Good evening, town of Littleton. This is the board of health meeting for February 25th, 2026 at 700 p.m. This evening we have uh Mr. Matt Wson, Mr. Dan Kaine, and Mr. Kevin Baker, and your chair
Kevin Davis here at the meeting. It is 7:00. Our first thing up is the continued public hearing for Nine Woodland Drive. Francis is actually in the audience. Could somebody please promote Francis? And we will
now soon as Francis comes in, there's Francis. Um, and we have Francis in our meeting. Yay, Francis. Um, okay. So, it's our 7 o'clock continued public hearing for 9 Woodland Drive. Um, Francis, according
to your public hearing notes, uh, the contractor asked the homeowner to contact town staff to schedule a joint site visit uh, by assessor and board of health to confirm both total room count and bedrooms. No response received from either assessor to either assessor or
board of health. Second request made and still unanswered. Um, is that still the case? >> Yes. >> Okay. Then I recommend um that the board continue this meeting um till our next
available meeting unless somebody else has an objection about it. >> So moved. >> I have a motion. Uh do we have there's no answer? So we have no idea why we didn't get a response and why they weren't able to make this meeting.
>> Correct. So, do we automatically continue it to the next meeting or >> I'm recommending I'm recommending that we continue it to the next meeting to give them a chance. >> Okay. We we missed our last meeting, right?
So, it's been a month. To have no response to a month to something that they actually want just seems it see strikes me as odd. I have no idea who the people are involved. It's not a personal thing or anything. I'm just wondering if we I mean to effectively, you know, do we vote to say no and suddenly have to
start all over or do we >> continue it without assigned and say that >> I I said let's continue it to our next monthly at the end of the month meeting. That's what I said >> and then so I had Kevin Baker move on that. >> Correct. >> Right.
>> There's no second so I'm asking questions. >> No, no. Yes. And you're within your right. I'm not saying, but that's that's what my recommendation was. >> Okay. >> Um, so the reach out was to the homeowner. >> Did we also go through the contractor
since they may have a better chance of getting through to the homeowner than we might? >> I did both. >> Okay. No, I'm sure you did. I'm just closing the loop, making sure we tried. We have done our due diligence that if we've talked to the contractor who we talked to and reached out to the
homeowner and there's been no response. >> Okay. All second. >> Motion seconded. >> Okay. I will take a vote. Uh Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes to continue. >> Thank you. Matt Wson votes.
>> Matt Wson. Yes. Kevin Baker >> Kevin Baker votes yes >> and Kevin Davis the chair votes yes so we have continued that uh meeting for that one 710 okay so since it's not
7:10 quite yet so we don't want to start our next public hearing um let's go to some administrative matters meeting minutes uh let's see if we first question has everybody reviewed the meeting minutes
that are in the packet. Um, all that kind of good stuff. Yes. Shaking of heads. Yes. Kevin, you need to verbally say yes or no. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. So, then let's go ahead
and look at uh the packet and let's go to the first one. Oh my goodness. All right. So, the first one in the packet is the January 28th where we had Kevin Davis, Dan Kaine, and Kevin Baker
present. Three of us are here. A board of health members absent was uh Matt Wson. So, um are there any changes that we need to the January 28th meeting minutes? Okay. Hearing none. Could we have a motion to accept the
meeting? >> I'd like to make a motion to accept the meeting minutes as presented. >> Do I have a second? >> I'll second to uh for the January 28th, 226 meeting minutes.
>> Okay, we're going to take a vote, a roll call vote. Uh Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. Matt Wson. Matt >> Wson abstain. >> Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> And Kevin Davis votes yes. So those meeting minutes have been accepted.
Let's go to the next one. Since we're still at 705, uh we got the October 22nd, 2025 meeting minutes as presented in the packet. Has does anybody have any discussion points
or corrections they would like to make? Hearing none. I need a motion. >> I'll make a motion that we accept the minutes of October 22, 2025 as presented. >> I'll second. >> Motion and a second. Let's take a roll
call vote. Uh Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> Matt Wson. Now we yes. >> Kevin Baker >> Kevin Baker votes yes >> and Kevin Davis abstains. Okay. So the
22nd minutes are accepted. And our final meeting minutes are November 12th, 2025. Uh at the present of that meeting were Kevin Davis, Matt Wson, and Dan Kaine. Kevin Baker was absent.
Um, do we have any comments on the meeting or additions? >> Hearing none, I need a motion. >> I'll make a motion that we accept the minutes of November 12th, 2025 as presented. >> I have a motion.
I'll second. >> Uh, seconded. Yep. Heard you. I got it. I have a motion in a second. Let's take a roll call vote. Matt Wson. >> Matt Wson. Yes. >> Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker abstains. >> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kaine votes yes.
>> And Kevin Davis votes yes. Okay. So, all of our minutes have been completed. Yay. All right. Uh we are still two three minutes out uh from our next
public hearing. Um any uh we can go into uh correspondence any light correspondence that anybody has had that they would like to discuss. Very light knowing that we have uh something to talk about in two minutes.
Um, we just got notified today that we received a grant for $96,000 um for substance abuse related counseling and peer coaching. And then we also received a grant in the
partnership with uh Emerson Hospital for blood pressure awareness. So that'll be coming soon as well. >> Nice. Congratulations. >> Yeah. Seriously, nice job. >> Great work. Um, do we have plans for the
substance abuse counseling outreach? >> Yeah, something for the grant to get approved. So, >> yeah, I mean, it's pretty broad. We're going to narrow it down and then figure out the budget of itself, where the cost will go, where you submit that to them,
and then they approve on that as well. >> Oh, awesome. Awesome. That is great news and I'm really glad to hear it. Nice job. Is there a specific timeline for the statement of work that you have to put together or anything like that?
>> I I haven't even gotten the official notice yet. So once I get that a little bit better. >> Okay, cool. And then is it uh just one year? Is it two years, five years? >> Um it looks like it's a multi-year grant. You have the option to renew, but
they say it's not guaranteed. So >> Okay. All right. That is way cool. Awesome. And then the other grant you said was for blood pressure monitoring from Emerson. >> Yeah, it'll be a educational awareness campaign. >> Oh, okay. Cool. Perfect. Well,
congratulations on that. Okay. Well, it is now 7:10. We're going to do our public hearing for 21 Lakeshore Drive building permit variance request setbacks. Um, so why don't we bring in the engineer
and if anybody in the in the room wants to raise their hand, unless Francis already knows who or what whom the person is. We have Josh or Joan, Josh and >> Tim. >> Miss Hamlet is u here on behalf of the
Leister Tobacco Control Alliance. >> Okay. >> Um I'm not sure who Tim is. I've been talking to an architect called Chris Rogers regarding this property. >> Okay. Um if >> if if you're in the audience and you're a part of this public hearing, please
raise your hand so that we can promote you. >> What Matt said. >> Okay. Oh, we have some notes on this. So, the contractor submitted a building permit for an accessory building. The proposed building would contain a garage
space, a work area, and a partial basement. It would have heat, but no plumbing or water service. Title 5 requires a 10-ft setback for slabs and a 20ft setback for foundations. The partial basement foundation would be
within the 20 ft. Variance requested is the minimum is 15.211 minimum setback distances. Survey titled sketch of septic offset dated the 20 uh May 11th 2023 notes that the leeching field location is based on stake set by the
property owner with approximately 12 ft. Confirmation of leeching field location by se licensed septic installer or professional engineer was requested by staff. Applicants have preempt applied for deed restrictions already.
Okay. Well, do you want to walk us through what we've got in this lovely packet then? I don't know if we can without a representative of here. I'm not really sure. >> Okay. Unless we had unless it drove some
questions that we wanted to research before the next time I I wouldn't want to any discussion we have is going to be immediately filled with with assumptions I think. >> Sure. My whole thing is that uh we have worked really hard to maintain the setbacks from anything. Um and also if
we haven't been able to have the setbacks or foundations and things like that, we've asked to have a liner put in and all kinds of fun stuff. So I know that's kind of my thoughts on those things. Um Dan's kind of looking at it.
>> Yeah. So I'm looking at I'm looking at the drawings still. >> Yeah, me too. >> There's lots of drawings. >> Francis, are you saying under the staff notes? Are you saying that the leeching field is 12 ft away from the proposed
foundation? >> Yeah, approximately. >> Okay. But it hasn't been it hasn't been officially it hasn't been located by a licensed uh septic or surveyor or anything like that. >> Right. But that also would typically say
a 20 foot setback for that as well. >> Mhm. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And I like I said it's we've we've we've worked really hard to maintain those setbacks and things like that. And if you there's no other option
encroaching on those vent including rubber bladders and things like that. We did ask if um they'd be willing to remove the partial basement which would change the application but they said they really want to go forward with the basement because they need the storage.
Okay. And it's going to have no water. >> Correct. Yeah. >> And there's not a bathroom over there at all. >> No, just three basic spaces.
