Greetings. Okay, it being 7 o'clock, I'll call this meeting of the Shootsbury. Actually, hold on a second. Do we have a porn? >> Not yet. >> Not yet. Let me let me uh hold my horses
for one moment then. Hopefully, we'll get a Well, I expect we'll see uh hopefully Ashley, Steve, and Tom. Wow. All right. Okay, we have Tom here. Hey, Tom.
It does make a quorum. So I will call this meeting of the Shootsbury Planning Board to order. >> I will note that the meeting is being recorded. I'll also welcome Ashley Pyraftoft to the meeting. >> Hello.
>> So we have Michael Dier, Jeff Weston, Ashley Pyraftoft, and myself from the board. We have Tom Seaffort as an associate which I will designate Tom as a B member.
And the first item on our agenda is public comment. And if I could just get a show of hands for how many people would like to provide uh public comment today. I see uh Sanford, Sharon, anyone
else in the Okay, uh Zapora, is there anyone else that uh uh Henry? So, I've got about four people, Leslie. Okay, I've got five.
Okay. So, uh what I would like to do is uh just given I'm going to extend public comment a little bit based on on the interest of uh the public in this matter. However, uh we do have quite a
bit to get to tonight. Uh so I do want to limit public comment to about 10 minutes and I believe uh so with uh uh five hands up in the air I'm going to say we'll uh shoot for about two minutes a piece.
Say >> All right. Who's the brave first wants to go first? Should it be uh S Sanford? We'll let uh Sford go first. >> All right. uh two two minutes is going to be uh less than I have to say. Um so
I'll just say that as an environmental lawyer I recognize that the data center issue is really an industrial regulatory issue that the town is not equipped to handle it. Um you've done your best in writing the bylaw. You have some
interesting amendments that you're going to look at this evening that would strengthen it. But it still is basically a regulating a high techch fast evolving nuisance inflicting industry. Hundreds of communities all across the country are discovering that data centers are
not good neighbors. They're gathering this weekend to share notes uh from all across the country. Um there's substantial fiscal and energy consumption issues that are clearly not addressed. Um uh uh the as I sent in a
note to the planning board, I believe that with the evolving technology, you could be looking at a 5,000 square foot data center that would actually um be significantly more energy consumption than our town leading to risk of
blackouts and uh increased rates. Um this is no time to lift the moratorum at a minimum. We need to keep learning from other communities. If you don't edit the draft be before you in the way that it's shown in the direct in the draft that
you have pending, it would be imposing extraordinary burdens on neighbors and the environment and would quickly become something that the planning board would regret as we're forced to do combat with well-funded developers determined to literally blanket the earth with data centers. you have some good edits to the
bylaw on your agenda for today, but because of the bigger concerns, I don't think it's ready. It would not be prudent and legally you'd have a problem with the open meeting law and the zoning laws to to not um to to try to go to town meeting with this. So, uh I guess
that's probably about two minutes. So, I'll stop there. >> Thank you very much, Sanford. All right. Um who would like to be next? How about uh Henry?
>> Well, I want to commend Can you hear me? >> I can hear you. Yes. Thank you. >> Yes. Okay. I want to commend you for the the updates on that uh bylaw, especially around the noise, which I was very concerned about. Um you cover a lot of
ground there. That said, I I still think it may be premature to go forward with this. uh have concerns about the 5,000 uh square foot uh measure uh and and the potential for there uh to
be unlimited number of these uh at least from what I read in the bylaw. Uh so that among other things I think that uh we could look at some improvements maybe perhaps some more research looking at other communities who have dealt with
this as well. uh shouldn't do this on our own. Anyway, I'll keep my my comments to that. >> Thank you, Henry. Okay. Um how about uh Leslie?
>> Well, thank you. Um, first I want to say uh ditto on everything that Sanford said and having spoken to some neighbors and friends in town, everybody's like, uh-uh, no way, don't want it. So, if it
does come to town meeting, I would vote no. And I know many other people are um afraid if this goes forward and they will vote no as well. I don't think it's ready. I didn't check out all the extra things that you might have put on there
since I looked at the March meeting, but I will say that I would I'm against it. I'm against any data centers being in town and I'm also against it and will vote no if it does come to town meeting. And again, everything that Sanford said,
I agree with. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, let's see. How about uh uh Sharon? >> Hi. And uh I really appreciate you giving me the opportunity to speak here
today. Um, I was part of smart solar Shootsbury and you know we were trying to stop the solar power plants that were proposed for our town and but at least the solar had some redeeming
uh virtues that it was going to bring some renewable energy to this alien planet. And these data centers have zero plus side for the climate. In fact, it's exactly the opposite. They take huge
amounts of electricity in order to air cool them. And that electricity is about 65% non-renewable energy and also um you know potential to
create heat zones and pollution and terrible things in case of a fire. Um, and I I feel like it's really important that to know that we are protected from data centers right now. And this bylaw
opens a door to data centers, you know, and it's so right now we're protected. The bylaw, unlike most bylaws, this bylaw is opening the door to data centers and we are protected from them right now. So, I am so against this
bylaw altogether and think that we should not bring it to town meeting that we should stay closed. And one other small point is that we don't know yet and I don't know if there's even been any research about this like what the what's the benefit for the town would be
quote tax revenues, but we have no idea what those would be yet. Like what kind of benefit would this even bring to the town? And so I think it's irresponsible to bring the bylaw forward when we don't even know what the benefits would be and countering that with some of the
infrastructure the town would have to cover in order to even make room for that. It could be a blanket financial loss for the town. I mean I don't know the answer to that. But that's the important thing is that we don't know. So why should we even open the door? We
could do this next year. at that time technology might have really advanced to be not so environmentally damaging. So that's all I have to say. Thank you so much. >> Thank you Sharon.
>> Okay. Um uh Zapora. >> Yeah. Hi. Thanks. Um I didn't see a way to raise my hand on the on the toolbar there. Um >> okay. And so I really appreciate all the work that this committee has put into
this. I know it's really a lot of time and energy. Um and I think there's still some big problems with this draft. So I think um sending it to town meeting is is a little rushed and and I think there
should be another public hearing before it goes to town meeting and town council should attend. And and in terms of the draft itself, for me the biggest thing is there's no limit on the number of data centers or the total power consumption.
And um the environmental harms from heat, noise and clearing forest compounds with each one that's built. And then the more power they take, the more likely it is that residents will
have higher rates for electricity and possibly brownouts or blackouts. Um, and if they were built near each other, which would make sense, I think, you know, from an engineering perspective, then if there was a fire, then it would
just like spread to the others and it would be even more disastrous. So I I you know at this point I don't think that the the fiscal advantages which are hypothetical at this point are worth the tremendous risks.
And since the technology is evolving very fast if we waited a few years it could be a lot safer. There could be safer batteries. There could be better heat management. There could be less noise. And the whole problem might just go away because you know they might go
into space or something you know. So, um I think you know we should just wait. >> Bora. Thank you. >> Okay. Um I see just three more hands up. So I'm going to uh go ahead and um keep
moving through people. So I'll say uh David. >> Thanks Nathan. Uh and thanks for the opportunity to speak. as you as Sharon said, um I share a lot of the same concerns folks have already voiced, so I won't repeat those, but um I would just
say that um this this really the concern really is that this is opening the door to eventually accepting a project here or perhaps multiple projects. And we have fought long and hard in this town, I think, to preserve our natural area here. It's well known in this part of
the state that um this part of the state tends to be the dumping zone for unwanted projects and power and uh you know all these the uh latest advancements for the urban areas of the state. And I think we really need to stand up for ourselves
and perhaps put more energy into working with other towns that are likely to be victims of this as well. So I'd rather see more time devoted to that. Um and um again just appreciate the opportunity to speak and that you're considering this and thinking ahead, but um I think we uh
we need to really be thinking creatively about how to address this onslaught of not only solar projects but now these data centers. So I'll leave it at that. Thank you. >> Thank you, David. Okay. Uh let's go with Mary Lou.
