Okay. So, for the sake of the recording, this is the board of health meeting of it's July 29th, 2026. Everybody's here, meaning myself, Katherine Hilton, Arlene Reed, Whim, Liby, and Clare Plus, and Garrett
Simson. And we're expecting a guest, Deborah Panic, but she has not come yet. So, how's everybody? Everybody good? I I think I see the sun. >> No kidding. Really? >> I've got a little bit We've got a little
bit of sun over on West Palm. >> All right. Well, let's let's all go over to Garrett's house right now. [laughter] >> I have one spot left, Garrett, on my ark if you want. [laughter] Exactly. >> Yeah, I saw some sun briefly this afternoon right after it finished
pouring, but uh that was about it. Yeah, but I don't think our problems hold a candle to what went on west of us. Um, New York. I was the Albany public radio station was on locally and they have had
some major flooding. >> Oh, is that right? >> Yeah. >> Uhhuh. >> But I I think we are doing okay. >> Yeah. And I thought I saw something about power out somewhere else. Maybe Connecticut. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. I'm not sure.
Well, anyway, let's let's do the meeting. >> Yeah. >> So, minutes of last time, did I send them out? I hope >> um the last time was mid June. Am I right?
>> That seems right. And >> yeah, and it seems to me that it took me several days to get around to sending the minutes out. >> Yeah. Um, >> I don't recall if I responded to it then. >> I don't think anybody did actually.
>> Let me see what I can >> I don't see in my board of health email. I do not see right away. Uh >> there's an email on June 10th for June 6 or uh 3rd.
>> So June 3rd was our last set of minutes. Is that right? >> That's what I what I show. >> Can that be right? >> Let me double check here. >> And I don't see that email when I look at mine.
June 10th was the date of the email, Garrett. >> Yes, I think so. >> Huh. >> Certainly had meetings later than that. We had one in July, >> but we had a meeting apparently on July 8th.
>> And that would be that would be the minutes that we're thinking about now. But the question is, did I then send out >> the draft? So, we had the meeting on the ETH. I'm looking in my scent file here.
>> I don't see him either. I think I didn't send them out. Okay. Well, I can fix that. But for now, we'll skip that. Um, >> quick question. >> I'm glad I I'm glad I didn't say I read them.
>> [laughter] >> Yeah. No, I I even looking in my trash folder, I do not see. >> No, I don't I think I didn't send them out. I thought I I thought I made them up, but it looks like I didn't send them out.
I hope I I hope I have notes for it. I hope I did it, but I can't tell that from from the laptop. Okay. So, we're not doing that. >> Make a note.
So, that was July 8th and those were not found. Okay. Debbie is not here yet. >> Have a question about that. Did anybody see that she sent an email asking what time this meeting would be? >> Yeah, at least two of us answered it.
So, so >> that's what I was wondering. >> But thanks for noticing that. >> Um, >> may I add a request agenda item? >> Yes, >> I would appreciate an update on what's
happening with the JCA. I know that I understand that Claire has been on that in my absence and I would love to get an update. >> Oh, okay. >> At some point tonight. >> Okay. Let's just let's do a little bit of business first and then we can talk
about that and anything else. Um, so we have two septic system repair plans. Mike Thorough has has reviewed both of them favorably. Um,
one is on January Hills Road and it does not seem that there are any local upgrades or anything. It's pretty straightforward. Number nine, January Hills Road and the
other is 205 West Hull Road and there are apparently no local upgrades on that either. So, assuming that we have received the fees,
which I'll have to check before I do anything, might I hear a motion to um to uh issue permits for these two repairs? If we had a motion and then if you want
to have any questions or discussion, we can have them. >> Maybe we should do them do them one at a time. >> Okay. >> Motion. Right. >> The first >> Okay. So, let's talk about 205 West Pill Road. >> Mhm. >> Um there are no issues. You said um
>> there's no local upgrade or anything like that. Okay. Then I move to approve the cons um the repair permit. >> I'll second Garrett. >> Okay. Any questions or discussion?
Hearing none. Um, let's vote. All in favor? Arlene, >> yes. >> Claire, >> yes. >> Garrett, >> yes. >> Whim, >> yes. >> Cat, yes. Okay. So, I will do that as
soon as I'm sure we have received all the fees and and so on. That is a that's an Alan Weiss plan. The other plan for Nine January Hills Road, equally simple, and this is a plan by Chris
>> Stoddard. Um, uh, do I hear a motion to issue this permit? >> So moved. >> Do I hear a second?