And this is falling under the ADU. How? >> It's not falling under the ADU. It It just if it looks like it, then it's questionable. >> Water service isn't that hard to finish over the line. So, it wouldn't take much. >> I see. I see. And then it's also within
the 20 foot boundary. That's the reason why. Okay. All right. I got it. >> That's the reason why. All right. I understand. >> I mean, they're not here. So, I would say they have to we have to know the plans of the main house because this would be effectively adding a room
to the property. Correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we'd have to do our typical room count based upon what the existing structure has. Yes. This is not a bedroom they're building, but it is a room. >> Mhm. I I think we did. I'm just not 100% sure
at this point. Um, it was a while ago, but I think that's why we talked about deed restriction. >> Yeah. With no heat and no water, um, it's a different situation. >> It has heat. >> It has heat, but no water. >> I see. >> I mean, it's the same as a finished
basement, right? >> Yeah. You're just doing it with another bu with a different >> just It's detached, but it's the same as as a room then. >> Yeah. It's the same conversation as a as a basement space. That's a very good That's very good. Okay.
>> At what point does it go from being a shed to being a room? I'm not trying to place I'm But it's like, okay, what's it's got electricity. It's got heat, >> but I can put a heater in my, you know, Reed's fairy shed in my backyard.
Obviously, this is much more finished. It's got fans. It's got walls. It's got It's named studio. So for like a porch, as soon as you have heat and insulation, it's a part of the house, right? >> Your threeseason porch is not a room if
it's not insulated and doesn't have heat. But heat plus insulation turns it into a room. So I assume it's insulated if they're putting heat into it, but it's attached. A porch is is attached to the house where this is an
out building. I I don't know. I'm just I'm asking the question cuz like I see it I see it as a room as well. >> Yeah. >> But again it's like where is that line between a heated shed and a room >> and an ADU is detached can can be
detached, right? And falls under the same guidelines. >> Mhm. Yes. But an ADU is a living space that has a definition of blah. Right. This doesn't fall into that definition. No, but I'm
just saying attachment is not I don't think attachment is a criteria that we typically look at whether it's attached or not. >> It's it's a room of the property. That's how I would interpret it. It'd be great to get some clarification before this is brought to the board again. Um just so
that we don't have to punt it down the road a second. >> Yeah. >> And I that would be good. And I also think uh the reason why it's coming to us again is because there's a basement. It's within the 20 foot of the leeching field or the tank.
>> So now now you're you're disturbing the soil. >> Yeah. Well, I understand. That's why they that's why it's on here for that variance request. I'm just saying let's not have it show up next time we look at the room count and then it's something wonky and we have to kick it again because we we shouldn't approve the variant request just for that piece if
we're also having concern. I know it mentioned the deed restriction so maybe that's already taken care of but I I don't I apologize. I don't remember this property. So >> I just when when they come to the next meeting, let's make sure we've got all the ducks in a row so we can actually discuss it if they're here and approve
it or deny it per that. >> Yeah. Okay. So go ahead, sir. Okay. digest so I can't obviously we are not kind of acting on this tonight but so make sure that whole piece that we have our answers um for when they do come before us that if if
this were granted I know in the past we've done okay you get you need imper imperous barriers on the outside of the foundation and those kind of things um I didn't see I'm looking back at Francis's
notes if there was any conversation of if this were to go through, what would be the mitigation? And I don't think I saw anything in their plan. It look they get great construction plans, but I didn't really see anything about what their mitigation or was there a
mitigation plan in in response to the variance request. We realize we're making we're doing something outside of the norm and to make this as compliant as possible, we are doing the following. I I mean they may have that
verbally, but I don't see it here. But again, it's what 15 pages of construction plans. I'm just not seeing that focused out. >> I think when we talk to them, they were going to do a poly barrier maybe. Um but I'll just make notes to get answers for
these for the next meeting. >> Yeah. Oh, and and if you guys look at it, it it looks like also um that it is connected by a elevated walkway,
a boardwalk. So, that's the other thing is that we got to make sure those pylons that they're using to support the boardwalk aren't also within that buffers or Yeah. Was
there we're having the whole conversation without them. They they don't actually know where the plan where the fields are. Was there an as built for this? >> There's not. The um engineer did do that plan by places, but
I was a little concerned that it's they use the homeowner stake marks as part of it. Yeah, I was going to say if we don't have an asbuilt and we don't have we're just going by it's about here is probably not adequate for that kind of
an offset. And then also putting in looks like pillars for a boardwalk and in some places over the leeching field is what I thought I saw. Again, there's so many pages it's hard to >> It's really close to the leeching code. I don't see it. If the gray area or that
tan area is the legion field, which I'm guessing that's what it is. Uh, it gets really close, but it's not there. >> Oh, it's not actually. You're right. Sorry. >> No, no, it's all good. But it's within the zone. So, it's not even the foundation. You also have that within the zone as well. So, it's not it's not
that the foundation's 12t away. It's that there's a pillar that's even closer. >> All right. All right. So, we have lots of good questions for uh the petition. >> Make a motion to continue. >> Motion on the table. Any discussion or a
second? >> I second that. >> We have a motion and a second for a continuence to the I would assume it's to the next meeting. Matt. >> Sure. Okay.
I'll take a roll call vote. Matt Wson. >> Matt Wson. Yes. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker, yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Kevin Davis, the chair, votes yes. So we are moving that to our next end of
the month meeting. Yay. All right. 7:15. We are over the limit for that. Awesome. Uh discussion on the tobacco regulation update. So let's go do that. Um,
>> promote Miss Hamlet. Are you taking care of that? And you are. Excellent. And there are two there was a couple of PDFs that were sent around and there were some notes that were sent around.
>> BN, can you hear me? >> We can hear you. Welcome to our meeting. Hello. How is everything in Littleton, Mass? Have you guys Oops. I'm sorry, boys. They heard your voices, so they're My my dogs are barking. I'm sorry. Um,
>> that's okay. >> So, um, are you guys all dug out in Littleton, Mass? >> Littleton, I think we got somewhere between 10 and 14 inches of snow, I think, is what people are generally saying. So, somewhere around that. >> Yeah, that's where >> where we were half off. And then we got
an about an inch and a half today, at least at my house. I don't know where everybody else got, but about an inch and a half. >> Yeah, >> we we got about three today. >> Whoa. >> I'm I'm an >> Ah, got it. Got it. I really feel I really feel for the people in the outer cape in southeastern Massachusetts right
now. Oh my goodness. >> Well, they they usually get a lot less than everybody else, so they really got they really got hammered. >> Yeah. And the power only goes in one direction from the Cape Cod Canal forward. So when you lost power back, you lost everything. >> Yeah.
>> That also sucks. >> Yeah. >> So I really feel for our our residents that are out, not Littleton residents, but Massachusetts residents that are out there. >> Yeah. It it's been a brutal brutal winter. We we had our Athal Border Health meeting earlier today and uh we had a warming shelter like consistently
open for the last several months where I think last year we only opened it maybe 3 days total. Um so it's been consistently open for the past month. Um but getting getting back to tobacco, I am on the agenda. Um >> you are
>> we g we gave um a draft regulation um that Francis got to the boards and he had asked me a couple of questions by email. So I didn't know Francis if you got my email today. I responded so you could forward it to the board members. >> I did earlier today. Yeah.
>> Okay. So, what I did is um I answered the questions as they were asked in the email and then I gave a checklist. Um this is the cover sheet of the draft rag. So, I highlighted everything in blue that you already have and then I just kind of where you could make
decisions. I made a few recommendations. So, I'm not sure where you start with this. Well, why don't we go ahead and um well, it's to the uh perview of the board that's members that are here tonight. Um I'll open it up to them to see if
there's a constant direction. Uh as far as the chair goes, I see an interactive discussion amongst people and we can walk through things and make sure that we have answer our questions that we answered. And if we have any other further questions on the highlights and things like that, uh we could quickly
ask that. Um, so why don't we go ahead and go through our questions and things like that. >> Okay. >> So the first question that was asked to me by Francis by email was page 10 retail density the maximum number of
permits. Um, you guys have a straight cap. We don't feel that you have the density issues or some of the issues regarding why you would need to limit retailers to do the restrictive retiring cap. So, we recommend that you stay at a straight cap. However, you guys have had
10 retailers for so long. Since you passed this rag, there's been no increase in your retailers, and it's a good thing because somehow in the signed document, the number is missing. So, you have a cap, but the number isn't there. So, it's just blank. So, you have 10.
You've consistently So, no harm, no foul. Um, I have no idea how that happened. I can't speak to how that happened. um you know either bad proofing or somebody doing the final draft and missed it in the proof. Um so what we
usually do is we recommend boards to if you're doing a straight cap, the goal isn't to stop business from coming in. It is a retail density strategy. It's to manage the business that's there. Um so we usually recommend that you do if you have 10, you do one or two more. Most
boards do two more. And that allows if something comes in unforeseen, like maybe we had a community that developed this digital way and it turned out to be a big shopping plaza and there was a market basket and a couple a convenience store and a paper store. They all wanted to sell tobacco and there was only one
permit and it was um you know two had to go on a waiting list. So it's just unforeseen things. Um, so we would recommend that you cap at 11 or 12 and then what happens then is if somebody comes and wants to, they go on a waiting list and wait for one to become
available. Um, so you could cap you could cap at 12. We don't have major problems in Littleton and we have pretty good compliance and we work really well with the retailers in Littleton. >> Okay. >> Um, so I I think you could could cap at 12.
