We'll get going. All right. Good evening, everybody. Uh, my name is Andrew Shepard, chair of the Towns and Planning Board. I call this meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. I'd like to have a roll call of all the board members present. Please say your name. >> Terrell Hoses, present.
>> Brett King, present. >> Cindy King, present. >> Andrew Shepard, present. >> Would you please join me in the pledge of allegiance? I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> I would like to thank all of our veterans, those who are currently serving here and abroad, their families, and those who contribute their time to public service. I think we owe them our gratitude. This meeting is being
recorded and will be uploaded to the Town of Towns and YouTube channel. We do not have Robert here tonight and we do not have Lance either. So, let's jump right in. Thank you.
>> Uh 1.4. Were there meeting notes here? >> I was not provided any. Um so that might be something that comes on the next meeting which I think is supposed to be in July. >> And you guys didn't see any meeting notes. I didn't see any. >> No, I didn't see any. I didn't see them.
>> Okay. So we'll jump from 1.4. So we have two public hearings tonight. 2.1 and 2.2 6:45 and 7:15. Um we can go to uh meeting business 3.1
discuss planning board standard operating procedure for procurement and contracting of professional consultants in project review pursuant to planning board regulation 175-26 subsections A throughF employment of outside consultants.
Um certainly would like to open it up to the board for feedback. I think we've talked a little bit about it. Personally for me, I think the only thing I would like to try to add to that is that we try to gather three quotes for peer reviews for the applicants. I think that would be fair. But yeah, if anyone else
had any other thoughts or comments I think we should a minimum of two like I don't having just one is not good business. >> Yeah. >> Right. I mean typically the standard is three. You can't always >> How much money are we talking? What
window? contracting rules of putting things out. >> Is it because it's because the the applicant pays for it, >> right? >> So there's no >> it's what 1,800 or something. >> Okay. >> Well, the the highest one was 10,000.
>> Was it? Oh, the highest. >> Oh, now it's 15. Okay. So, I mean >> I mean three would meet that, but I was just throwing that out there as you know question. You may not get three. You may not even,
you know, you may only get one, but you could try for, you know, for three. >> So, I know she tried another one that was not qualified. >> Yeah. >> For that >> particular >> particular one. >> Yeah. >> But there's so many engineering firms out there that we could lean on to get
quotes. I mean if you send it out broadly you might get more I don't I don't know how they >> each of them will have a different specialty too. Yeah, that's >> so we probably I mean I don't know what all the rules are on all this but >> if you've got different specialties that
having a larger list a pool so that we can draw on >> Yeah. >> Anyway, I mean >> I think we should create the list now. >> That's what I mean. >> So it's not a fire drill when we >> all of a sudden need three quotes and now we're like oh we can't find
>> find somebody. Yeah. >> Yeah. The real key is for, you know, it's over $10,000. And if you put this in the AI, like I did quickly, and this is pretty normal. It's over $10,000, you need three written quotes. So it could be Carol's engineering firm, Brett's engineering firm, and Cindy's
engineering firm so that you're just making sure you get feedback on what their abilities are, what their specialties are, and how it satisfies the project at hand. Um, you know, if you hit certain other thresholds, you have to go through a more formal process. So, if you're over 50K, then
you need to go through a formal process and maybe Andrew's firm also wants to be part of this. But, um, you know, we're doing procurement with another group in town where they're purchasing a lawnmower and they went out to three different groups, got written responses and are able to satisfy the procurement
um, in that. So, >> so I totally agree, but where it's not it's not considered public money, right? >> It's not, but even with engineering firms, you still should follow the process. So, it should be, you know, over that $10,000 threshold, you want to get one from Graves, Oil and Tanner, and
then >> throw another a third name out there that we I don't know of that. >> And in your experience, does it count when Graves says, "I'm not qualified to do that." >> It's a written Yeah, it's a written response. If they say, "Hey, like I can't opine or I can't deliberate on,
you know, honeybee hives." Like, that's not in my wheelhouse. >> Sure. You've you've asked them, they provided feedback, you've satisfied the need for sure. Okay. Uh, now given that this is a regulation and the way I understand it,
I think we have to have a public hearing on it to change it and then come up with some draft language of how we want it to sit in there and then um vote to approve it at a public hearing specific. I'm not Yeah, certainly if you
have any more thoughts or comments as you read it over. Um, but I feel like we're in a relative agreement. >> Yeah. I I'd like to try for a minimum of three if possible. >> Yeah, I also I agree. >> It's almost like an Angie's List, like having three firms that you know you
could lean into it and depending on the specialty you have. There used to be like Angie's List, there's like another >> Craigslist, you know, right? >> Yeah, there's a lot of those. >> So certain ways you can satisfy that. So >> I like having a long list of >> right >> with different specialties. >> Yeah, that would be ideal. So
>> be good if we can get them qualified to four so we're not getting the oh I'm I I can't >> if we're able to have a list of eight. They might not necessarily want to bid on everything we do, but if we know who is available approximately what their
the bid numbers might be, >> but you know that we know that this person does storm water, this person does subdivisions, this person does I mean I'm just making >> and everyone's workload's different, right? So if we have eight, there might be four that just can't take it on because their workload's too much. So
>> Right. But yeah, eight would be a nice If we could get a list of eight, then you're people can take themselves off. Yeah. Depending on and we don't have to start over, >> right? The select board did um approve a master services agreement with oil and
Tanner. Um there were a larger firm in this neck of the woods. Um so they do a lot of these things, but you know, in the event that you you you had less than $10,000, you just needed a quicker result, they might be an option. They're pricey. They're not an inexpensive firm.
