Good evening, town of Littleton, and welcome to this the May 27, 2026 meeting of the board of health. In attendance are myself, Matt Wson, board members Dan Kaine, Kevin Baker, and Libby Donigan, our new member, as well as our health director, Francis Dagel.
I would just like to start by saying welcome and uh thank you for joining the board. Uh Libby, appreciate you being here. I I hope uh you were able to connect with Kevin Davis at some point before today so you get a little little background, but um we have a stacked
agenda, so we will launch right into it. I did not we're not totally ready to run this, so just give me a second to get everything lined up here. Okay. Uh our first is a 7 p.m. public hearing on 18 Long Lake. If you are a part of that project, please raise your hand from the
audience so you can be join up. >> Hello everyone. >> Hello. So, go ahead and introduce yourself and uh let us know about what uh what your request is. >> Sure. My name is Dan Carr. I'm from Stamping McKinary and I am here on behalf of the property owner of 18 Long
Lake Road. Um and I will share my screen and take you through the plan doing here. All right. Can everyone see that? >> Yes. >> Great. So, uh, this is a repair septic
system for a, uh, single family home, three bedrooms. There's no changes proposed to the house itself. Um, it's just replacing a failing septic system. The lot is is quite tiny. It's only 7,500 square ft. Uh, there's the single
family dwelling in the front or I should say the center of the lot. And then we're proposing the uh, replacement septic system in the backyard. The water service from the street connects in over here. Um, so there's really no no other spot on this lot for
the septic system. Um, >> sorry if I can just pause you for a second. Could you zoom in because we can see the whole plan so we can't see the detail you're referring to. >> Beauty. Thank you. >> Yeah, sorry. >> That's okay. Um, so the the sept the
septic system that we're proposing is a uh 1500galon septic tank, dual compartment that drains by gravity from the house to a,000gallon pump chamber which pumps the waste water up to a three-bedroom presby leeching field. Um,
and the two requests um, waiverss we need from the board of health. Um the first one is the reduction in the offset to the seasonal high groundwater table. Um this is an allowed um the the reduction to the groundwater
table is allowed per mass d um when because it's an alternative technology the presby system mass d explicitly allows the twoft reduction to the offset to groundwater. And the reason we're requesting that reduction is because of the other waiver we need, which is um
no, which is a local bylaw um from Littleton's bylaw that says that you can't have fill for a septic system within 10 ft of a property line. Um so obviously they the two waiverss kind of go hand in hand. We're trying to reduce
the grading by reducing the offset to groundwater so the system can sit lower in the in the ground. And then um so there is a little bit of grading required. Um this is the 95 contour here
and the 96 kind of wraps around the whole system. Um but you can see the existing 96 is over here and the existing 95 is over here. So it's not a huge change in grade. It's just that the lot is so small that the grading is
within 10 ft of that lot line. Um and I think that pretty much covers it. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer. >> Um, first we'll go to Francis. If you could provide your expert review and recommendation.
>> Um, so like Dan said, it's a very tiny lot. It's.17 acres. Um, this is really the only place you could put the system. And, um, by doing the twoft reduction, it does minimize the grading substantially. Um,
as it is already, I don't think any necessary runoff components are needed like a swale. It's pretty flat lot. >> Very well. Then questions from the board. Uh, go with Dan Kaine. >> Uh, I don't think I actually have any
questions for this one. Kevin Baker. >> How many bedrooms? >> Three bedrooms. >> And Francis, did uh did they confirm with the the property card and everything? Francis.
>> Francis, did you hear the question? >> Uh, sorry. Um, >> I'm not 100% sure. I believe so. I can look right now. >> And then, uh, Daniel, how was, uh, how was the perk rate?
>> Perk rate was five minutes per inch. So, pretty good. >> Great. Uh, no more questions. Thanks. >> And, uh, Libby Donigan, any questions?
>> No, I don't have any questions. >> Very well. Um, the only clarification I had, I think you were drawing those lines on there. So, that 95 contour that's actually on, that's a part of fill right there effectively. >> Exactly. Yep. >> Okay. And then that the 10 ft is right
to the edge of the system. That's that little 10 foot right below it. >> Correct. So that's 10 ft to the system itself, but the grading for the system is within 10 ft. >> Yeah. And is it also within 10 along the back of the system then? >> Yep. Right here. That's about 2 ft off
the property line there. >> Okay. So we're uh a butter is all properly notified. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Are there any audience members including potential Butters who would like to raise their hand and ask questions, make
inquiries. I'll take that as an >> Go ahead, Gavin. Make a motion. >> Go ahead. Uh I'd like to make a motion to approve the variance for the uh twoft groundwater offset uh as well as the uh
reduction in the required footage uh of the fill from the property line. >> I'll second the motion. >> We have a motion and a second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Libby Donigan. >> Yes. Dan Kane.
>> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. Thank you Daniel for your presentation and good luck with your project. >> Great. Thanks to everyone. >> Next we have our 705 public hearing on 19 Christina Street. If that is your
project, please raise your hand. And Kevin, could you turn your gain up a little bit perhaps? Hey. >> Hey. Long time no see. How's everybody doing? >> Good evening. >> Welcome. Welcome, Libby. Welcome. Good
luck with the board of health. Ted said here on behalf of the owner, uh, ready to go or do you have to read an announcement? >> No, no, I'll fire away. >> Tell us about the project and go ahead and show us plans.