>> Okay. So, uh, board, let's have a little quick discussion about that. Does anybody have any points or anything they'd like to talk about as far as the cap go? >> So, we can't we can't talk about um putting a cap on. That has to be reserved for um an advertised hearing. This would be
>> No, no. It's just it's just it's just discussion. I'm not saying we're voting or doing anything like that. All I'm just saying is is there any discussion surrounding that? >> Yeah. We have to tell you what to type into the document. >> Right. >> Right. Yes. So what the board can do is you can what we're doing is we're
reviewing the checklist because you're the process is we go over this checklist and you go over and decide what do you what do you want in the draft. A lot of boards leave everything in the draft and let the public hearing decide. Um you know but there's if you're not
interested in being more restrictive there's nobody going to come up to a hearing and say please do a retiring cap. You know people aren't going to come to the hearing. So, we usually when I go over the draft rag, you tell me what you'd like in it to present because the next step would be presenting it to
the public in a public hearing. And in the public hearing is where the board is discussing. So, you're not voting on on >> Yep. >> anything. You're just discussing what do you want in your draft to present to the public. >> Yep. Yep. Agreed.
>> Personally, I think 12 sounds fine. So, I wouldn't have any offense to that going into the draft. >> Yep. and and you can make that final decision when you vote on the reggg, but this is an actual error in your current rag that could be corrected with or without a hearing, but we might as well correct it and upgrade the whole thing
at once. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um and then the next next question in the draft that that um Francis presented was oral nicotine pouches whether to cut off at 6 milligram on
page 11. It is recommended in the state draft. This comes from MHAB, Mass Municipal Association, and Acasta Legal Teams. And the recommendation is for local boards to cut it off at 6 milligrams. We've seen pouches as high
as 34 milligrams. And the people can pop them like Tic Tacs and candy and have two or three pouches in their mouth at a time. Nicotine poisoning control calls have gone up 400% since pouches have hit the market. So um we we're very
concerned what's happening here in school and workplaces. People are using these pouches now for the nicotine and then they're going home and doing whether they vape, smoke, cigars, whatever their tobacco of the choice is. So there's actually a significant increase in nicotine pouches because
where workplace um takes away their ability to smoke in public and workplaces, the nicotine fix is being replaced by these pouches. So, you know, it really is a um thing. We're finding more and more schools and parents are reporting youth using them
even if they're not flavored just to kind of keep that nicotine um going. So, we do recommend six. We have multiple communities that have had no problem in um implementing the six milligram with with um compliance.
>> So, a quick question that I have um because I don't know this. What is the milligram size of the nicotine pouch? Uh, nicotine pouches that you can buy at a CVS or Walgreens or whatever. >> Um, there is a Walgreens and CVS's don't sell nicotine pouches because this is
not >> the patches the dermal patch. >> Oh, the patches. Oh, that I don't know. Um, I I don't know that because what that is is with the nicotine patch, it's a medical approved device and there's a a program that you start at a certain level and it's prescribed to you based
on how much you smoke. So, if you're a three-pack of smoke day, you're going to get this pack, two pack, one pack. So, it's very tailored and it's a tapering. They taper off. So, if you want me to get that information for you, I can. I was just doing it as a as a as a
comparison in my brain. Uh that's all that I was doing. Anybody else have anything about that or am I Go ahead, Matt. >> Oh, not not about us specifically. I have another question. >> Oh, okay. Before we go to that question, I just want to point out with nicotine patches, they come with medical
instructions, poison control numbers, um they come with all kinds of if you have this symptom, this symptom, stop immediately and call your doctor. So, um, it's it's it's a very controlled product. >> No, I understand. I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm accepting that that what it is. I was
just more interested in seeing what that level is that were there that has all those controls. That's all I was asking. >> Yep. >> And and then I guess um what's the standard amount of nicotine that is in a cigarette that people or a vape that people are ingesting? >> I I think it varies between three and
five, but but I I don't know. There's, you know, 80,000 products out there, but I think it uh um varies between three and five. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Does anybody else have any questions on that one?
>> Yes, Matt. >> So, um I'm not sure if our question was about whether we should do the 6 milligrams or not. In looking at the document, the way the language looks at, it looks like you either choose between the statement that says don't sell more
than 6 milligram per pouch or only allow them to be sold in adult only retail tobacco stores. And that doesn't feel like an eitheror choice for me. Is that am I reading it wrong or is there a reason not to have both of them combined
into one? Um, you could combine them into one, but an adult retail store, it would be you would do six or six in an adult retail store only. Um, we're not recommending that you limit them to only the adult retail stores. We're recommending allowing everybody to sell them and not
allowing any more than 6 milligram, but >> you're it would be 6 milligram for everybody or 6 milligram in an adult only store. So, the wording might be a little unclear. >> Okay. Yeah, because the six milligram per is not included in that second
phrasing. So it sounds like if you went that route, you would not put a limit. We could what you're saying, but your recommendation is to not limit it to adult only and just have the 6 milligram. >> Correct. >> Okay, that makes sense to me.
>> Okay. Um the the next question um was there was some confusion about what the cigar sales purpose was. Why single? Why bulk? wasn't sure if I could shed some light on that. And basically cigar pricing and blunt wrap restrictions are
um in direct relation to youth use youth. And a lot of these products were in towns that don't restrict the the single cigar to 250 or more plus tax or more or two pack or more being $5 or plus. You can get like the sing um two
packs three or four for 99. So, it's to stop kids from pulling lunch money, using their lunch money or or whatnot. And pricing um has been a big indicator in helping reduce youth use. So, we do strongly recommend that you
stay with the pricing. We worked with retailers for a long time to get them used to single cigar is 250 plus tax. Any pack of two or more is minimum $5 plus tax. Um in the model draft they do raise it to if because it's based on tax
index and they raised it to 280 and 530 or something like that. Um we work so hard with retailers that I over that 20 cents or 30 cents we didn't want to confuse retailers unless we were going up significantly higher. So we recommend that you leave it at 250 and five. Um,
and it, you know, it eliminates the lunch money purchases and whatnot. And then, um, the most local, all of our retailers, 40 44 of our alliance towns have both these in their regulations,
majority have it. Majority of MTCP funded boards that have a tobacco control person, such as myself, have cigar pricing. and I think we put them in Littleton's rags back in 2014. So, this has been a consistent policy that you've had in your regs for a long time
and the retailers are are um very consistent and used to it. So, we recommend keeping it as is. >> Okay. Any comment or discussion uh from the board?
And then the next one, I wasn't really sure. It says, "Which language to use for the flavored tobacco products prohibited on uh and content on page 11 and 12." Everything in yellow is state language, so you have to use the state language. And then there was a couple of
sections where they added three words um in mo in a couple of the paragraphs and that was like local and it was just to further clarify the intention of that state law. So, we we recommend just leaving leaving that whole section. Everything in yellow has to be in your
rag because it's already in the state law and we're already enforcing it in a separate document for you. Um, but those few green words are words that the cast legal team felt by incorporating them in it makes it clearer what the intention is of those flavored products.
So, I wasn't sure what the question was because when I looked at that, it's all yellow, which means it's there was just a couple of sections on that page. Um, and the words I can look it up for you right now. Um, >> so basically what you're saying is that this is specific language from a CMR
that says this has to be here. you, the your organization has said, "Hey, if we add these three key words into that list, it strengthens it, which is a local thing that we're allowed to do to make it better." So, >> okay, >> possess, hold, and keep. So, that those
words get repeated in green in three parts of that. So, we're because it is it's possess, hold, and keep. So that that's the um what they want you to add locally and it's it's standard.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. >> And then the last one was penalties option one or two. We highly recommend keeping them separate. And for your local components of your rag, which
would be like cigar pricing, the blunt wrap band, um you know, a few other minor things, we would um the nicotine pouch being more than 6 mg, we would highly recommend you keep that to your local fines, which you noncriminal fines
used to be 100, 200, 300. that's what you have in your current rag, but it's very standard now that everybody goes to a straight 300 on the local components for first offense, second offense, and third offense. Um, and that's entirely up to you if you want to just do 300 for all or you still want to tow them 100,
200, 300, but then if there's a sale to a minor or there's a flavored product or they have nicotine content higher than five, you have to use the state fines of a,000 to 5,000 and they're very separated in your rag and it's clear in your reg. as your agents, we're experts
at keeping tolling those and keeping them separate. Um, the goal isn't to be punitive. The goal is to educate the retailers, really work with them, get them on board with what their responsibilities are, and then if we find the violations, we're in the unfortunate situation that we have to
cite them. But public health, we want to come from a place of helping people come into compliance, not punitive and catching them in non-compliance. Now, while I say that, we do have retailers that have gotten to the third violation, and it is pretty punitive when you're getting a $5,000 by fine in a 30-day
permit suspension, but a board can do more than the state law. They never can do less than. >> Have we had any of our lenses get to the third level? >> No. Okay. We've had nobody with a $5,000
fine. >> Okay. >> We we've had a couple with a $1,000 fine, but they haven't come to the board because they chose to pay the fine since 2020. Um I I can't remember the last time we were in front of your board for an appeal. Um but we like I said,
Littleton is one of my higher compliant communities and we work really well. Um almost every re out of all the 10, I believe nine of your uh retailers have um stores in other communities that have these same regulations that Littleton
has. >> Okay. >> They have in another town. They own a store in another town. >> Sure. >> Uh let's go to the board members real quick to see if there's any discussion around those topics. Uh, one question I didn't include was
um, Pat Wayson had asked about educational institutions. >> Yeah. Um, that that's been in the rags since the '9s. No smoking in any education. Uh, no tobacco sales in any education. And that um includes like college college stores like Fitchburg
State became a tobaccof free um campus a long time ago. long long before the workplace um law, but they had a campus store that sold tobacco. So that means like if you have a convenience store, a little pizzeria or something on on a school grounds that there's no tobacco, no vending machines for cigarettes in
the teachers room in your schools, things like that. So, um it it's it's very common. It's been in the regs and it's not in the um it's it's in the um like Department of Education requirements, but it's not in
the um smokefree workplace law about in terms of selling it. It's just that you can't smoke on school properties. So now we're we're just reinforcing it in the local rag, but you guys have had that in your rag since at least 2008.