Um, but the town does have a sort of a master service agreement with them now. So, for under $10,000, they can do it without much leg work. So, >> we're using them on one now, right? >> You are for the zero sceiver. I think they're >> I thought so. That's where it was. >> They're expensive. They're very good,
but they are an expensive firm. So, >> yeah. I I mean I I guess for me as we try to work with the people who come before us to the benefit of the town, I I think it'd be in my mind best for them to have a number of options. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Because you never know. >> Yeah. Workload, you know, time of year, stuff like that. >> Yeah. Okay. And they foil tanner is very pricey. And if you're putting the burden on somebody else to pay for, it'd be nice if they had an option of maybe a lesser
>> painful amount of money. >> Yeah. Well, you know, it's just something that I can work with the admin back um when she's back and say, "Hey, let's sort of compile a list. Check with some of our neighbors in, you know, Lunberg, Ashby, Croton, you know, all this area said, what do you guys have
for a list? Let's just put everyone down on a working thread >> so that you can always lean in the folks as they the work calls. So we're not reinventing the wheel here. It's just something we could create a list for. It could be on a share drive off you go. Someone asks say, "Hey, here you go." >> Yeah, exactly. >> Call these four people for your project
and just give us a copy of the quote. Yeah. So >> do a signin sheet. >> Well, actually there is right there. Right up there. >> When you get a chance, sir, we got a sign sheet. >> Yeah. All good. Um, so you can sort of, you know, back into things that way.
Sure. >> Okay. Um, so that covers 3.1. I guess Karen, if you can work with Beth, if you don't mind working with Beth on that, >> um, we can put it as one of our next meeting. >> Uh, 3.2 discuss, review, edit, proposed,
draft amendments. Chapter 175, Towns and Planning Board Regulations and Memorandum to Towns and Planning Board from Joseph Bole MRPC re-planning board regulations and zoning update dated 51426. To my knowledge, that's none of the
material in there is any different than what we've already seen. >> I hadn't heard back. I know there were some little homework uh tasks that were assigned. So, I didn't >> Well, yeah. >> Did anybody do anything? >> I didn't even understand what I was supposed to do. I mean, I printed out >> I didn't have time.
>> I I printed out the the stuff and then I looked at it and I'm like, I I'm clueless what is what I'm supposed to do. So, um I know it was this table. >> I was going to review the video and to
try to focus on what did what did we say when Joe was here. >> I know it was. >> Okay. Well, that's just one of the things, but we went through, >> you know, the the bylaw as it is, and we talked about a lot of different things and we talked about a few ideas. I was
going to go back and review that to say, okay, what did he say? Cuz I started looking at the material earlier today and I said, >> okay, I I got to I got to look back at that video and I just didn't have time to really see, all right, what did we say? What was that conversation? Because I don't want to I don't want to have I
don't want to I personally don't want to come to our next meeting and say, I didn't do my homework. >> Yeah. No, I I get that. >> I was like, so my my plan for myself was to watch that section of the video and see what what did we say we were going to do >> because I think it's clear.