>> I'll second. Carrot. >> Okay. Any question or discussion? Okay, it seems pretty straightforward. Uh, hearing none, let's vote. All in favor? Arlene, >> yes. >> Claire, >> yes. >> Garrett, >> yes.
>> Whim, >> yes. >> Cat, yes. Okay, same deal. I'll make sure they have met all our requirements mainly for payment and issue these. Um, Claire, do you have anything to tell
us about JCA? >> Um, so I did hear back from Steve maybe. Um, apologize. I don't currently have that email up on my this computer. It's on a different computer. Um,
but I believe what he said is he seemed fairly clear to him that they do four test wells in each corner of the property. um and that he has a contact with um sorry was it uh DP
um that he can work with with this. So it seemed from Steve's answer that he has a sense of what to do with this situation. >> Bear, may I just ask for clarification? You said four test holes in each corner.
Do you mean four total or four times four? >> Four total. Excuse me. One in each corn. Yeah. >> And is that the 10 acres that they're considering or the have they narrowed it down to five which is their ultimate goal?
>> I think >> um I think I was a little less clear on that bit. I think it's the 10 acres. And then he said something about like if you don't mind, I'd go grab and sign into this email on this computer, but
like I I believe it was the 10 acres. >> Okay. >> And then that it would be narrowed down from there. >> Okay. >> Right. My my recollection is that that these perk tests were going to help them decide which five acres >> Sure. >> they were going to use. then they might
need to delve in a little further. Who knows? >> Okay. >> Um I also I think I had CCD both the board of health email and Arlene you on that. So it's possible. >> Really? >> I think so. it was. So, I created the
Shootsbury email address and that's why that one's not on I haven't signed into it on this computer yet, but um >> so that's why >> I could do that though. Um and
so there's a chance he replied all that's the part I'm less certain about. >> Okay. Yeah, you I have your um I have your email here. You did send it to Arlene and to
uh board of health. >> Can to send to my board of health email address or my >> hang on >> I think it's to the one that I had available. So >> arlene.readshootsberry.org >> and the date of that was what? Please.
>> It was June 29th. Do you want me to just forward it to you right now? >> Please. I don't I don't see it. So, maybe I inadvertently deleted it. I don't know. >> Okay. Well, here here it comes. >> Okay.
>> And he does say Ford. That's Well, no, he says a little bit more than that. Here's what he says. I talked this over with my contact at DP. For large system soil absorption systems, the general rule of thumb is to
do four deep holes at the corners. I take that to mean one at each, four more along the perimeter and a couple in the middle for a minimum of 10 deep holes. More are necessary if the soils are variable. A decision made in the field.
>> Okay. I didn't >> turns out I didn't get this directly from him, but I was searching for >> emails from Claire and I didn't see it, but I I do see it as an email from Steve maybe. Okay. >> Right. So, Claire, am I failing to send
>> um board of health things to your Shootsberry email? >> Uh yes, I'm still getting them to my personal >> Okay. I'll try to uh I'll try to reform. Mhm. >> So that that sounds like a lot more than one in each corner. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. >> Yes. There's a minimum of 10, >> right? >> Four in each corner. Four more along the perimeter presumably along each side and then a couple more in the middle and then more if necessary.
>> I like the sound of that better. It It's comparable to what they had to do or what they did in the other property. >> Right. Right. because they did about nine depotles on that one. Well, that's two acres >> and it's a much much smaller plot. So,
>> yeah. So, is this information been conveyed to JCA? >> Oh, that's a good question. Let me look. >> I hadn't followed up further on it because I wanted to talk about here, talk about it here because I wasn't sure exactly what we're
>> Well, this Yeah, this email wasn't sent to anybody at JCA. >> Okay. So, and then I'm confused about the sentence, a couple of sentences. Soils are
reviewed down to five feet for redux. >> Maybe Claire can explain that. She's a geologist. >> Redux would be um reduced oxygen, I would imagine. Uh cuz like a redux condition is
conditions where you don't have oxygen. >> I've never heard it before. Okay. >> I don't know exactly in terms of soils how that applies but that's what the term would mean. >> Okay. And then to check feet to see if water is observed. If neither is
observed then what the heck is frinter? [laughter] Um, if it's looking for redox and water, I could imagine they're trying to determine any sort of um contamination conditions or >> Okay.
