Uh so good evening everyone. This is the community preservation committee meeting of August 27th, 2025. We have a quorum. We will get started. Just a reminder that we are being recorded for um
posterity. Yes. So, mind what you say and mind your eye rolls. I need to be all set. Um, so we have a couple of things. Um, administrative news, mail minutes. Um,
we do have some minutes I sent out. I think one was from the June meeting and one was from like last October. Everyone had a chance. You need pen? No, I think I have others. Linda, did you have any edits?
I do not. I thought they were fine as is. They look great. Must be perfect then. So, do we have um motion to accept? make a motion that both sets of minutes
uh was it October 2024 and what was June 2025 be approved. Oh, it's actually 11:20. Oh, 11. Thank you, Andrew. Second.
All right. Um we'll do roll call since Andrew is outside. Yes. Linda, yes. Yes. Kate, yes. Sam, yes. And yes. And Andrew, yes. Okay.
7 nothing. Thank you. Um the only news I had from the coalition uh was that and this was a couple months ago now, the um the CPA a fund is trending up. Um they had our estimate at 15.9 at town meeting.
They're now saying about 16, which isn't a whole lot more, but um we still have quite a ways to go. Uh last year it was 18.06. So hopefully we at least get to that high, maybe a little bit higher. It would be nice. Um, one of the reasons they're saying
that the the fund is down is because real estate transactions are down and that's the the main um fund um that they get get the money from. So
I suppose if interest rates go down then there'll be more real estate transactions. So everything is connected. the um people I'm sort of in that business and the people refer to the market before April and the market after April market after April not being very good
and it coincides with certain federal governmental things that have happened though we will see how that goes. Um I've Okay, I guess that was the only news. Any other news or
um the next thing on our list is the payment for the community preservation coalition. I think I sent the invoice around and and you kind of heard about the coalition now. So we do pay dues and it's interesting because if you notice it went way up.
Seemed like a lot of money. However, I found Can we do this? So what how they figure it is based on your revenue and of course now that we're getting the matching funds the revenue goes up.
So we used to be in the 1750 category. Um and then of course last with the matching funds I think it was like 800 and something. So we're in this category which makes us now 3500. You say manage funds you mean blended. The blended fun. Yeah. Sorry. So, because they, you know, they gave us
another 400,000, it kind of doubles our pot. So, our dose do go up. Um, it's it's more, but I still think it's worth what we get from it. Um, but when I saw it, I thought, well, that's not right. I
know one one year a long time ago, we fought it. We did. Yeah. Yeah. Um, but what happened? Um, they gave it to us. They let us pay the lower rate. Um,
we could always fight it. Yeah, we could. Um, I mean, they do do good work for the CPA communities. I know. What people what people feel you remember what our rationale was last
time for fighting it that it was so much higher than a previous rate or Yeah. What what basically happened was they had us in a 3% uh category which basically like Caroline said jacked us up to the higher rate um where we were
the equivalent of 3% with the blended funds. So we we basically kicked it back and said hey we're not a 3% community where you know a 1% but with blended funds and they accepted it. So we're still in that aren't we still in that position right now?
Yes. Yes. However, we are taking advantage of the blended funds. Yeah. You know, do you want to push back or should we? I don't feel the need to push back, but if anyone wants to, we could. I think it's worth the money all day
long. We have plenty in the uh the administrative bucket anyway. So, all right. So, we want to make a motion for the 3500. I make a motion to pay the
bill to the coalition for $3500. I second it. All right. Uh Mitt, yes. Linda, yes. Carol, yes. Skate, yes. Sam, yes. Jeff, yes. and Andrew. Yes. Okay, great. I'm take that up to a
attorney. Thank you. Um, see, um, any member updates? Anything to report? No, the uh the historical society has contracted or found the the preservation company. They think they're going to
start the doors at the end of September. So someday you may see us with a funny temporary door, but that's good news. So the tennis courts are well underway under our school. Yes. Yeah.
Talk about that from soccer teams and stuff. That's recreation. area on our Yes. down there. I haven't been over there recently, but yes, the um baseball diamond is going over on Whitcom Field.
So, and the tennis courts, the goal was for them to be open right in this time frame. So, I haven't driven by, but if not done, they should be very close to being done. Yeah, they got to work on that. They did. They did a very good job.
And uh when is tennis season for school? Is that the spring or the fall or I think it's old but don't quote me. Yeah. Yeah. That's a couple of projects going forward.
Yes. I did have one one other thing on uh one of the July select board meetings. They were talking about 550 King Street and they mentioned because there'll be supposedly a you know boutique hotel
going in to 150 rooms I think and they mentioned putting the the Roman meal tax into the CPA there would be another revenue stream um to get blended funds for us. I think they said last year it was a this was Lean or was it this
was the library? Yeah, I think I think it was Gary because I'm I'm thinking I didn't hear about that. It was just kind of one of the open discussion but I thought you know hey and there currently no plans for hotels to start construction.
Yes, it may be out before we see that. But um All right. Is there any public input other than items on our agenda, Mr. Ralph? So, yes, Rocks 25 Juniper Road. So, first, thank you. Conservation
Commission recently approved uh two of the projects to go forward that you had funded the walkway that Andrew um brought before you and also invasive plant removal. So, those got clearance with your funding. Those should get
done. And I think the tenative timeline hope for is um this year still. So thank you. Uh and it's invasive plants that know these folks are familiar with the the water ones. I'm actually here to talk about the terrestrial invasive plants that I know Sam is quite
familiar. Maybe others are as well. Um I'm not representing Littleton Conservation Trust tonight. I am currently a member of Littleton Conservation Trust. So, I'm reasonably familiar with some of the challenges they're experiencing on the 200 acres
that LCT uh basically manages and takes care of for Lumington. I'm also knowledgeable about the existence of um invasive plants on property that isn't owned by LCT and rather town property, whether it's town property that falls
under conservation commission or the select board. And so I was here months ago asking if I as an individual resident of the town can bring forward determination of eligibility in the other document in order and was told no you need to go through different you
know organizations etc. And so what I want to present to you is my question. Don't have any asked here tonight. Want to be real clear about that. But I'm kind of thinking to myself that LCT with its responsibility for managing 200
acres of both town property or property managed by select board or property that it owns itself in Littleton that they might have that standing. And so I recognize and Andrew was very helpful to me over the last couple of days that
when it's a property in your determination of eligibility form, there's a question that says, "Do you have ownership of the proposed property?" So that would result in if LCT wanted to initiate something on a cons
that come through the channels with you. Similar with select board for things like town forest and that sort of thing. But then there's also property that LCT owns that is still available to the community etc. And so I wanted to just
present to you this idea that ultimately I'd appreciate conversation a time where you can there's no timeline on this. there's no urgency, but I do think it's something that I'd like consideration and get a perspective from you so that I
can carry it back to the LCT group and say we have this ability to go this way with consom, go this way with select board and go this way with um LCT properties because invasives from my
perspective are overwhelming uh our community and everywhere else as well. and we're losing the battle and I know as a member of LCT and again not speaking for them um but it's it's now dollars beat warriors
which I'm a member of volunteer efforts the previous conservation agent told me and others give up and some of them I've said no and poured in hundreds of hours and some of her no you know properties but the
reality is it's going to take some money similar to what you've done with regard to your frog pond $30,000 project that you approve so that's all I wanted to say appreciate your time appreciate any consideration you can give to it I'm more than willing to be educated offline
don't need to take the time of all of you but it's something that I think is worthwhile and it's a problem I think exists and I'm trying to find funding sources to deal with the problem. So, thank you. Yeah, that reactions. Well, if I understand what you're
saying, I think wouldn't the LCT already have standing if they came if they put a project before us? Couldn't we review it and vote on it? Right. Is that kind of your question? That's my question. Yeah. I'd like to just confirm that because it was kind of
a new I'm kind of used to seeing different Littleton approved boards, committees and commissions and yet all CT is a 501c3. I think nonprofits can come before us with projects as well as town boards. Correct. Yes. And what is the standing of maintenance