>> Okay. Hi, I'm Marylu Kanka. I live on Wendell Road and um I agree with the speakers before me and I I just have this to say that
I would vote totally against a data center in any form. And I do believe from what I'm hearing from a lay person view that they would cause more harm
than good. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Marylu. >> And uh Jeremy, >> hey doing Nate, um thank you for uh giving me some time. Um, I agree with uh
everything that's uh been said. I think um you know with all of us living here, we share um you know um this obviously beautiful community in the same concerns um and and why we probably you know
moved here in the first place. Um I apologize if uh um I missed some of the updates to the bylaws. I did watch the meeting um from the 9th. Um but I'm not sure if um wastewater has been thought
of um doing some research um I've seen in the maintenance of uh some of these closed loop systems um they can produce uh substantial waste water. I don't know if that's been taken into consideration
um in these in these bylaws. Um also uh the large generators um that will you know be on site uh for backup um and other times of uh high energy demands um you know concerns of
of fuel storage and also um you know excessive uh noise. Um, and another thing I found pretty interesting specific to Massachusetts is, um, Massachusetts currently has non-disclosures,
um, for water and energy consumption for these data, uh, data sensor uh, centers. So I find it um kind of ironic that you know the lack of transparency um you know with these things is just a
a major concern and um I think you know a data center in Shootsbury goes against everything you know that this town stands for. >> Jeremy, thank you. Thank you everyone who's uh come here and uh I just also would like to remark
on the uh overwhelming uh and uh robust uh public participation um in this process. So I thank everyone who's uh been part of that and uh and I applaud our public here in Shootsbury
for being involved in your uh local uh democratic processes. uh very important work um to be involved in. So thank thanks to all of you. Okay, let's see.
Next on our agenda, we have a quick note for landowner education and guidance. Is there anyone here who is um seeking uh landowner education and guidance? Okay, hearing is seeing none. And um Jeremy, if you could, I would ask that
you uh lower your hand, please. >> Yeah, sorry. I'm new to this uh Zoom meetings. It's not uh >> it's quite all right. >> I'm fig figuring it out. Give me one second. >> No worries. Take your time. Okay. Um
so now we have uh minutes from uh March and uh January. And uh we'll start with uh January. >> I'll move to approve the minute to January 15, 2026. >> Okay. Do we have a uh second?
>> Second. >> Okay. Michael Decira moves Jeff Weston seconds to approve the minutes from January 15, 2026. Uh do we have any discussion? >> No.
I just had one edit which I sent to Matteo um which is at the top of page two. Um it just clarifies something. It said uh merger binds the board of the town's bylaw format floor bylaw which allows
for these corrections is the part that I added. Um just to say what the bylaw does. >> Okay, perfect. >> All right. If uh there's no further discussion, I'll call the roll. Uler
>> I >> steer. >> Hi, >> Weston. >> Hi. >> I'll abstain. The minutes from January 15th have uh been approved.
Motion carries. Uh, next we'll look at the minutes from March 9th, 2026. >> I'll move to approve the minutes of March 9th, 2026. >> Okay. Do I hear a second? >> Second. >> Was that uh Jeff again?
>> Uh, yes. >> Thank you. All right. So, M has moved Jeff has seconded that the planning board approve the the minutes from March 9th, 2026. Do we have any discussion? >> I do. I have to find it. It's on page
three of nine. I have a lot on my plate. I wrote down something about was it uh set at town meeting or also a concern on our board. Let me find it. >> Okay. And by the way, Ashley, did I forget to call you on the role in the last vote? >> No, I I voted.
>> You did? Yep. >> I did call you. >> You did. >> Okay, good. just every now and again I do uh miss somebody. I apologize. >> Yeah, it's a lot to manage. >> No, it's all right. I just uh All right. So, you're looking for your uh
>> I am. I'm looking at it right now. >> Should we see if >> anyone else has anything? Maybe they go while I'm figuring this out. >> I've got a few simple ones. So, also on page three um in the second parag and I sent these to
Matteo as well. Um, in the second paragraph at the end, it's it said Fox suggests the board give uh the Lake District more consideration. I just wrote suggested the Lake Wyola district to make it more clarifying. And then
I was brave enough to question Matteo's grammatical writing. So Tom, you can jump in maybe, but I don't know if 247 should be written out as opposed to 24/7. It just I've never seen it that way. So, I leave that to the grammatical
gods. Um, and then on the top of page six, the second sentence, it says Murphy expresses doubt that a micro data center facility would reduce much noise. I suggesting deleted it deleting it because two sentence two
sentences before it basically says exactly the same thing. So, it seemed like we didn't have to say it twice. Um, and then the last thing was on page six, um, when I asked to take a negative poll of board members since that's not a
normal thing, I just wrote does anyone object to any of these. So to clarify what a negative poll is for the reader. Um, so those are my suggestions. Oh, I actually had another one. I'm sorry. on page eight um when we were
talking about the clean energy rigs I was explaining things and I uh and said they care explains there is a new division under the dos is working on this it's it's the green communities division so I just changed that it's not a new division um there's a new division doing sighting but the bylaws are being
done by the green communities folks I I'll just chime in. >> Oh, go ahead. >> For what it it's worth. Thanks, Michael, for mentioning me about it. Um, I would probably go with numbers, but I don't I can read it just fine. Um, but like
24/7. Is that right, you mean? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Um, I hadn't really thought of it. Uh, but that's just my two number two sense. Michael, when you said uh defer to the grammar gods, I thought you probably
mean Tom Seaffort. >> Tom and Matteo. It seems like the two of them are our literary experts. >> Yes. Um All right. So, mine is it's simple, but it's on page three. It's the first full paragraph and it's uh where we're
discussing I believe it was Mayor Fox who brought up data centers at the lake and she asks why the amendment is only for site plan review instead of special permit. Diara notes that because micro centers are small a concern was raised
at town meeting that some computer storage already in town such as at the school would fall into this category. And I guess I just want to add in that from the get-go, like maybe our first meeting where we started talking about the bylaw, that was brought up that the
school in town likely has something that could be classified as a data center. It wasn't just a concern raised at town meeting. It was raised here first as well or just raised here as well.
And that's all I've got. it does talk about that, you know, we acknowledge that a little bit later in the text as well, but um it's something that we had discussed pretty early on. >> Now, uh Michael, you've given your edits to
Matteo. >> Yeah. >> And Ashley, did you send this in to Matteo or >> I can. >> Is that you? Do you have do you have, you know, the exact wording that you're looking to do?
>> Um, I mean, it just came out of my head. I could write it. I also could go back to the initial meetings where we talked about this and dig and find where it was brought up. Well, I uh >> Matteo Matteo,
>> so I would I would suggest going back to this to the recording of the March 9th meeting to see what was said because even if it is true that the board had previously discussed it, the minutes are meant to capture what was talked about at the meeting. >> So unless somebody specifically said as we discussed earlier or something, then
the minutes should only reflect what was said. >> Okay, we'll do. So in this case, are we good with it as is >> Ash? I think that's for you. >> I mean, you can call the roll. Yeah, I
think I'm ready. >> All right. All right. Well, we'll leave that one. Um I will uh any anyone else? All right, I will uh call the role. Let's see. Uh wrestler, >> I'm going to abstain because I wasn't at
the meeting. >> Okay. And take care. >> Hi. >> Um I prompt >> I'm going to abstain. >> Okay. and see.