>> or if there's going to be um rusting issues, etc. Yeah, I'm sure that JCA does not need to know all this technical stuff at this point, but >> Right.
Huh. All right. So is so maybe a next step would be to um send the gist of this maybe not all the technicalities but the gist of this on to um Karen Rhodess who is the person
who's been inquiring on behalf of the JCA. >> Well Steve Steve Steve maybe is is hired by her. Correct. Is that how this is going? >> Am I right on that, Claire? Is he the
one that's actually going to be doing these perk tests? >> That's the sense I've gotten, but I I don't know that side of things. All I know is I've reached out to him for asking for more information. So this this is kind of >> the amount that I know
>> and I am um I need to go back and refresh my own memory about whether or not there is a contact between them. So, um I will I will tackle that over the next couple of
days. And if this needs to be passed along to her still, then I can do that un unless someone else wants to. >> I'm assuming that she's getting information directly from Steve maybe. >> She's the one who presented to us about
the green burials on the existing lot, right? >> Yes. Yeah, she from from JCA. She she to prior meetings, >> right? >> About the current uh cemetery.
>> Oh, you're talking about Karen, not >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> Okay. I thought you said he and I thought, really? >> Okay. >> My recollection from the last time we talked about this was that Steve maybe is contracted by them.
>> That's what I thought. So, um I guess there was a question about how many depots we were going to require and it seems like Steve maybe and D have
answered that question. So, I think we're kind of for the present we're kind of out of it, right? That'd be good. And from what was described, it seems consistent with
what was done however many years ago that was >> in 78 whenever it was. >> Yeah. >> A long time ago. >> Okay. Okay. >> Okay. Anything else on that? Okay. I still don't see any sign of
Deborah. I wonder. And she hasn't sent an email saying she can't get in. I'm gonna I'm gonna send Oh, that's not what I want. I'm going to send her an email. And no. Okay. So,
I mean, we can go on to that to that if she doesn't if she doesn't show. But in the meantime, um uh there's an email going around between um Maryanne Antonellis and somebody somebody I don't
know who. I think just a a a citizen wondering if we should have an air quality monitor at the library, not for indoor air, but for outdoor air. I don't think we needed for indoor air, but um that seemed like a kind of an
interesting thing that we might that we might want to use some of our budget line to uh to implement. I looked at the the person sent a couple of of links and I looked at one of them and it seems like we
could get an air quality monitor with all the appropriate bells and whistles for about 300 bucks. And uh I'm not really sure how it would how I'm not really sure how it works.
The website was not very informative, but apparently you have you it uses Wi-Fi and you have somewhat remote sensors. I don't know how far those sensors can go. Probably not all that
far. Um that give you a readout at your at your base unit. And uh if we had that at the library, that seems like a good a good place to have it because it's a kind of anformational
thing that might spark some activity or discussion. And it seemed to me like it might be a good use of our budget line, which we rarely spend all of it. >> Is that for wildfire smoke or for what? >> Well, that was that's the thing that is,
you know, on everybody's mind right now. But if there were any other kind of of pollutant or something that was causing causing particulates, it would measure that. My biggest concern would be who's
going to be on top of the maintenance of such a thing. I'm sure there is a need for some regular cleaning or making sure the whatever devices are outdoors that are picking up the
you know the sensors that are outdoors. >> Yeah. >> Are intact and functioning properly and >> but even more so who's going to report on the findings? >> Right.
Well, this looks to me, I haven't really discussed it with her, but it looks to me like um a project that or a thing that that Maryanne is is willing to undertake. And I assume that she would
have some volunteer to um to help with it. I know that Graham Septton um is is one of the people that she relies on for things like like internet. So we could we could I would if we were going to do
this I would run this by him and ask him if this is an appropriate unit and what it would require if we can meet those requirements and how it would work and and so on. and um then possibly he or
some other volunteer could be charged with maintaining this system. The question about reporting, I am hoping that the the Wi-Fi connection would include
something some kind of connection to the internet where the where the results could be made public in real time. I am happy to ask Graham all these questions as excellent. >> He's my next door neighbor.
