Everyone, today is January 28th, 2026, and tonight's board of health meeting is now live for the town of Littleton. Um, it is uh 700 p.m. and why don't we have an update on our opiate fund settlement.
Take it away, Francis. >> Um, I didn't know that was on the agenda. >> Am I reading the wrong agenda? I'm reading the wrong agenda. Sorry. >> Okay. I wasn't sure. Sometimes I forget. >> Oh my goodness. No, it's me. It's me.
It's Let me pull up the agenda that I have here. Do we have a 7:00 public hearing for 47 Springfield Drive? Oh gosh. embarrassing. Why don't we pull in the person who is
going to be for that? See, we have a couple people in the audience if they wouldn't mind raising their hand if they're going to be doing the presentation for that. >> This should be Kirk. >> Kirk. Okay. >> Amber, if you could pull in Kirk, that'd
be lovely. I gave both you and Francis ability to do that yourselves. >> Oh, okay. >> Francis, do you want to pull in? >> Yeah. Hold on.
>> Okay. >> Can you hear me? >> We can hear you, Kirk. >> Good evening. I'm Kirk Fitzpatrick with Civil Solutions and I'm here on behalf of Cindy Napoli for a property at 47 Springfield Drive. Um be happy to share
the plan with you here. >> That would be great. So basically what we have proposed before you is upgrade septic design for the existing two-bedroom dwelling uh which is on Springfield Drive. It's
serviced by Town Water on the side here. It currently has a small septic tank directly behind the porch and then there's a leech field uh diagonally off to the right rear of the house. Um, I talked to Cindy about where she wanted to put the new system and she thought it
would be best to put it back where the old one was. Uh, evidently they tried digging to the left of the house previously and it was nothing but boulders and ledge. So, that's why we're back in this this area here where the existing system is. Um, and this house
is actually on a crawl space. I went down in the basement to get a measurement on the existing plumbing. Um, and it's actually only has about a 4ft crawl space back in this left rear corner. Uh, you can see the ledge in the basement uh for the good portion of the
rest of the house. So, with that being said, uh, we dug three test holes. Test holes one, two, and three. Um, so the testing results showed that we had uh a top in the subs soil and it changed to a sandy lom with
a water table at 36 in and 32 in. And we were able to run a perk test and that ran at 20 minutes an inch. So what we're proposing to do is to come out to a new 1500gallon two compartment septic tank which is going to feed a 1000-gallon pump chamber to pump the liquid up to a
system composed of the presbby and viral septic that's going to be 13 1/2 ft wide by 32 ft long. Um with the use of the presby we're asking for a reduction in the groundwater offset from 4T to 2 feet and the system also requires a variance
for fill within 10 ft of our property line. Um, so this is actually an empty lot next door and that fill would be within 10 ft of the property line over in this general area of test hole three. Um, I I did uh notify the abutters by certified mail 10 days prior to the
hearing and the Allens who live at uh 62 Colonial Drive reached out to me uh with a question about the well offset. So there there's a well uh behind the house and I can show you how I came up with that if you'd like. Um,
>> yep. That'd be good. >> This might take me a second. Oops. Come on. There we go. Um, so on the left of the screen is a
blowup of the assessor's map. Uh, so the Napoli's property is actually parcel 115 and then she also owns parcels 114 1116. So that's outlined in orange. The Allen's property is behind it, parcel 92A.
And then there's a well in the paper street uh off the left rear of 47 Springfield Drive. And I got this well location. It's actually not visible. Um but I pulled the plan for the adjacent property. There's a new house built um
in this vicinity here and that they had located the existing well at that time. So this is this is a blowup of the plan view from that plan and uh I put that into CAD to scale and took that well location off and transferred it onto our
design. So that's where I came up with the 100 foot well arc to that existing well. >> Okay. and I'd be happy to answer any questions the board may have or if any of the abuters have any questions. >> Uh why don't we go to Mr. Kaine if he
has any questions? >> Uh can we start with Francis if he has any notes comments? >> Absolutely. Francis, why don't we go ahead and start with Francis? >> Yeah, sure. Um, so like Kirk said, the site has a lot of constraints, um, including the seasonal groundwater
table at 32 in in the spot. Um, I think Kirk's design provides 2 and 1/2 ft of separation between the water table and the bond to soil absorption system. So um, it minimizes the separation into groundwater while also not requiring fill for breakout to extend beyond the
property line. Okay, thank you for that, Dan. >> Um, since it's going in the same place, um, I'm assuming you're going to be doing full clean out of the old system,
clean, fill, all that good stuff before you put the Presby in or >> Yep. So, basically, um, when they go to build the Presby, uh, this system is actually an extreme failure. We actually clipped it when we tried to do a test roll over in this area. Um, so it is
full of liquid and the tank was actually searchcharged when I was out there doing my topographic survey. Um, so what they'll do is they'll dig a hole in the old system and pump out all the liquid and then when they go to build this system, that'll excavate out the area of the presby and then additional 2 ft
around it and replaced any contaminated material um the old stone and um the old top of the subs soil with title 5 sand below the presby system. Then the presby system will get built from there.