>> Yeah. And that's section R on page uh 12. currently >> um >> of what was sent out. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I I think on the cover sheet I put that you already had it in your current rag. >> Mhm. >> And and apologies, I don't remember why
I was interested in that one. Um in hindsight as you bring that up, I was interested in the healthc care category. Um >> got wrong. Yeah. simply because it kind of gave some examples but then
um perhaps didn't kind of fully cover it. I think I think it was it left it open to like what's what's a healthcare institution and what's allowed and what's not allowed. And I was curious if you had some >> suggestions on that because I think it calls out specifically um any retail
establishment that has a health care institution within it such as pharmacy, optitian, optometrist, drugstore. Um but what is a healthcare institution? That's in the >> um I thought I think there's a definition for it.
>> Yeah, >> I'm looking to see. Um, I'm in definitions right now. Uh, healthcare. Yeah, there's a definition on page five of what a healthcare
institution is. And there's an exemption in there because we have for example Fishburg and Limester has a BJ's on the line and they sell um they have uh glass glasses opthalmologists and then they have um
they sell cartons of cigarettes. So there is an exemption in there that would allow it in that circumstance. But if you look on page five, there is a definition of health care institution, an individual, partnership, association, corporation or trust or person and groups of persons who provide health
care services and employs healthcare providers subject to licensing under the chapter. And then it says or a retail establishment that sells pharmaceutical goods and services is subject to regulation by the board of registration of pharmacy. Healthcare institutions
include but are not limited to hospitals, clinics, health health centers,armacies, drugstores, doctor's offices, and dental offices. And then there's an exemption if a town wants it to for like a BJ's like situation.
>> So that's that green is it green language? Okay. So it would be it would be an exemption for an optitian optometric hearing or aiology because those are kind of popup things that are sometimes in like a Walmart or
>> but >> so that's that's the point of it having the key language of um one of those is not subject to regulation by the board of registration. It's really that sentence that protects us from it just being any sort of optometrist that
decides to sell tobacco. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. And it has to be in in a retail establishment. So it just can't be somebody opening up a, you know, renting out a space and now I'm going to sell cigarettes, too. They have to be in a retail where the the optometrist doesn't sell it. The
retailer that they're in is the one that's selling it. if you have that exemption, but we don't I mean, you know, you could just go and leave that exemption out so they can't have it. >> Okay, that's >> the exemption is really was really created because nobody on nobody
visualized the BJ situation that are all over Massachusetts and almost every BJ's that exists in Massachusetts is on a line between two towns. >> There's there's not a BJ that's wholly in one complete complete town. So, um
>> nice. >> Yeah. So, so I think that that they put that exemption in there to um you know in response to kind of some of the push back when this was a draft um to that. >> Okay.
>> Um and then and then just in terms of >> the state law the state law exempts the BJS, but it's optional for the board. You don't have to just because the state law does you you'd be doing more than if you don't want to exception, >> right? As a board, we can do that. >> Yeah. >> What were you going to say, Matt, real
quick? >> Uh, give me a sec. >> Okay, time's up. Um, sorry, just kidding. Um well I was what I was trying to remember is if there were any like kind of
um it calls out just I I think I think for me it's the the language that says anything that requires regulation. So where does that umbrella for healthcare institutions end and do we need to call anything out more specifically? Um I understand it
says like clinic. So that's where a chiropractor would fall right in a clinic. Do we want to call out more examples so that people understand is maybe it's not necessary? Does a massage therapist uh a licensed massage therapist fall into the category? Are
they included? Are they not included? I think it's just kind of that is it. >> I I think so. So it says healthcare institutions include but are not limited to. So I think that part of the language is being inclusive in things. So like an aesthetician is a separate license thing
that provides some sort of health care. So >> I'm not asking if it's included or not. I understand that it would be covered under a not limited but are not limited to. >> If you would like you add some specific examples to the include list just so people are clear on it. And then again,
I'm going back to the the it's it's the language that says provides healthcare services, employs healthcare providers subject to licensing under this chapter. That just seems so I wouldn't want somebody to have an argument of like, well, what's a health care service or health or a health care
provider subject to licensing? What licensing? So, is a massage therapist included? We can if you would like to add estheticians and massage therapists to be clear, we can. But it's it's not
right now. Most boards are using that under included but not limited to. >> I'm not asking if it's I'm not asking about the language being there. I'm saying does it automatically fall into the bucket right now based upon the language that's written in here?
>> Okay. >> Yes. But if you would like further clarification, we can list more and it is an important ask because I'll give an example of catam powder. I don't know if you guys are familiar with that. Everybody and their brother is selling that now and it's popping up
everywhere. CBD CBD is not legal to sell in Massachusetts as a food or a drink. But everybody from hairdressers to bowling alleys to uh every corner store, gas station, Mini Mart has CBD gummies. And it says right
in the state law that CBD cannot be in any edible form at all in the state of Massachusetts and everybody and their brother is selling it. So I I don't know. And it falls under the agricultural commission under the the um hemp law and they don't have an
enforcement department. So they're just asking us to kind of while you're in there, if you notice that they're selling it, can you kind of track a list for us? And eventually somebody's going to be doing something about it. So again, the these types of places you're mentioning could suddenly be like, "Hey, I think I'd like to sell nicotine
pouches or I might want to sell vape, you know. Um I'm not sure, but um but it is included right now. So if if an esthetician does open up, we could go under the not limited. You you need a your uh registration and a license. So
we're going you cannot sell tobacco here. You could deny them the tobacco permit. Okay. Okay. Thank you. As long as we're covered by >> Yeah. >> that list. >> All righty. >> Did Did anybody have any questions on
this list, the blue list? Cuz that's the cover sheet. >> Oh, the cover sheet. So, the thing that I want to make sure we cover are the smoking bars or whatever. That that was something that is new that we want to make sure is in the documents. Yep. So,
lots of times people used to do environmental tobacco smoke regulation, a separate regulation from the youth access rag. And um that was before the smokefree workplace law prohibited smoking everywhere. Uh so some people have old regs where they said no smoking bars way back then. Um so now because
there's really not a need to do a a secondhand smoke regulation above the state law because of the work smoke free workplace law unless you wanted to prohibit smoking in private clubs. um you can put this right in your um your your local
um regulation. So, this would not apply to a private club because they're exempt. It would apply to somebody trying to open up a cigar bar, hookah bar, any type of smoking bar. Okay.
Uh what's the board's opinion on that? one wants to comment about their opinion. >> It's a good thing to regulate when you don't have one. if you don't have one in the pipeline and you don't have one now. Um, smoking bars are very hard to enforce and they're very they can be
very troublesome because the law says a smoking bar you have to buy the products there and leave your product there. So, if nobody can open up a Parker Marbros or smoke anything that they have in their purse. So, if you buy um a cigar,
you buy a cigarette, you buy a vape pen, you have to finish it there or or leave it there. And if you actually let them take it in their purse and take it home, it's a violation of your smoking license. And you have to get a special smoking bar license through the Department of Revenue. And you have to
prove that the alcohol and anything else you might be serving in that bar is that you're making 51% of your profits off of your tobacco. So, lots of times if you get somebody in there that's not doing the right thing, it takes almost two years to go through do to close them
down if they turn out. And then usually your your local bars with regular liquor licenses get very upset because these smoking bars tend to just allow everybody in um and and that they're they're serving alcohol and not selling.