>> Um, as far as I understand that minutes can be amended in the future as needed. I'm going to vote. >> Okay. Weston >> I. >> Okay. I will uh I'll vote I so we can uh
get these uh minutes approved and posted. The motion carries and uh the planning board's approvement is from March 9th, 2026. Thank you. And now we can u we will move on to the next uh topic on
our agenda which is uh data centers. And as I understand it, uh Michael, you would like to uh say a few words? >> Yeah, I would. Uh so and I apologize in advance because with
open meeting law it sort of makes it awkward not being able to convey these thoughts but um it's this probably just a few minutes but um and I wrote it down so I could get it all but um so the planning board made a commitment to town meeting to try to create a data center
bylaw. Um, as we just talked about, we spent about six months doing our due diligence. And I personally spent many, many hours of this researching, consolidating, getting comments, getting input. Um, I think I took this job seriously. Um, trying to find a consensus approach. I think we all
worked really to good together trying to find what the compromise was. Um, and I think at the outset, two of the things I want to just acknowledge as motivation for doing the work. One was, you know, Nathan's in particular articulated
concerns that because we approved a use table at town meeting along with the moratorium that if nothing happened the use table would go into effect so that you know the commitment was that we should be looking to see about doing something. Um and
then also just to acknowledge that there are a variety of people in town who want to find ways to generate revenue uh for the town. I think people on the planning board as well, but just to acknowledge those two things. So throughout the last six months, I've been hopeful that we could craft something that would work.
Um I think at this point, the complexity of this bylaws screams to me the fact that we're trying to push a square peg through a round hole. Um, and I think after lots of reflection, the last public hearing, the public comments
this morning, uh, this afternoon, um, a lot of reflection on my point, I'm sort of returning to my initial concerns about data centers. Um, and so, you know, I was push I was pushing for a moratorum to protect the town in the face of quickly evolving and potentially
high impact technology, which is some people talked about. Um I think six months later now that we're down this part of the road um it seems like data centers the technology is still changing and just on the research and getting people's feedback it feels like there's
more opinion and interpretations than there are really solid facts. Um so some observations that I have just personally because I think you know what and part of the reflection for me was in crafting this since I you know took that job on was trying to take everyone's input and
then synthesizing stuff um which means I didn't necessarily remember what I actually thought about it. So, where I'm at, um, I think data centers undermine all the climate action that the state's trying to initiate by driving up energy
usage as opposed to driving conservation. Um, as was said by a few people, data centers are industrial use. I mean, that's where it is in the use table and I think that makes sense. Um, I think it's a mismatch for Shootsy's rural character. Um, data centers, and
this gets back to like I think our first meeting around the moratorum, Steve said it, data centers, unlike solar, are not a protected use. So, we're not obligated to allow them. Um, and I think I had a conversation this morning where someone was surprised that um that was the case,
but we're not. um in terms of the revenue situation which I think is legitimate. I just want to you know for the record put out the financial ways woes of the town they're one not unique um to shoot spray you know it's true for
rural Massachusetts um and they're not our creation you know that they're based on broken formulers you know just recently I I was in a meeting with Joe Cford he talked about chapter 70 is broken chapter 90 is broken the pilot we received for DCR lands you know anyone
who went to the trivia um I think it was 50 cents uh $50 rather per acre as opposed to thousands in other places in the state. So there's structural deficiencies that are creating the financial challenges in the town. And so
as I think about it, you know, yes, we want to generate revenue, but how we do it is really important. And then the last thing sort of touching upon what you know, Ashley had said because this was actually clarifying. Um, you know, we did talk about the municipal light plant and the school both having, you
know, maybe needs for data centers for different reasons. Um, but I think what I was reminded about is those would if the school built a data center, it would be a secondary use. The primary use is education. Um, the MLP, I'm not quite sure how it got built, but um, if they
wanted to expand, they're on the lot where the the town is. Um, so I think you know as accessory uses they would be allowed and it wouldn't be a barrier. Um, and I think just looking to the future in terms of the revenue, something I just thought about a couple
weeks ago was what I'd like the planning board to do as much as we can looking forward is figure out how do we create development that's consistent with Shootsberry's rural character and that plays to our strengths. You know, and I think about Charlemont. So Charlem's got Bergkshire East. It's got Zor outdoor.
It's got zip lines. Um when I thought about that, I was like, well, we've got one summer camp and we used to have, you know, two. Um we could have more camps. We could maybe have environmental centers. We could have art centers. We could have retreats. We could have appropriately scaled housing, which we've been struggling with. But all of
those would generate revenue. Um and it would also contribute to the vitality of the town, which is sort of built into the purpose of this. So all of that to say, I'd like to move to table further discussions of the data center bylaw and move to affirm the use of the use table
prohibitions and definition approved by town meeting in September 2025. So that's my motion. Um and I apologize for surprising people. I've been struggling with how to convey this given open meeting law, etc., etc. But um hopefully someone will second that.
And thanks for the time, Nathan. I appreciate it. >> Sure. >> I'll second. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second on the table to table further discussion of data centers
and to revert and to leave the uh amendment from special town meeting uh in place as >> I mean yeah I mean it stays that way anyway. It's more to affirm it. you know, it's sort of saying the message that we're affirming that because if we take no action, it'll it'll be there
anyway. But I think rather than just have it go into place by inaction, moving to affirm it is sort of, you know, it's it's embracing it and saying those use table prohibitions where we get behind.
But uh just to make sure we have the motion uh clear, it's uh table further discussion on uh data centers and firm the uh the amendment that was approved in special town meeting. >> Yeah. >> Can I ask a member of the planning board? Can I ask for some clarification?
>> Um >> yeah. >> So we're talking about um keeping the moratorum in place. Is that what we're talking about with Could you explain it to me? I'm not exactly sure. and also to talk before we data before we end the
conversation about data centers. I really want to address the community that's here as well before we take this vote. Okay, Michael. So, could you explain what the um what the proposition is before we second it and vote on it? Thank you. The motion has been seconded and I mean
you can I was just going to quickly say Michael that uh >> you know what what Michael has moved Jeff is simply to abandon the uh draft that we have uh you know been working on and to uh let the changes that went in
uh stand uh that does include uh section uh what was it 8.13 or 8.14 >> 13 >> 13 8.13 which is moratorium on data centers uh which says that uh
you know for the purpose that we can you know draft the good regulation and then that uh the um it expires June 30th uh of course upon expiration um currently there's no data centers on the
use table that are allowed you there's there's a data center item in the use table with prohibited across the board in all four zoning districts. Does that answer your question, Jeff? >> So, um I'm sorry. >> Can I jump in, Jeff, real quick? >> Yeah, go ahead, Michael.
>> So, there's three parts that we approved a town meeting. The there's a definition of what a data center was. >> There was a use table for all four districts and as Nathan just said, they were prohibited across. So, basically, they would be prohibited in town. And then section 8.13
was the moratorum that ends that actually although we although we corrected on town meeting floor it got recorded as June 20th so officially it would end June 20th and then it becomes obsolete. So in tableabling the
discussion for future amendment if this get approved what would remain are those three things one of which is obsolete. So the definitions would continue and the use table prohibition saying that it wouldn't exist in town would continue and the moratorum would be there but it you know at some point we could clean
that up. >> So my understanding just to be very clear is that if this vote is approved data centers will not be allowed in Shootsbury. Is that correct Michael? Am I am I reading this correctly?