>> Thank you so much. Yeah, I don't think I have any other questions right now. >> Okay, thank you so much. Uh Kevin, do you have any questions? >> I'm just curious if you went to twoft groundwater offset separation
get away without the pump. >> No, this actually this has about a twoft offset. Um most of it has a little more than two but at at its closest point um >> which is closest to test hole three it already has we're asking for the two
reduction >> um the water table at 32 in basically you're starting the system about 8 in in the ground so it it's not possible to make it by gravity. >> All right. Thanks. Looks like you did a great job. >> Okay. I don't have any further
questions. Um, is there anybody in the audience that has any questions? >> Okay, seeing no questions, um, I need a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> Go for it. Uh I'll make a motion to
grant the variance for the reduction in the groundwater offset from 4 feet to 2 feet with the use of the presby envirroeptic leeching system and uh to grant the variance uh requested uh for regulation 27 to allow fill
required to meet the minimum breakout grading requirements within 10 ft of a property line. >> I have a motion. Do I have a >> I'll second that motion. All right, we have a motion and a second. Uh, Dan Kaine, how do you vote?
>> Dan Kane votes yes. >> Kevin Baker, how do you vote? >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> And Kevin Davis votes yes. All right, Kirk, that one is all set. Are you also going to be here for the next one or is that a different person?
>> I am not. That is another firm. >> All right, great. >> All right. Thank you. Good night. >> Good night. Thank you. >> Promoting the speaker right now. >> All right. It is our next presentation is for I think
it's 9 Woodland Drive. Yes, the 705 hearing for 9 Woodland Drive. It is 711. So, we are ready to roll. Please introduce yourself and um let us know what you're coming to
review. >> Hello everyone. Can you hear me? >> Yep, we can hear you fine. >> Okay. I took a second for for you to get logged in here. Uh Chris McKenzie here uh from Dillis and Roy uh to represent Mrs. Ms. Krauss on this uh project at 9
Woodland Drive. Uh Jack Maloney from our office uh uh did the tests out here and and prepared this plan. Unfortunately, >> before you continue on, I was hoping that you could please share a plan with us. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Thank you so much.
>> Yep. Uh so Jack asked me to uh attend the hearing tonight. Uh, I've uh reviewed the plan with him. Uh, and he explained to me what was going on here. Uh, so you can see this plan. All right.
>> Yep. Looks great. >> So, that's the entire plan there. I've zoomed in on the plan view portion of it here. >> Perfect. >> Uh, as as you can see, it's a a tiny piece of property. It's uh just barely over a quarter of an acre, 120 ft by 95
ft with an existing five- bedroomedroom house on it. Uh, so squeezing this all in here was a tough thing to do. Uh, we looked at doing a presby system that didn't really fit in very well without some retaining walls and stuff. So, we opted for a geomat system. Uh, we're
we're asking for uh uh some reductions for this. Um, it's going to be a pump system, be a new septic tank located right here. uh 2,000galon two compartment tank uh with a pump chamber
here and a force man up to uh a pressure dosed geomat system. You can see the grading around here, the 200 foot contour uh 2012. So we're obviously pretty close to the property line uh in this location. Uh there's existing water
service. There are no wells in the area. Uh so there no radiuses to worry about. We're asking for a couple local variances from regulation 23 regarding retaining walls and fill uh and requires a butter notification which we have done and I I believe those uh receipts were
sent over to Francis earlier today uh a a system incorporating retaining waller fill within 10 ft of a property line where we're providing 2 and 1/2 ft from the property line to the toe of the fill. Uh there are no walls proposed in this plan. Uh so that also includes
regulation 27 for fill requirements. No portion of a fill requirement for an SAS shall be within 10 ft of a property line where 2 and 1/2 ft um from the property line. There's a couple title 5 local upgrade. Uh we're asking for from 310
CMR 154051H reduction on the required 4ft separation between the estimated high water table and the bottom of the leech area. We're requesting a three-foot separation uh from the bottom of the leech area to the to the uh water table. And then section
310 CMR 154051K uh at least one depot has been performed in the proposed disposal area. Uh we only did one depot due to the lack of available land area. The existing system is partially just as the last uh project
mentioned. Uh the new system is partly uh in encumbering over the old system. So that'll be removed accordingly. Uh so we only had really room for one test hole down here. We couldn't really test in the system area. In this system, nobody's really too sure what there is
for a leech area. They only really knew where the tank was. Uh so we didn't want to end up digging into the system and and damaging it to the point of not being able to use it until until it's repaired properly. So, um, so those are the the four, uh, special, uh, requests
that we're making. Any questions? >> Uh, Francis, why don't you go ahead and give us a chitchat about the site? >> Um, so, as Chris mentioned, it's a very tiny site. It's 11,400 square ft.