>> All right. So, that last guy would that was here, what he said. Um, small lot. Uh, the plan is labeled four bedroom. We'll have to change that on the as build. It is a threebedroom design. The assessor has it
a four bedrooms, but the um permit in on file um has it as a threebedroom. So, we can only design for a three-bedroom as an as a it's a repair. Um, high groundwater. Uh, we didn't even get a perk test because there was groundwater
interference. So, we ran a laboratory sample um and had to use an application rate of I think we used 0.15 on this. Oh, 33. So, it's basically um comes out to be a
30 minute similar to a 30-minute perk rate. Um we're using uh 1500gallon septic tank and 1,00 gallon pump chamber and we're doing a force mane um into the serial distribution of the presby system. Uh again as you know that drops
the groundwater by 2 ft uh the offset for ground water 2 ft and it will um it also makes this system about 40% smaller. We do need an imperous barrier because we're above grade and we can't make the 15 ft breakout. Um so if you can see the impervious barrier runs all
around here. Uh the variances that we are here for are um see we have to um we're filling within uh 10 ft of lot line. I don't know if it's a variance. I have to read the regul read the regulation again. I thought it was just you have to notify everybody and come in for a board
health. But uh regardless we're here and everybody's been notified. Um, in order to deal with the um the possible repercussions of the e- fill, we are putting a swale in. So the swale kind of even starts up here because this side is a little bit higher. So we got wa water
coming across here and then wrapping around the system and going into this area here where we're going to accentuate a swale in this area just make sure that the water continues to flow in this area. Um we also have Phil close to a lot line about 6 ft from the
lot line over here. Um the butter on a butter on this side. Um Rod Stewart, he um he asked for a plan. I sent it to him. I was out there last week and I talked to him. I don't know if he's on here now, but um he said he understands
and he's pretty much um I he believe he told me he was okay with the plan. Um we're doing the best that we can and he was in a similar situation, so he understands the area. Um in this situation over here, this um a butter over here I believe was 17 Christina called me. Uh so we talked about it cuz
he has a system over here. And if I can try to change I'm going to try to change drawings here because I did a sketch because he is concerned about his system is over here and there's a drainage
swale that comes down in between here. So, I went out there and I met him and I did some additional survey um so that I could pick up this wall that's on his um property here and the grading from his septic system because he wants to make sure the water still travels down this way. The issue that we found out there
and it shows here while we're um you know the the bigger issue that's creating that is of a concern for the swale is that his fill come for his system his breakout fill comes over the lot line. Here's the lot line between the properties. So this is 17. This is
19. This is his grading fill. So this 301 302 contour. This 301 contour creep in. And when I took my shots, this is about where this is where I found the fill from his septic system to end. The fill from our system is going to end
here. This 301 contour that you see right here is going to come around, run in here. It'll connect with this existing contour, which then comes back this way off of his system, too. So we will be able to maintain the slope. There's some plantings in there and we talked about, you know, we'll make sure
the contractor stays away from there. Um he doesn't need to get there because we're not getting that close. But um you know, we're going to try and m we're going to maintain that um that uh drainage swell. But just to be clear, we are not creating a problem with that drainage with his drainage. His
property, his fill comes over onto our land. So we're not making his property any better, any worse. But we are trying to address the issue or we do or we do feel I do feel the issue is issue is going to be addressed. Uh we also need to have uh board of health approval because we had to use the alternative
perk testing. Like I said the sample did go to a laboratory was collected from the perk hole. Um so that requires board of health approval. >> That's it. >> Yeah. Okay. Francis
analysis, please. >> Ted pretty much covered it. Very small lot. It's really the only place you can put the system on the lot. Um, shall groundwater and limited area make it really hard to construct something uh that can conform. So, that's really
about it. Um, we did talk to the assessors about the room count uh bedroom count issue and that's being resolved, I think, on their end. So, okay. All right. Uh, board member questions. Dan Kaine.
>> Uh, just follow with Francis, but it sounds like you got it. Did you do a walk through to confirm the room count or >> We did not do a walk through. The assessor will follow up with a proper count. >> Okay. Um,
if the assessor walks through and says, "Nope, it's four bedrooms." I If I'm just not sure where that leaves us, if we just I'm just I'm just running it through going if the assess says yep it's four bedrooms and we approve a three as a it's a repair I understand you got to
repair it to the level it is but are we just setting a if we if the assessor's card says four and they decide it is four and we've said three okay to the three system I'm just not I'm just running it out for the group for discussion is something that we need to be cognizant of if if we have not
confirmed that it is in fact three and it's leaving it to the assessor's office to make a determination after the fact. >> We can just go out and make a determination separately um and then meet up with the assessor to confirm the count. >> Yeah, fair point. So, I think anything
that we approved today should be contingent upon that house coming back as a true threebedroom. >> So, what are we going to find out? You're saying what's contingent on it being a threebedroom? >> As Francis just said, the assessor going out and evaluating that, which they've been asked to do, correct?
Ted, we'll talk about it after the meeting. So, >> okay. Not much to it. >> Okay. >> Uh questions. Kevin Baker. >> Uh yeah. Did you say that you couldn't do the perk because of uh high water or
was it boulders? >> Groundwater interference. When we dug the perk hole, the the the water was not running out and there was water signs of water in the soil as we walked around. You can see the the water was the soil was saturated not enough for it to come streaming out, but there
was interference. Oh, yeah. It just said boulders in your letter, so I didn't know which what it was, but uh Francis, did you witness the tessles? It >> was u there were some rather large rocks, I guess you call them. Okay.