versus improvement or That's the only thing we have to see. Is it is it a maintenance or is it a one-time project? But I'm with you. Um it's awful to drive around town and and and particularly my bug bear strategies
now to see it just taking over and um and I spend you know every day I'm on Longline Park which is a LCT thing and it's not terrible there but what they have a lot of bittersweet a lot of poison
but the parking plan has a lot of not and it's gotten to the point you can't sort of like get out of the parking lot without being hit by a car coming down, you know, the road. So, I I if we could find a if we could
accept a rationale for that being eligible for funding, I I that would be great. And whether you know we approve it or not or the town approves it or whatever, but um I think many people are
educated on the NA situation and I have had it on my property for the whole time I've lived there and I managed to keep it to you know to almost nothing but across the street which was the Northern Bank property. It was terrible. It would
it would almost break up the street, you know. And they did some kind of professional mitigation with some imported from England super vinegar
that worked. So anyway, I mean, but they have guys with, you know, like asthma. [Music] So just off the top of my head, and I don't know if this could fly, but could
we look at it as sort of capital improvement, meaning the land itself is the capital, and getting rid of the invasives would be an capital improvement. I'm I'm willing to stretch in whatever
direction, you know, to make this once again kind of you don't need to approve it, but um to sort of bring it forward or and I would think that every other, you know, the highway, you know, the the
highway department, the conservation commission, they all ought to get um expertise in the end of this. If I could just I think what you've said tonight is very encouraging. So, thank
you. And I think that Jeeoff, what you just laid out, I think there are opportunities with regard to specific invasive plants and treatments that are proposed to eradicate them. Linda, to your point, some of these invasive
plants change the soil. So there's different ways that I'll share your feedback with people who are much smarter than I am about this stuff and we can attempt through identification of proposed portions of property in order
to make an argument that that might seem to fit the parameters that that I've just heard tonight. So thank you. And to just kind of follow up, um I I mean as Rob's highlighted when it comes to treating invasive plant control as uh
you know an eligible project when it comes to the preservation of open space if invasives ultimately run over these properties and destroy their ecology. I mean that's that's the definition of um preserving property open space, right? So that's another way to kind of look at
it. But uh yeah, in in terms of Can you guys hear me by the way? I don't know if this is working. Yes. Oh, perfect. And so the other point I'd like to touch on too that Rob was kind of curious about was, you know, when it comes to funding uh projects on private
property. Um there is precedent for using it in town for the historical society or and the congregational church. And actually, I was just pouring through a few things uh on my computer as we're kind of having this discussion. And CPA does allow for um open space
preservation on private land as well. So it look it would appear that if the trust um did file a uh an application for eligibility and funding, it could potentially qualify, you know, for us for invasive plant control.
Yeah. If I may put in to this is midwer um open space in Massachusetts refers thank you internet to publicly and privately owned land protected for conservation etc and communities develop open space
and recreation plans to guide in planning um and it makes those lands eligible for state grants eligible elig eligible for our grants I would think too and so and even a project um could
could wrap in multiple properties. I don't think it would be against the law to to have a proposal that was brought by say the Littleton Conservation Trust um to help on their properties and additional properties so long as they
sort of so so long as they appeared on some publicly endorsed map like our open space and recreation plan that the town has um given a big check mark to. Um I think it would hold water.
So So it doesn't have to be project specific. I don't have think it has to be public. I mean it doesn't have to be parcel specific. Even mostly they have been I mean our most successful um probably some of the biggest projects we had were over on Route 2A at um
something land. Cloverdale. Cloverdale. Uh the Cloverdale property has had um funding to do basis in the wetlands as well. Um and so I I think it's I think we could
see. Okay. Thank you. That so well that'll go into that next. Um, in between m I just um left this on the agenda, the uh town council's opinion on the clean lakes um the marijuana key
reallocation request. So I want to just get this in the minutes. We since we missed our meeting last time I don't have the letter with me here. Yeah. So um we had um clean lakes in for the marijuana uh
project that we had um applied that they had applied for and had passed town meeting. So we when we talked about it, we said, "Yeah, we think it's okay." But we did I did pass it through um town council just to make sure and went through it and she also agreed with the
the committee's decision um because of that one phrase, the uh the backup plan. So we did get a letter and um I did communicate to to Dave Bar for Lake Meowanaki so that he was able to use those funds for um the other project.
So, just like I say, I just wanted to get that into the minutes, although it's kind of old news. Oh, I'm sure I have that help there. So, that's just a kind of an update. So, what what we were just talking about kind of dubtales in with the next item
that we have, discuss future project applications. And I just like that they're on a spec specificity and general language. We've kind of talked about this a couple of times and this is kind of good timing because um and I'm not sure how I want to start
this or how how I want to talk about it but some of the projects I had noticed that come through and one was like the historical society doors we didn't have a quote we didn't have photos you know we need when do we push back you know should we have have these things we do
have [Music] city I had to put this in. So some of the things this this came off of the um coalition the components of an application uh submission guidelines let's see the
amount of the funding request obviously project description identification of the categories this is all the um simple stuff uh description of the goals the community need and the two important components of an effective application that are sometimes overlooked is a
detailed project budget including other funding sources and selection criteria. Um, and I guess we need to decide, do we, you know, when do we push back? Do we
want budgets and hard numbers? Um, thinking I had a question, someone questioned me on the spec pond bolt engineering plan, which was 30,000. You know, the um eligibility came in at 20,
the final application came in at 30. And someone said, "Well, why would you ever approve a $30,000 engineering study?" And I said, "Well, to me, it didn't sound like a lot of money the way engineering studies felt." But we didn't have a quote. It was just kind of a I think a this is what I think it's going
to be based on conversations I've had from the applicant. Yeah. I think the applicant said he talked to a friend of his who was an engineer, right? You know, but it wasn't anything. I mean, that's a good I mean,
yeah, it's also hard because what you know, chicken and egg, what what comes first? And I think I heard Alicia um day say once, well, it's it's irresponsible of us to go get a quote if we know we don't have the if we don't have the funding yet. So,
I guess my gut reaction is I think it should be an exception not to provide a quote. The rule should be they need private. they could get a ballpark estimate or a back of the envelope estimate at a minimum to give to us I think because it's I think we need that
information to make a decision is what's the cost what's the you know a realistic cost right and then I don't know maybe there'll be projects that could qualify as exceptions for various you know individual reasons but I think we should
get that information I'm meeting you didn't push back if there's a vague you know and I think that particular item did cause some common but not p not in a public forum. So
um these are and you know we have to be mindful too of the procurement law. So this is the under 10 is the most latitude established for contract. That's when you can pretty much, you know, choose who you want to go for. If a contract is between 10 and 50, then
three quotes must be solicited. And contracts over 50,000 supposed to be sealed bids or proposals. And that's why sometimes we ask for 9009,999 instead of 10. Um, but I think we are supposed to be
um, you know, these these guidelines I think we're supposed to be using. But that is interesting what you say because I do I do think I have heard Alicia Day say something along the lines of we can't put in for like you can't
get into the bid process until you know there's a money source because there's so many steps to move forward. Right. And like the school project, they do that by doing the feasibility study
first, which is what this and I think the problem with that particular project was people thought that would be for the whole project. But the way it's written, it's just these ability to determine,
you know, what we need, you know, the brand. So um in cases where there may be this need for um you know this procurement process