>> That's my intent of this. Yeah. Is uh any other member of the planning board see this differently? Nathan, do you see this differently? >> No. >> Okay. So, a positive vote here basically makes data centers illegal to have in
Shootsbury. Is that correct, Michael? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I would uh clarify that. >> Yeah. Not illegal. It's it's they're prohibited. >> Prohibited. >> I have a question. I mean, it's I I think obviously if the uh planning
board, you know, recommends this, it would be hard to imagine um any other outcome >> and I I'm at a loss for >> what would happen. But so what I'm getting at is um suppose that uh at town
meeting that there's an amendment from the floor to to push our our draft uh that we you know approved for the uh public hearing uh forward. >> Well what I'm thinking if if this gets tabled then there's nothing on the warrant. There's no warrant article
because we're not proposing anything new and so there's no one can offer an amendment for something that's not there. So it just would not it wouldn't exist in the warrant because we're not proposing something new or tableabling it. That was that was my thinking.
>> So in doing this we would uh >> make the meeting >> also ask also ask the select board to uh remove the article entirely. >> Yeah. And and there's uh I mean, you know, I'm not, you know,
this I feel like this is getting a little bit into a a wishy-washy part of the the process, but I mean, we've already contacted the select board and held a public hearing on a uh proposed amendment. Um
is there anyone that could uh you know, is there any way that it it must stay on the warrant because it's already been set in motion? No. No, I mean the warrant's not finalized. >> Yeah. My understanding is that the warrant has to be turned in today,
otherwise it doesn't appear in the town meeting. Is that correct? As far as my knowledge, >> I uh so yeah, they had a desired deadline, but that that's not like the legal deadline. >> Matt Matteo might know and Tom might know.
So March 24th was the deadline under the bylaw for warrant articles to be submitted. The select board has reviewed the articles as has Donna. And then tomorrow night's select board meeting at 4:30 is to vote to approve the warrant and sign it. So it hasn't been signed by um the
select board yet. >> Do we have >> that'll be tomorrow? >> That's tomorrow. Yeah, tomorrow's meeting at 4:30. >> Move the warrant. I'm sorry. Sorry, Jeff, you broke up for a minute. >> I'm sorry. My It's my connection. Do we
need to have a vote to um uh affirm and tell the select board that we do not want this warrant um to be presented? Do we need to vote on that? >> My we would we already have a motion on the table that we would first need to dispose of which
>> could be amended to include that or there could be a you know an additional motion. Um, so, you know, let's leave that there for now. The question of the warrant. Um, I mean, I, you know, it's, I'm just raising the question, um, because I
don't, I don't know the answer to it. And, uh, you know, it's just, I just want it to be something that we think about. Um, I mean, and even if say it it has to be on the warrant because we've submitted that to the select board and they say, "No, you
gave it to us, we're putting on the warrant." Um, if we recommend against doing it, I I I believe that it would just be tabled and uh >> and I would find it very unlikely that uh there would be any effort to um
to to amend the that motion to table it or or whatever, you know. So, I'm not really worried about it if that's the direction we go. I'm just trying to understand the different possibilities that could take place. Um so is there any other uh back to the
question which is should we table this uh the data center discussion and who else would like to speak I see uh Tom >> thanks um if it might help it's helped me because I brought it up while we're
talking the article on the town meeting warrant that was approved or the special town meeting warrant because if I'm understanding correctly this motion is as much as saying we keep
this article as approved. Um, and it felt as though it might help just visually, but maybe Jeff and other people have already gotten what they wanted to know in terms of what it would prohibit or not. But, um,
I just noticed things that technically I don't see the word prohibit in the >> in the use table. But in the table it says N. >> And so I just little things like that I thought it might help. Should I display my screen in other words and show people
this article or is it moot? >> Well, we can see it. >> Yeah, I think the pre the September article is moot because we changed. >> I mean, assuming the attorney general approves it, it's what the changes were. >> So,
>> were there motions on the floor? You mean? >> No. So the use table got is now in the assuming the attorney general approves what we did which I don't know if we ever heard back yet but >> they they did they did approve it. >> Okay. So if it's approved so then the
use table basically right now says no data centers in any district and there's a new definitional paragraph about data centers. >> Yeah. And this is just the uh the that language exactly that was inserted. So it's like you can just read it on one screen. >> Okay. >> Going to the different section. Yeah.
Yeah. Bring it up. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Cuz I don't think it's posted on the on the website. >> It's hard. You can Google it and find it. Um, so I will hit a send request or share please. Okay. So maybe I can do that.
And sometimes my computer takes a moment, but hopefully you're seeing article 10. Is that the case? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is it readable?
So would your motion or would this motion essentially say this is staying what we're seeing? >> That's exactly what it says. >> Okay. >> The affirmation is uh symbolic. This is already uh law of the land.
>> Okay. So the tableabling keeps this and the affirmation gives it a spirit or something. Okay. Sorry. I'm ad living. I'm sorry. No, >> that's right. That's right. Yeah. intentionality. >> So, I think it's been answered already,
but my concern, and Michael, I appreciate how you articulated all of this. And I also appreciate everyone who's here. Like, you know, there has not been a single person who's shown up and said, "Yay, please build data." Thank you.
>> Um my concern was that it says the moratorum will be in place until June 20th 2026. And what you are saying is that if we table our bylaw that the more the use table stays as it is there is why is that? Can
anyone explain it to me? >> Is is it because 311 is different than 813? Well, when Nathan and I met with Donna before the September meeting, originally when I had written the draft in the
summer, it was use table. It was ends all the way across and then there's a little asterisk underneath that said, you know, until June 30th. And Donna said you can't put a conditional time on a use table. A use table is is what it
is. And so that's when she said take the moratorium language and make a new section. So 8.13 is the moratorium. And so there are three distinct parts. There's a definition that exists. There's a use table that exists and then a moratorium that exists. The moratorum
is temporary. The other two will just remain because they're there and until we decide to change them, they continue on. So 8:13 is moot if we as we table this if we table this tonight
>> and the moratorum stays indefinitely. >> Okay. >> But but 813 has always been move. >> Yeah. It'll be moved on June 20th. >> Right. >> Um
now uh I think Jeff has some words he'd like to say. And uh before you start, Jeff, um note that you're on mute and Tom, if you would uh stop sharing. Excellent. Thank you. Go ahead, Jeff. >> Don't forget to unmute yourself. There
you >> Thank you. Can you hear me now? >> Yes. >> Thank you, Nathan. Um thank you, Michael. Um, I'm in completed. >> He froze on the compliment. >> Could you hear me? >> No.