>> Just want to make sure it's not ledge. It's all >> I don't think it was ledge. >> Thank you. Is that it? Kevin question. Libby Donigan. >> No, just because you mentioned that
their area was already showing a lot of water. How is this system going to be impacted during periods of heavy rain? >> Does it make a difference? >> So, yeah. So, groundwater is is well, any any properly functioning septic system
is going to be able to handle a rainfall. Rain traditionally gets caught up in the first couple of inches in the lom for most storms. Ground water comes up from the bottom most the time. Um, so that's the so the rain will mostly be run off and absorbed in the lom.
Okay, thanks. >> Uh, and Ted, just again, the impermeable bar impermeable barrier, you've got it running around three sides of the field. Uh, you said that was within because something was within 15 ft of something. I'm sorry, you went through real quick. Can you just clarify that? So,
the breakout elevation is the top of the septic system or there's a break I'm sorry, there's a breakout elevation on every type of system. This one from the presby is measured from the bottom of the system sand. So that's the breakout elevation. That elevation is supposed to be carried
out 15 ft from the system and with fill. Okay. So if we can't if there's not enough room to get that fill in there, we put a barrier in and break that and bring it down to 5t. >> Got it. Okay. So that's why you don't need it on that one side because you've got enough >> land basically to make that a more reasonable. So Okay. And then you're
running into the patio up top. >> It looks right. Okay. All right. Uh, those are the only questions I had. You said you notified the abutters. Uh, any butters for any other people in attendance who would like to ask a question.
I will click over to that hand raised. Dave Estie. >> Ah, yeah. I'm I'm the butter on on the left hand side of the drawing. It's actually 15 Christina. Um, yeah. I I I believe that that Ted understands what the the challenges are with the with the
water runoff and maintaining that swale between the properties. So, as long as it's done according to the plan, which I'm sure it will be, um it should work. I was I was concerned because if it doesn't, I mean, that wall that wall that he mentioned is at the bottom of my driveway. So, if the water backs up, it
goes into my basement. That's all. So, I just want to make sure the water was going to continue to flow. And I I think it will. I mean, it looks looks like a good plan. Um, so I'm good. >> Good. All right. Um, yes, I agree. It looks like the plan addresses the fact that we've got those elevations from
both properties kind of conveniently making a their own little valley between that will hopefully help all of that water drainage and avoid either property from getting water infiltration. Any other questions from the audience? Go ahead, Kevin.
>> So, Public Record has it on as a fourbedroom, >> but Ted, you you designed a three. Okay. So, uh would are you interested in doing a four? Can you can you fit it? >> We can't do a four. >> It was designed and permitted as a three
originally. It just is different than the assessor's card at this point. >> Okay. Sorry. Thank you. >> All right. I have no further questions and no other hands in the audience. >> I'll make a motion that we grant the
variance for um fill within 10 ft of the property line as well as local upgrade approval to allow Civ analysis in place of a perk test. I'll second. >> We have a motion, a second. Before I um
put that to a vote, would be per chance be willing to add a reduction in groundwater offset. Is that correct? >> I don't I don't know if it's a variance. It just says it needs to be >> It just says Well, I guess it does require It does say local upgrade approval. Yeah, it is a local upgrade approval to allow that. And while I have
the floor, I'll just say for a second, just to address Kevin's question about rocks, uh, about ledge and things, uh, I look at the test holes. We got to 112 inches in one test hole and 84 in the other one. So, we didn't we didn't cut a ledge. There may have been boulders that prevent us from going deeper with that's
too big to dig by hand. So, >> I'd like to make an amendment to my motion. >> Please go ahead. Can we also add a um reduction in groundwater offset from 4 feet to 2 feet, please? >> Sure. I can second that. >> All right, we have a motion in a second.
Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Libby Donigan. >> Yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. >> All right. Thank you, Francis. Let's circle back this week. Okay. Thanks.
Bye. >> Okay, that brings us to our 7:10 p.m. public hearing on 5004 Great Road, if that is your project. There we go. unmute. Can everybody hear me now? >> Yes. >> This is Jack Maloney from Dillis and Roy
and I'm here on behalf of Chris Kaiser. Um, and I am going to share my screen if that's possible. All right, everybody see that? Yes. >> All right. So, we're at uh I think it's
504 Great Road. Um this is to the right of the police station. Um big open field is a common driveway that services four houses. Uh this is the first one on the right hand side.
Um this is a three-bedroom house. It is assessed for a three-bedroom house. It was originally designed uh back in the late '7s uh as a three-bedroom house. and we are replacing a failed septic system. Uh we have a presby system here in yellow. Uh we have a new uh 1500galon
two compartment tank, 1,00gallon pump chamber um that's going to be replacing the existing 50 uh existing,000gallon tank and then um some sort of a leech field out in this red clouded area. Uh this property is serviced by town water.
You can see the water line coming in on this side of the house. Um, we do have a 60 foot wide uh Littleton municipal light easement in the back of the property. Um, that runs from the street all the way to the back section of of
this whole property. Um, and we did a couple of test tolls. I do have the other the original test tolls from I think it was name was David Pearly back in 76. uh it was all sand and gravel and we are looking for a local upgrade approval for the reduction uh from the
offset of groundwater from a 5- foot offset because this is 2 minute per inch sand and gravel to uh a 3-ft offset. >> All right. Uh Francis, >> um same theme as the other ones. The easement places a large burden on where
the system can go. Um, that's really about it. All right. Board member questions. Dan Kane, >> no questions. >> Kevin Baker, >> no questions. >> Olivia Dominic,
>> no questions. >> And I guess I have no questions either. Um, anybody in the audience have any questions or comments? I will take that as a no. >> You can entertain a motion.