They compete with the bars because they're allowed to smoke and the bars aren't. And it's uh nearly impossible. And in the state of Massachusetts, there's only a couple smoking bars in Boston and a couple in Worcester. Um because it's just very hard. You really
have to be that specialized cigar bar or that specialized hookah bar um for it to be successful. >> Okay. So bored. >> I I'm confused. I don't I didn't think I had a question because I thought what
you said is based upon the statewide ban of workplace smoking that you can't have a smoking bar anyways. >> No, no, you can have you can have a a a smoking bar is allowed. Um, but because of the most people don't have environmental tobacco smoke regs because
the smoke-free workplace law bans smoking from in so many places cuz like back prior to 2005, people had um environmental tobacco smoke regulations where they restricted smoking in some work sites like restaurants and town
halls and things like that. You don't need to have that separate reg now because the the smoke-free law replaced that. But they do have an exemption that allows smoking bars. >> Ah, okay. In that case, >> we highly recommend >> and say no smoking bars. >> Yeah, we highly recommend you keep it in
your draft in in um you know, you know, you could have a public hearing where people come and give their input and you'll >> change your mind or like there's there's no commitment to anything other than put this in the draft and we'll get it out to the public and see what people think.
>> Yeah. Now, we hand deliver this to all your retailers and we have them sign that they receive it and we'll answer any questions on the draft that they have on a one-on-one visit in their store, but then you guys would post it wherever you post your public notices for any type of hearing that you have.
Um, and then we also recommend um we'll draft the hearing notice for you and we would recommend that like say you're going to book your hearing at your April meeting or your May meeting, your whatever your next meeting is, you would have an open written comment period so people could submit written testimony
prior to the meeting. Um, and they'd have to get it to you the morning of that meeting. Um, and >> we'll actually try to get it like a week ahead so that way we have time to read it cuz morning of is a little challenging. Well, well, at the hearing, you don't usually vote that day. You just say, "Thank you for coming. We're
going to take everything you say under advisement." And then you absorb what everybody says, and then in your next month's meeting is when you vote on it. Unless you're one of these boards who has nobody show up at all, then you can close the hear. If nobody submitted any input and nobody shows up at all, boards
can close the hearing and and vote on whatever they think is necessary because there's no no additional input. >> Right. Right. >> Yeah. >> Okay. No, we're going to be an open board and we'll make people that if they have something that they would like to say, they can say it. >> Right.
>> So, um All right. Is there any other things in the document that we've got uh sent out to us? Is there anything else you guys like to discuss? >> Um I does and also does somebody want to take point on this to get it through
some of the edits and things like that to work with Francis on getting through the edits? I I will edit it for you and give it to Francis unless Francis wants to do it. >> Okay. >> Would you like me to do this for you as your tobacco agent?
>> You got to twist my arm, I guess. >> Okay. So, um >> I'll call you tomorrow. >> Yeah. I mean, it's it's there's not going to be too much, but what I'll go through the document now and where it says city, town, city, town, I'll make sure that it says Littleton all through it. It's it's marked draft. Um, you
know, we we'll leave um everything in that was just discussed tonight. Um, the only thing you didn't discuss is no permit renewal if there's outstanding fines. That's the usual practice of boards. We're just asking you to put it in your local reggg. And then the other
one was no permit renewal for one year if there's three sales to a minor in a 12-month calendar year. What is the what is the current that's that's currently not in there at all? >> No, you have if there's three violations
in a 36-month period, there's >> three seven three seven and 30-day suspensions. But one of the most gregious violations is to sell to a minor. And in the history that I've been working with Littleton, no one has ever sold three times in 36 months, let alone
three times in a year. Um, so I don't think it's I mean, we're looking at Littleton. I I it's something that people are putting in the draft. Um I don't have a recommendation either way. Um I would be very surprised in my lifetime of tobacco control if we would see Littleton a Littleton store sell
three times in a one one year because we do it um if they sell to a minor once, they get reinspections and then if they sell a second time, they get three reinspections. And then if they we go in the database and they sell more than once, the federal program comes in and does extra inspections. the
state program comes in and does extra inspections. And I have never had any, you know, in all these years, we haven't had extra inspections in Littleton. So, I mean, it's one of these things that it's it's, you know, somebody could lose their they can't renew their license for 12 months if they have three in a year.
But if you have three sales to a minor in one year in Massachusetts under the state of emergency that the that's been in place for youth uh smoking and vaping, it I mean it's that's three in a three sales in in one year is a very
egregious record. You'd be you'd be on everybody the federal list, the state list, the do list, you'd be on the no list. Um so I I don't I think it's a hypothetical. I don't think we'd have that situation in Littleton. And then let's just say you had somebody have three in a year. They'd get a $1,000
fine and a 3-day suspension. Then they'd get a $2,000 fine and a 7-day suspension. And then they would get a $5,000 fine and a 30-day suspension. Um they still would get all three of those, but now they'd get one year off where
the next permit renewal they'd get a year off. So they're still going to get $8,000 in 38 days of suspension. But then this 41 days of suspension, >> but then this is but this is when it comes to renewal, they have to wait a
year. And so what happens then is that if somebody's on the wait list, they can get bumped. >> Yes. Yes. I mean, I I don't foresee it happening. So to put something that restrictive in there, it's it's a it's a coin toss. You can always leave the
language in your draft and make that decision at at the final. >> What's the board think? I mean, I certainly think if they have outstanding fines, they can't renew their license. That seems like a no-brainer. >> Mhm. >> Um,
>> what about the one year >> of a renewal with multiple concerning behaviors in the past? I think that comes down to a it that because that basically results in us a revocation of their license. Whether we revoke it today or we say you can't
renew it in three months, it has the same effect at the end of the day. Um so I'm just not sure which way to go with that. I mean if we're going to say you got three in 12 months, you can't renew. >> You have the authority to do that. What >> I was No, that's what I mean. But part
of me is I go if we're going to use it as a almost a passive, you've got three and 12 months. So that three months from now when it's time to renew, we're not going to allow you to renew. We may as well at number three go have that discussion of if do we do a passive revocation, you can't renew or
do we do an active revocation at number three going we know in 3 months you're not going to renew anyway because you've already met the non-renewable standard. I I guess it's just that matter of do we allow the regs to be a passive process to do it but then let them still function potentially for months and
months. I mean, depending on how how quick their their their errors have been, they could they could be going six or nine months, >> knowing that at the end of 9 months, they could, you know, they're not renewable, but they've already because they've already met that non-renewable standard. I I don't know. I'm not sure
what's better, letting the regs do it passively or >> we simply make that as, you know, our standard. I I don't know what's I don't know what's better. Part of me is like if you've met that standard then you just it's an automatic revocation. Um or the board can choose
not to take that route if someone has made meaningful differences in education and staffing and leadership and those kinds of pieces. But then by the passive part of the the regs they would still end up even if they do we've we've made horrible mistakes. We've done a th000%
of the things to make it right but we still can't renew anyway. So, I guess it just kind of leaves >> I don't know. I'm just I'm talking through I'm thinking out loud. I apologize. >> There's an appeal process, >> right? >> So, that could be that could be handled
through the appeal process. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um I actually I I was looking at the the draft we previously looked at. Um the this language is in there for the draft we were considering. Um, but it wasn't shaded any color. So, I think we didn't
um look at it. So, it means it was either I think it means either we thought it was already in there. And so, if you're saying it wasn't, then we we skipped over it. But, um, we hadn't discussed this particular point because I don't think it was colored >> shaded a certain color. >> Okay.
We did not have I don't think we had the fail to pay all fines ver uh version of it though. So, I would say we could add that one in there. I yeah par uh section E, paragraph six and seven which are referenced in those bolded number one
and two items are actually not linked appropriately in the text. If you actually go to section E, the one that we're actually viewing section E, paragraph six is titled tobacco product sales permit shall not be removed is pay all there. That's true. And then
paragraph seven, a tobacco sales permit when removed blah blah blah. Look at that. It's there. >> H >> Yeah, it's supposed to So, I think six is supposed to be green and it's not. >> Yeah,
I I So, in my opinion, I actually um mixed on uh the second one. The first one is a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned. >> Uh the second one I'm a little mixed on. Um I'd like some additional comments on that. So, we can have it in there as a
highlighted section to say, you know, maybe we will, maybe we won't. Um, it seems to be punitive to me. Um, but I get it. So, from a health perspective, I also understand if somebody is really doing
all these things wrong and they refuse to correct it. And I also see that as an appropriate response. So >> we do space out the the youth access inspection. So it was wouldn't be like they'd have three sales in January, Feb,
March, and now you're waiting to the following January to renew their permit, >> but we do space them out. >> Kevin Baker, any comments? No. Yeah. Okay.
All right. >> Um I think everything else has been discussed. >> Okay. We do have two people in the audience. I just want to see if they have any mo uh pointed information about that. If you do, you can raise your hand. Okay. Seeing none. All righty. Um,
so why don't we go ahead and you go in and uh dress it up, work with Francis, get that rolling, and then um uh if we have a draft uh as far as the mechanics go, um it's February, so we would have
another maybe a public hearing the end of March. Is that appropriate? And then a final public hearing the end of April. Is that the mechanics or do we need to do another one in there somewhere? >> Um, if you if I can get this draft ready and you give me the date of the March to
do, you want to set your March meeting for your public hearing, we can get it I can get everything out and ready. I can get it to Francis and he can, you know, proof the draft, make sure it's as discussed tonight. Um, and we could get the uh I can send him a draft hearing
notice and we could get that notice out and we can get it delivered. Make the copies. We'll make color copies for each retailer and we'll deliver it to each store. We could do that next. >> Okay. Do we want to put this before before we have the public hearing?