>> I think it was clear that night what we were going to do. To me it was well to me it wasn't. I was I was still confused. >> Okay. >> And then I says, "Well, when I print out everything and put it in front of me, I figured, okay, now I'll figure it out." But then I printed out everything, put it in front of me, and I says, "I'm
still confused." So, yes. >> Okay. >> But I'll look. But, but if you figure it out, >> I'll try to do my homework. >> Send me a little note and say, "I figured it out." Then I could do the homework. So, from what I remember, and
this is just because I wrote it to Beth like the morning after the meeting, >> um, >> was to look at that table to figure out >> um, and for us to think or yeah, think through what the board wanted to be a special permit versus site plan
approval. And then the other one was the ADU bylaw and to think through if we still want it as we wrote it, which was to come before us if it's a new structure on the property, which I think our intention at the time was that we're thinking through, you know, does the
location fit? Is there parking? Is there things like that? for now that we've had a few come before us ADUs uh largely >> I did review the ADU and for me I didn't want to I had I didn't want to change it
but that was just me so um >> but maybe we'll keep that on our homework list and come back for the next meeting >> yeah I know just my thoughts without studying it maybe studied it more than I did but um without really studying it my
my thoughts are to you know ease up on all these applications and to make it easier like if if it's pretty if if everything else is pretty clear about what's needed and if we've got it
spelled out enough that an applicant who wants to put in an ADU they can do it by right >> meeting other if everything can be then why do why do anything why let let them do it and work with the building inspector on what
needs to be done on what they what they can do and because there'sn't why why create a step just because we want to know what's going on as long as we have the the parameters clearly laid out so that they they have
enough information to do that okay that's my thoughts but that's yeah we can we can revisit it keep talking I mean I'm not you know >> I feel >> I'm not dead set on it I'm just like we should >> I think >> make it easier on applicants the fact we're going to have so few of them out
here without sewer. I I think it's why bring in an extra step just >> well we have if I mean we've got a lot of properties we got what two acres owning there's plenty of room to put another >> subscri a lot of people >> there's a housing shortage and a lot of
properties on well water so wells are not cheap to put in this >> is true >> anyway anyway we'll keep we'll keep we can keep talking I'll give it back >> so it is approaching our 645.
Um, >> a minute to go. >> The next meeting business would be 3.3, which is the marijuana zoning bylaws. Um, I don't mind working on that and I remember myself feeling that I wanted to promise the applicant that we would work on it. I would just I'd like to have the
applicant um or someone who is a proponent of it be be present to help you know push it along and guide it and such. That's my personal feelings. >> Um okay, we'll come back to that though. >> Okay. >> So, we're at 6:45. like to
open up the public hearing. One depot street extension mod modification to age restricted development special permit and site plan review special permit decision dated December 9th, 2024. Uh this is regarding an application by Kevin Smith and Kenneth Py for
modification of a planning board decision dated December 9th, 2024 granting a special permit pursuant to zoning bylaws section 145-54.1 age restricted development and 145-42 site plan review special permit. The
proposed modifications would retain the requirement for the designated open space area approximately 21,54 square ft as shown on sheet C6.0 of the approved plans while eliminating the
requirement that this open space be placed under a permanent conservation restriction pursuant to MGL chapter 14 184 sections 31-33. Let me I just want to look this public hearing
rule sheet. Got to make sure I >> You don't happen to have public hearing. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. I'd like to introduce all the board members. They'll go ter present and Cindy King
>> and Andrew Shepard. Uh, there is a public signin sheet circulating. >> The legal ad. I don't think that was technically the legal ad that I read. Cindy, do you happen to have the legal ad in front of you? >> Oh, let me see if I can pull that. >> Oh, is it in the folding underneath here? There's a folder here.
>> Folder right there. >> Just because you might be on that. >> This is This is actually the stuff from last time. Is that stuff? This is everything in here is from last time. There's nothing here new. >> If you want, I can put it up on the screen here.