that it maybe have to be a two-step process. you get the feasibility study money and which you could call up an engineer and say or an architect or whatever and then when that's process is done I mean that's what shape sponsored
that's what happens with all these these projects I yeah I don't know if that's the answer but that maybe the process I I really have mixed opinions on it because I
think were special in some ways because the the spectrum of projects in terms of their scale is so broad for us. I I don't you know um we've looked at a couple historic properties recently and had discussions around chicken and egg kind of things you know well don't you
want to are you sure you want to preserve it? Is it worth it? you know, that old farmhouse. And then, um, you know, real estate, you want to get there's there's stuff that we're legally bound to do, and I think that's convenient, especially for real estate transactions. There's stuff that involves borrowing on
the town level, and I think that'll get a lot of scrutiny. So, I think we're pretty safe for stuff that's really costly. I think we should be pretty um I don't think we should tie the process up with things. For instance, I think like we've had good track record
with the cemetery projects, but but if if um and we've had quotes on those and we've had quotes, but but imagine that if it was the first round, say the cemetery commission said, "This is the first time we've done this, and we know there's 10 headstones that we want to preserve, and we think they're of
immense value to the town, and what are you willing to give?" Not well, they they would say, "We want $20,000." Say, "Yeah." And then we would sit here as a board and say, "What's it? What's the value to us? Do we think it's worth $20,000 to grant the money?" And then
the money is in that person's hands and then it's up to them to see how far it's going to go. And they may only do nine headstones. So I I think we should think of the smaller people in the process. I don't I understand what you're saying
and I don't necessarily disagree with that. And yet for these cemetery projects, it was easy for us to go out and get a quote that they could do approximately six, you know, 18 gravestones, you know, whatever. So, it's not that hard in some cases to get
those kind of quotes. I sort of agree with you on that. companies out there they know they have to in some cases have to give a quote and especially on town on municipal projects quotes are necessary at a certain level
but I see your point is that we don't want to stifle the you know some of these smaller projects with the process but say for instance the um LCT came forward with you know a proposal for
invasives I mean you could go invasive rental company and get a per square foot price or something, a generic price that would give an idea about what this amount of money could achieve. And then anyway, I mean
to kind of justify what they're well to so people would understand what this how what what we would get for this month. you know, we're going to get a quarter acre cleared, whatever. Um, but
whatever. Um, yeah, I don't I don't think we've done badly. I mean, I've only been on the board for a year or two, but No, I don't think so. But I guess we were thinking of, you know, clean lakes talking about um and maybe not so much
on the quote side but on the the process and you know we talked about I mean John um Pulsome from Clean Lakes were talking at the last meeting about how you were writing for specific projects because that's typically how CPA is. It's a
specific project and had you written that a little broader like I mean if you got that one little phrase in which could be interpreted as a little broader you would have been able to use it for something else but you know what do do
we want what do we want to do? I mean CPA I think is more projectbased but do you know do we start putting these big blanket purchase orders out there that people can go to? We have done that though the I would say the affordable
housing trust operates that way. Yes, that is we did something for the conservation commission to allow them flexibility and those two are allowed by CP. That's the difference. I could historically couldn't do that. I wonder if there's we could sort of
start looking at something in between those two extremes for the clean lakes slip for instance. not so broad that it's a blanket, but maybe something larger than a specific project because of what we already know that we've run into with that. I don't know, not that
we can answer it tonight necessarily, but think about it or by body of water in that instance. But in in your position where you want to have a multi-year,
you know, program um the other belt and suspenders is accountability. I mean, you know, when you come the next year, well, what did you do for the last year's um how you dealt with it? What did you accomplish? And that what you
accomplished may also give you an idea about what you need going forward. So, it's not, you know, I mean, there there could be pitfalls, but I don't think it's I don't think we've, you know, let things go.
No, I don't think so. But I'm thinking like fairness, too, like we were just talking I just wrote down, you know, maintenance. How do we say to LCT, you know, yes, you can do three years of invasive, you know, and then tell clean legs, well, no, you can't. So, you know,
how do we keep it fair and and do the same thing for everyone? Well, Lakes, you provided sort of a, you know, you come here every year and you you referring back to what happened last
year, what was successful, what wasn't successful, what you accomplished, and then you go for the next year, you sort of look ahead. And I mean, you know, I think you could use that as a, you know, with the LCT with the invasives, you
know, student for a year and and um but do we become the fun the exclusive funding me? You know that's when does all this invasive work then become the CPC's exactly
line item which we're not supposed to take the place of municipal funding although they've never had funding so for this Carolyn are you thinking that this agenda item is a beginning of a
discussion for revising the application itself I I don't know. I just like certain thing like I I feel I feel uncomfortable with this just because I want to make sure that we're fair and I'm not sure, you know, how we how we how what we tell
Clean Lakes and how, you know, how do they do it? Do can they do a Long Lake project and and list like every possible thing that could ever happen at Long Lake and say, "Oh, well, now we can it's covered under here." Um it or or do we
go back to you know the project you know the the the passion project I've seen CPA you know called you know for passion projects which is you know I think the original spirit of of uh
of CPA but I just I don't know I something that I I would put in the con conversation either now in the future to this about contingency costs and um exceeding the original. There's been a lot of applicants coming back a second
time or or later saying, you know, is there still time to revise it and you know, the warrant hasn't closed, but we really need this or coming back a couple years a year later and saying we didn't spend it. Could we spend it on this? Right?
Or you know, the project is blocked. Here's our second application for the same thing that you just discussed a year ago. I think that's something important to tell the applicant at the outset. You know, tell us what your expectation is for unseen, you know,
have you have you put in a percentage for over plants, etc. I just um let me just make sure we've all spoken. Andrew or Bartlett, do you have anything to add? Yeah, just a quick note. Um, so when it comes to lake projects, for the most
part, it's invasive plant control, uh, those are the big ticket items that I think we'll be seeing probably over and over again, um, in the near future. I think as long as it's still that narrow scope of invasive plant control in general, whether it's mechanical
removal, herbicide, dredging, if we wind up getting permission for that, I I think there are just so many different avenues under that umbrella that it's still a narrow focus invasive plant control, but at the same time, there's just so many different avenues. So, I think it's very doable in the future. And just to kind of circle back too on
like uh forcing uh official quotes for projects, I I kind of I agree with Nit's point that we don't want to stifle the you know the little applicant and I know getting quotes is like pulling teeth for a lot of different projects. Like it's it's next to impossible sometimes. So I
think you know Linda had mentioned kind of that back of the envelope uh rough quote. uh ultimately if a project gets approved and uh it goes out to bid and everybody's over bid it's not going to happen anyway. So it's uh yeah it's just one of those things but I think it's
workable but we really it's a balance because we do want that due diligence on the side of the applicant. You know they can't just throw anything at us. Uh it's a high bar to get consideration by our committee and approval ultimately. So I I think a reasonable back of the
envelope style uh figure at a minimum would be probably be best. So you mentioned it like having it as a narrow scope. So like in in on John's application where it was narrow. Yeah. Yet he wasn't able to use those funds
this year and wanted to apply them to something similar. Yeah. That's where it gets a little dicey. Uh I I I think it's it's doable, but it really just kind of requires like like John um you know taking everything
into account at the beginning of you know planning the project and saying you know what like Caroline you mentioned you know what else could potentially fit under this umbrella of um you know open space preservation. Uh but yeah so like plan B like plan B like like they did for Madawani.