>> No, no. I'm sorry. The next meeting you guys will review the draft and then April do your public hearing. I'm sorry. The hearing hearing. So, I was going to say you only need one hearing. Okay. >> Okay. >> So, I'll come back the end of March and we'll plan on an end of April hearing. >> Okay. So,
>> I'm sorry that No, that's fine. with that draft. Uh, Francis, if we could also run it by town council as well. >> Sure. >> Can I ask who your town council is? >> Uh, Tom Harrington, Harrington Heap. >> Okay. We love Tom Harrington at Harrington and Heap. So, they're they're
very very familiar with um tobacco issues and they they represented um North Brbridge and a couple of our other towns. >> Okay. So, um All right. So, that'll be good. We'll get that reviewed. Um, anything
else that I'm forgetting board or Francis? Anybody else have any other discussions on this point? If not, I say we move on to our next item. >> Okay. Thank you, Miss >> Thank you, Jan. No problem. >> All right. Bye-bye.
All right. Yay us. Very happy about that. That makes me smile. Okay. Um it is now 8:10 and we are up to our ID decision support tool.
Yay. Okie dokie. Uh the good news is it looks like I found some uh better source for uh our CO 19 numbers now that we're kind of at the tail end of that season, but I don't have them in here yet. So um what we have is our vaccinations 18%
wastewater numbers remain pretty darn low. Um in the respiratory illness world, our flu status has dropped to low. The state also has a respiratory illness category which is more broad of
an umbrella and that's a moderate risk right now. Um I might add that in here. I'm going to take a look at what their definitions are for that thing. Uh and then RSV is the only kind of bummer one that that one is actually starting to increase again for um
>> New England. So that's not a Massachusetts specific number because it's a region based on the CDC. So, unfortunately, that one's gone up. I think last time it was just over 5%, now we're at 11.2%. Um, so there are still plenty of uh
respiratory illnesses out there. Um so please the usual make sure that um if you have some sort of illness you're wearing a mask covering your cough uh senior physician or other healthcare provider um and trying to protect those that might be imunocmpromised or
otherwise more concerned if they were to catch um one of these illnesses. Okay. um lessons learned from vaccinations and things like that last year. I know we talked about it a little bit. Um does
anybody else have any other thoughts on lessons learned from this past year's vaccinations? As I know everybody's sitting here going, we need to get those rates up. But >> uh I mean I think just from what I've uh observed is that um
people just don't think it's necessary. Um CO's not serious anymore. Uh it's not going to hurt me. Um a lot of people have had it. People, oh, I tested positive for COVID. Um so I kind of get that sense and so there's a feeling of like I'm just not going to bother with a
vaccination. Um I I'm actually a little surprised that the difference between our influenza vaccine and COVID vaccine were that far apart. Um because while 46% for influenza is still not, you know, nothing to really care about. Um
that's that's a lot bigger than CO. So that one surprised me because I kind of feel like if you're going to if you're going to spend the time getting your influenza shot, you're actively saying no to a COVID shot because they're all offered. I was going to say they were offered at the same time at our two in
>> pharmacy doctor's office. I mean that >> I can't imagine a place that's saying would you like your influenza vac? Yeah. Can I get CO? Oh no, we don't do that here. Right. So >> Right. >> I said that that difference in those rates is is kind of shocking to me. Um. >> Mhm.
>> So, okay. I I'm wondering if if we would like to entertain in the springtime or summertime um some investigative work around this and maybe maybe it's uh a
survey, maybe it's a question, do you plan on getting one? If not, why not? If so, why? And see if we can come up with any reason. Um, and then I think this board, um,
>> we could reach out to may maybe we could reach out to a couple residents that might be a verologist or a data scientist or something like that that might be able to come up with a survey that or they may have data already from another >> Yeah, if they if they have data, but it's that like how do we kind of really connect to the people and try to figure
out what are there barriers that we don't know about? Are there misconceptions we don't know about? Like I I don't I don't know where to start, but that number is so low. There has to be something. I feel like there has to be something relatively easy to >> throw a rocket off. >> Um,
>> so I think that this board uh either with or for our health director should set a target that we want to to achieve for next season. Um, this if this is a measurement of success
that we want to hold for the health of our community, then we should set a target. If this board doesn't feel like that that then I understand but I would like to have that conversation again springtime when it's hopefully not a big issue but I think it's the
responsibility of this board to figure out what the level of importance is for our community for things like vaccinations and if we think it's important then I think that the that a target should be set that's publicly available and that we should say as a board and a department we are working
towards Okay, we well we'll put that on an agenda item and let's do it in April. Let's have that discussion. Okay. Anybody else have anything about
the ID support tool? There's nobody in the audience, so can't even have a public input on that one. Okay. Alrighty. Um, correspondence. Um, so we're we've done the 7:25, now
we're at 7:30. Um, there's nobody in the audience right now for public input. However, um, board member updates. Okay. Yay. Um, so I think you've seen uh the
information that Francis sent around that Dan got to me, which was that uh the charter committee has recommended that we go to an allappointed board by the select board.
And um what I would like to do is to have a I know my opinion on this um but I don't want to express that quite yet. I want to hear from the rest of the board how people feel about that. Um and then
how as a board uh we may want to um respond to that. I did put a strongly worded letter together uh that we can send out to the charter committee if we would like to do that. Uh that was sent around to people. Um and then also um
there were some comments made during the charter committee that a board of health is similar to a conservation comm uh um concom board. And um I know uh Dan and uh well I won't speak for Dan. I'll
speak for myself first. Um that a concom board and a board of health are not the same. Um it's not that they f beside the fact that they focus on different areas of the law, there are different things that the boards can do and not do and
the board of health actually as you saw tonight has some pretty powerful tools at which we can strengthen and change and create uh regulations in law. So that is kind of there. So, um, I'm going to go around and let
people have some moments to speak before I speak some more. Um, but I would encourage people to speak and see what's going on. So, why don't we start with um Dan, if you want to set the stage a little bit more. I know I didn't set it very well with that, but if you want to
start to to point a little bit more out, I think that might do us well. >> Before we get into the discussion, could you give all of us a little more understanding of where we are in the process? Okay. I understand it was from February 10th, I believe. >> Yeah, it was from February 10th. Uh so
we're still in the process of discussion. They're putting together a draft that they're going to go put before the the select board. Uh they're looking to put that draft select board sort of kind of thing um by the end of March, sometime in April, I believe,
Dan, if that's what uh the chair of the committee said that was going to be happening. And then there's a process by which it has the board has to vote on it and then it has to go to the legislature to be voted on and then it has to come back and be voted in the town. And so
there's process that happens and it's going to be a couple of years yet. >> Uh and will this will the um committee will they talk to us? Will are we expected to talk to them? Is that an
opportunity or no? So there uh so uh I let the chair know that I was kind of surprised that we had come and made a presentation to them. We showed them the importance of that and then we heard that it might be we might be a hybrid where we get appointed an MD sort of
kind of person uh if there's not one on the board uh but then we would still be elected which I thought was kind of an interesting approach. Um but then also but then at the meeting it went completely everybody's appointed. >> So that's kind of where it was. There
was no discussion or saying hey we're going to go talk about that tonight. I received no email or notification. Um Matt, you being the vice chair, I don't think you received anything. Um right and none of us kind of saw it. Um so that's where it was kind of that was
kind of a surprise uh from that perspective. Um, so yeah, that was kind of um interesting. Um, so that's kind of the stage was set. Dan brought it to my attention. I
immediately reached out to the chair and asked for a meeting um with Dan and myself. Um, so Dan, if you want to say a few more words about it, that's that's kind of where it is right at the moment. Does that answer
your question, sir? Okay, Dan, do you want to fill in some more blanks or expand upon things? >> Um, I can try. Obviously, I we can't speak for the perspective of the charter committee.
>> Um, they obviously Kevin put a presentation that was a number of months ago as they it sounds like the charter committee talked to most of the departments and boards and committees in town to get a sense of what their jobs were and stuff. Um the
meeting came up as they were trying to finalize their draft before it goes to the select board um mid-March and as part of that process on I believe the 10th they were basically going through anything they hadn't decided on yet and
some of the ones that came up that that night were the town clerk parks and wreck and us um and planning I believe were all that night kind of cleaning cleaning up what was still outstanding on their their list. And uh during that
process, they shared a little bit of kind of the mindset, the tool, the framework they've been using from one of the consultants. Um and kind of the framework really looked at a couple different big things. I don't have a copy of it, so it's only from what they shared in the discussions um in general.