>> I'll send you I'll send you a link to the product I'm looking at. >> All right. Sounds like a citizen science project. >> Yeah. Yeah. It seems to me that with all the space up there um that we could have
we could have an air quality monitor and we could have other stuff too like maybe at some point. I mean I wouldn't I don't think that the board of health should finance finance this but it seems to me that we could also have like a weather station. Okay. Okay. Well, we'll look into it
further and uh and you um Garrett or sorry, Whim, you can ask Graham what he thinks. >> I think he's in Canada right now. >> Okay. Well, it's no big rush. >> All right. >> Right. He's experiencing the wildfire smoke firsthand, huh? >> Exactly.
>> Lucky guy. Lucky guy. Um, I feel like there was something else about library stuff. Oh,
apparently apparently um Sarah is going to provide some blood pressure monitors to the library [clears throat] for lending out >> uh battery operated ones I assume. >> I guess so. Yeah, because you can't
People don't know how to use manual ones. >> Oh, right, right, right. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Right. I'm assuming that that they are this, you know, the ones you get at the drugstore. >> Well, that's neat. It fits in nicely
with Maryanne's library of things. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Apparently there I I heard at the um at the collaborative meeting last time that uh some somebody borrowed one
and got a truly frightening reading and and she checked the checked the um instructions and immediately went to the emergency room and she was having some kind of a serious event. And so she felt that having having borrowed this thing
saved her life. So, I hope we don't have anything quite that dramatic in Shootsberry, but it's it seems like a good thing. >> I have one item. So, I I need to update the 247 contact information for DPH
um and remove Norine. So, Claire, what we typically do is we list all of the board of health members. Um, and I think it's typically that I don't remember how it's currently listed um
who's primary and secondary uh for emergency notifications from DPH to the board. Um, but if you could email me your preferred email address and
uh phone number for urgent notifications. It's very rare that they do it. It's mostly drills. They'll do like a quarterly drill of it, but if you just email it to me directly, then I'll um I'll input that into their system.
>> Go ahead. When are we due to have another drill, Garrett? >> Anytime between now. So the quarter one started July 1. July September. So anytime between now and
the end of September. >> And typically they'll ask us to log into a system, Claire. And either Katherine does it or I do it. >> Right. Right. We'll have to uh we'll have to teach Claire how to do that.
>> Yeah. >> Right. Only one person needs to do the updating for all of us, but everybody needs to acknowledge that they received the message. Am I right about that? >> Yeah. So it it'll typically if you open
the email >> that typically generates the acknowledgement or you pick up the phone it'll say you know press one to acknowledge or something like that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. In my experience it comes almost simultaneously to my email, my landline and my cell phone.
>> Yeah. Me too. And that not only my personal email but also my board of health email. >> Yes. >> And that's also all the emergency notifications too. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. We'll have to um we'll have to work out how to get Claire not only
listed in the system but able to at least log into it. >> Yeah. So when Claire when you send me your contact details >> Yeah. >> I'll send an email back with a little instruction guide. >> Okay. that talks about the system and
I'll tell you our we it's a shared login. >> Okay. >> So, we all have the same login and same password. >> Got it. All right. I'll do that pretty much right after this meeting. >> Yeah, that's good. Yeah. No rush. >> I know I can log in, but I think it's
one of those things where the password is autogenerated and I can't see it. So, I could not produce it to save my life, but I'll ask you for it another moment. All right. Um,
where is she? Well, even though she's not here, let's talk about this thing at 80 Lake View Road. So, she is appealing our decision to require
tank replacement. She had Dennis Clark come over and look at it and Dennis said something like, "What are they crazy? There's tanks all over this place within 100 ft of of wells." Which is true. Um,
I am not sorry to to have an opportunity to revisit this because I've been feeling uneasy about the decision that we made because I mean we all felt like we needed to do something.
We couldn't just give it a pass or give it a fail. But um it seems a little bit arbitrary to me to to require the
the tank replacement. So, I wanna I want to share with you um share. No,
but I might be not be able to. Oh, here we go. Okay. Can you see that? Okay. If anybody sees Deborah come in in in the waiting list, let me know. Okay. Because I can't see that that thing. So, what this is is from Title Five. It has
it's the section that's about um about the title five inspections and what happens when they fail to protect public's health and blah blah. So if one or more of the following conditions exist then the system is
failing to protect public health and safety. And where we get for that is down to this section that is highlighted. Evaluation of systems with septic tanks and soil absorption systems near
drinking water supplies. If any portion of the soil absorption system is within any of the dimensional criteria with which has to do with the setback from the wells unless right in other words it fails
unless the approving authority that's us in its professional judgment such as it is with the concurrence of the public water supplier which there isn't one determines the system is functioning in a manner to protect the public health and safety. welfare and the environment.