Backyard's fenced in, extremely tight in the backyard. Pool doesn't help. Um, so we only could do the one deep hole. Um, I would recommend improving it cuz it's a very limited area to be able to do any testing. And I think that hole
characterizes the soil within the disposal area as well. Um, I mean this is probably the best plan to try to meet required setbacks the property line building foundation. Um
and uh it was 36 in for the groundwater table as well. >> Okay. Uh why don't we mix it up and why don't we go with Kevin Baker first? >> Sure. I was wondering how did we get to
five bedrooms on this property? My my understanding is there's a a a threebedroom unit and a two-bedroom unit if I remember right. Uh again, I didn't work on the project directly myself. Uh but that's what I recall was explained to me was either a a three and a two or
a four and a onebedroom unit in there. That's why we've uh uh required a two compartment tank because it's it's more than uh a single family house. Okay, Francis, could you provide some is there any other clarification? Is this a
multi- room multif family home or is this just a single family home? >> Uh yeah, I'm just pulling up the emails. Um, so this house is a five- bedroomedroom house, two units. Um, when I looked at the assessor's card, it said eight, which was odd. Um,
>> I forgot about that. See what else we got. >> That was it. >> I believe >> Oh, sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you, Francis. Jack said something to me about that as well that uh the assessor has had it as an eightbedroom uh and he
spoke with the owner uh who said it's it's a five bedroomedroom and and has been for a very long time. Um so I don't know what's going on. >> I saw you I saw you had the 550 gallons a day. So that's that's that's five bed and the public records as eight and
>> it is classified as a two family. So, is this going to have a deed restriction uh and some maintenance for when it gets, you know, turned into condos and they sold off individually? >> I've only heard part of that. Um I if if if the
>> shared system >> if the board >> if the board feels that it's necessary for a deed restriction then uh I don't see any reason why not. >> I was just curious about those two
things. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Kevin. Uh, Dan Kaine. >> Um, yeah, I would love to know some history. I'm I'm curious again how a five- bedroomedroom house got through the process for approval
on a relatively small lot and now we're requiring multiple variances and local upgrades to make this a compliant system. Um, do we know when this house was built? It looks relatively modern from the outside.