And that one some of the things they looked at to decide elected, appointed or something else was whether elections were contested on a regular basis. Um basically were they able to get people to serve? Um the required skill set to
serve on that committee. You know do you need to be do you need to have some particular skill set? Um you know board of health what what criteria do you need? They did not go into what that looked like for any of the boards. It was basically is there a skill set and
knowledge base required whether that's for planning or parks and wreck or health or anybody else. uh learning curve to get up to speed and be able to be successful and effective in the on on a board and
um how interconnected that board or committee needs to be with the greater community. It sounded like where they're kind of some of their big big check boxes of left versus right, you know, elected,
appointed or something else. During that discussion um they had talked about um parks and wreck and they had gone to an appointed perspective. They talked about
the board of health discussion for the 10th of February was minutes. It was very very short. uh the chair shared that they had spoken to a member of the board of the select board earlier in the day and that member had shared that it that the board of health was a lot like
concom um and that member of the board was actually in the meeting as a me as an audience member and was addressed and presented to the board briefly that concom provides oversight
um and enforcement of regulations around wetlands and those kind of things. Board of Health does the same thing for septic systems. So, in that perspective, they're both pretty much the same in the same kind of job. After that discussion, the committee
very very briefly went through and went, "Oh, that makes sense, I guess." And at that point voted that it had been it sound like the the placeholder had been a a hybrid elected model had been there.
their placeholder undecided and after that that discussion it was um the board of health should be appointed. My perspective just as a member and as a as a resident um you most of you guys know I was on the Burka board of health
for about 10 years before I moved to Littleton. Um, it's an appointed board appointed by the select board there and um, I'll be honest, I had no I had no issues functioning in that model. Um,
I've I've talked to um, Cheryl Spara Spara believe it's Spar um, who is the director of the Mass Association of Health Boards, basically professional organization um, for health boards in Massachusetts. and her perspective, she's an attorney
and her perspective has been consistently that elected boards of health are most appropriate. Uh it's about a 2/3 one-ird split right now about 2/3 elected, one/3 appointed. Um her rationale as a health board expert
and as a attorney is that because of the scope of responsibility and more importantly the scope of authority that boards of health hold under mass state law that um elected boards are more
directly answerable to the electorate. And um as a result of our ability to basically enact law independently that cannot be overridden at the local level that having the board answerable to the
electorate is important. The other perspective is that because of the scope of power and the unique responsibility of a board of health um around public health which is not always
the public health policy as some of us have learned is a challenging task to accomplish in some circumstances. We'll pick the recent unpleasantness.
um that public health decisions are not always the most popular decisions. And as a result of that, appointed boards who serve at the will of another body are more tend to be more subject to
influence by small groups of those in power rather than the electorate or other things. Um certainly not talking about our community or our
you know our individuals or our boards but just as the example that if the board of health in you know east overshue Massachusetts is appointed by the planning board of East Overshue Massachusetts and they decide
that we should not we should not allow smoking bars in East Overshue. The planning board has been working with five different smoking bars over the last two years to bring them into the community.
the ability of the planning board to appoint or remove members of that board of health who may disagree with the five smoking bars in their community places the independence and the responsibility of the board of health
outside the board of health and with some other body who can simply go we're going to remove you and appoint folks who may be more likely to act in a way that we think you should act. It basically makes the board of health sub
a subcommittee of whoever the appointing body is. I am not saying that is the case. I'm not saying that would ever happen in our community. But that from a mindset is the concern that sometimes happens. Uh and why elected versus appointed boards are a often a
discussion. Um I personally I I think elected is is appropriate. Again, I've served on both. Um, without speaking out of school, I have
found serving as an elected member not a challenge from being elected, but being a member of the community and working with other boards. I felt I felt more of more pressure to act in one way or the other
here as an elected member from other boards than I ever did as an appointed member in a different community. But that's again just been my experience. So at this point I I don't know what other folks thoughts are. I will be honest that we have
little to no say or input at this point. No matter what the charter committee makes for their recommendations, they they are just that they are recommendations um per discussions with the charter committee that it goes to the select board who can take the entire
thing as is change pieces or change the entire thing at will if that's their will um before it goes to and again I'm not sure if it has to go through town meeting and then the legislature and then come back for townwide ballot. I
believe it has to go through town meeting before it goes to legislature and then comes back for a townwide ballot. I'm not sure. We are a long way away from it being implemented, but as far as our ability beyond being members of our community and registered voters
um is we are basically at the will at this point of the select board and then the community at large as it works through the process. >> Kevin, thank you. Maybe. >> Uh, yeah. I was just curious and Francis, you might know the answer to this. Um, how how does the folks on the
charter committee uh become members of said charter? Were they elected or how do they get that role? >> I believe they're probably appointed by the select board. appointed by the select board
to determine whether other boards or position appointed or elected. >> Okay. Thank you. >> This is I'm I know the select board appointed a lot. I'm not sure if other boards may have had appointees as well.
I'm not sure if finance somebody else may have had seats kind of like the deferral ones, but >> we didn't have an appointee. Go ahead, Matt. >> I know we do. >> I mean, kind of just playing off of what Kevin Baker just said, um I I know they repeated multiple times in the charter
committee that um they could feel comfortable that they were just making a recommendation and that the select board could, you know, further restrict um from what the recommendation was. And I think it was putting people's minds at ease. Oh, it'll be okay that the select
board will then do what's right. It's incredibly concerning to me that the select board is preempting that and going directly to the charter committee making recommendations for what the chartery committee should then recommend that there's a conflict of interest there. If you've said, "Hey, charter committee, I
think you should put this in or this is how you should treat this." Because then when it comes to the select board, I have much I I have concerns about then the weight which they're going to be giving that that information.
>> Yep. >> Yeah, that's clear. >> Agree. No, no, I agree. >> Mr. Baker, you still have your hand raised. >> Uh, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was uh I was just curious. I can't see it. I'm on my phone right now. Is is the board
of health uh liaison to the select board present at our meeting this evening? >> No. >> Oh. Because, you know, I was surprised uh to hear him speak at the February 10th charter committee meeting uh and and misinform or leave out significant
information and comments about the roles and responsibilities of the Littleton Board of Health as a local arm of D and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. So, I didn't know if he wanted to have a meeting with us to learn a little bit more about what we do and what our roles and responsibilities are.
uh before he goes and and talks to the the charter committee about what he thinks he's >> uh he and I had a quick discussion over a um chat session, a message session where I said that I disagreed with his
position uh that he had presented and that um that he was factually incorrect in a couple of items and that He politely disagreed with me um that he didn't
believe that that was that he presented anything inaccurate. Um but >> fake news. >> What was that? >> Fake news, >> right? Um but I'm I'm you know I'm not going to speak ill of the person. U but
that was just our discussion that we had um about that topic. Um so we definitely need to go back to the board. So, uh, Dan and I are going to go back on March 2nd, um, which is their next meeting, uh, that they have a public meeting. So, uh,
unless somebody, uh, wants to, we can only take two people there because of the open meeting law, uh, we would have to declare a meeting with them, you know, if more people wanted to show up. Um, so if you do want to show up, please let me know. We'll have to do that 48 hours in advance. But right now, it's
just Dan and I. And I think that's okay unless somebody objects. to that. >> Well, they if we wanted to join meeting of more than two people, we would have to ask and they don't have to approve that request. >> Right. Right. So, I think uh right now
we're just going to have two show up. Um there's also an open public meeting to ask questions this Saturday. I think it's the 28th. And Kevin, I think you said you were going to be going to that. >> It's a 10:00 a.m. I'm going to try.
>> Okay. Um, if you can't, I definitely would like one of us to show up um to that. Matt, if you have some time to go there and find out some information or um that might be helpful. Uh, but um I we really need to be careful about that
public meeting time because if more than two people show up at that meeting uh while they're there discussing it, then we are in violation of an open meeting law. Uh so we need to make sure that only two no more than two show up at that meeting. So
>> but if it's an open if it's a public meeting we can show up as as citizens. >> Yes. But I don't want the I absolutely no problem there. But I want to make sure because we have the I don't want any sense of oh well there were four people
from the board of health that showed up. Uh I I don't want any sense of that there. Uh so I want to make sure that we're well within the law of that if that's okay with everybody. >> I think um I think we should ask for a joint
meeting with the charter committee. Um, >> okay. >> Under the understanding that, um, they're making very impactful decisions and as far as we can tell, they're maybe not fully informed about our board
and be able to have an opportunity to have a discussion, hear from multiple people on the board, um, and I guess put them in a position where they either say yes, let's come have a joint meeting, or say no, we >> okay, >> we refuse to do. So,
>> I have no problem offering that out to the chair. Um, I'll draft that email tonight and send that out to the chair. Uh, do you guys want to do it? And now, here's the thing. They have that public meeting on the second. Do you guys want to have that? Uh, I know Dan, you've got
some out of town um trips and things like that planned uh like the end of that week. Um, so if we're going to do that, I would like to propose a date to see if their board can meet, you know, give them a couple of evenings there, uh, to be able to do that. Um, if
everybody has their calendars available, um, I know we can't include our >> We actually don't have time to make it a joint meeting for the second, do we? >> I >> What's the notice we have to get 48 hour notice? >> 48 hour notice, I'm pretty sure. Is that
right, Francis? Yeah, it's got to be business days though. >> How many? >> It would have the announcement would have to be out by tomorrow afternoon. Oh, >> okay. >> Right. >> Because that would give us Friday day,
Monday, and then meeting. So, >> Right. So I can I can see if if the chair is willing to entertain that for the second for a part of their thing to have it like you know part of it to kind of come in and do a joint meeting for a little bit and then close that part and then
they can open up their own part of the meeting. Um so uh I can propose that. If not what are people's calendars look like after that? I know it I know they're trying to get their draft ready what by the end of that week middle of next week. So, what do people's
calendars look like for N? I know Dan's out that weekend. I I would like to have Dan present in as many of these as possible. What's next week look like after that? The week of the 9th. >> That's my spring break.