>> I'll make a motion that we grant the reduction of groundwater offset from 5t to 3 feet using the presby system. I'll second that. >> You have a motion in a second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Libby Dunigan.
>> Yes. >> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. >> All right. Thank you very much and have a great night. >> Thank you. You too. >> All right. >> Uh this brings us to our 7:15 p.m. continue public hearing on Zero Elm
Road. Um I believe we are continuing that or we rescheduled that for a future meeting already. Is that correct Francis? >> That's correct. Y >> okay so we are um do does the board need to have any discussion about that right now or do
you want to >> so talking? >> Yeah, if we could hold off that'd be great. The representative for Elmor didn't want to have it talking about without him here. >> Okay. Um, let's just make sure. I know there's a lot of stuff in the packet that I was
reading to about that property. So, if we need to have any sort of work done before the next time it comes up on the agenda, just let me know or let Kevin Davis know so that we can have a chat about it. >> Yes. Okay. I'm going to talk to Kevin next week about it.
>> Perfect. Um, that brings us to our 7:25 p.m. public hearing on tobacco regulation amendment. This also needs to change, correct? because we are not going to have the public hearing on that. We just have a discussion right now. >> We can open it. It's just uh we're going
to extend the period for comment um into the next meeting basically. >> Okay. Um before I keep going, actually, Dan Kane, should we vote to continue the prior one because it's on the agenda as a public hearing? Can't hear. Right. For Elm Road, you
want should we vote to continue? Um it it's probably cleaner just to play it safe. I mean, it's I think it's probably cleaner just to continue it. Make it a formal >> very well. So, on um going back to our Zero Elm Road um public hearing, could
we have a motion? >> Continue. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Thank you. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Libby Donigan. Yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Mason votes yes. Terrific. That is
uh formally continued. And so for our 725 on tobacco regulation amendment that one similarly um has not gone out to the tobacco sellers. Is that correct Francis? So the
tobacco care alliance wanted to have time to do that before we then have our public hearing on it. So, um, but for that one, is there stuff that we should still discuss here in the paperwork? Do we have to make some decisions on it? >> So, we're lucky enough to have Joan from
the Lemonster Tobacco Alliance here with us. Oh, that's her way. You should be able to see me. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Sorry I didn't notice you in the audience. >> Oh, that's okay. Um, I was very
interested in the title five and variances and procedures. So, I've learning a lot. I'm I'm on the AHA board of health as well and we do these variances from time to time and it's always interesting to see how other people are handling them. >> Um, >> I hope we got a good grade.
>> Well, I don't know enough about it to grade anybody so I'm always always learning. um on tobacco control. However, I'm very versed in tobacco control. So, um yeah, it was unfortunate, a little u miscommunication and then I had to um take an unexpected
8 days off from work. So, we typically um as a courtesy, we hand deliver the regulation with the hearing notice and before I went out that we hadn't had the hearing notice yet. So, the person I assigned it to, there was miscommunication and it didn't get
delivered. Um almost every retailer in Littleton um has a store that they own somewhere else that this regulation applies to. We're not expecting heavy traffic or you know big opposition or any big issues. So I recommended to
Francis that it gives us a chance to get it out and what we would do is an open written comment period and then they can submit their stuff in writing and then you guys would answer things at the um next meeting. see what if anybody any public or anybody had a comment then um
it could be discussed. I just had um everybody should have gotten this packet. I don't know if you can see it uh but there was a packet of the regulations and then there was a cover sheet that I had sent forward um back when this was on the agenda in February and it tells you what you already have
and what we would like you to ask and that's what we're presenting to the public. So, you know, Francis and I talked it made sense. Does the board have any questions or concerns about this draft and what we're intending to do? >> I believe we've gone over it pretty thoroughly in one of our recent meetings
and I don't think I I don't think we came out with any outstanding questions still. Do you remember Francis? >> Yeah, I put everything in here that you guys said yes to. Um, but I once you received the final version, I figured if you know, we were already here for a couple of minutes if anybody had any any
further point they wanted me to clarify, but otherwise we'll just put it out for uh open written comment period. And um it's not very often um that we're having anybody even come to the hearings anymore. Um, so I'm not expecting a lot and we we are in good communication with
the Littleton um, uh, retailers. So, um, I'm not expecting any surprises. >> Could you talk about the nicotine patches real quickly? I did get that email from him a little while ago today. >> Okay, Peter. Um, Peter Peter sends that
to every um, it's Peter Brennan from the New England Convenience Store Association. I'm not sure of the exact acur acronym. We talked to him. I've talked to him for the last 10 years on a regular basis. Um, their organization um would like to see you not regulate nicotine pouches, but if you're going
to, they would like you to allow up to 9 milligrams, but that letter will be submitted to you as part of open written comment period for your full review. Um, for us for nicotine pouches, we're recommending no more than six milligrams. There's two options and you
guys we recommended the lesser option of restricting it to 6 milligram but allowing all your retailers to have it. The more strict option was you could require it to adult only and you know that would be taking it away from other retailers. The difference between the
six milligrams is this product is like a product that's exploding on the market and it's kind of um big in Massachusetts because people are putting the pouches in to circumvent the smoke-free workplace law and now schools are reporting not confiscating vape and cigarettes. They're starting to report that they're confiscating these nicotine
pouches because they're undetectable and you're not spitting on them. Um the National Poison Control Line put out a report that um since these products are exploding on the market that there's a 400% increase in nicotine poisoning calls. Many of those calls are related