>> I do not know when it was built. I'd have to check the assessor's records. >> Hey, Francis, could you check the card property card real quick? >> 1950. Okay. Um Okay. And again, France, I'm not sure if you
look. Do you know what this was approved for the original asbuilt? I'm just cur obviously this is not an 8-bedroom house and I can't imagine an 8-bedroom house was ever approved in this lot but that's just a guess. Um but I'm just curious what the existing you know so we we often go through this as we add rooms to
houses or finished basement of you know you owner's intent versus what's potential which is kind of our standard. um the owner reporting it's a five bedroomedroom, but is it truly a five- bedroomedroom or was this the previous
system designed for a five- bedroomedroom or was it less than that? And by approving this, we're basically granting an additional bedroom that may not have originally or ever been approved prior to this unintentionally. Does that make
sense? >> Yeah, I have a comment. You know, historically, we've always gone by the public record >> and it says eight bedrooms all over it. >> So, we need an eightbedroom system then for this. >> I was I was just going to state that too
that we have always gone with what the public record says in that. And if it's an eightbedroom public card, then we're we're missing three bedrooms. >> I got to change or you got to change the card. >> Yeah. >> Right. I suspect the issue is that the
card is wrong. Um, but I don't know that to be a fact. That's that's what's been explained to me that uh everybody was a little bit surprised that it that it showed up as an eightbedroom on the assessor's card, including the owner. Um, so I I don't think anybody was
really aware and I it could very well just be a typo on the card. Uh certainly uh I've seen in the past where uh situations like this, it's usually the reverse, mind you, where where they're they're uh on record as a two-bedroom
and the house is clearly a fourbedroom. And we've had uh the assessor's office go in and and review the interior of the building and determine the actual number of bedrooms. Um so that's a potential to get the record straightened out uh to do
that. >> Yeah. But we have to go off of what's in the public record for that. And and if the card says eight bedrooms, we're going to expect a design for eight. And that's just what the that's what our board has traditionally done, historically done. So, we're going to have to go with that. My other question
is, what's the offset from a pool to a leech field >> uh >> or to a situation? Probably 10 ft. >> No, no, no. I want to know what the regulation is. I don't remember what the
regulation is for an offset uh from a pool to to like a tank or a leech field, >> right? Well, a pool to a septic tank is going to be 10 ft and probably 20 feet from the from an ingground pool to the leechfield.
>> So, we're probably in excess of both of those. >> I understand. And I just don't know what I don't know what it is on the on the again I don't remember what the regulation is. It's something I'll have to like pull up real quick or if somebody could look it up real quick if there is a title five thing. But then
I'm going to want something on the print basically show the distance between those and have a minimum so that way we understand what the uh offset is. >> Right. Yeah. We can we can add that to the plan. >> Yeah. What do we What do we have?
7 ft. >> 27. >> Well, this is on a PDF scale, so I don't think that's correct. >> Okay. I mean, >> I hear you. >> Well, there's a dimension right here from the foundation to the side of the system, and that's 20 feet. >> Okay. >> So, if you look at that dimension, there
there's not likely that that's only 10 feet. It's probably 10. >> Okay. >> It's not less than 10 feet. >> Um otherwise, we would have to ask for that. Uh uh >> yeah, I'm going to have to ask for that. just to see what that is for the dimensions. >> Okay. >> And we're also going to have it we're
also going to have to have the car the >> the plan uh appropriately or uh corrected or the card appropriately corrected before we move forward with this. I'm sorry. >> That's fine. Um it is what it is. I certainly hope we
don't have to try to put an eightbedroom system in here cuz getting a five was pretty tough to do. So getting it uh almost uh 50% larger uh or so uh might be tough to do. Uh but uh certainly we can look at that. Um so as far as the
variances, then we don't want to proceed on any of those until we've uh made these changes to the plan or gotten the uh bedrooms straightened out. >> Yep. And we're going to have to and Francis, we're going to have to see if we have an ASB built to see what was
actually approved originally. Yeah, I can't remember off the top of my head, but I want to say it was um so we'll look into that and if necessary, we'll go on site and to the house and view that as well. >> Fair. Okay, that sounds good. Uh we do
have one >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Do we know how many rooms are in the house right now? Obviously, I know this isn't um additional construction, but just as a as a sense, do you know how many rooms overall what our room count is? I do know that. Um,
>> hard says 16. >> 16. Okay. >> H. >> Well, that might be how >> that would that would be how somebody came up with eight bedrooms. Uh, because the state code says you take the total rooms, divide by two, and round up. So,
that gives you eight right there. >> That's kind of why I was asking to see how we got there because that's a lot. That's a lot of rooms. It's a looks to me. I haven't seen the property, but it looks like >> What's the square footage of this house?
>> I It's not big. I assume it's two stories. Um, >> Zulu says 3500. >> Wow. >> Okay. >> Yeah. 3500. I uh I think we have some more investigation to do before this one
goes on. And I would just like to can may I just make one comment before we leave this is that you know if this is if this if this system is going to be serving uh
two two prop two units >> you know we need to take a look at calling it a shared system uh and how we want to do that with the maintenance agreement and and everything should if and when it should get
divided. And so there's more to it if it's a multi, you know. >> Thank you. Motion to continue. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to
continue. Uh Dan Kaine, roll call. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. and the chair, Kevin Davis, votes yes. Francis, what's our next available slot for these people so they can plan?