>> Okay. Are you going somewhere or? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> If that's all we can do, I could pot I can potentially do it remotely. I but I have no pro I can't promise it right now. >> Okay, >> we could care if I
>> Yeah, go ahead. >> I I'm I'm going to I'm going to be the dark cloud here and I'm just going to say we can try to figure out a schedule. We could try to make a request even if we meet with them. I guess I'm I'm feeling a little bit again pessimistic
and a little bit tilting at windmills. Do we actually think one it changes anything and two um even if charter committee changes their opinion and their recommendation that does that
actually change anything moving through the next step of the select board. Um we with our select board is five members. One member was two members of the select board are liaison to the charter committee. one
was present for this discussion and we saw or at least many of us saw what his recommendation was or his description at the time and he did not certainly speak out against that decision or express any reservations about the charter
committee's decision on the 10th. Um I I'm I guess I'm just wondering is this a windmill that's not going to act that makes no sense to fight to I will share without go without going into a big depth in an open meeting um some
things were shared that some things have been said about the board about effectiveness our ability to operate as a part of a bigger town government community. Some of some things were rather pointed that
the charter committee shared with that they have been information they have been provided with from some ones unknown to us. um that I I think this might be a windmill that's that's that's
uniltable and our efforts to tilt at this windmill is only going to reinforce some opinions accurate or not, agenda driven or not, that have already been shared with members of the committee and that I
I will share that some part of me is concerned that this is rather than being an effective advocacy for the board of health. This could easily turn into evidence of why there are challenges and issues that
warrant a change in the model. >> I realize that's a dark cloud and pessimist, but that's that's my concern that I want to also just put out there. But my understanding is it's not it it's not just whatever the charter committee says the select board is going to do anything anyways because it's my
understanding that if the that the select board cannot go further than the recommendations of the charter committee. So the charter committee says a hybrid board is recommended the select board can't then say no we're going to go with a fully appointed board. >> Yes they can
>> they can do that. Yes, it is a recommendation only. The select board makes the final call of what goes forward to I guess the language I heard in their meeting was it seemed repetit so repeated that it's like they're providing some limits to it with the recommendations but you're saying that
it's just >> uh the so the prior to that the 10 meeting on the 10th um they had been before the select board and the again I'm paraphrasing so please forgive me if I misspeak um but basically it was from
the select board to the charter committee of make your recommendations of what you think is right? Leave the politics to us and we will make the final hard decisions if we think we need to. If it's politics, you guys do what you think is right. And I think they are
doing what they think is right. But they were told clearly, leave politics out of it. Leave personalities out of it. We will handle that when it comes to us. So, so >> that to me that to me means they they
are going to if this the charter committee says they feel one way and that the select board feels a different way that it's the select board will make the hard call will take the action based on what they think the action needs to be.
>> So, so I will certainly ask to have a a a dual meeting. Um I have no problem with the windmilling. Um, I think it's important enough that we at least try to get back on the 2nd of March in front of that board and say, "You guys were misinformed and here's the real thing."
Like, we have that data. There's nothing. We have the law book that, you know, we can print out and say, "Here's the law book that this is what boards of health are responsible for. Oh, by the way, and you know, those kinds of things that we can we can give that kind of
data to them that we gave them to them already. we can do it again and see if it sways their opinion at all. Right. Uh I have no problem going and giving that information. The other thing that I do want to point out is that according to the Mass General Law that
does organize boards of health, it does say that you can either be an elected or an appointed board. So it it does say that in the MGL as far as you know which direction to go. My opinion is that it should be elected. I agree with Dan on
this. that gives the voters the abil the direct ability to have a voice in what's going on without being filtered through another round of committees and things like that. The other thing that I would also like to point out um is that
someone also said that it it it allows a single voice to be presented and in my opinion uh democracy is best served by the largest voice possible and that a power group of a few does not
necessarily represent the voice of all and so we need to make sure that that's also represented there. The other thing that was also mentioned was the organization of how the health department is managed within the
town and it is always been the or uh the organization of this that this board sets the policies and all of that kind of good stuff. And there are some adjudications that have to come back from the health department to us as as example title five and things like that
or smoking you know tobacco reviews and there's a whole bunch of things that have to come back to the board for specific review but that the people that work in the town and do the day-to-day operations are largely managed by an
organization within the town and Francis correct me if I'm wrong but that's I think that I think that is and the board correct me if I'm wrong. I'm like 99% sure that is the understanding that everybody has. So unless I'm wrong, somebody can come and slap me about the head and face. I'll accept that. But I'm
pretty sure that was the organization that we set forth when we set up the um health department here in town locally as we moved away from the showa. So that's there as well. And then the other comment that I've heard a lot about was well why did we move away from the show?
Yada yada yada. We've been through that a bunch of times. It went before town. It was a It was a town vote. It went that way and we've done that transition. So that's ship has sailed. We're already through that point and there's no really kind of going back to
>> but but a point that was not initiated by the board of health. >> Correct. >> That's I think that's a point that is been forgotten. >> Yep. So let's put that back out into the ether of everybody that's there and let's make sure that that's also understood.
So, um I think we've I think So, let me see if I can collapse what we've just decided. Um people want to show up on Saturday to go do their thing, please do that. Please try to keep it no more than two people. I understand there's a concern that you as a public, but I want to make sure that that we are not
stepping on anything with that. So, I would appreciate a little bit of of of um viewpoint for that. Uh myself and Dan are going to show up to the March 2nd meeting and we're going to let um the chair of the charter committee know that we will be showing up and we hopefully
have a little bit of time to discuss the decision that they made on the 10th and try to educate them a little bit more about what the board of health does. And then uh I want to also uh someone also suggested that we try to have a dual meeting and it looks like the earliest
that we could do that dual meeting would be the week of the 16th sometime. um are and the 16th of March. Um so is everybody okay with that if I suggest that time somewhere in the 16th of March to see if they're still willing to do that?
>> Sure. >> Matt, you're you're getting different opinions. I I think we should ask for the second. Dan is I believe thinking maybe we shouldn't ask at all. Dan, I I
I think so. I I I've heard Dan's thing and I am thinking that it is uh important that we push forward with this. So, I'm gonna push forward with that. >> Okay. Um I think >> because we have the time, but otherwise if they want to get things moving quickly.
>> I will I will reach out to Betsy and see if we can get a dual meeting for the second if that's even possible. Um if they're willing to entertain that. If not, then the week of the 16th would be the next time that we could meet. Okay. All right. I will try for the I will try for the second. I will text
Betsy tonight then. Uh see if we can do that so we can get the ball rolling tomorrow. All right. Does anybody have anything else on that subject and then we can close that sucker out? Okay. Anything else you want to talk about?
I'm not going to say we're closing that for now. I'm just saying just that act of discussion. Does anybody feel important about wanting to open something back up on that topic or are we good for right now? I >> think we're all good for right now. Everybody's
>> good. >> Everybody's good. Okay. >> And Dan, I just wanted to say Dan, I I appreciate your comments about these being futile efforts. uh and and and I don't know what's going to happen, but I think we have to do our best uh for the residents of Littleton uh to make sure
that uh the board of health always has uh Littleton's public health uh in its best interest and if the positions end up getting assigned by the select board, you can't say that. So, uh I think that's I think we need to do our best.
No, no, thank if I if I I completely agree and I'm not trying to minimize our role. I I would hope you all understand how important I think the work that we do and the department does is for our community. I'm also just trying to be a bit of a realist. So, but yes, no, I I
obviously am committed and feel important about the work we do. So, >> okay. All right. So, any other board member updates? Anyone? Anyone? Buler, Dan, Matt, Kevin, anything else?
>> Okay, Francis, do we have any other administrative things we'd like to bring up? >> No, it's past my bedtime. >> I understand it may be past your bedtime, but I just want to make sure. Is there anything else that we want to bring up in our meeting tonight? I agree. It's it's getting a little long
in the tooth. I understand we're almost to nine o'clock. It's been almost two hours. Um, but is there anything else we want to bring up? >> No, it's the stuff that we went at the beginning of the meeting for. >> Okay, perfect. Um, and seeing no other people in the
audience, uh, so there's no other public input that needs to happen. Um, I think that's it. We've covered our agenda. Francis, keep me honest. I think that's it. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> perfect motion to chair. I'd like to make a
motion to adjurnn. >> Motion on the table to adjurnn. Do I have a second? >> Second. Any discussion? Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes.
>> Matt Wson. >> Matt Wson. Yes. >> And the chair Kevin Davis votes yes. This concludes our February 25th board of health meeting.