to around how these are packaged. So, you know, a parent is using them, they're left on the counter, the child picks it up, it looks like a mint container, and they're mimicking their parents behavior. It's not necessarily that they're being sold to children and children are doing this. Um, but we have
had the pouches sold this year. We added um in our youth access inspections. Luckily, knock on wood, so far none in Littleton. Um, but we um the youth have been easily um able to purchase the Zin pouches. Um we've had multiple sales of Zin pouches to our youth ages uh 17 to
19. Um so it is a very product gaining popularity. The reason why we um want to leave it at 6 mg is um just looking at different reports um when you look at a cigarette uh you know the opposition
will say a cigarette has um 10 to 12 milligs of nicotine in it. This pouch only has nine or it only has six. But when you look at the science of how a cigarette is combusted, the actual user only gets out of that one cigarette
about 1.2 to 1.4% 4% of nicotine where this is a pouch in the mouth. The nicotine absorbs into the saliva and you're actually swallowing it because this is not a product that you spit. We don't have any studies at all on yet on the impact of how that's going to be
with the nicotine going through a digestive system opposed to a lung system. And we've seen them in our service area up to 18 milligs. But other colleagues have reported seeing them as high as 30 millig. Even at 6 millig, there's no directions, no instructions,
there's no comparison. Someone can take two or three, you know, six milligram ones and pop them in their mouth at the same time as well. They can use them continuously. Um, so we're there's just a lot of concerns about them. So, we'd rather be a little bit on the conservative side. And from what we
understand that six milligram is going you're you're absorbing a majority of that 6 milligram where a cigarette in the combustion process you're not absorbing um 10 to 12 millig of the nicotine. So this is you know the main reason why let's let's get ahead of it.
This is a new product that's exploding. It's not like the cornerstone of the convenience stores completely rely on this um for heavy income. And the 9 mgram just got approved by the FDA. Um and it it just hit the market in um
April. It got approved in December and it hit the market in April. So there's a lot of stores that don't even have it yet. So um it's not like you're taking away a cornerstone product that people are making a you know paying a mortgage with that profit money.
>> Go ahead, Libby. Um, do you happen to know if this is replacing like traditional smoking for people and encouraging dual use or you know like >> um well the FDA prevents anybody of making claims that it's a harm reduction product because to be a harm reduction product you have to have the medical end
of it like a nicotine gum and a and a nicotine patch. There's instruction. There's poison control. You have to tell them how much you use. So it there's a program for you to how to wean off of it and whatnot. So there could be somebody who says, "Gee, I'm I'm smoking. I'm using the nicotine instead of smoking.
But, you know, we could liken that to gee, methadone is a little bit better than heroin, but there's still neither one of them is good for you. There is no safe use of nicotine. Um, you know, so we we have to be mindful of what the substance is, and it's highly addictive. Nicotine is as addictive as as heroin.
Um, and that's well documented. So what we're finding in youth risk behavior surveys that are being done through the school and in um you know working at health fairs and talking to people we're finding that there's actually an increase in use because people are using these in the workplace in schools and
restaurants where they can't to keep the nicotine you know edge that they need and then they go home and use their vape their cigar their cigarette or their other for choice. So it's kind of almost like it's there really isn't enough data to answer that question.
Okay, thank you. >> Other questions from the board? >> No, Kevin. No from Dan. And this was this was definitely a a limit the 6 milligram limit. That's that is not language that we had in our regulation prior our last version. Is that right?
These these pouches were almost non-existent at that time. So this is like a whack-a-ole product. Like every time we get something under control, the industry comes up with another new product. So this product was not relevant in the stores at the time you updated your reg. It's a new policy. Um
majority of our I have a good amount of communities in our 46 town alliance that have already passed it with 6 milligram. Grten and Townsen have pro pro uh limited it to adult only establishments with a retiring cap and there is no
adult only establishment. So essentially they banned it inadvertently. Um but the majority of our towns have gone with a 6 milligram. Um and right now I have 14 boards in the process of regulations with three just passed them last week um
reviewing the the um 6 milligram. So you're not you're not the island. You're not alone. You're you're in the middle of the pack of um in the process of everybody updating their regulations. >> And do we by chance have any sort of consumption or sale data, whether it's
town or statewide, about kind of these this various strengths and what's kind of running through shops? Um well typically what we're seeing is right now the FDA has only approved two brands Zen and On plus. So because the
local permit requires you to be in compliance with state, federal, and local law in my 46 towns, we have made all the retailers remove any pouch that's not these two products. So that really has eliminated unauthorized products. So in my 46 towns um we're
seeing we're not seeing an exposion of these products and those products are only approved um ZIN is only approved for three and six and on plus is only approved for six and nine. Um we're not seeing the nine in in most of the communities because so many communities
have um restricted it to six that um a retailer will tell us I own, you know, stores in four different towns. If three have six and one doesn't, it's too hard for me to keep track of that. So, we're kind of seeing some voluntarily self elimination. Um, but we're we're not
we're very heavy on if it's not FDA market authorization, you got to get it go as a condition of your local permit. Um, so we've been very fortunate in my area, but um other colleagues in um like the Framingham Collaborative, the Boston um the Western Mass Collaborative,
they're all have making sure one it's got to be FDA approved and they're all asking their boards to do the six milligram as well. All right. Well, good information. So, um we'll see, I guess, what uh folks give us feedback on. And that's one of the outstanding choices we still have to
make. Correct. >> Yeah. And that's all this draft is is what we put in it. And there's no final decisions until you receive your input. >> Yep. >> All right. Any other topics that we should uh review and discuss? Cool.