>> Uh, wait a minute. >> That's the mandatory referral. Let me see. Hold on. I've got my the SharePoint still. >> Um, are you going to >> I can help you read it out loud if you
want. >> Oh, okay. It take me a minute to find it on this thing. Okay, let's see. Legal notice. The planning board will hold a public hearing on June 22nd, 2026 at 6:45 in select board chambers in Memorial Hall, 272 Main Street, Towns,
and Mass in accordance with master chapter 4A and the towns and zoning bylaw. The hearing concerns an application by Kevin Smith and Kenneth Tolley for modification of site plan per special permit granted under zoning bylaw section um 145-54.1
age restricted development. The applicant requests a modification to the planning board's notice of decision dated December 9th, 2024, recorded in book 83876, page 318 for the approved age restricted development special permit and site plan
review special permit at one depot street extension assessors map 51 block 56 lot zero. The proposed modification would retain the requirement for the designated open space area approximately 21,54 square feet as shown in sheet C6.0
of the approved plans while eliminating the requirement that this open space be placed under permanent conservation restriction pursuant to national law chapter 184 sections 31-33. The hearing will be held in person with a virtual option. Full remote access
details will be posted. Oh, you're moving it on me. Hold on. Um, yeah, the hearing will be Yeah, full remote access will be posted at least 48 hours prior to the town website under the upcoming events calendar. Written
comments may be submitted prior to the hearing on the web. >> Okay, Siri. Public comments will also be accepted during the hearing. The application on f is on file with the town clerk and planning board for public review. Andrew Shepard chair planning board. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. >> And post in the Guinness Arrow May 20 March May 29th and June 5th. >> Um the next order of public hearing process would be to invite the applicant to present or to comment or talk.
>> I really don't have anything to present. Last time we were here, I thought we were all set. It said after spoke with the town council said that it had to have a public hearing to eliminate the need for the conservation restriction. That's
dragged you guys through this >> part of the process. Sure. Okay. Thank you, Ken. Um, so board reviews project and plans against town rules, regs and bylaws. So, I think I mean in my mind what Ken said
at our last meeting, we were hoping we'd be able to wave it just because of the amount of land is not what are you going to do with it. Um, and then we decid we learned from town council that we were not able to under the regular we had to
post a public hearing to do so. >> Um, >> but it makes sense that if Yeah. based on the legal opinion that we received. >> Yes. Um did any you know specific to rules and regs? Uh any planning board member
have any other thoughts or comments upon review? Okay. Um so there has been um we've had the opportunity for a site visit from the board. I know that the storm water uh
Colby has visited recently um and uh inspected and I believe everything is in order for the minor storm water uh permit. We've got all the docu I think some of them gone into the portal today. >> Yeah, >> if you want I can screen share, you
know, you'll see on this um >> again I like making sure everyone can see everything. So, um, you'll see here just a storm water management certificate of completion inspection checklist. Um, so Kobe Streer, your conservation agent, met with Mr. Smith
on June 10th. Um, they, you know, went through the different disturbed areas, you know, noted things along the way. um you know there's pictures on file and then it sort of concludes with um you know referencing the registry of deeds
and you know ne you know recommended scheduling annual inspections with the property owner to satisfy the requirements of storm water management. So um that's what you want to see. >> Okay. Um any questions or comments from the
board members? Okay. Uh mandatory referral comments. We got one comment from the conservation commission. >> We have two >> with two. Oh >> yeah, >> we have two. So >> I did see you wrote one. >> Conservation on disabilities comments as well as concom and I'll share these on
the screen for you as well. >> Sorry wasn't it's in the it's in the thing. >> Um so I'll read Kieran maybe while you share that I'll read the concom. Um this is from vice chair Mike Potand. The concom believes there should be a
conservation restriction which should have been created upon the inspection of the project. Concom would agree to hold the restriction upon the mutual acceptance of these specific restrictions with the condominium association.
That's the concom. And then we have the commission on disabilities. >> I got this here for you too if that helps. I'll read that one. >> Sure. >> Um, the Commission on Disability makes the following comment for consideration in the application for One Depot Street.
The Commission on Disability hopes the accessibility for all residents and visitors be considered. The inclusion of walkways providing people with mobility issues allows for full enjoyment of any open space provided on the property. Walkways should be constructed in accordance with the Mass um
architectural access board regulations 521 CMR 20.00 00 accessible route. The COD has no specific comments regarding whether the area be open space or under a conservation restriction. We only suggest that under either proposal that accessibility be allowed and required in
consideration of any other needed restrictions on use of the space. Thank you for requesting comments from the commission on disability for this important project submitted on behalf of the commission on disability syndicate. >> Thank you Cindy. >> Thank you and thank you commissioner. Select board had no comment on this.