Exactly. maybe a little more specific. Yeah, the better defined the better. Otherwise, we're kind of interpreting, you know, one sentence and that everything hinges on it. So, yeah, absolutely. If they could make it a little more defined, that would be great. Yeah. So, if you could define it for
like invasives and then the backup plan would be herbicides, but you wouldn't want to put new docks in the same Right. So, hey, we've got extra money. We want a fishing dock. Yeah. Yeah. So, but under invasive, you know, just
what Andrew just said, under invasive plant control, the application could say, you know, there's various options. There's eco-h harvesting, there's herbicides, that whatever. And, you know, that would be we we will select one of these methods
as a best, you know, best practice or whatever. All right. And maybe this commission should have a conversation with like the DPW or whoever like for invasive plans so that we're not the sole
funding source. Maybe we have a conversation with the town about right. Yeah. I think main likes is attempting to be a line item eventually. We we are slowly but sure. I see.
Question if I might. uh on end request uh is it does it make any difference at all? Perhaps I should ask, but I will ask uh if you would rather see uh a project come in uh under budget so it frees up
additional money so it's not spent returns to your coffers or or would you see a project that ran over and we have to make another application for further funding uh of you? Uh is is there a preference one way
or the other? Of course, if it comes right in on the nail, you know, great. Yeah. But uh uh but but if there was an overage or an underridge, is is is there's some advantage to the committee uh in terms of of maintaining uh resources or
not really. I mean, if if it comes in under budget, we just put the money back where it came from. If it's over, that's like the applicant. you then have to wait for another funding cycle. So um I don't I don't think I have any opinion
when or you know I think you were saying like you know part two of a project is that with that and sometimes it's not like poor planning it's just like something happens you know if I don't currently having a problem with oides uh
on the uh mill pond uh uh path renovation uh to access the boat launch Um, engineering costs have gone ridiculous and $20,000 will not now be enough for us to renovate an existing
hat. Very embarrassing, but requirements, mostly new requirements through uh cons uh for engineered drawings and an analysis of runoff on the same bank that water runs off now uh only with a longer
path. Um, this is kind of distressing to me, but there it is. Uh, we'll be doing that engineering and I think we'll probably seek another source or in fact come back to you for the actual labor to do this project. We'll see how it goes. at Conscom. I'm
telling you, you'd be listening, we also have a new storm water bylaw that was promoted, I mean, it was promagated by the state, but that is what you're doing. And tree roots.
happen. I just want to throw out I I think my experience of watching and being here, I've seen rather a quick sequence between the determin determination of eligibility document and request consideration and then the the project
and I just wondered as as I'm thinking about it in order to address this will subset primarily the quote and back the envelope or however it wants wants to be framed that if you could differentiate with regard
to your expectations with regard to quotes between the two because I think a determination of eligibility in the meetings dealt with here and other places thinking about coming before you it's it's more than a germ of an idea a
lot of work's already in involved to bring it to you for determination eligibility but it may not have reached the place that it's more if it's in excess of 10 grand to get three quotes it probably isn't there as yet. And I just wonder if you could feel like you
could adequately give a determination of eligibility for a dollar amount and you could accept something less than the, you know, prescribed number of quotes for that determination of eligibility and then
reinforce with whoever's requesting it of you with regard to that's okay for this one, but in the next one we're going to need this volume and just wanted to throw that out. It's a possibility in if everything was wonderful. My dream
is that someone comes in with an eligibility request 3 months before the application and it just doesn't happen. If you look at what we have in our um rules and regulations, I think we have people coming in. Clean
Lakes has done great because we've kind of molded you to to us. we've been able to uh get there, but you know, a lot of times like the parking w you know, it comes in on, you know, right the week before we have to get it on to the warrant. So, I think that's the the
template is you you submit an eligibility, we talk it over. What do we want? Do we want photographs of this? Do we want quotes? They go back and then they create the application. That's great if you have time. Okay. Um but I think we have found that well I think that's just good for me to
know he hasn't these folks have done the work you've reviewed them I'm still learning and they may come that they sometime might not be able to you know there might be something all of a sudden April where they say but what I'm hearing you say is determination of eligibility is a lower
bar than say the project you know quest okay especially ones that keep coming I mean obviously now we know that invasive plants is eligible. I mean, we almost don't need the eligibility for that. It's like the gravestones. I mean, we've done that, you know, a few years in a
row. So, um, but if it's a brand new project of something that someone's not really sure about, you know, like when we were doing the houses and things like, you know, is is this acceptable? then you really want a little bit of space in between so we can look things
up and you know research and and I know in years past we kind of looked at other communities where maybe there's a a few eligibility requests that come in um towards the beginning of the fiscal year and we kind of save the funding
applications until you know maybe a couple months before the warrant closes to kind of lay everything out and say okay this will get funding this year. This could probably wait just because uh you know, who knows what the future holds. What if the um competition for
the different categories gets uh intense? We might have to make hard decisions like that as opposed to you came in the door first, you get the money. So, we do eligibility. And I think we had talked about potentially doing that at some point, but I mean, we're all guilty of that last second like, "Oh my
god, CPC, here's this project for town meeting, right? Yeah, the timing is so hard and I isn't it westward, Andrew that like they have a hard cut off. West where they hear like everything and then they stop and then they go and look
at everything as as one big Yeah, Harvard Harvard does that too because they don't um delineate the um the categories like we do um in terms of you know open space gets this percentage, historical gets this. So everybody kind of has their bucket. It's
just one big bucket that they kind of split up. But yeah, but food for thought maybe for the future, but we do what we can. Yeah, I I I mean I love them, but I just don't see how we could ever say everybody has to have an
invite to set the end of December. It just um especially with the you know the capital projects coming through because what the town says we have to kind of play along and yet these other towns do it. I don't know how they do it, but they somehow do it. I'm sure they sneak some through.