>> Good. Um, I've been in these meetings for a full year and I have a few words that I'd like to uh share with the planning board and also members of who uh maybe voted for me. We promised our due diligence and explore the possibility of having data
centers in Chesbury and that's exactly what we have done at the end of our work. The conclusion is very clear. Data centers do not belong in Chesbury at the present time. Under our current laws, the construction of data centers is not allowed and um and hopefully it will
continue to be not allowed. passing the data um the bylaw as we know uh would allow an unknown number of data centers to come in. I want to say a few words about these data centers just to be on record. Data centers would need a large lithium batteries which have been known to
spontaneously catch on fire. Lithium batteries contain PAPs or forever chemicals that are linked to liver and kidney damage as well as several forms of cancer at very low concentrations. The EPA has established legally enforcable limits of PAS at four parts
per trillion. That's one drop in four um actually five Olympic swimming pools. Data centers would also contain heavy metals, organic solvents, petroleum products, all of which could enter our groundwater and contaminate
our single aquifer that supplies 100% of the water to our town. Our town has already spent $700,000 for testing and water filtration systems for the 50 plus homes that have their water supplies contaminated by PAFS and other and other
harmful molecules. We do not want any additional possible sources of contamination. Since water cooling will not be permitted, these proposed air cooled data centers produce significant noise 24/7. Their low frequency hum from cooling fans and chillers can travel
more than 2 m and is able to penetrate walls and windows more effectively than high frequency noise because low frequency travels like a bullet. High frequency goes up and down. Low frequency travels much better through everything. These persistent hard to
escape low frequency sounds can lead to sleep disturbances, chronicle chronic head headaches as well as stress and increased anxiety. The proposed bylaw actually stated the noise of the data center shall not create a negative impact for a butters or the natural
environment or noise shall not pass beyond the property line. This is folly. This does not even make sense. How can the generation of low frequency hum that can travel more than 2 miles and easily pass through walls and windows not have a negative impact on a butters or the
natural environment? It makes no sense. using 100 kilowatt per per rack which is the current standard right now of 4 million BTUs per hour and Nvidia actually has announced that next year
they'll be bringing in racks that are 1 million kilowatts that's 10 amount our bylaw states a data center shall not cause the ambient in temperature to create a negative impact for the natural environment. How can the
generation of 3.4 million BT use per hour not have a negative impact? You know, I've taught biology, chemistry, physics, and ecology for 37 years. 37. This does not even make any sense. This
massive amount of heat will generate heat islands that cause temperature spikes and ecological stress on our delicate native plants and animals that live in our wetlands and microclimates. Finally, what would be the real cost of having these data centers? Would they even
produce a negative revenue flow? I during this year I have not been on one conversation about how much money would they possibly bring in. Our town has already spent tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees fighting so dangerous lithium batteries.
Given our limited emergency response capability, what would be the possible cost if we needed to upgrade our volunteer fire department or improve our limited road access due due to the potential dangers of wildfires caused by these lithium batteries? For these
reasons and possible irreversible damage to the animals, plants and I strongly urge you to keep Shootsbury data centers free by defa by defeating this law. And that's what I've learned
over a year of being in these meetings. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jeff, for that very impassioned statement. Okay. Anybody else on the planning board have any uh anything they want to add here? I haven't heard from you, Steve.
>> I'm agreeing with everybody um you know, previous comments in addition to when I read through all the changes in additions to that bylaw, I said there's no way in hell the planning board could even, you know, walk through those
steps. But I I'm in total agreement about no data centers at this point. I'm I don't think I've seen a a bylaw that long and detailed before, at least a draft of one in 20 some odd years.
>> All right. >> I can I say one more thing? It took a lot of time um and a lot of effort. And when I was thinking about tonight's meeting, I was feeling some guilt just because of how hard people worked on it.
And it's been a learning process. Um, and I'm really pleased about about uh what has been said so far. Um, it's just there's too many things that are just that we don't know. Um, and it seems
very prudent to to wait to wait this out. Um, and it just feels a lot better to have a moratorum on them right now. Uh, I am in
no rush to to push this forward for this town. >> I see one other thing. Nathan, >> I want to say thank you um, particularly to Michael and Keith and Nathan and like particularly Michael. I mean, it was a lot of work and I mean, it was the substance of almost a year of meetings
for us and it's been an interesting process, but I'm I'm pleased at the tide it seems to be taking this evening. >> Yeah, I'll just riff off that real quickly and say I'm glad we did all the research and we had all the discussions. I mean, I
think, you know, as a board, we worked well together. We tried to problem solve. We gathered a lot of information which we didn't have in August and September. So, it was fruitful and it got us to where we are. So, you know, would have loved to spend my time doing something else, but I think it was really fruitful to get some clarity. Um,
and you know, I I think I I appreciate our our collectively trying to figure it out. But, um, when I stepped back, it's like, okay, you know, you put in a lot of hours, but in the big picture, where did for me, where did I start and what do I think the evaluation was? This it
just doesn't feel right. It's a mismatch. All right. Now, uh I wondered if we would go down this road tonight. I was going to suggest that we uh you
know get the draft in order and then uh have the soularching conversation uh when we get to uh the recommendation piece. But I guess this is quicker. I personally would like to uh at least consider amending uh the motion
or taking a slightly different action to remove data centers from the use table altogether and rest on the uh you know established precedent of a uh prohib uh prohibitory bylaw where unless the uh use is listed as allowed
and the news table then it's not allowed and to uh I think you know you can leave the the definition of data centers in there which makes it something that's not like industry and the thing I would probably
suggest doing if if anyone has any appetite for this road would be to just uh replace the moratorum uh with uh you know so you know uh change the title you section uh
data centers and I just say you know uh you know no data center shall be uh uh permitted unless uh the bylaw is amended uh um to uh have a a
unless the bylaw is amended to show an allowable use for data centers in section you know in the use table section right just to kind of you know clean it up a little But >> that's not that important. It's the same effect either way. That's just more my
uh my sentiments of uh >> kind of just not having uh things on the use table that are not allowed. >> Do you are you actually you want to move? >> I haven't I haven't moved. I'm I'm I'm I'm asking if anyone has any uh you know
would consider that. I mean if if not I'm not I'm not gonna >> put up a huge fight. It's just it's just a a friendly ask. But >> can I ask why? >> Well, I think um you know, it kind of goes back to uh
Michael Pill's comment in our public hearing last year where he said, you know, you've got a you've got it laid out in your use table section here. Let's uh well, it
I'm actually going to just read it just so I can section 3.1-1 use table which is under section 3.1 allowable uses. All right. So, section 3.1, this bylaw
is intended to protect the character of Shootsberry's existing landscape and historic settlements while allowing flexibility of land use and new development that is in keeping with the town's role charact. Right. The use table that follows indicates allowable
uses in the districts shown. See article what 13 for definitions of the use categories. uses that are not listed below are prohibited unless state or federal laws preclude
such prohibition. So that's that that was my reason for it. If you have this clause here and then you have um you know things that are in the use table and explicitly and just prohibited
across the board, I I you know, one I don't think it's necessary and two I think it, you know, it creates a contradiction that I would just assume not having our bylaw. So that's my reasoning. Uh, but
like I said, I'm not trying to uh spend all night talking about it. Either either you guys are willing or you're not. >> So, I'll jump in. I mean because I feel like that's retreading the conversation we have with Donna this summer because you made that argument and Donna was really clear that the more clear we are
and the reason she supported putting it in the use table is that we have a definition and we say it's not there because if it's even though it's true that if it's not listed in the use table then you have to defend it where if it's in the use table and it's defined in the
bylaw you don't have to defend it. everyone knows it's like a big sign that says it's not allowed and this is what they are. Otherwise, someone can say, "Well, this is, you know, what we're proposing." It just it's it's more murky. I mean, Donna's recommendation was very clear. Um
>> Donna's recommendation was that there was not a problem that it could that you could have something in the use table across the board. She was she was more or less unconcerned with nos across the board, but she I don't think that her recommendation was that >> to be clear, you need to have things in
the use table is prohibited because that is that's that's just not true. Okay. I think I think I think it's like settled. I mean, I can't site case law. Um, you know, I wish I had gone down that road, but I mean, yeah, I wasn't quite anticipating this part of the argument to be honest, but it's just uh, you
know, it's um, you know, the it's it's in black and white already that if it's not allowed in the use table, it's not allowed. >> You don't have to argue. It's it's it's it's simple. >> But, I mean, that's, you know, if you
don't want to do it, if you want to rely on on that, I mean, that's that's fine. I'm not going to I'm not going to I'm not going to uh fight about it. >> I I was just I just wanted to make the ask. >> So, uh I see a few other hands up. Uh let's see. Ashley, Alexa.