>> Um, okay. So, we don't have written correspondence from voters or concerned citizens, but we would like to open it up to public questions or comment if anybody has any specific to >> I was just curious. I'm going to across the street and I was just curious what
what it was all about. I could barely read the letter that you guys sent me. It was like the machine or something. serious a permanent conservation restriction. Well, in order to get one from the state, the state typically
doesn't allow a permanent conservation. You have got to be approved from the state >> and to get that on such a small piece. The state doesn't want to be bothered policing areas around the condo association. Basically, we can if the town was going to hold a conservation
restriction be one thing, but they're asking for permanent conservation restriction and those are only up by the state. So, and that's was a big snap and there is a in the deed on the deed docks there is a conservation restriction. It's just not a permanent like was required in the original.
So, we we came as close to the meeting as we could I guess >> being a neighbor you know liked it. >> Sure. I remember talking with Kevin at the beginning. As long as he left the trees along the street, you know, instead of opening up and >> turning into, you know, keep that
country some trees up, you know, on the street still. >> Another question. >> Hi, I'm Sandra Lord. Um, in I'm here as a resident and as well I'm not officially speaking for conservation
tonight, but I am on there and from my understanding it would be the conservation would be responsible for checking on it. Wouldn't be necessarily the state. That was my understanding at the last meeting.
>> Conservation would check the annual storm water checklist. From what I understand about the conservation restriction park, that's all you had input on that on those comments. >> Mhm. >> And my understanding was it would be up to the conservation commission to do that.
>> Conservation Commission is able to offer comments. >> No, when I was at the meeting, that's what they said. We are told that we as the court the commission would be the ones that would be in charge of
poling it I guess you could say um we were told that and that's I guess that's what we were told and you can go back and look at the meeting that's on YouTube. >> So I don't obviously I don't know what you guys were told versus what we were told. I I wonder if given what Ken said
if that was maybe the minute differences between a permanent conservation restriction >> perhaps perhaps >> um I don't know if that was clear or confused >> but that was just a high meeting >> and I just wanted to add my input
>> my perspective is being on the commission >> and that's that's that's about it I I really believe in these conservation restrictions um it should be upheld I mean we keep I'm throwing out bylaw statute, whatever. It's like why why are we even
bother meeting as a commission if you know we're not going to be paid attention to. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Thank you. Um I guess I'd like to open it back up to the board if there's any additional comments or thoughts. Sure.
>> Okay. Um, yeah, I think I mean I can hear what the conservation commission is saying and based on what we've talked about previously that this is a new open a a new public hearing, but the the issue the reason I think that we're
here with this new new request is a change in the bylaw that the by correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is this that at some meeting We changed the the bylaw regarding these types of properties and you in the previous bylaw
the conservation restriction was required and that was in place when we did when Kevin did his application for this to do this build and since then it's no longer a requirement that it's
it's there's an open space requirement now only or nothing. I think it's uh I think there is >> some kind of open space requirement but not a conservation restriction requirement >> or it's now waveable >> or wable >> because I think that was part of the problem last if he had if he put in if
he had put in an application today the conservation restriction might not even be on the table. So and that's part of the reason for the waiver. We also receive um legal opinion that allows us
to have we have to have another public hearing. They'd have to do a new application because they were asking to wave it before, but so we're doing this new application because but but as a modification and it sounds from council that said that we could do it this way
if we so if the board decided to vote to allow the open space versus the conservation restriction. Um, and I know there's a difference between open space and a conservation restriction, but and they're both both of them are
beneficial to the property. But I mean, I'm I'm leaning towards, you know, letting the open space happen because if he did, it wouldn't be a requirement if he did the thing today. And it is, it sounds like a lot of work for s such a
small area in consideration of what a conservation restriction is. So, um I think that um that's why I'm and and I think that for me that explains it really well that the hardship created by
can he what would it take him to sell the property? I mean, because they're condos, can he can he sell them until this is settled? So we're we may be are we holding up business quite a bit by quibbling over >> conservation restriction versus open
space which >> so that's just my my thinking. >> Thank you usual wordiness. >> Well said. >> Okay. Um I'd like to I guess entertain um a a motion. Um Karen maybe you can
refresh my memory or even Cindy. Uh, do we close the public hearing first or do we vote before we close? >> I'm looking at your checklist here. So, I think there would be a motion to either be in support or opposition. >> All right. >> Um or continue if you weren't sure if
there were outstanding issues and then you would close the public hearing. >> Who would like to entertain a motion? >> I move that we support the um the applicants request for modification >> and I'll second it. >> Okay. Roll call vote. >> Carol says yes. Cindy King.