Mr. Bar, you had your hand up earlier. Do you still have a Yeah. So, I guess you know, you were talking about ways to have a bit more generality in terms of like in specifically uh looking at the lake um
issues. Um would it be appropriate to say that in some cases we're looking uh like you said to eradicating or managing uh aquatic
invasive plants and uh that's the objective and uh we don't know exactly uh you know but a year from now or two years from now what the actual conditions are going to be and which the
best most appropriate method to use for it would be at the time. But that that's the objective and if the funding is used to deal with aquatic invasive plant management for
instance that would be acceptable. Or does it need to say uh it would be uh echo harvesting or it would be uh herbicides or it would be diver assisted suction harvesting um but but nothing
else or maybe potentially those and maybe something else. And if it's something else that still falls in the under the umbrella of invasive aquatic plant management and it wasn't one of the things that was supposed to be listed, we would come back and say is
this okay? But the umbrella uh project was been approved by town meeting and it's just up to you to say yeah that's still in what we're what we've got in mind. And I I just want to chime in and say I
don't know if it's this committee's place to exactly dictate what form of removal or control it would be because also what if some new technology comes along and then you're unable to utilize
that unless there was a catchall effect. There could be any number of like like last year where we were planning to do echo harvesting this summer and we weren't able to but we you know would have been able to do something else or like you know so there's any number of reasons but if
we're saying generically or with sort of the the focus and the reason is to do this and we may use different but possibly different uh methods to do it but this is the objective is that an appropriate
approach or maybe using the best the best methods that are available, right? To to accomplish this for that particular reason, right? Yeah, Dave,
go ahead, Andrew. I'm sorry. I was going to say, Dave, I think you hit the nail on the head. Keep the objective as invasive plant control and then in the application list, you know, it may be performed via, you know, a number of techniques. lists the possibilities like put everything under the sun and it just basically says if
we're giving you $80,000 to do it uh you can spend up to that amount using any combination of these methods um you know as permitted and I I think you'll be covered and one of them would be or best possible method yeah you know so that you have
or you know best you know whatever the expert recommended from procedure is something new could come up that's not we're not even aware of and I would hate for you to be like this is the new best way to do it and because
we didn't list it we're out of luck. I wonder I wonder if we could ask under those circumstances for them to let us know what that method is and describe it to us so work out with our money. Yes,
I I think we're talking about specificity here, which is um one of the things um about this application process we want to discuss. And if and I think Dave's example is excellent, but I I don't think it's necessary to list all
the things. um noting what the um the council's opinion on the reallocation request when reading that letter, they focused not at all on technical matters, nothing on biology. It had to do with the spirit of CPA and the CPA law is so
sparse in its language. The lawyer has nothing to do but fall back on to preserve or or cons or or Yeah. to um well, that's not totally true because the reason that she the lawyer said yes, it's it's permissible is because
herbicide treatment was included in the original application. So, there was some technical information. Okay. Interesting. Well, then I guess my question would be what if an applicant came in and just said, "We're going to
we want $20,000 to support the wellness of lakes. We're going to preserve the open space. Um, I don't want to get a little too, but you would want to say invasive work, which could include herbicides, eco-h harvesting, or
whatever. And I think the word good there is is helpful. Yeah. But also bolize their intent. Bartley, did you have something? Well, I just um want to say I agree with with Andrew and with um most of what's been
said that that um a a stated goal of invasive removal um with some listed proposed methods is is fine. and I'm working on the the uh the model of housing which is you know
support of of affordable housing and and um we I guess we apply for grants you know specifically for for rental support and for purchases and stuff but um I
think that you know stating the goal with possible means of accomplishing it is is is fine. And and I don't think we need to go more than that. Mr. Bar, did you have something further? I'm just going to I mean to Linda's you
know comment I think the reason that the town council had to fall back on that specific fact that we had uh identified herbicides as a possible alternative was because in the first place the request
was specific to echoh harvesting. Right. You're right. And and if if we had said instead that we wanted to deal with uh aquatic invasive plant management instead, then uh it wouldn't
have needed that. Yeah, you're right. Yeah. I I do have a question. If if Clean Lakes Committee, for example, came back and said there's a new invasive species that has taken over the lake, would that
be a separate request to manage then? As long as they don't Oh, go ahead, Andrea. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. So, essentially, invasive plants would be under the same category. So whether it was, you know, one particular variety that was existing or like you said a new one emerged, I
would assume under the same application, you could still attack them all and uh get rid of them. But even if it was like worms or another fish or something like a species, not a landsl. Oh. Oh, yeah. Yeah. I mean, you could just maybe tailor the application to say
uh aquatic uh flora and fauna. Yeah. Just the reality also of invasive critters coming our way.
Yeah. Yeah. So I don't know if that you know Yeah. Like if then they go but beaver dams up or beaver dams down or whatever is that would that be or that's more controversial.
Yeah. Yeah. No, I was trying to think of what might be my brain is going to I I was just in a different country and they had to bring in divers to try to get rid of the invasive fish cheese. So, anything's
possible, right? Yeah. There are even lakes in the state that have to deal with that. Yeah. Fish or slugs or clams. Yeah, exactly. So, I just wanted to see see what we think about that to help alleviate
issues in the future. I don't I don't know. Well, like maybe what Andrew said, include fauna, flora and fauna. Um, yeah. So, I guess that might give Does that give you a little, you know, I kind of think
we're all kind of in consensus that we could broaden the project a little bit, even making, you know, while making it specific to a type of project. So, you know, again, you wouldn't want to put docks in with invasive species, but if you could just for a body of water,
have something that's invasive things, right? So, for instance, we've been working on a five-year plan and and you know, part of it is, of course, dealing with invasive species and such, but uh one of the things we're
looking at is uh a lake developing lake management plans for the lakes that don't already have them where we bring in professionals to look at our whole situation and say, "Here's what you've got in your case and here's what your options are. Here's what we recommend."
that would be something separate from dealing with the invasive plants on a actual on the ground you know doing something basis. So those would be separate requests but you know actually dealing with the
trying to fight the utrification would be sort of what we've been talking about. Yeah. Yeah. So, has this commas has this committee ever funded management plans of different We actually just did we did
Yeah, we actually just did for frog pond an invasive uh plant management plan. Um that'll coincide with the actual work. No, but I mean did the commit did the CPC give money to that? Yep. For the man. We did for the management
plan. Yep. Okay. was all wrapped in. I remember the frog plan, but I didn't remember it. The other thing is that kind of consultancy would allow you to be more specific in
any other grant, any further grant application. Hopefully, it's almost actually asking for. Yeah. Right. Right. And based on what Andrew said earlier, it might be good to include that under the umbrella of o open space
and preservation of the open space, right? Because you can probably take it back to the open space and recreation plan and maybe even the master plan. Yeah, too. So, I think that should be a consideration. just uh if you didn't hear what I said. No, I heard it. I just didn't understand
it. To to help to help your cause. Yeah. Think of preserving it as open space. Yeah. The man not just management but the preservation. So yeah. Yeah. No, I understand. Yeah.