>> Um, I'll give Dillis and Roy a call tomorrow and talk. >> Okay, perfect. >> Appreciate that. Thank you everyone. You have a good night. >> Thank you. >> All right. Well, that are our two public hearings
that we have. It's now 7:27, so it's just in time for our IDE decision support tool. Oh, and I'm so sorry. There's somebody in the audience, uh, Gary Allen. I'm hoping before we go on to our next thing, um, I didn't know if the person in the audience needed to
speak on that last one or are we okay? Nope. No raising of the hand. Okay, we will continue on then. Um, our ID decision support tool is brought to you by I don't think Matt Wson's here tonight, so we don't have anybody to bring it to
us. However, I can say um I did look at some of the numbers in the wastewater for COVID and flu and I can say that um things are still kind of in the like mellowing out period or starting to flat off flatten off a little bit. if I
looked at the data correctly. Francis, did you get a chance to look at the data? No. Okay. Um, so I think that's where we are with that. Um, RSV, I don't know what the numbers are for RSV. Uh, so we're not
going to continue uh talking about that tonight. We will wait to get the numbers from Matt at the next hearing. Um, okay. Now we get into some fun things. It's 7:15 and I mean it's 7:29 and we can go
to our 7:15 administrative matters and we have meeting minute approval. Um let's take a look. I know one of them I was missing on. So we're going to have to move forward from that. Uh so that would be the October 22nd. We can't approve that one cuz uh we don't have a
majority or actually do we do we have I think we have I would have to abstain and then we'd have two people approving that one. We could we could get through it. >> How does the board feel? I I think technically it would be majority vote and it would be approved.
Although it's still pretty light to approve minutes for when members weren't here for it. >> Yeah. >> Is it technically accurate? But it's I think it's probably chair's discretion whether they >> want to I'm going to let's see Matt Wson
Dan Kane. So we can't do that one for the same reason. And then this one's Kevin Davis. at way. Well, we could look at the January the January 14th one. Uh because there's three out of the four people are here
for the January 14th one. I would feel okay doing that one. Thoughts on that? Yeah. Okay. All right. Let's go for the January 14th uh meeting minutes. Um I have read through them. I didn't
see anything that made me feel off on that. Anybody else have any issues with those? >> No, Mr. Baker. Nothing. >> No. I'd make a motion to approve the January 14th, 2026 meet uh meeting minutes as presented.
>> Excellent. >> I'll second that motion. >> Perfect. Uh let's take a roll call vote. Uh Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. and Kevin Davis, the chair, votes yes as well. So, we have
those meeting minutes approved. I'm sorry, Francis, we can't get to the other ones. Just don't feel comfortable approving them. We just need another person here. That would be great. Well, we got one of them done, so you know. Hey, 33%. It's something.
All right. Um Okay. Um, our next topic that we have on our agenda is correspondence at 7:20 and it is 7:31. So, um, let's go ahead and
talk about anything that has come in since our last meeting which was 2 weeks ago. Francis, >> we recently got um a notice from the state. Well, we didn't get a notice. We just got a really thick binder um that said Patriot Beverages on it and we
weren't really sure what it was. Um so it turns out that we were supposed to be permitting and inspecting the facility once a year. >> Oh, >> so we're going to do that now. >> Yeah. No, that I'm I'm surprised because Yeah. No, it's
Do they do carbonated? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. I thought they were doing carbonated and actin or an air and we were only non-carbonated beverages, but yeah. No, carbonated beverages is a is an annual like everything else. >> Yeah. So, that'll be fun.
>> Do we need do we need any additional regulations in town if they're doing carbonated? And did they get approval from us originally to do carbonated? >> Mark, it's it's like a joint venture with the state. So they look on that side, but we're supposed to be the ones to go into the facility and make sure sanitation measures are in place. And
then we're supposed to issue a local permit to coincide with the state permit. >> Oh, interesting. >> Yeah. I don't recall that ever coming before the board in the last number of years.
>> We've never done it. No. >> Interesting. And I I do know back when we were when I was looking at our compliance rates with inspections in general that that was one of the local board of health responsibilities was inspecting
producers of milk, producers of carbonated beverages, those things. And that's why I I'll admit I I thought as I said that they were doing carburetor there and they weren't doing it here to basically not to I I don't mean like bypass the regulation but not be required to like go through those same
meet that requirement because they weren't doing that. So I'm I'm surprised to hear that yeah we're I'm I'm disappointed we're out of compliance with that. Um and that yeah we weren't aware that it they were performing that operation there that would trigger our
involvement. So, but at least we know now. So, >> yay. >> Francis Francis gets to learn something new about carbonated beverage can. >> So, there's going to be a lot of CO2 coming from somewhere. >> Yeah. >> I know it's not going to be the same
size tank in my soda stream over in over in my kitchen. So, >> Oh, that's interesting. Okay. Um Well, that's fun. So, uh, when did that workload just show up on your desk? >> Uh, like a week and a half ago.