>> All right. >> Um, so give us a Oh, go ahead, Louis. >> Um, do we have a ban on indoor consumption of ecigarettes? >> That's a state law. You can't use any electronic cigarette or um any vaping
device or um electronic cigarette or or combustible product. Um that's that's covered under the state law. So if somebody in the workplace if the state gets an 800 call about a lives workplace smoking um they refer it to me because you have a funded program and I have to
inspect it and then we issue the $100,200 $300 smokefree workplace law. Um and it's the law is set up the same. So, we issue it under the law, but the money gets collected and goes into your general fund. We have not had I think we've only had workplace questions, no
state complaints, and then if somebody calls um Francis locally and says, "Hey, somebody's smoking in the workplace." We do the full investigation and they would still get the smoke-free workplace law ticket. I think we've only given one warning in Littleton since the law passed and we have not had to do any investigations on any Littleton
businesses. >> Good. >> But, but vaping can be very discreet. It doesn't mean it's not happening, but it is included in the law. And it's the same fine as if you were smoking a cigarette or a cigar. Maybe as a part of this, Francis, once it's kind of finalized, part of the um
kind of public notice that new regulations are in place could have some reminders just to make sure everybody's aware of those restrictions. And so they don't have to put up with it if they're seeing it in their workplace because that might be one of those that people don't necessarily know it's banned um if
they're not up to speed. >> Yeah, we we can come up with a community education flyer you could put on your website as well. >> Great. Um, if you do upgrade your rag and pass a rag, we will hand deliver it to each retailer and they'll sign that they receive it and then we go over it with
them while we're there in the store and then they can always contact us for questions um before the effective date. >> Terrific. >> Um, okay. So, somebody sorry Joner Francis Francis
give us just the timeline of now what's going to happen. So, next steps by date so we know what this board is going to do when. >> So, next steps um Jonah is going to hand deliver the regulation amendments to all our retailers in town within the week I think. >> Yep.
>> Um and then we would give it the month for any comments to be provided. So, that will be the 24th of June. >> And then you would discuss any of those comments at your next meeting. And if
you're satisfied, if you have additional questions, you could, you know, you don't have to vote on it. Um, but if you don't have any additional questions and, you know, there's relatively nothing exciting going on, you can make a decision to vote that at the next meeting and pick an implementation date.
>> Um, but we don't have a we don't have a totally finalized regulation yet. Correct. Don't we have to finalize it as this board and then put it out to additional public hearing besides the retailers?
>> Um well the retailers as an extra courtesy we hand deliver it to them but um it is the the hearing in the is posted for anybody in the community to make a comment on it. >> Okay. >> And it's posted wherever you guys post
your public notices and then anybody can get a copy of it by email or by request from the board. But I don't think anybody has requested it, Francis. So nobody's requested a copy. Correct. >> I guess because we still have at least the pouches decision that is not
finalized in the document. So I'm not sure if >> we need to actually have that final before we say, okay, this is the regulation we actually intend to put into place. So you should be giving us feedback or is it good enough to have that option in there right now? >> Well, what you did is when we met previously, you said to put it in the
draft. So this is the draft presented to the public. You're going to accept the public comment and then this page is listed 1 through 17. So after you get your public comment and review it, I'll come to the next meeting. Does that public com public comment change
anything in this draft? Number one, do you want to still continue with number one? Number two, do you want us? So you would go line by line and vote on the changes and then so you would vote on the changes and then I would make those changes and provide you a copy to sign with an implementation date. Now let's
just let's just say you you hold the meeting in June and okay, we're going to pass it with as as written as drafted and written based on our concerns and public comment. Then I would give you the final draft that's ready for signature. That would take out all the
extra wording, all the explanation, all the color coding. It would be a finalized draft for you to sign. And normally what we would say is if you pass it in June, we would say, okay, an August 1 implementation date. And then anybody who has pouches, it gives them a chance to sell them down um if they have
them over 6 milligrams. And it gives them a chance to understand the changes. Your current rag has most of the with the exception of the nicotine pouches and then you know a few other minor things. You guys have the most current regulation. You were pretty up to date with all the other other um things and
retailers are in good compliance with everything else. So there's really nothing new for the retailers in this with the exception of the nicotine pouches. Um, and I I I if if a retailer does have a public comment, um, I know retailers prefer that you at least allow
the six then put it to the adult only, so then it gives everybody a chance to have a little piece of that market. Um, and then you know, like no permit renewal of outstanding fines exist. That's a policy that that's new in the rag, but it's a policy that most boards
have. You're just putting it in the rag. It's not new to a retailer to hear that. >> Okay. All right. So then our plan is we will be continuing this public hearing until our June 24th meeting. >> Yeah. >> Correct.
>> Very well. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any members of the public who want to chime in, ask questions. Take that as a no. There are no further questions from the board, we can
vote to continue. >> Okay, great. I will I will see you on the 24th. >> Correct. >> Motion to continue. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I thought you were looking for a motion, Matt. Sorry. >> If there was a motion, I will second the
motion to continue the hearing. >> Kevin, did you make a motion? I did. I thought you were looking for a motion to continue. >> I was. We couldn't hear you very well. Um, there is a motion to continue from Kevin and a second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes.