>> Yeah, just um quickly to acknowledge what you were saying. Um I appreciate your insight. I think based on the the way the town voted at town meeting last year for this moratorum and based on the
sentiment that's been expressed and based on my own heart, I feel strongly that a moratorum should be clear in our use table for data centers. >> Well, there's no mortorium in the use. >> Sorry, that should be prohibited in the
use table. that data center should be prohibited in Shootsbury in the use table in 311, right? >> Yeah. 3.1 defin. >> Yeah, >> Steve, >> there there's just no downside to
keeping it as is. It's crystal clear. You don't have to go hunting for it. I understand your point, but we've already got it. Why make more work for ourselves at this point? >> That's fair. Not worth the uh squeeze.
All right. Um any uh anyone else right then I will u follow the role. >> Excuse me, Nathan. There was some talk about making sure that the select board knows exactly what we want and incorporating that into what we're doing
right now or do we do a separate vote? I just want some clarification regarding our decision. >> I I would say Jeff, if if the motion passes and it's tabled, then we can discuss how to deal with it. But right now, it's not a done deal. Thank you. Um,
>> are we voting on the on the motion now? So the the all the the motion we're voting on is to uh table the discussion on data centers and to um reaffirm the amendment that passed at special town meeting September 30, 2025.
>> In that case I >> Okay. Um, daycare >> I >> se >> I stayain. Motion carries. Now that we've gotten that out of the
way, I suppose we'll uh consider our next uh part of the agenda, which is uh what do we have? >> And so Nathan, I thought review language for annual town meeting. That's no
report to town meeting. I guess >> we don't really need a report anymore. Yeah, we So, we'll just uh rather than doing a report, we'll just send a letter to the select board, a email to the select board and say the planning board voted to table. Uh
>> h >> we could I mean we could just move to Jeff's point. We could just move to communicate to the select board to remove um the warrant article about data centers from an old town meeting
warrant. In fact, I'll I'll move that. >> Okay. >> Second. The motion is to u email the select board. Do you want to uh clarify that a little bit? You want uh you know I would be happy to do it as
uh as chair. I'll uh just send an email and say that the planning board voted to table that and to just uh reaffirm the uh amendment that was passed at special town meeting in September. >> Sure. I I'll just clarify. So, the plan the planning board um requests that the
chair communicate to the site board um our desire to remove the data center warrant article from this annual town meeting warrant. >> Okay. And uh do I have a second? >> I am clarif
I I don't know if I would word it that way. I didn't now is the time to mention that. >> What would you say? Well, as I understood it, it's not actually on the warrant at this point in time. So, I would communicate something perhaps like um the planning board voted tonight to
um do the two things we just did uh table it and uh affirm the the town special town meeting vote and as a result has no article for the warrant >> and maybe just, you know, leave it at
that. um because it's kind of the predication of what we just did >> that we we kind of reserved >> dummy. Let's not get too if I may, you know, let's not get too specific about this. Um you know, just because there are uh
as I say, you know, I'm not convinced that there's not some potential for variables. Um so I would say that uh you know have it general to you know communicate uh you know the vote and the intent to uh you know not have a warrant
article or if there is one to withdraw it what have you know just keep it vague and uh and we'll go from there. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I'll I'll cover the bases in the email and you'll all see it. >> Got it. >> Thanks Nathan. That sounds good. >> If that's the motion I'll second it.
>> Okay. Yeah. Right. So the motion on the table is that the you know the planning board requests that the chair contact the select board inform them of the vote that we just had which was to table or data center bylaw amendment and reaffirm the zoning amendment that passed at
special town meeting last year in September and to take any steps uh um any action relative there too. Any discussion on this?
All right, I'm gonna call the role. Brassler. >> Hi. >> Jay Carrick. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Seafford. >> Hi. >> Weston. >> Hi. >> I'll stand. The motion carries.
All right. We're We're moving right along here, folks. >> Can I ask uh who seconded that motion just for the minutes? Uh >> Tom Seafford seconded the motion. Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Um
>> I can do a quick member updated about clean energy if we have time and you want to hear it. >> Uh yeah. Yeah, please. Uh you know, I think if uh if we look at the agenda, we're we're at member updates. So, let's uh and you know, Michael, I'm
sorry. I uh I got to stop you there because for months I've been meaning to just note that uh I was looking at my electric bill now. I want to say the other day, but it's been months and I noticed something a little bit different about it and I saw that
there was a uh you know, new aggregation or something like that in there. Um so, I just wanted to you know give you offer you my congratulations on on making that happen. um doing that kind of thing is a monumental achievement. So congratulations. >> It's it's definitely all of ECAC and uh
Nate Herd took the lead on that. But I will accept the thank yous on behalf of the committee. >> Yeah, please please convey my uh my congratulations to Nate Herd and the rest of the committee, please. Thank you. >> Thanks for those. >> Yeah.
>> Sorry. >> Okay, cool. Thanks, Nick. So, I'll try to keep this brief, but um I've been telling other towns this. So, and I reported to the select board, but we didn't have a chance because we've been doing other stuff. So, as I think you all know, I've been sort of tracking the
clean energy law, which passed November 2024, and then the regulations have been in process since then. So, the regulations go in effect July 1st um of this year. And there's a lot to them.
Um, the two things I think are important now and we could we could do more substance next month if it makes sense, but the the premise of the clean energy quote unquote reform was in my this is my opinion, but the state felt that we
weren't deploying clean energy quickly enough in the state and they deduced that the they decided the reason was those pesky municipalities were not doing things quick enough. Um this is my editorial comment but they sort of forgot the fact that planning boards and concoms etc work according to statute.
So the fact that it's like hurting cats is by their design. Um but what they ended up doing was they streamlined it. So they created in the clean energy law a consolidated permit which is a new concept. And so this will affect us as
if ever we get a solar wind or battery storage project. And so municipalities are still allowed to regulate solar and wind under 25 megawatts of which there's none currently in the state um and under 100
megawatts battery storage. So that would be an perview to regulate. Anything above that goes to the energy facility sighting board which is the state. Um so in the consolidated permit process the thing that's really different and concerning is a municipality as an
entity has to make all its decisions within 12 months. So by comparison when the planning board considered we lock it was over two years um and so the idea is to sort of and there's no extension. So often times, you know, like we could by
mutual agreement extend a a deadline, but the way the law was written, whether it was intentional or an oversight, I'm not sure, but it's 12 months drop dead. And so basically what has to happen is that any permitting body that's concerned with clean energy and it it it
varies town by town but in our case it would be you know the planning board would have to make a decision and the concom I'm still a little murky about it if the board of health would have to do something but anyone that would have to provide a permit we would we could do it
separately but every each would have to make a decision one way or the other before 12 months and if any didn't then it would be constructively approved. Um and so do has a whole bunch of conditions that if constructively
approved what would kick in um the two things just in the in the short version that are important. Um one the select board already addressed when I presented to this to them about a month or so ago which is the way the regulations are written. Municipalities can start
accepting consolidated permits on July 1st, but they have to start con accepting them on October 1st. And so the select board agreed to have us town of Shootsbury accept them at starting October 1st. And so the regulations say
you have to decide that then you have to publicize it. And according to D publicize it can be as easy as putting it on the website which I think at this point we might have done Matteo might know. The other part which is a little more complicated which Nathan and Matteo
are aware of is the state created a new role called the local government representative and that person is supposed to be I see it as sort of like the conductor making the trains run. So unlike the current process where a a special permit
application, you know, will come to town in a particular articulated way through statute and the same thing in concomment representative. By state law, it's the chief executive of the town. So in our case, it's a select board. Um so by default, it would be the select board.