>> Sweet. Well, busy. Um, >> what does what does that look like for additional hours and and people power? >> Next question. >> I have no idea until I see it. Um, still wrapping my head around it. I've never done one of those before, so it's
all new to me. >> Okay. Do we need outside help? Do we need an outside contractor to come in and help? Do what do we need? >> I don't think so. I mean, I can go in the facility and look at it and then make a decision, talk to the state sanitation program, see what they have to say.
>> Okay. >> Go from there. Um, if need be, I can find a consultant. But see what it looks like first. >> Okay. Joy. >> Yeah. >> Wow. Never a dull moment around here.
This is awesome. Okay. So, that's that. Um, what other than making us aware that we're going to have this here. Um, and we never I don't think the board has ever approved a carbonation facility before. I know it was verified. It was just
juices and things like that. It wasn't anything ever carbonated. So, I think this is going to be new for us. Um, yeah, I'm not sure. Um, we can always have meet with the board and review the materials. Um, otherwise it'
just be more of an inspection based permitting process. >> Well, it's the board's pleasure on this. >> Let's take a look, talk to the state. >> Yeah, I think that's a good first step. And then why don't we come back at our next meeting and have a chitchat about
that? Definitely put that on the agenda. Yeah. >> Beautiful. Okay, what's next? >> Um, we didn't have to stand up a shelter during the snowstorm, so that was good. Um, we did talk about it, but
>> Okay. >> Um, didn't have any tickers for the warming stations. >> Um, they are talking about another system coming in this Sunday, so we'll wait to see what that's going to look like. Yeah, so far I'm looking it's it's oscillated between
several feet and one inch. So I think it's the wobble of the system to figure out which way it goes. Okay. Um so we had no takers on that. Interesting. Uh we are also coming up uh is it tonight? I think it's going to be
minus 4 overnight. So, do we have the possibility of another warming station if somebody's heat fails or something like that? >> We do. So, we met with um EHS and we talked about their vulnerable population. So, they have a list. >> Okay.
>> Um that they have people they can check in on. So, that's kind of how we're doing it right now is just testing. >> Yeah, I'm kind of concerned about that. I just want to make sure our residents are taken care of, especially with negative single digits. So that's that's no fun.
Okay. Have we has anybody called in to ask for assistance if they're like heat has failed or something like that? Um >> we have not. No. >> Okay. >> I mean the last one since it was so cold out there wasn't much density of the
snow was very light. >> Mhm. >> So it didn't stick to the power poles and such like that. But if we have a wetter snow next time, that's when we can run into the power lines issue. >> Yeah. Okay, cool. Anybody else have any
other comments or questions about that? Okay, next topic. We applied, we partnered with Emerson Hospital to apply for a um stroke grant um which in essence will be um a couple
seminars on what to look for in strokes and how to recognize it. Um we also part of the funding will go towards a video, educational video. Um so we applied for that last week so we should know I think in a month. >> Okay, that sounds like great information
for the public to have. comments from the board? >> Nope. That's awesome. Look forward to hearing what whether it goes through and uh what the process will be to make it happen. >> Yeah, I think it'll be good. Um I think I mentioned >> Will they will they be making the video
or is this something that uh the town would be making? >> Merson's going to take a lot of the lead. We're just their partner to bring it into the community basically. So, >> okay. >> We'll have the input, but you know, they know what they're doing obviously. So, >> no, just curious cuz we have LCTV with
all those amazing people at LCTV to do videos and video services and things like that. So, >> Oh, I got your point. Okay. >> Yeah. Resource. >> Okay. And I might mention at the last meeting we did get a grant um from Emerson
Hospital um to do what's called memory cafes which are um meetings where people with Alzheimer's and um their caregivers get to meet up, check in, also socialize at the same time. Um so that will fund it for at
least a year. >> Awesome. Is that going to take place in the community center? It's Yes, it's going to take place in the new shadic on center street there. >> Okay. >> Um it'll be a monthly. >> All right,
perfect. Uh next item. Um septic is still going. We haven't slowed down. Um we did hear today that Tingsboro put a moratorum for the next month on any systems going in.