>> Libby Donigan. >> Yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Mason votes yes. More to come on the 24th. Next on our agenda, 7:30 p.m. discussion on regulation 23.
which sounds mysterious. Francis, talk to us. >> I can let Kevin take the stage. >> Kevin, talk to us. Sure. We had a
uh discussion a while ago about uh retaining walls in new construction and it prompted me to look up what the regulations used to say and um what it what it reads now. And then
uh a previous board uh had actually put together a a proposed uh regulation uh should the board have the appetite to discuss and have a public hearing on uh re-implementing uh said local regulation.
>> Um so you can see the packet I think it's in the packet. It >> it is. Can somebody pull it up and show it? Uh Fran Francis, do you have the ability to do that or do you want me to try? >> Oh, dang. I got it. Great.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Uh so I can just talk through it. So yeah, regulation 23. Um Libby, I'm not sure if you've seen all the the list of re local regulations. uh new board members used to get this big binder uh
full of the uh uh title five and uh the different regulations that we are responsible for and um anyway the local regulations uh are a part of that. And so um we have a
regulation 23 in uh 2007. Uh as you can see uh impervious barriers um were uh limited here and uh retaining walls uh used for breakout and grading
purposes around soil absorption systems for new construction uh were not per permitted without a variance. Um so uh you can see that in uh what it says today uh basically uh
subjections A and B were repealed in 2011 um by a board and you know when you when you take regulations out you don't have to post it you don't have to have a a public hearing notice or anything like that you can just do it. Uh but when you
put them back in uh you have to notify people. Um so it's been proposed um I guess I've been on the board for almost nine nine years and so at some point over the last nine years uh there were discussions
about this and uh it just sort of came up again. So, putting this in front of the board to uh see if they have an appetite to discuss this further and hold a public hearing about uh the potential uh to refortify local
regulations. And just a detailed question, the without looking at every single letter written on this screen, it's pretty much A and B were taken out and you A and B are going back in >> on this proposal or is there any other language change or something >> with some adjustments?
>> Okay. Um it's not like they're being uh outlawed. It's just they need, you know, to be um it's there's a process uh to to to get a variance and get that approved. Yeah, >> it's only for new construction.
>> Yeah. So, I think this is one of those that came up because we were talking about new construction projects and we have a memory and we're operating on a memory of the 2007 rag, not realizing that in 2011 it had been scaled back because that doesn't get the publicity
that the additions get. Um, unfortunately. So, how does the board feel? Uh, let's talk about this. Kevin's throwing this out here and I think Kevin, you're saying if we have it, you're you're in favor of trying to get this rag updated
back to the kind of this new version. >> Uh yeah, with with the board's opinion and um after public hearing and discussion, uh I think I think there's room uh for something uh that can um you
know, try and try try and keep Littleton uh you know, allow the town to continue to have the feel that uh you know so many people moved here for and and and that they they love and enjoy and it protects public health. >> Well, I really appreciate you digging
into this and finding the history and it helps a lot. Um and this doesn't look like a a big big one to tackle unlike some of our rags that we're working on. So, um other conversation, thoughts, ideas from the board or Francis Dan,
>> I mean, I think it's certainly worth a conversation. I think it's appropriate. >> I'd say for new construction, if it requires intervention, it can't naturally take the system. That's worth considering. Libby, have you uh developed an opinion
in such a short period of time? >> I'm in favor of regulations. So, yeah, I'm in favor of putting it back in. >> Okay. All right. In that case, um like I said, this doesn't feel like a very big one to tackle. So, Francis, can you get
us started on the track to um officially getting this rag proposed? and >> advertise. Um, I can make a pros and cons list if that's helpful too, just to for debate. >> Sure thing. >> And then we can discuss at our next
meeting and say yes, we want to go ahead and move forward with this. Can we can we look at peer communities as well? Perhaps again that retaining wall for new construction just kind of see again that we'll use uh the line before are we an island kind of creating
this or is it pretty common around our our peer communities. >> I'll dig into it. >> Terrific. >> Thanks again for putting that together. Um, next agenda item is 7:35 is our discussion on board reorganization. This
is usually the time of year that we have new members join the board and we do our reorganization. Um, historically we try to get the whole board here for that and I did not know Kevin Davis was not going to be here. Um, Mr. Chair is not wanting
to give up his chair, I guess. So, um, is everybody okay if we just push that off to our next meeting on June 10th? Or does somebody know they're not going to be here then by chance? Looks good right now. Okay.
And let's get that back on our agenda for June 10th, please. Next is my own agenda item on the infectious disease decision support tool. So here's what we have. Um I I wouldn't I wasn't even going to like mention CO
um because it's so out of season, but I actually did want to call attention to the wastewater numbers that they're getting um are actually not detectable in the southern source and in the double digits in the northern source. And it looks to me like those numbers haven't
been that low for for 5 years, I don't think. So, we have astronomically low numbers of samples from the wastewater testing. Um, I'm going to take that as like a really good sign that nothing's going on. And I'm also going to take it
as a sign that maybe that'll mean that when they do go up, if they do go up, that could be a more serious flag to monitor. So, um, I'll keep checking it. We'll keep putting it in there. But right now, um, those are at astronomically low levels. So, uh, we
can feel good about that. Um, arbo virus updates, those start in June when they start doing testing of mosquito samples. So, we don't have any update on that as of yet. Um, but the mosquitoes are out there living the life. So, protect yourself. Um, influenza has dropped to
low and um, so we'll probably stop that. Similarly, the RSV has dropped to very low levels. So, we're kind of out of the respiratory illness season, we hope, and are just going to move forward on our arbirus season soon.