Clearly I I don't think that's the appropriate place. Um, the conversation that we can subsequently have, but I know that Matteo and Nathan had a like a little set of comments during the siteboard meeting is because we're fortunate enough to have Matteo shared
already between the concomba and the planning board. He's he's in a good position to do it. The question is there's more work to be done new consolidated application process than there currently is. Um, and it's more it's both administrative and
substantive. So there might it seems like there could be more hours than Matteo might be currently doing if it all ran the way it currently is designed, but we won't know until it happens. Um, and then the challenge is
um, for every municipality, you don't know if and when you're going to get an application. So you don't want to hire staff people or assign hours and then not get anything. Um, one of the things that I've actively pitching with the legislature, um, I pitched to do, but they didn't listen, was to allow
municipalities to do the 53G consultant drought, which is what we we would do if like if we had storm water experts for an application, we would be able to get money from the applicant, put it into our bank account, and then hire an
expert to do it. And so the hope would be that towns would be able to hire someone who, you know, could then manage this whole process, but that's that's like an advocacy hope. It's currently not the case. So currently, we have to figure out who's going to be shoot's local government representative. At this
point, we have to October 1st. I raised it a couple months ago only because I was thinking if we're doing the budget, this would be the time to sort of plan budgetarily. Um, it didn't happen. It's not the end of the world. we you know we don't have a application in front of us but I'd say right now for purposes of
this meeting those are those are the two things knowing that we won't get a consolidated permit till October 1st um we don't have a local government representative identified so right now it's the select board um and then I mean Nathan if we want to go into other stuff oh the other big thing this is this is
the other thing which um in the minutes remember it came up that green communities division of DOE was developing the model bylaws I have a feeling they're having a little hard time because it was supposed to be about a month ago and they keep saying it's coming soon. There's this huge
inconsistency. So, I've been to several presentations now. And what they verbally say is municipalities don't have to change their current bylaws. So, you don't have to change our solar bylaw. You know, if you had energy storage in there, you wouldn't have to change it. But the
model bylars are coming out and they're going to sort of create layer of the land. Um, and I just personally can't see how one can comply. Like there's a lot of Dover amendment gray areas in there. So I think it's really murky and I don't have
clarity because the model bylaws haven't come out yet and I've asked lots of questions and haven't gotten any answers. So I think that's the big thing for us next is when they come out. I I'll be evaluating anyway. So I'm happy to share to figure out like do we have
to change something? When do we have to change it by? I mean, the other thing I would just say is when I did my public comments to the U, I said if towns have to change their bylaws to comply because the effective date is July 1st and we
haven't seen them yet, everyone's going to have to go to a special town meeting in order to have their bylaws passed. Um, so as I understand it, I think Tom and Matteo can probably confirm, I think we have a special town meeting scheduled for September. So, if we had to change
our bylaws, what does that mean? Could we hit it, you know, hit something by September 1st? It that's like a huge question mark. Um, and I think that's that's the active ambiguity that, you know, is going to be before us, but I don't have the more information on that
yet. That's it. All right. Uh, >> thanks. Um, just if you happen to know quickly, Michael, >> how does a local government representative get chosen or changed from being the CEO
of the town? If that's what it is by default, do they designate somebody else? >> So, it would be a board design. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Just curious. >> Yeah. Thanks, I think uh
I'm thinking about scheduling the next meeting for uh hybrid and town hall. All right. Nice. go back to fully remote when the snow flies and fall. It >> it would be it's nice to spend some time
together in person. That would be really wonderful for me. >> Me, too. >> That's the 11th, right? >> Pardon me. >> Um >> May 11th. >> Oh, see. >> Um
>> I'm looking at the calendar real quick. Uh, >> excuse me, Nathan. >> Mary Lou, would you like would you like to speak? >> Yes, please, if I may. It's really quick. Um, Jeff, I am so impressed with
how you spoke that it's leaving me speechless except to say thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. And um if you can convey that kind of message to a greater audience at town meeting,
although I think you all, you know, you talk in your own lingo and half the time I really don't know what you're saying, but best um I took from this is I think you all are not going to go forward with anything that's going to allow data
centers anyway. And again, I just want to thank you um Jeff for speaking the way you spoke. >> Mary Lou, thank you so much. I want to I want to return by saying
this town is very very lucky. Um to have this planning board, >> we are a very devoted planning board. This is all volunteer. It's like a family in some ways. we can we stick with each other. We have arguments and
um we come up with the con you know as much of a consensus as we can. So I want to thank you but al also I want to say that this town is incredibly lucky to have this planning board and um and I feel honored to be a part of it.
>> Very good. >> What do you mean we have arguments? >> I want to go on vacation together. All right, >> we're we're gonna do it at the new Shootsbury Retreat. >> I'm saying good night. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Jeremy, you want to uh chime in as well? >> Yes, I do. Uh I just want to commend uh all of you. Um you know, I caught wind of this uh not too long ago and um you know, can definitely tell the amount of
work that was put in. um you know to all of this and uh really appreciate um your efforts and I just want to uh especially thank Jeff uh and Michael um you know for your words. I couldn't uh agree with you more and I think uh you
know it sounds like a large majority of us feel the same way. Um, you know, it's what, uh, you know, this town is about and, uh, you know, I'm glad that, uh, you know, we're protecting, you know, what we all love. Um, and, uh, on a
second note, uh, Michael, I'm, uh, very intrigued about the, um, you know, mention of, uh, you know, further recreation and utilize what makes this town so wonderful as far as outdoor recreation and things of that sort. Um,
you know, I'd love to hear more, you know, um, going forward. I know this isn't the the time for it, but um, you know, definitely, uh, keep me in the loop, Nate. I know I can probably get a hold of you, uh, through the grapevine and, uh, hope to have further
discussions about how we can bring revenue into this town because I know that's obviously, you know, imperative as well. But uh I don't think uh data centers would have fit um you know what we represent as a as a town and what we
all love about it. Uh this town is special because like who want to participate and who care. So that's what makes the town. So um thank you so much for coming and thanks for being part of the conversation. I really like a
all the terrible things that are happening. So in in just moving through this and coming to a greater clarity about who we are and what we want. >> Thank Yeah, I think yeah, I think we all share that that the same passion for uh
you know the you know this beautiful place and uh seem like we're all on the uh the same page uh to keep it that way because we could have all the money in the world and uh you know what's a what's a town that you don't want to live in. >> Yeah. Good. Right,
>> Jeremy, there is an opening for a vacancy for associate member on the planning board. FYI. >> FYI, there's a vac there. There's going to be a vacancy as of >> um >> July 1st.
>> Yeah. No, it'll be on uh >> May 9th. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I you know, my concern is when I >> when I do things, I want to uh give it 110% and I have two young kids that I cart around all the place and and and keeping them in line and stuff.
>> Okay. So, write your write your name in. Yeah. >> So, yeah. >> No good deed. >> But, you know, this this this has been uh something, you know, new to me uh the in this whole process and uh it's definitely intrigued me to be much more
active and involved um in in things in the in the town. So, I I appreciate all all your efforts. >> Yeah, >> it's fun doing this with kids. >> Yeah. I'm I'm lucky my wife came home early enough that they weren't asking uh
for me every uh 10 minutes. So, I'm glad I was able to sit down and actually take part in this. So, you know, in the future, I'll definitely put more effort to uh uh to be more active in it. But, uh definitely would like to hear uh some ideas and maybe give some myself, you
know, as it uh pertains to what Michael had had mentioned briefly. Well, Jeremy, feel free to find me through the grape vine and thank you for your comments. >> We'll do. So, it's bedtime for my youngans. So, I appreciate it. Everyone have a wonderful night.