uh just based on the weather and the cold, but we haven't done anything yet. Might be something worth considering. >> Okay. When's our next February meeting? >> The 11th. >> The 11th of February. Okay. >> Um
>> are you scheduling septic inspections right now? >> Yeah. Oh wow. >> So this is this is remember that was one of those things that got uh removed from the thing and we said hey we should probably go find out if that's one of those
things that we should be able to do during the cold weather is to actually dig holes and see what the perk rates are and things like that. Um so also the groundwater is going to be at a
what level right now? Low. So that's that's my thought right at the moment. Um, okay. Did we get any information besides Tings, did we get any information about
uh from the state as far as if there are any regulations in the state about not permitting because I know that was a topic of conversation our last meeting. >> Um, I haven't looked into it. I just heard through the grapevine earlier today. So just throw it out there. >> Yep. Fair. No, it's I know it's an
interest on my side because I'm not sure it's an appropriate time to be doing things like that because of the low water, traditionally low water and also the fact that the ground's frozen. So, uh I have no problem with emergency sort of kind of things like if something is
actively failing and we need to figure out some way to remediate something, I get it. But um yeah, thoughts board members, nothing. Kevin. Okay. Maybe we'll put it up for a public discussion at our next meeting on if not
the 11th and one after that, but let's at least put it up for a public discussion uh on the 11th. >> Yeah, I'll pull some data together and research we can look at. >> Okay, that sounds good. All right. Uh, next issue
or item. Um, budget amendments were submitted to the town administrator's office. We have our hearing coming up on the 4th of February. >> Okay.
So, amendments to the budget. >> Um, so in the last meeting we talked about um increasing some of the line items. >> Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, I was just making sure it was clear that it was amendments to the budget and then the February 4th hearing. Is that something we're going to need a member
or two from the board to go to with you or >> It's up to you. Um, I mean Dan can probably tell you more about how it is, but um, it doesn't hurt to have support. >> Okay.
>> What time? February 4th. >> It's at 7 7:30 February 4th. It's at the police station. >> 7:30 a.m. That would be great. >> Yeah. >> Ticket is not AM. Okay. Nope.
>> All right. Um why don't we um it' probably be a good thing to have at least one if not two members from the board. Uh definitely one member from the board show up so that way um we can at least represent and let you know be there for Francis. So, um I know I am in
town on the 4th, so I can support. If somebody else wants to support um that's more than welcome to show if they want to feel very strongly about going and supporting, we can do that. >> Believe I'm available. Uh we can circle
back offline as the date gets closer and >> Yeah, let's do that. >> If if there can be two of us, that's that'd be great. >> Okay. All right. So, we'll have support there for that. So, those additions and changes went in.
That's awesome. >> Okay. >> Was that Was that before the Patriot Beverages binder arrived or No. >> Yeah, it was before. It was before. Okay. Yeah. Okay.
That's all I got. >> That's all you got. Awesome. Kevin Baker, anything correspondent or administrative things come in what we've heard here. >> Okay. Dan Kaine.