That's all I got. Any questions or comments? >> I love seeing low numbers across the board. It's always It's always pretty. >> Yes, I agree. I'm leaving those red boxes for our vaccinations for last season, but
that doesn't reset yet. Um, I think the only other thing to say is for the public that are watching our meeting, um, I don't think you have anything to worry about honto virus or Ebola virus in case you are worried, in case you hadn't heard that message
repeatedly. Um, that is not something that we need to be worried about in our country right now. So, unless you're traveling to areas that are hotspots for that, and I think you'd be well aware of that and precautions you should be taking, um, you can put those on the back shelf. Not things to worry about in
our community today. Okay, that brings us to our 7:45 p.m. agenda item on administrative matters. We have several meeting minutes to approve starting with uh April 22nd. This is going to take me a second to find them in the packet.
>> Page 80. >> Page 80. >> Okay. Uh let's see here. One, two, three. We can vote on this one. Kevin and Dan, have you um had time to review this one?
>> Yes. I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes as presented for April 22nd, 2026. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion in a second. And Libby, you probably already know this, but you weren't there, so you can abstain from the vote. Uh roll call
vote. Kevin Baker. Kevin >> Baker votes yes. Libby Donigan. We can't hear you. >> Abstain. >> There we go. Uh Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. The media minutes for April 22nd are approved.
Next we have the meetings for April 8th. We cannot vote on those. We do not have sufficient numbers. Next, we have meeting minutes for the March 2nd joint meeting.
And we don't have enough people. We can't vote on that one. And last, we have March 25th, 2026. And we can't vote on that one because we don't have Kevin Davis. He's he's holding us up on the minutes here.
All right. And that brings us to our last item, 7:50 p.m. Our general correspondents and board member updates. Francis, would you like to go first? >> Sure. Thank you. >> Um, so, as you saw in a previous email, we no longer have an administrative
assistant in the office. Um, the job has been posted and is due to close in two days. Um, so we'll see what it brings in. Um, it's a little chaotic, but we're managing. Um, we've been talking to Dana Farber
for a while about um having a mimography van come out uh to our site and um offer free screenings. So, they have set a date with us for July 22nd. Um, we will be sending out some
advertising materials probably in mid June. Um and last um there was an item that we've been getting more and more emails about is um pesticides, pesticide use in town. Um it's a growing topic among many
residents who have inquired with the department. So I was thinking about talking to people who have inquired, putting together some information from the board to look at and have a broader discussion about pesticides used in town. Um, I just wanted to get a temperature on the board for if that
would be okay. >> I would say sure. Um, are they specifically talking about residential, town property, commercial distribution, or all of the things? >> Um, it's a mix. Um, definitely
residential, which doesn't really fall fully within our purview. Um, it's a lot of information, so I'd put together something comprehensive and give a long lead time to read about it ahead of time. >> All right. Thank you.
Uh, anything else? >> We're fully in septic season. It is busier already than last year. All right. Uh, board members, anyone have something to throw out? No. Kevin, >> come on. Dan, what what month is it,
Dan? There's something I'm sure you've got for us. >> Of course there is. It's mental health awareness month. >> So, again, we have um the A11 system. So certainly call for help. Reach out to friends, family, providers. 911 is always an option, but as a 911 provider,
it is an emergency option. There are there are better options for non-emergency or, you know, non-acute situations than that, but obviously 911 is always an option if you need to get that far. Um, other things, it's National Water Safety Month, so enjoy
the water, but make sure you are use appropriate flotation devices for all of your passengers on any watercraft. Make sure people know that you where you're going, when you should be back, so they know when to start looking for you if you are a delayed return. Um the Department of Environmental
Protection um and fishing game and a lot of the water sports organizations have stickers you can put on your watercraft so that if something floats off of your dock and they find an empty canoe, they can track it back to who owns it and figure out did it just wander off in the wind or is someone
missing from that canoe or kayak. Um so please obviously do that. And it is of course National Bike and Motorcycle Safety Month. So, all the gear all the time. Enjoy the the great times out there. Streets are clear except watch for our friends who like to mow their
lawns into the street. Um, grass works like ice cubes for motorcycles in the street. So, please be careful. And again, dress for the ride, not for the or dress for the slide, not for the ride. Long pants, boots, full gear, helmets, you know, all the things that make motorcycleycling uncool but make
the getting back up afterwards a lot easier. Was that enough, Matt, or do you want me to keep going? >> Thank you. That was very comprehensive. >> Okay. Were those all those all May? >> That's all May. So, yeah, we're at the end of May. But yeah. >> Well, yeah. Can we get them all at the
end for June or you're not ready for that? Cuz I >> I'm not ready for that yet. No, I I don't want to tip my hand. >> All right. All right. We can't cancel our early monthly meetings because then we don't have enough time to talk about what month it is. So, >> all right. Thank you, Dan. Uh, Libby,
any updates or anything you want to throw out? >> Um, I guess maybe this could be related to managing mental health. There have been a number of break-ins in my neighborhood and um, I learned recently that people that are know they're leaving town can call the non-emergency
police number to put themselves on a house check list so that it can be surveiled when they're out of town. So, just if anybody's watching and interested and didn't hear about that from the police department yet, that's an option in town. >> Good tip. Thank you.
>> All right. I don't think I have any other updates. Anything from audience members? They There are no more audience members. So, that's all we got. Go ahead, Kevin. like to make a motion to adjurnn.
>> I'll second that. >> Tojourn. >> We have a motion and a second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Libby Donigan. >> Yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And my votes yes. Thank you all for a good meeting tonight. Thanks for being
here. Thanks for your help. Amber