So what what that underlined section there tells me is that we have a certain amount of discretion here um that we can decide if it is protecting the public health and safety
or not. Um remember that the issue is number four here. It's less than 100 ft but 50 ft or more
from a private water supply well. Notice it says a private water supply well. It doesn't say the private water supply well providing water to this address. Okay. Unless we have a wellwater
analysis. Um if we had a wellwater analysis for all the wells within 100 ft then this would be an automatic pass. In our last discussion of this,
we determined that one, the on-site well is the closest one to the leeching area and therefore basically
acts as a a sentinel of contamination going from this um uh the soil absorption system through the groundwater and potentially into wells,
all of which I think are shallow in that area. Um and two, that should some of those other wells not come up clean, it's an inconclusive result because of
the proximity of their own septic systems. Yeah, >> that I think I think would give us leeway
to say that this system is not failing to protect the public health etc. Say that again, K. That would give us leeway. What? >> To to say that
this system does not fail to protect the public health. >> Okay. And I'm putting it that way because it seems to me I mean the whole the whole gist of our conversation last time was was
that it doesn't really pass but it doesn't really fail either >> right I mean we can't say it's perfect and everything is great and we can't say that there are any actual failure criteria that we see actually
um being um such as require action. And of course, the action that we were advised to take and that we and that we did order the homeowner to take kind of
is not um is not really answering to the problems that we see on site which is which are the proximity of those other wells.
I have a thought about what we might do, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first if you >> our just refresh my memory. Our recommendation there was one about the driveway, right? >> Yeah. the the existing septic tank.
Um, yeah, the tank itself is in the driveway, which is trap rock gravel, and it's it's showing a little bit of wear, but not anything that would suggest imminent failure or
even, you know, failure within a reasonable time. Um and also it does not appear to be rated in its structure to uh endure traffic.
Now traffic, this driveway is approximately the length of a car, right? So it's basically in the driveway and out. It's not like cars are driving over it all the time. Um,
so how significant that is is uh it's kind of anybody's guess. I mean, so far so good, but you know, to say I've been driving over this for 50 years um is not does not suggest that it's going to be
lasting for another 50 years, right? I mean, I'm going to live forever. So far so good, right? Um, on the other hand, there's there does not seem to be a problem currently.
>> And that problem by itself, okay, this this slightly substandard tank by itself would not be enough to trigger
a failure. and remind us. So there was a report that we received of an inspection of the system that talked about the problematic aspects and you know someone brought up the
driveway and the the component that isn't of up to current standard. for it to be under a driveway, but I felt like there was there was something else in that. And then we also got
feedback from um >> we got feedback from the people in the collaborative from Megan and I think from Mike Thorough and their first response was
we need a tight tank there. um when we pushed back on that a little bit and said, "Wait, there aren't any failure absolute functional failure criteria here." Um and that seems extreme. They said, "Well, how about
having them replace that tank?" So, that's what we did. >> What can um why was the inspection done in the first place? Um, transfer of title. The house is on. >> Oh, it is a transfer of title.
>> Yeah, the the house is on the market. To the best of my knowledge, there's not an interested buyer. >> Okay. >> And then just so so there is nearby a D designated public
drinking water supply at the lake. No, no, there's no there's no public drinking water supply. These are private wells. >> So, there's I thought that the school and the and at
the lake and um over on Baker Road, >> the nearest I think the nearest public water supply is up at the um athletic club and that's like two miles away. I I thought um fountains or whatever at the
lake were considered >> Oh, at the state park. >> Yeah, >> that's possible. But it would be >> it would be further >> it would be well away, I think. >> Okay. >> Greater than 100 ft. >> Yeah, >> definitely. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Yeah. My notes from that meeting say there are multiple there's not a number but multiple wells are between 50 and 100. >> Yeah, I think there's the one. Let me think. There's the one on her property. There's one on John Kinder's property.