Um just following up on Patriot. Uh I just shared out to the group not for discussion but just for your email for information. um the Mass Association of Health Boards guidance around responsibilities and they've got seven pages on bottling plants and shared
responsibilities and references back to uh the CMR um about requirements. It looks like we may have some work to do around I don't I don't know if we have a fee structure around this kind of inspection. I don't think
we have a line item for this, which is obviously going to be more complex than a restaurant carbonated beverage system or those kinds of things. So, um, it looks like applications for permits need to be through. And again, this is a a quick skim while we've been here of
these seven pages. Um, an application approved by DPH. It looks like we may have some work to do locally. It doesn't look like necessarily regulations. would be following the state food and beverage regulations, but to go through the inspection process, the reporting
process, the application process, we may need to do some some leg work on our end just to make sure those pieces are in place and that we can the department can be compensated obviously for the work involved pre and post and make sure that I'm sure they're already doing these
things, but make sure they have their requirements and expectations set before we inspect so that they actually have all the information we need around planning. and and testing and some of those kinds of things. So, u I've shared that with everybody just so you guys can take a look. And Francis, I'm sure you've already started the process, but
just as a a starting point as well of things to think about even if it's not all necessarily applicable to us. Um so, hope that helps a little bit. >> Yeah, I haven't looked into it. Thank you. >> Yay. And that was another thing because we
didn't know that that's here. We don't have the fee schedule for that. And it would be interesting to see what the town of air has since I know they have a carbonation system in the town of air. Uh and wondering what their permit costs are and things like that. So
>> Francis, did anything come over from the showa regarding Patriot beverages and the file? Nothing. Okay. >> Wow. This is really sounding like this caught us flatfooted. Yeah. I wonder if it just got like returned to sender and then they they
they brought it over. >> I sure >> I know there was a long conversation at the select board and and all those because I I believe when cuz after Verify left it was empty for quite a while. >> Yeah. >> And then when Patriot took it over there
was a lot of water water use permits because it was going to be beyond typical water use because of the nature of to the business. and I believe there was tax abatement as part there was a very long drawn out process um when they
came into town. So, I'm I'm disappointed, although I think this was before this is obviously before Francis and an internal department. Um, that I mean, I hate saying this, but it's it was part of the challenge of having an external
agent where Francis sitting in town hall is probably going to notice all this stuff going on where where Jim being in I forget where his office even was now. um air but is not necessarily going to be aware of some of these things going on
locally and be able to step in going wait this is something that the board of health needs to be involved in as part of its regulatory requirements that a lot of those local things get missed because there's nobody local noticing.
So nothing against him it's just the nature of having an external agent. So that's all I can think of is that it just it was never brought up as something that was something within our scope because >> we weren't aware. I don't think I was on the board when that actually occurred. I
think it was just before I joined, but I can't remember now. So, so fun fact, I remember going to a bunch of the select board meetings on this because I was concerned from a water usage perspective, the amount of water that was going through this and I do not recall them saying at all that there
would be carbonated beverages there. And so that's the reason why this is surprising me because I went to a bunch of the meetings for this and it was like it was going to be, you know, several tens if not hundred thousands of gallons of water used in
the bottling process. And and then it was, you know, that's like you said, there was a whole bunch of local tax incentives and things like that, which I understand, but I don't recall it having carbonated beverages. So, okay.
Oh, it actually looks like just bottled water as well falls under the same requirement. So, it's it's bottled water or carbonated non-alcoholic beverages kind of fall under the same >> Oh, so we totally >> guys. So, we totally not again I just went back and double checked and see
when it happened. It looks like it was 2016 that they came into town. So, >> yeah. >> Fortunately or unfortunately, that was prior to my time sitting on the board. It was prior to the time I think of >> pardon me. >> Gino was probably here. Kevin, I think
Kevin, you started the same year I did, right? Was that your first year? Or were you already on when I get I forgot because we're in the same cycle. >> Uh yeah, we're in the same cycle. So that was both our our first year. >> Our first year. So yeah, I think Gino
was the only folk only member who may have been on the board at that time, but and that would have been Noba era for our agents. though that all I can think of is that it just never came up on the radar as something that fell under. >> Maybe >> maybe a phone call Francis in a showa to
see if they have anything in their files on it. >> Um, sure. We have their files. >> Okay. I >> Yeah. or or thoughts or yeah that whole institutional memory kind of thing because unfortunately none of us other than as residents can offer
institutional memory on what the process was from a health side of things. Jim may Jim may know something or remember something at the time but >> yeah. Okay. >> Thanks Dan for that information. Much appreciated.
>> No problem. >> Do we have anything else Dan that we would like to contribute to the cause? Nothing for me tonight. >> All right. Well, I have nothing else to contribute to the cause this evening. Uh I am still getting back into this time zone from being on a business trip 14
hour time zone delta. So, um yeah, still I think tonight will be my first night that it's kind of like sort of there. Um so that's all good. All right. And I do apologize for the mixup. um that was just in another PDF viewer sitting in
the window that was over there and I needed to swipe this way. So I do apologize and thank you so much for that. So um also it looks like we chased away the person that was sitting in the audience. So we have nobody in the audience for public input.
I was hopeful. I was really hopeful. Um before uh we get to the end of our agenda, does anybody else have anything any gobacks that they would like to talk about? No. Okay. Motion
>> I'd like to make. Go ahead. I'd like to make a motion we >> motion >> and a second to adjurnn. Let's take a roll call vote. Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> Kevin Baker >> votes yes.
>> And Kevin Davis the chair votes yes.