>> Red King. Yes. >> Cindy King. Yes. >> Andrew Shepard. Yes. And it passes. Okay. Awesome. I'd like to entertain a motion to close the public hearing. >> I'll make a motion to close the public hearing at 7:02 p.m.
>> Cindy King. Second. >> Second. Roll call vote. >> Carol House. Yes. >> Brett King. Yes. >> King. >> Oh, yes. >> Andrew Shepard. Yes. Okay. Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Okay. Thank you very much.
>> Okay. So, that covers 6:45. I think you got uh 13 minutes until 7:15. I think we can go back to 3.3, which is the marijuana zoning bylaw. Um
I don't we don't have anything in our folder either explicitly on it. >> I had nothing to share nor did that before took a few days. So >> yeah and I have a I had done research from the town meeting thing but I have
all that paperwork at home because I had pulled down all the state blog the website and stuff. >> Yeah. I'd like to have a little chat about, you know, how we want to just generally how we want to proceed. I'm not necessarily ready to let's start having public hearings. I'd rather we
come up with what's our game plan on how we want to approach >> the idea of of opening things up a little bit. And, you know, do we want to do our own research for a meeting or two and bring in laws or do we want to
invite >> bring in laws? bring bring in-law not in-laws. No, no in-laws, please. >> But bring bring you know look look do the research that you like you pulled up and present these things and have us >> you know we can look at maybe
surrounding towns by was like Roden and Pero and see what their buy was >> say. Can we Yeah, >> because they all they all already have all the retail stores. >> Yeah. Can we do like an information dump just for ourselves to discuss in open
meetings and then decide how we want to structure any ideas we might have without committing to anything you know a loose conversation about what how we might want to change the bylaws be which is safe before we get shot.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. and then tighten things up on what we think might be and then so that we're prepared for I think public hearings could be challenging for us so that we and make
sure that we have our ducks in order before we start having public hearings but I mean I'd like to get it done but I want to take our time >> too in making sure that we make the right decisions that that people will at least appreciate
forever regardless of how people feel about the issue. >> Here I think you're having a discussion trying I'll try to pull down the u bylaws committee for our next meeting >> and then they have to do info dump on our next meeting.
>> Sure. I mean >> what do we we were thinking about relaxing them? >> That was the intention of the initial petitioner. >> Yeah. The petitioner wanted to have more areas in which marijuana could be. >> Right now it's industrial only, right? Is that >> the dump?
>> Well, I think it's all of Scales Lane from what I remember. >> I think there was one place. >> That's why if if we're opening up, >> I'll work on it. If it's just scales or industrial, I'm going to abstain because it's a piece of property that I own that
would >> Right. It's about I I don't Yeah, it's about opening things up. >> Lessening it. happy to. >> Yeah, that's what the petitioner had asked for before meeting and >> we agreed to review those options. >> Do you think there is an appetite from
the planning board side to like it sounds like you're interested in sort of collecting some information what other communities are doing um having sat at your town meeting at public there was some interest but not an overwhelming so it might be good that I think I heard your sort of comment at the start um
just maybe the applicant almost represent or kind of almost like you know coffee table like hey here's what I'm trying to get to here's what we think is important and here's why and that may help kind of frame the regional research we do with like a you know an a
or a graten you know a pil how they got there >> I'm comfortable with what the applicant or the petitioner was looking for I don't >> I don't really need it for myself I don't >> see I don't need another presentation
>> I don't I don't know I don't we we can pull up the town meeting more and what did what was being asked >> and I think we I think we understand what's being asked and even >> in town like that's what it wasn't clear at public that was the contention
>> and that's where that's where I think that >> well not in my backyard right yeah >> yeah but I mean we I I think that it's our I mean it's our opportunity not I mean it's our responsibility and our opportunity to look at all the zoning
>> from end to end, north, south, east, west, you know, you know, where where could we be? you know, we're the ones who are most likely going to look at that stuff and not making it before it become I mean it is a political conversation but that we can look at it
and then because I know it's still there are people who are against it and some people are strongly support it in town and but I think it's our opportunity to put everything together and I think we I think we know what that is. I think we have a sense of
>> what it could be >> what's being looked for. I think >> I mean you're not sure, you know, I'm, you know, I'm personally I mean I but personally I'm against relaxing the uh
the footage from the schools or the child care center. Um, and that was one of his things and that was um I'm not opposed to actually having one, but I'm just opposed to relaxing from the schools and
child care centers. Um, but otherwise I'm fine looking at other areas in town where it's, you know, you could put it. Um, one of the things, you know, maybe as a town we should look at
where we want to populate our industry. When I lived in Westford years a you know, I lived in Westford 20 25 years and years ago, they asked the citizens, you know, before they built up 110 as
much as they built it up. And basically the citizens voted to restrict all the all the industry and stuff to basically 110 and pots of roof on each. So as you go
through Westford, you will find that 110 is huge with with all kinds of stuff. Whoop 40 has some businesses but not a lot. And then the rest of the town is
pretty much rural. Um, but they that was a decision made by the voters years and years and years and years ago. And maybe that's something we'd be to look at the town of Thompson and say what areas do we want to you know
encourage retail shops, restaurant shops, industry and what areas do we want to keep businesses from going there and keeping it more rural.