There's one that I think so that's two. There's one that I think is shared between the two houses between the or right next to the state park. And there's one right across the street
and they have a they have a tight tank in the front. So the well must be down down on the on the lakeside. Um so so there are like maybe four
and things are so tight that um you know if there's anything wrong with those wells, it's anybody's guess. um what's causing it? So, when we first considered this, we thought, should we order them to put in
a tight tank? Should we order them to get wellwater tests from all of those wells that are within 100 ft? Um or should Uh should they replace it
with a more up to code um not a tight tank but the ordinary tank. Um uh those were all the the options that
we considered and we decided to require them to replace the tank and do annual testing of their own well I guess. Um
so now we're considering removing that requirement right based on her appeal. That's what I'm thinking. >> And I don't want to I don't want to take over this. I want to hear what you all
have to say. >> You'll let me know when >> you've said it. I mean, I I agree with you, Cat, that since there is really not a technical failure here that
we don't really have firm ground to stand on to uh require them to replace the tank. Um but with the multiple wells within 50 to 100, our policy in the past has been to
not require but recommend annual testing for anyone who's got a a well within between 50 and 100. We can't do a local upgrade approval for something less than 50 ft separation. right
>> from a tank. But we can do so when it's between 50 and 100 and um but that's never been a requirement. It's just been a strong recommendation. Am I right about that?
>> U basically yes. I mean we the only time we have leverage enough leverage to to require well testing is when we are issuing a septic system permit and then
we can condition that permit on annual testing in the future. We don't have that situation here. >> This is not a permit. This is just an inspection. This is just an inspection and and it's it has fallen to us to make
the call of whether this system passes or fails >> and if it doesn't pass what remedy we require. Now, if we were requiring say a tight
tank or requiring her to replace the system, then um then we would have some leverage. >> That's when the local upgrade approval would come into play. >> Right. Right. Because that's part of a septic system application.
>> Right. Ah, >> doesn't a lot of the potential risk depend on the hydraology or the flow of the aquifer and and how do we know that
I mean are these other surrounding wells in all directions or is there would there maybe be one that's at greater risk that we could say um
dig a dig a test hole or is that does that sound at all reasonable or is that is that overly burdensome as well? You think >> well we don't have any leverage here
with respect to anybody else's property. >> Right. >> Right. And I did I did suggest to the homeowner that she could get well tests from all her neighbors. >> Mhm.
>> Um and you recall that we said at the meeting that you know the possibilities of that are slim to none. >> Right. >> Right. Um, so what we know about the soils around the
lake is that they are sandy. The water table is fairly high, right? So these are these tend the the the wells down at lake level tend to be shallow. So, we're we aren't really dealing with aquifers
that behave in mysterious ways deep under the ground because these wells aren't going deep under the ground. >> And I think it's basically sort of filtered lake water that you know seeps. >> Yeah,
>> Clara, that may be really unscientific of me. If you have [laughter] if you want to weigh in on that, please do. >> I think it's generally what I was thinking too. If they're all shallow and very close together, I don't think it's going to have too much variability to
it. Um, I feel like there's a lot of just surficial groundwater that's probably recharging their wells rather than um a lot of the fractures and rocks that we deal with with our deep wells. Um, which would come into play for
exactly what you're talking about with um more like water plumes and how they move. But I feel like with them all being shallow, I don't think that would be as um complicated. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that's my thought.
>> So, what did what did you think would be a possible remedy, Pat? Well, I've been thinking about the purpose of a title five inspection. And the main purpose of it is when it's done
for transfer of title, the m main purpose is to inform a buyer of the condition of the septic system right now, right? It's a snapshot to saying
what what the condition is right now. And so it seems to me that that and I I think we've done this at least partial partially we've done this in the past. We have we have been
asked to we're required at this point to review the septic system report and rule on it. Does it pass or not? And that usually takes the form of a letter in which we say it passes or it doesn't
pass. In this case, I think we might be well advised to have a letter that says um basically neither one nor the other,
right? That we're not we're not assigning a past fail grade to this septic system. But here are the here are the here's the situation, right? Um um while it doesn't
while it's not failing to protect the public health and environment and whatever the third thing is, um it's it's basically marginal, right? These are the risks, right, of
contamination. um basically laid out saying we don't consider this either past or failed but a marginal a marginal system and then and um recommend
annual um water testing in August, annual pumping of the tank with um a a visual inspection of the tank by
the pump, which they basically do that anyway. You know, they pump it out, they look down in there, they see if the tank's in good condition. They often mark that on the pumping report. So, that's what I think might work. What do you all think?