>> You too. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Nathan. I got two quick things just picking up with that. So, um, in the thank you category, I just wanted to thank you cuz I mean I I struggled with this the last few days of like coming
around to thinking about this, but it's sort of like it's nothing that we were planning on and it's sort of out of almost you're forced to do it out of the blue, you know, because you can't like tell everybody, hey, this is what I'm thinking. So, you you know, you took it
to Strider's chair and I know you have slightly different opinions. So just your grace in managing it I just appreciate. Um so I wanted to thank you and then I think the other thing is just in terms of the you know coming up with revenue generation that plays to the
character of the town. If I'm totally up for trying to think about that as like >> you know for next for next school year as we you know as we turn the corner and we say oh what are we doing next year? I don't quite know how to incentivize that kind of stuff, but it'd be worth a
conversation to figure out if there's ways of doing it. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Um, well, thank you for the kind words, Michael. And, you know, I uh I I was really wondering what was going
to happen. I I uh you I knew this was a possibility and I I kind of I kind of thought we would do the draft and and and I was going to you know say all right you know so uh are we going to have a a soularching moment here? are we really going to put this
forward or and then you know on one hand I uh you know I might have uh I would have abstained if I could but if if if there was not uh if I would have been a deciding vote I I I would have certainly considered voting for it in
the affirmative in the spirit of uh bring it to town meeting but it's uh I I mean, that's not always the case. It's uh it's a good outcome, I think. Um and it'll make town meeting a lot more
efficient. >> Yeah, we'll win points. >> So, um >> we could do that. We could communicate as a placeholder this efficiency brought to you by the planning board. >> Thanks. I also want to echo what Michael
said, Nathan. really appreciate your leadership and openness to having this discussion and uh your openness to whatever the results would be. So um it showed a lot of grace and um and trust
in the consensus of the group and um so um thank you for your leadership and all the effort that you've put in. It's amazing. You've got two little kids and you're doing this. I I could never do it with two little kids. So thank you. It's a great um it's a great amount of energy that you're putting in because I know
you care a lot about the town and um I appreciate your leadership. Thank you. >> Thank you for the kind words, Chuck. I appreciate it. >> Yes, it's been a quite a remarkable journey these last uh six months or so.
>> Now, um I think that covers updates. I think I don't know if you um >> I have a member update >> just to >> um I did reach out Nathan I CCD you so you probably saw it I reached out >> right yeah >> the wheelock uh folk and just haven't
had a response >> I just said this is following up from our last meeting I just you know reached out and said you know we noticed that the 2025 report was on our website and uh we had a conversation at planning board and none of us received it so I'm
just reestablishing a connection with you to and and was curious who you sent it to and how it got there and you know and I thanked them for sending it. So I got one out of office message from uh the fellow I
can't remember his name and I haven't heard back from the other person. >> I think >> I think they might send it to the select board. >> Yeah. I just I I want to comment on that. Last time we went, I don't know if anyone remembers, there are grasses growing right right next to the lithium
battery right to the center area that had um possibly some Native American sites. So that could spread right from the grass right to that area and we would be in a disaster land. So if we could somehow maybe have that on the
agenda of maybe bringing a truckload of gravel so at least we have a barrier between the lithium batteries and the forest. there's grass growing right up to it. >> Um, so anyway, I wanted to bring that into consciousness. >> Okay. And Nathan, what did you say? I I
should also CC the select board or I'm sorry, I missed what you said. >> I said that I think they may have sent the report to the select >> the select board. That would make sense. >> Or the town or the town administrator, right? And then from there it could have
just made its way to uh >> to Gail on the any or anyone on the web committee really to uh just get posted which would be unusual that that would happen without any of us knowing about it but not that unusual. So >> okay >> um you know we don't own our the the
page. It's a town website you know so that's the uh the web committee does have authority over that. Um, oh yeah, and we we Yeah. So May 11th is the next meeting. And yeah, and just just to be clear, as
of uh the election on May 9th, because there's also a town election on the 9th, right? That will be uh you know, with Deacon not running and as far as I know, nobody is running. >> Yeah, just Steve and I.
So, two out of Yeah, sorry. You two are running. Yes. But nobody there's no third or fourth person. Uh there's a Yeah, there's a vacant seat without anyone running for it. Um and and and Michael and and Steve are running for uh
another term. Thank you both uh for your continued engagement here and I wish you the best of luck. And uh so uh that would mean that you know we should be uh encouraging people like Jeremy and whoever else we meet to
uh go ahead and uh step in. Um possibly as a associate um maybe not and we'll uh we'll go from there. We'll uh certainly begin discussions on potential
appointments I would imagine. Right. Um, we'll probably uh and we're having the meeting. It's uh >> Yeah, we should definitely do that in May because they'll make appointments in June and we'll have to sort of do our
both committee things. >> Yeah. Should I do another uh town and house then just before the you know in the next uh few days if I can get to it? Maybe maybe next week, but or maybe I'll ask see if
Matteo will do it. He's a good guy. >> Matteo, would you uh sent out a town announce for us to uh look for associate members and also you know anyone that's interested actually well yeah anyone that's
interested in a uh you know what let's stick with associates for now. Um there could be some kind of writing thing that happens. So we shouldn't put the cart before the horse end of it. >> So we'll we'll we'll we'll stick with
associates only on on u in between now and town meeting. Uh will that would you be able to do that mate? >> Yep. I I can do that. And with the open third seat that does mean that somebody would only need to get one right in vote in theory to get elected. So you could
end up with another blending board member through Idens. >> Just write my name though. >> I'll be I'll be like I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Don't do that. >> Matteo, with Dilman in mind from the trivia thing, we could write you in and
you know, maybe you'd have like a third of his official status. >> No, I'm good. Thanks. >> Yeah, tell tell them what you what was it was really impressive. Uh Henry Dilman when he entered uh when he
enlisted in World War II left 12 public offices vacant in Shootsbury because he was serving in 12 different offices at the time. And he was I think was he was 34 I think. >> And that was uh which war again?
>> That was in 1944. >> Puts us all to shame. that I think that was probably like a real uh in Shootsbury I I feel like around the uh the depression era like everyone a
lot of people left the area. You know, there had been some activity here before then with maybe like the railroads or whatever and then uh things totally petered out and then at some point people started coming back because they're like, "Oh, we like we like the woods.
Okay. Hey, Nathan, just to clarify, you we're definitely in person May 11th. We should plan on that. >> Yeah. Yeah, I I would like to do that. Um >> and you know, if I forget, please remind me uh after I you know,
but I'll uh yeah, I can I would like to do that. I've been thinking about that for a while and uh seems like a decent uh time to do it. It's nice, you know, it's uh it's nice to you know, you get out and about a little bit on a nice uh
summer evening, right? Why not? Or spring evening at being. Do we have anything else we need to talk about? I don't think we do. I think uh this this will be nice to have a meeting in before 9:00, huh? Yeah. I'll move to adjourn.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um does uh anyone want to second that motion? >> Second. >> All right. All right. I'm going to say that Steve seconds. Uh so the motion is to adjurnn. Any discussion?
No. All right. I'll call the role. Brassler. >> Hi. >> Carara. >> Hi. >> I >> see. I >> Weston >> I >> and I am an I. The motion carries.
Meeting is adjourned. Thanks everyone. >> Good night everybody. >> Good night. See you. See you in May.