I think certainly a uh you know I mean engaging with the voters I mean ultimately we approve the town meeting which has the voters >> but I I think it's a good idea to discuss it and come up with a plan. So if when we do have to go to the voters, we we have a knowledge of them.
>> Yeah. >> We're not learning as they're telling us. We already know what we can anticipate. >> Mhm. >> And we know what other town well not just what other towns are doing, but what they've learned about the industry. I know Ashb has a
cultivate cultivation and retail too, I think. and you know the towns able all kinds of stuff and we can learn from those other towns on okay how was the process what if you could do it over again what would you do different >> and our questions that we can ask them
and which I'm sure is even public available knowledge and I'm sure it's no secret I mean >> well yeah because just reading it what benefits you know >> well I always thought before I started reading this that you could just grow marijuana in a field and I always
wondered Why the farmers in town just didn't throw barrel water into >> well they do probably for personal use but I mean for for for retail sales >> you can't do it for agriculture the agricultural exception here
>> but you can't but I understand considered agricultural >> I know that's why it's like it's kind of >> you know you grow your own you don't need >> I know that but I I was thinking for retail put soil up there when you thinking, you know, fields of why why
they but I now I realize it has to be cultivated in a building and all that stuff. So, >> um things I learned. >> Yeah. And I mean, but if we could take some time to to learn the business, >> I uh Cindy, I would certainly I think you do a great job with research, you know, putting together
>> stuff already >> as does Carol as everybody here. I don't I don't mind going out and >> but thinking through it and putting some stuff together about communities or what you think. Certainly I think I had some similar reservations as Carol did during the previous hearings. I would certainly
like to have I think there was a a woman who expressed some level of expertise. I hope that too be true. But having uh having the petitioners involved I think would be helpful. It' be something I'd like to see. But um yeah,
>> you're have to dig up Adam's response because he said to be careful about designating it a cultural or whatever. >> Yeah, there were a few things. >> Yeah, there was a few things and I do >> saw the petition. I think the petition have issues, but I'm not necessarily interested in following to the letter
what he was looking for, >> but we could come up with some >> generally loosening and making it more available that we can get a business or two in that area in in the marijuana cannabis industry to be able to
provided that the properties are available. But some, you know, some scaling issues were we'd allow it if >> those areas were available. >> Right. Do you have any more thoughts or comments on the subject? >> I think, you know, I I don't know what
the um minimum distance from a school is, but unfortunately, and I'm with you, I don't I don't think we should loosen that, but like it's got to go in commercial zoning. So throw school in without commercial zoning and it really
>> narrows down to where like you can't put it in the mall, right? You got to you got the school across the street, you know? We have some downtown commercial. >> You mean the the dollar store mall? >> The one that could >> the dollar store one I guess you could the one down harbor mall.
>> I think Central Plaza is a perfect place. That's just my >> Oh, yeah. The har you can't put it across the street from the high school, right? which I'm okay really have limited >> but maybe like the Dollar Tree plaza I don't know >> that would I think within that district
>> or within that space or something yeah >> that's downtown commercial right is that >> should be I saw that map I can't tell from from here but >> but I mean I think that's an area place >> yeah those are certainly things look
>> a place that would be it's right there it's parking Um that's one place that's um >> okay so we'll come back uh to the next meeting um with some more thoughts and some more general thoughts where there's
no objective timeline or time pressure and we'll you know go slow and measured and try to come up with a good quality product. You said Ashby is where they cultivate. >> I think every town around us has something cultivates and they have a big retail store. >> Okay.