That sounds reasonable to me. It's essentially a buyer beware type of statement. >> Yeah. >> Because it's not technically failed, but how many more years does it have is the question,
>> right? >> Yeah. as long as a recommendation strongly emphasized what you said that at this time you know here's the condition um as as reported
>> we might also add that for the future we suggest I would go not as far as a recommendation but a suggestion that the tank be replaced >> with something sturdier And would that um mllify this homeowner?
Well, I think so. Um uh that's you know I don't want to basically fail the system when we don't have failure you know functional failure but I don't want to I don't want her to get off scot-free either >> right
>> when um um when there are here >> right >> right so nullified or not um this is already a lot better than than she might have than she might have
gotten from a better deal than she might have gotten from Mike Thorough who would have made her put in a tight tank which I think is a a little extreme, >> right? >> A big extreme actually. >> Yeah. Is this a seasonal residence or a year?
>> No, it's been uh it's been it has always been lived in year round. I think it's about 50 years old. So, you know, I I have no idea what a future owner might use it for, but um but it has been used um as a year-round
residence. Um it has uh you may remember that that there is in addition to the septic system leeching there's a a septic tank and a leeching pit. Um there is also a separate
um a separate tank. I guess it's a tight tank. Anyway, it's a separate tank for the washing machine. >> Oh, okay. Did not know that. So it doesn't get as much use the the system itself doesn't get as much use as as
most most do because most have the washing machine emptying into the tank also. >> Not that the seasonal versus year round should influence our decision. And I we have to have the same requirements, >> right? >> Both because a person can change the way
they're using >> that at any time. But um I just wanted to know. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Garrett, you look thoughtful. I think I'm I'm mainly just reflecting back on our prior conversation and in
the prior meeting and reacting to the information that we received from the report and from uh folks from the collaborative.
And that was mainly the reason that I landed where I landed. Um, and then also just just thinking about the degree to which a report like that puts us on notice
should the system fail. And then to what degree is the town liable for not having um responded to parts of the system that weren't um in
compliance or heading potentially heading toward failure. >> So um >> that's an interesting question actually. >> Yeah. Do you want to say some more about that or were you done?
>> No, I was done with that. You know, just generally thinking, so when we receive reports like this and if if we don't take action to the degree that we can take action, you know, you know, recommend remedies,
does it then put the town um in addition to the homeowner because the homeowner would have liability as well. But if we haven't if we're in possession of information and we don't take action.
>> Yeah, I I I get what you're saying. I think that um well, for one thing, I don't have a title five report in front of me, but it seems to me that it's it's explicit in
the reporting form that this um this um this report is no guarantee of future um performance of the system. Um and I
think also that if we if we spell out all the conditions um our requirements and our view of the of the situation that that pretty much covers us as far as avoiding liability
if liability were an issue and I'm not at all sure that it would be um gosh Gosh, I just lost my my train of thought. If liability were to be an issue, really the only the only sure
thing would be a tight tank. >> Right. >> Because because Hang on just one sec. Because replacing the tank does not address our actual concern. >> Right. Exactly what I was going to say. that
the neighboring wells are still within 50 to 100 ft from the leech pad, >> right? >> New tank or not, >> right? The tank is not the problem. >> Those wells are still a bit on the close side, but we don't have nothing happened
50 years ago to to provide a local upgrade with this. I mean, it was just the way it was put in back then, right? >> Well, yeah. Um, it would have been I can't remember exactly how how old it
was, but it was not under the new title five, I don't think. >> Right. Pre-title five. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, new tank or none or a new a new tank with a leech pit
still does not address the prox those proximate wells, >> right? That's still a concern, >> right? A tight tank would address it, but Right.