So that's that's the kind of way that they describe that. But it's it's basically I mean all everything we're doing is trying to preserve the quality of the lakes and keeping them from utrifying uh you know if you look at the
example of Mil Pond which used to be 12 ft deep and well sorry but and and you know a real lake and now it's 3 ft deep and um not as
yeah um I think um I want to just weigh in here that um I don't think you could exclusively um use CPA funds. I mean you couldn't use CPA funds for a project that was exclusively consultation
developing a plan for the lakes. I don't think that's allowable. I think it has to be tied to a specific project. So you can support the project. I mean it depends on the verbs. The verb has to be preserve, conserve,
purchase. Well, this is this is and the only one that has more or well the one category that has a lot more leeway in this is a community housing where the verb is support. You can use some funds to support community housing,
but you can't support conservation programs, the CPA funds. You have to use the funds to support a project whose end goal is a material asset or or the preserving of
some natural or historic feature, but it could be part of a specific, you know, they want to preserve the water and they want to have this operation
and they want and have someone tell them what to do. Yeah. But but with a specific purpose. I I don't Yeah. Well, yeah. So, the the
purpose of the preservation plan would be to give us guidance. So the objective is we want to maintain we want to preserve the resource we resource we have we have a finite number of lakes
they have certain quality and we want to keep that quality and how do we do that we're we have experience but we're not professionals and we would like to get the advice of professionals on how best
to preserve these resources and we could make it as a sort of one two project and say here's the here's the objective and the first step is to get guidance on it and the second step is actually doing it. uh do you
want us to put it all together now or can we split it up and uh say you know we want the guidance first and then once we know what the guidance is then we have a better uh information about what we should be requesting to actually deal with it
and to Dave's point as kind of like a followup with that um planning is technically an allowable um activity under the the act um if you consider planning to be a mechanism of eventually eradicating open space. I think potentially it could be allowed and in
the past we have funded pure plans uh like alumni field we did pay $100,000 purely for a plan and not a project. So I think in this instance we could actually do something similar to that. When did do we ever find, you know, the
uh historic preservation surveys? Did we ever we had didn't we get money for Jennifer Dhy to Well, she did surveys. So, we never have had done we've never
done like a preservation point. No. No. Have to look into that and see if that there's always that's a thing with CPA. It's very gray. you can always find a way to get it in. But Mitt's right, if
it's simply a project plan or management plan, could we just without tying that to anything? We'll have to see if that's right. And Andrew, could you talk a little does anyone here remember the 100,000 for the alumni field plan? What
was that all about? We only aid money from our plan. Yes. So, and I I think when it comes to we we just spoke about like, you know, a plan being tied to a project. To Dave's point, I think you could technically
file a u a funding eligibility request for a plan to do work or you know a project in the future as a separate application. But um yeah, so in the past I think it was 2014 we did fund a um uh a plan essentially for alumni field um
just a pure plan without any actual you know work or site work. And I know it that that was considered allowed under the act um and I think a lot of other communities have used it for that purpose. So I think as long as you have uh that planned future project in mind I
I think purely uh developing a management plan or you know a plan for a particular project would be allowed as like its own standalone project or sorry application. Andrew was did that plan result in a
like specific budget for the field or what? So I think it was a mixture of not only site plan you know design but as you know as well as planning to to gather those estimates. Uh I think at the time there there were rough you know
estimates as to what the total project would cost but I think it was all part of that planning stage. Maybe we could get more information about what we approved and yeah, I'm sure it might be helpful for us going forward. Can you can you feed all the notebook
into AI? And I know I don't go back that far. Oh, I need a bigger notebook. Um I probably have it at home. So if I was on the committee at that time, you might have in your archives.
Uh yeah. I think I Yeah, I think I might somewhere I'll see if I can dig something up and uh forward it to Caroline. Good point. And the other thing is if if you know, Andrew, if you think it's allowable, like planning is mentioned somewhere in
the CPA information, you know, that it's legally allowed. That would be helpful, too. We could find that in the CPA. We could ask CP ask the coalition since we're giving them more money now. I'll pay the dues. Yeah,
that's a good point. When the check is cleared, I'll email them. Yeah. Okay. All right. Yeah, let's We'll take that as a to-do to really look into that to see how we need to touch that for our future. It would be also interesting.
I don't even though I was on the space committee at the end, Andrew, I don't remember how the lakes fit in and what all that language was. I need to look at the plan about what was stated for preserving
lakes in that plan. Yeah, lakes were definitely touched upon in quite a few areas. Um, it was the same with the last two plans as well where the town's people really prioritized, you know, their health because that might also help, you know,
lead us. Okay. All right. But I think that gives you kind of an idea of where we're headed. It sounds like we're all kind of in agreement. Yeah. So that's great. Um
so May May obviously we don't have a a schedule yet, but I'm sure they'll be coming soon. But I think last year you came in like December or something, December, January. And you know, since we already kind of been through the eligibility once already, that that
should be fairly easy for you to do. Is that a is that a good time? December. I think so. December. Yeah, because we'll have to vote usually by March, our March meeting, because the the more usually closes mid-March. Depends on
what the calendar looks like. Um sometimes we're before it, sometimes we're after. We can always call a special meeting. But if we could, you know, be able to vote by February, February, March time frame,
that would be good. Okay. Um, any last comments, I'm kind of I'm glad you asked because I'm I'm not comfortable being among all of you if you say we're all in agreement on this. I I feel more
and more like community preservation. The the key word is preservation and the spirit of the community preservation act is to preserve things that we have and they don't have to be physical things. That's why open space is part of it. But the land that we live on is a physical
thing. And I think that's that is really um and so that includes lakes and ponds and stuff. So uh that there is there are avenues that money will flow down towards uh projects like those the
clean lakes committee. But I think design is something to really be careful about because when I do a second search um on the internet it says that um funds must be used for a capital project. The design costs specifically must be associated with an eligible capital
project not for routine maintenance or non- capital planning. This sounds like non- capital planning. So I'm not trust I'm not totally trustworthy of the AI generated return on this but but it does make me say well when I
reflect on it what's my philosophy on um spending is that um non- capital projects or non- capital planning is is line item stuff. That's what the that's where the board of
select people should step up and say we want to support clean lakes and towns. So we need to fund an office and we need professionals who do the work to advise them and we contract or we hire them through the water department that is
like the province of that board. I think what we do is special and unique. Not unique, it's just special in a different department which is not planning. It's about uh it's about
specific or urgent or material needs that the community has for preserving something in spirit of CPA. Accomplishment more than planning. Yeah. And planning is necessary, too.
But I think we I I'm other than housing, I think I'm really ler to provide like this comes up all the time with recreation. I'm very lerary about our committee being the sole avenue of funding for for the parks and
recreation department because um their their their revenue through their programs is good, but it's not significant to what they need to accomplish. the kind of projects that they're promoting in hundreds of thousands of dollars. No, they're not
going to fund that through fees and programs. They need a reliable stream through town meeting that is not through CPA. I think you don't disagree.
Well, I think that's one thing we need to do is find definitively, you know, kind of plans we be part of a project and let them know. We need to let you know and have that stated more clearly. I mean, maybe we even change
our guidelines to have that in there. You know, management plans are not an allowable funding. So, clarification on it. I'm sorry. And go ahead. Oh, no. John, go ahead. Sorry.
Thank you. U I'm looking at a at a lake management plan as a as a guide much like an engineering plan for uh new dock at Spec Pond. Uh they are it's it comes from the
same source. Uh and it's an armature to move forward on whatever project you're working on. That has to be tangible. This is instrumental to moving forward. We're challenged by people who say, "What are you doing that for? What are
you what are you what are you doing the the herbicide treatment at Long Lake for? I mean, who told you that was the way to go?" Well, if we have an engineering form, assess our lake and say, "Look, under the circumstances, I
would recommend that this is this is this is the formula. this is the way forward. This is this is this is our guidepost. I think that's imperative and I think you're doing that all the time. Whether it's parks and wreck, whether it's Long
Lake or whether it's uh uh uh CLC, uh regardless, there's a plan and that's tangible. That's that's that's that's an asset. That's without that plan, you can't move forward. You put you produce plans all the time
and you fund plans all the time, constantly, always. It's part of what you do. It's what you offer. You're replacing uh you're restoring the the the doors at the historical society. There's a plan for that and that's part
of the cost. Yeah. And John, just to follow up, I really see that plan as a a tool, right, as a means to get that work done. Absolutely. Absolutely. So did we I mean my memory may not be
correct but were there times where we funded a PL you know a plan or or design or architect you know an architect or engineering plan and then the project fell through
but we paid for the plan and then the project didn't happen. M what about the what about the tennis courts that when they oh the first the first go around over at Cooper um but Cooper that got pulled though.
