave those things. Um, as would I say my office does in some capacity as well. So, if there are things that are really easy lifts that aren't going to require a lot of review, I don't think it's a big deal to
>> make, you know, determination that they can submit it a week in advance and that's fine. >> Um, but in general, for things where there's a lot of information that's being changed, >> um, we basically have to review it the day we get it and get it to you the same day, which is which is tough. But that's
something I didn't really think about before is that discussion of like could it be could it be 10 days instead of two weeks? Does that serve the same purpose to basically say that we have to get it >> the Monday? >> Yes. >> The week before the meeting would
probably be okay. >> I I think it would be helpful to make it as specific because people will say, "Well, counting 10 days, 10 business days, 10 days, >> right? >> If you made it the Monday, that would be definitive." >> Yeah. Yeah. I'll just say you're I mean you're signing yourself up for this. I
mean because the commission can can continue anything that we want at any point during the discussion if we don't >> didn't have time to review and that's what we've been doing for a long time. So it doesn't really >> do anything but put the kind of the onus on you for a two-day turnaround
essentially. Right. I mean, as long as they get it to us by Monday, end of day, then we have all day Tuesday, all day Wednesday, all day Thursday to review those materials and get them get them to the commission. >> Mhm. >> Oh, I thought you were pushing it further back and just calling it that.
>> No, I'm saying so like let's say, you know, today's the today's 25th. >> Mhm. >> Our last meeting was on the 11th. So, typically it's one week, so that's the 18th. If we made it two weeks, they'd have to get it in the 25th, but they
wouldn't be able to get on until the April 8th meeting if we made it, you know, what would that be? No, I mean, yeah, you're right. It doesn't work on a
typical week. It would have to be, too. >> Well, you have until next meeting to think about it. >> Simple things can always be adjusted. Um I think and so a two week normal
um deadline is as as stringent as I think we need to be. If he has a little bit of wiggle room to say it's fine I can still get it in. >> It would be like a nine day >> and as long as we get it a week before
>> we don't care. Well I don't care. I but I do want time. >> I want time to to absorb it to review it. Yeah, the day of is never the thing. So, >> yeah, as the thing, it could work as a let's say a nine day where they have to
get it to meet by the Monday, but >> I don't know. Two weeks is better. Like you said, if you have the ability anyways, which you do to say, "Okay, we'll accept this." In certain situations, I think there's nothing wrong with >> I mean, we can if it's just a correction of of a setback line or something, just
a bad number, that's a one one and done. So >> yeah. All right, we'll put that on the next agenda and thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Any other items we want to discuss? >> All right, then we will do uh closing remarks. The next meeting will be held
April 8th, 2026 starting at 6:30 p.m. The time is now 7:15. Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? >> Make that motion. >> Megan, do a second by D. All those in favor? I >> I. >> All those opposed. Um say nay hearing
none. Motion motion is uh to adjurnn is is successful.