But unless we show actual signs of functional failure, it's that seems like more than we ought to require. >> Yeah. And even if we were to say you need to
put in a tight tank, DP authorizes the tight tanks and the basis for their authorization is as I understand it that there is no other alternative. Right. >> Right. And there wouldn't be another alternative. Although I think that
you're not um I think that you're not up to date on that. I don't think I think now we can give the authorization. D doesn't do it anymore. >> Okay. Did not know that. Thank you. >> Yeah, they a few years ago they um I
think just for basically personnel reasons. They they don't they're too busy to do that. >> Okay. >> But yeah, I mean it is meant to be a last resort. However, in this case, it would definitely be the last resort because there's basically no property to
speak of around this place. >> Mhm. And what property there is is not hospitable to any kind of construction. >> I think that's true. I don't know if a if a conventional system could be sort
of wedged into the front yard. It might that might be that might be a possibility. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't automatically assume that a tight tank would be the only way they can go if if a future owner or this owner or anybody wants to
upgrade or needs to upgrade at some point in the future. All right. Well, I think I am comfortable with uh removing the requirement to replace the tank.
Um, knowing that the report would be made obvious to anybody considering purchasing the property that this tank, this current situation is
marginal and that it should be monitored and maybe we can require yearly pumping with the typical inspection by the pumper at that time. I don't think that we can require anything but we can
strongly recommend >> okay >> that I my main point there being that any prospective buyer be fully informed about the marginal step. >> Right. Right.
>> So can we consider that a motion? >> Yes. >> Okay. Do I hear a second? >> It was for pumping and testing. >> Annual water testing, annual pumping and visual inspection of the tank at the
time of pumping. >> Correct. >> Strong recommendations. >> Yeah. >> With a suggestion of [snorts] um changing out the tank in the future. >> So, four provisions. Yes.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Right. None of them binding obviously, right? So moved. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Is that you Garrett? >> Yeah, Garrett. >> Okay. Just get that. Okay. Further
discussion. All right. Hearing none. Let's vote. Arlene. >> Yes. >> Claire. Yes, >> Garrett. >> Yes, >> Whim. >> Yes, >> Cat. Yes. Okay.
>> I do have one other question. Not that it changes my vote, but >> do we have a recent water test from the uh well on the property? >> Yes. One accompanied the um this the septic system inspection report
>> and it it was fine. >> Yes, it was. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Usually, you know, that's the end of it. When we get a needs further review, they include the water test. Water test is usually good and that and and therefore it passes, you know,
automatically. That's why we don't have these long discussions because just open and shut. >> But all right. >> Okay. >> Okay. Well, thank you for bearing with me through that long process.
Do we have anything else that we want to talk about? Oh, one thing we need to talk about if we're done with business business and board of health business, we need to talk about a meeting schedule for August. >> So, our normal meetings would be 1 and 3
would be August 5th and August 19th. But, um, it seems unlikely that we're going to need a meeting on the the 5th. So, how about this? How about we plan to
have our meeting on the 19th and if we really need a meeting before that, we can call a meeting for the 12th and then maybe the 26th. And it would be good if we could get back on our normal schedule. Mhm. >> Does that seem good to everyone?
>> That works for me. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we will assume that that will be our next meeting unless unless there's a dire emergency. >> I may not be there. >> Okay.
What great place are you going to? I'm I'm kayaking the Eerie Canal >> for 15 years >> with your mule. >> Yes. >> Cool. That sounds great. >> Yeah. I
>> to end. >> No, it's 500 and something miles um with all of its >> Yeah. No, I'm gonna see how far I can get in two weeks. >> Okay, cool. Oh, wow.
Will you need to ha go through the locks and have them operate the locks? Okay. I have bicycled the toe path alongside the eerie canal >> and watch the locks operate and that was
>> it was cool. >> Yeah. >> Kayed it. >> You were out there with S. Okay. Well, have a great time and don't even think about zooming into the meeting. >> Well, I I may. It depends on I I I Yeah,
we'll see. >> And Arlene is you told me when you were going to be in uh at the Cape, but I forgot. >> 9th through the 17th. >> Oh, great. So, you'll be back. >> Yeah. >> Okay. It sounds like we can we can have a quorum. >> Yeah. And even if we need to meet
earlier, I'm okay meeting from there. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, I hope not. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anything else that we need to talk about? >> Nope. >> Okay. So, my assignments here, I have to
write this letter. I have to um do the minutes of this meeting and I have to find or create the minutes of the last minute meeting. >> And you're going to send me the details on the monitoring account. I'm going to send you the link to that product. Yes,
I'll do that right now. >> Okay, >> I think we're good. >> Thanks. >> Okay, you guys. Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> Good night. >> Good night. >> Good night. >> Good night.