Yeah. But when when these tennis courts were torn down at Shadic Street, you know Joe when Joe Laney was here and they put a project Did that ever actually go through? I don't think that was ever heard of it. When I joined Parks and Wreck, they I
was told that when those there was no plan for the tennis courts at all, which was why Parks and Wreck was pushing. They said some, you know, the tennis courts were coming offline, but there was nothing for the community to bring
back online. there was nothing in the works yet, which was why I think Alicia Day took it under her review to make sure we got something since they were removed. So, I don't I don't know.
There was no plan. That's what I've been led to believe. Yeah. And it's a part of funding that project. There had to be a plan made, but it was part of the project funded for for the um
senior center there. those tennis courts were removed, but there was nowhere in their budget that they would new tennis courts would be built somewhere else, which is sidebar why I'm pushing so hard on Shaker Lane to make sure that fields
are part of that land so that the town doesn't get stuck in the same spot with you have open land but no money to do anything with it. And that's a great point. We'll have to do some research here and
find we have our funded plans. We definitely did for alumni. [Music] Yeah. Yeah. Let's It' be good if we could find something about that. I don't know. It's a long time ago.
So would your management plan let's say um would it have specific projects in the plan or not necessarily. Um it would uh it would identify what the
specific issues are that are uh causing the lakes to uh be degrading and what the causes of those are and uh
should uh identify uh methods to deal with those. uh and there are there would be a number of methods and uh unfortunately none of
them on their own is going to be enough to to deal with it and it may be that so it's challenging right but so that would be the idea is to identify what is it that's really causing these legs to
degrade and what are our options for trying to uh deal that and avoid it. And that plan actually researches those things and spells them out for us. It's not it's not suggesting a a course
of of of investigation. It does the investigation. It's a document of research that gives us guidelines to say you think you have invasive plant problems, but your real problem is some seepage from some source you're not even
thinking about. that's what's causing fish to die. There's so many different factors that you want to consider that are specific to each body of water that u I I think it's a it's a strong argument that we need a management plan
for each pond and uh they will be specific and I should think an engineering firm like they would do a plan for a for a a boat launch or something like that. It's it's the exact same engineering that goes into this. Uh
and and and it is it's a it's a finished product in and of itself. It's a it's it gives us direction for the future. Uh Spec Bond is is having theirs done this year. Uh I think it's a renewal of one that's like 25 years old. Uh so again,
it's an update. Uh but who's paying for that? Um what's coming for that? Uh I think that was water commissioners. Um that came from the water commissioners because we couldn't do eco- harvesting.
It was kind of a little swell. It might be better to call it an assessment than recommendations of that's more what it what it I'm wondering if it's a matter of words. Um and I also wonder if it's
more oer if it's it's part of an actual budget, but whatever. You know, you'll have to go and find out what this costs. Maybe it's this huge amount of money that is not going to come from us anyway and you have to go
to some other, you know, selectman or water or whatever. Um anyway, but this again I'm trying I'm trying to see the difference between a plan for say a boat launch uh and and and a
management plan how they're any different. Well, in your in your I I don't I challenging you on that. Oh, I'm just just inquiring. I mean it come from an engineering firm who puts together analysis of shoreline
conditions and it specificity again we're sort of getting back to project specific versus so or if we thought about it more would we not really approve the engineering plan for spec pond you know is that
well one comes before the milk the milk pond was part of it was like the actual work plus the plan. Mhm. Um yeah, and and you you're right about the spec one. You know, that may not
have been the thing to do. However, it was approved by town meeting. And these are the kinds of things I think that I'm thinking about them thinking should do we need to pay more closer attention to what we're Yeah. I I don't understand the sticking point though. That's that's
Well, should we not have done that that spec pond? Should we have said this is an And that's what we need to find out is an engineering plan or a management plan. Are those are they is there a difference? Is there something that because it didn't include the actual construction?
It wasn't the construction. Could we pay for the construction but not for the plan? Is that something you know we didn't think about? Yeah. But John, I just think the I think the committee is just trying to figure out in the spirit of CPC,
what are we supposed to do and how are we supposed to be following the law and just making sure it's equitable as Caroline said was saying before maybe we should only be funding specific, you know, preservation of
specific assets, physical assets, whether it be land or housing or you know whatever. I don't know. I don't have an answer to the question. I think we have to reset. I don't think anyone's saying no. I think we're just saying that we're trying I'm sorry. I just I didn't realize that
that wasn't a question. No. Amongst the the members just talking it through and trying to figure out how brainstorming with the spirit of what it's doing and making sure it's in the right. You're really you're interested in in in
capital improvements. Yes. something tangible. Yes. This not exclusively. This this fence needs to be painted. We painted the fence. You guys provided the paint and the labor and that's a capital improvement. I I'm
looking at the do guidelines um which is um and the do department of revenue in in Massachusetts created a chart called community preservation funds allowable spending purposes and it's handy to look at because they they take the law and
they break it down into columns and they take the verbs out of the law and the law is is very tur and it says you can use funds for open space to protect existing fields, grasslands, forest, water,
marshes, ocean, river, streams, and protect wildlife and nature preserve and land for recreational use. And then you can do that by means of acquisition, which we're not doing here, creation, which we're not doing. You you can bring
into being or cause to exist open space. um preservation is the one that's really a gray area. Nobody knows how to interpret that and and so I think and until and there's little precedents for this either so few court there's been
few court cases about this at all. Nobody is suing people to say you're preserving the ponds incorrectly. Right? So you could make the case that your plan your your planning process was in order to
preserve the open space. In other words, to protect personal or real property from injury, harm or destruction. I think that's pretty broad. It's pretty broad. But you want to name the lakes. I mean it's it gets there is
some deep you have to be it. I guess that's why it has to be a project or that's why people read it is that that um the the action has to be toward the open space.
I just had a brain blast here um in terms of a standalone a standalone plan. The 2025 sorry 2024 open space and recreation plan was actually funded by CPA monies and that's a standalone plan that Yeah.
So that's a prime example, right? Yeah. I'm just looking at that here. What year is that? I think we did this is in 2021. Yeah, we did a historic survey too of town properties, right? But that wasn't a plan. That was a survey of
all the properties. We didn't create any historic resources. Okay. Yeah. the CP uh funded the planning the planning group. They're called planners who did the open space and recreation.
Yeah, it was and that would have fell under the preservation column on historic resources were preserved by means of writing plan. So
these are all words are words that need to be arrayed in a particular way and it seems like that can be done. Yeah. Interesting. Well, thank you all.
Yeah. So this is, you know, it seems like it's possible, but we have to work through it a little bit more. Yeah. And just be consistent again. I think the key Okay, we'll work through it some more. We'll get the answers to those and see what
we've done in the past and see what other towns do. That's always a good thing, too. you figure, you know, if three other towns have done it, then you don't even you're not supposed to do that. But well, but your comment was really good. And I know that in planning, you know,
we have new state regulations that have come out in various ways in the last couple years. And when you go to you know uh presentations by the state officials who were actually writing the regulations they emphasize that these
are just regulations. the actual um impact of them will be determined through years of court cases and um so you know because there's just
so much ambiguity and if there aren't aren't having court cases then they're not strong well no maybe there's no issue you know so I don't know who would bring the court in space would be a citizen or
I suppose the CLC could come and say No, I'm saying if they challenged us on some what we on what we Yeah. Yeah. I know because where town meeting is the one that right they're the ones that the arbiters of
not that they and I think everything goes through town council anyway. I mean, not sure how much they look at each project, but Well, the more you ask them to look, the more confusing, you know. Oh, Bartlett, did you have something?
Yeah. Um, I I just wanted to say that um we've um hired consultants before as part of a project. And it seems to me that that, you know, if Clean Lakes goes
to gets a consultant and says, you know, here's a here's a lake or a pond. What do we do to keep it the way we want it? And the consultant says, okay, do thus and such. Um
the the they can make that into a plan and it's that's part of the project. And I I don't really see what um the what the issue is, you know, with with that kind of getting getting a consultation or a consultant's opinion,
whether you call it an opinion or a plan. Um it seems to be the to me to that's just semantics. It's part of the project. You have to have some you have to know what you're going to do before you do it. Go ahead. I think part of the issue is if there's
a general management plan of whatever, a lake, a property, whatever, a house. Um, but but then it's not really tied to any specific preservation project. I think that's maybe the issue,
right? Does the outcome of a plan have to be a CPA project or should should the outcome be a CPA project? really well the objective is to preserve this
open space uh and uh you're supporting that process whichever part of the process you're supporting it seems like you're working to preserve the open space. If you fund this part and
somebody else funds that part, uh, it's all part of the same process. I would agree with Dave. I think as long as the ultimate goal of the plan is an eligible or something that would be deemed eligible by us, I think it would
qualify. All right, we'll have to sleep on this. Um, I'll leave it I'll leave something similar on the next meeting just in case we want to discuss it some more. We don't have to, but um, we can get the answers to these questions, too. Good.
And if there's any other questions that come through, just send them to me and then, you know, we can compile them. Mr. Bar, we're done with this chat. I should probably mention uh related to the previous topic where you know you're talking about the
town council had agreed that it's appropriate to as it turned out uh for several reasons. Uh we weren't actually able to do the herbicide. Oh,
uh hardly uh the expectation was that uh we were only going to be doing city lace committee was only going to be doing herbicide treatments on Madawani, not on spectacle pond because the water department had said you can't do herbicide treatments on spectacle pond
anymore. as a result of uh conservation commission and thin lakes uh uh collaborations with DCR and having some sessions to discuss the overall issues. Uh the water department decided
that it would be okay, it would be acceptable to do herbicide treatments on spectral pond and so it was decided that that should be part of the process too. When that was added in, the overall cost became high enough that it needed to be
bidded out, which ended up taking uh another month. Uh in addition, uh Westford Conservation Commission had some requirements in their
permit for doing the herbicide treatments on the lake because the lakes in Lton and Westward and we had to go back to them to get final approval on the uh plan that was proposed by the vendor and DCR and that took another 3
weeks. And then by that time the the herbicide treatment was going to be basically mid August which is not really effective. Um and so unfortunately for many reasons uh this they all
contributed to uh not uh going ahead with it because it wasn't going to be productive at that point. We appreciate that the chance, but that's sometimes the way things happen. All right. Well, that money will sit
there for a couple years. Yeah. So, we'll plan to next year we're I mean, clean committee has hired uh contractors to uh develop uh permits for dredging, which is what the D said we
have to do before we can do uh ethical harvesting. So uh for Madawani the expectation is that we will have a significant uh echo harvesting uh operation next treatment next summer. Uh
we're also going to Westward CPC this fall uh in discussing with them the the herbicide uh request for permits. one of their members was on the conservation commission too and they
suggested that we bring that request to them so that hopefully we can uh do ech harvesting on the whole lake. We'll have to see whether that works or not. But anyway, yes, we're planning to apply this to the harbicide treatment permits
will be in place as a backup. Yeah. or mechanical harvest or other city drive the shovel okay so I think we'll we'll put that on the discussion for next next time so we can sleep on it and it's usually when
I'm brushing my teeth that I think of great things um the next thing is just a real quick kind of si similar grant agreements now we do a grant agreement with the affordable housing trust and you should do a grant agreement if it's not a town owned a town entity. So the
historical society is not. So technically I think we're supposed to do a um grant agreement with them. We didn't do one for the windows. That project is already done. Um I didn't know if you wanted me to put one together for the door project. Um
it it's again it's just kind of a you know it's supposed to be a safeguard to make sure that you know you're using the money like you're supposed to when you do I think it's almost done right. Well, no. The door project is the window project. Yes, that's completed. So, it's kind of that's kind of water under the
bridge, but we could do one quickly for the door project if you felt I mean, it is a town property. It's just that it the entity that came forward with the application is a nonprofit. How much was the budget for that? Was it a hundred? Oh, it was.
Yeah, it was. Oh, Caroline, would that same apply? Oh, same. Um uh I'm sorry. The uh memorandum or agreement, would that also apply to the commission that the Jonathan Wickham Commission? I'm sorry.
Oh yes. Yes, that's right. Can I can I just say something before you guys leave? Thank you so much for all your work. We'll keep you. Thank you for your app. Thank you, John. Thank you, Dave. Have a
good night. Bye, Andrew. Could I hear you're right the um the commission the um document that we were going to have preserved which I think is being worked on now we could do that but I I think technically we are supposed to to
do those I'll put drafts together and make it very generic so that it's simple and would apply to the next project the next project right like we were doing with affordable housing it's just kind of a template now so Um, I think they have templates on the coalition
website. It's just I don't know. We never have thought to do them before and it does say that you're supposed to. So, all right. Transfer LHS. Um, any projects coming forward? Are you
going to for May? Have you heard any? No, but um what day is tonight? Today's the 27th. We will have um a meeting in early September. So, I have the last I mean it's kind of early but
it just you know just so we can keep everybody in the loop. Um um future meeting the next meeting technically the third Wednesday of the September 17th. If that seems to work for everybody,
we'll put that on. It was kind of nice actually having the fourth Wednesday. I don't know how people feel about doing like a fourth Wednesday of the month meeting. That doesn't seem to Well, the only Well, Bartlett, it depends anyways, right? Because you're you're every every
other Bartlett for PNBC or is it always the second and fourth? It's always the second and fourth. Oh, okay. That's why we did it the third then. Yeah. Yeah. Does that mean Andrew did the third when third Wednesday not work fe?
I'm sorry. The third Wednesday is town meeting. No, it's not until October. Oh, I don't know why my Yeah, makes mistakes sometimes. Okay. So, it's October. October 17th. No, the Tuesday the 28th or something like that. Okay. 28th. Yeah.
I think you I think I emailed you something that you misunderstood. Oh, was that the when does the warrant close for meeting? September 12th. 12th. Never mind. Sorry.
All right. So, September 17th will be our next meeting. Does anyone have anything adjourn? Motion to move. We adjourn and I would like Andrew to second for us. Second that second
I know our names and stuff. I don't know but we have to vote to adjurnn it. Okay. Yes. Linda. Yes. Kate. Yes. Sam. Yes. Jeff. Yes. Andrew. Yes. And Bartlett. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you everyone. We
will see you next month.