>> Yep. >> And then uh I mean Rodney's got some pretty stringent bylaws and they have at least one if not two. >> I think they got a second one. They have two one on the rotary and one um but near it's not at Craven's old Craraven's
liquor store but right next >> they have one right across from me in that mall >> here at that B building or something. Oh, that's right. There's one. So, they're >> so I was going to pull their score. >> Oh, I think >> got a couple GR has two.
>> Yeah, has at least one >> nothing. Timber is like the the known entity, but details. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Other communities to check with. >> So, we're at 7:15. >> Okay.
Next public hearing, I'm going to turn it over to Carol. >> Mr. Chairman, before you step out, I think we might have a form issue. >> We do. >> Yeah. So, um I can read this aloud just because I learned this um late today. Um
because we I'm I'm Karen subbing in for Beth tonight. Um the inter administrator here. Um, we had sort of a patchwork bit of attendance specific to this three-wheeler road topic. Um, unfortunately, when you think of what happened back in 2006, it's the Mullen
ruling where like it's 23D where you need to have some continuity within the board to deliberate and opine on even a continuence of a public hearing. We're in a scenario now where unfortunately for the landowner, I think it results in probably a restart on the pro procedural
side of things for this hearing. Um, you know, again, my personal opinion is they've satisfied all the requirements that are required for storm water and a modification of the plan. However, for planning board purposes, your best practice here is to restart this public
hearing and, you know, pick a date that you know you're going to have three members, at least three members present to deliberate on this decision. I think you're a land use attorney, sir, right here, Chris. Yeah. Put together the picture from the email. Um, I hope this is resonating with what you were
thinking. I think we have one member uh that wasn't here at the beginning of the starting public hearings disqualified. Uh, and then we have two voting members and a five amendment board. So, we have a problem. Yeah. And so, probably what makes the most sense, and I'll have to confirm with my client, but probably what makes sense is what you were
referring to, is to sort of reapply so that everybody can restart and the public hearing number one essentially. >> Yeah. Even though we have all the information, we'll be sort of resubmitted and it's like a new application. >> Probably the best way to do it. >> Yeah. I'm happy to I've been in correspondence with the landowner to
say, sir, you know, in my opinion, I got not a storm water expert, but I believe everything is satisfactory, but we just want to make sure it satisfies law and procedural processes. Um, I know we have Graves Engineering listening to us on Zoom. You're the gentleman from Dillis
and Roy and land owners, attorney Chris, Greg, right? Yeah. Um, so, you know, I appreciate you guys coming, but we want to make sure we do it right. I know it's been a long- winded, you know, this has been an adventurous chronicle to Narnia here, but um I think it's um >> you have to respect the process
>> and like we don't want, you know, I'm a risk reducer, so like let's not open up a can of worms for the land owner or for the board and the town. Um and I I think that I hope that seems plausible and agreeable to everybody, but I'm not trying to step on your planning board toes, but um >> is the other gentleman, I can't remember
his name, is he not on the board anymore? >> So there's um a couple members. It feels like we're getting like a late allergy flu season going on. So, one member um was not well. Um another one is an alternate. Um so, they're they're sort of patchwork participation is sort of
what kind of breaks the the voting abilities. Um Mr. Sheepard has to recuse himself. Miss King is new to the board, so she isn't able to deliberate on something that happened so long ago. Um and really, um I think Carol has been the most she's been present at all the
meeting. I think you had missed one, but then you had signed by >> um but then there was some break in like the lineage of it, if you will. Um so we're we're just >> Yeah, we're just sort of covering our butts, pardon the phrase, um on this just to make sure we do it right.
>> Uh before we um withdraw the application, it's okay if we continue uh to June Oh, excuse me. I'm trying to think. I'm here on another hearing just at the next hearing. I was seeing which date that was.
>> They currently have July 13 scheduled for the next planning board hearing. I say that with full appreciation that that's a busy time of year for folks with vacations and fourth post 4th of July. So, I just want to make sure you know you guys >> remember. Do you know what the hearing
dates are for that one? Do you know what the items are for July? >> I think we have zero seabird on that one. And I think you have 22 West Meadow um same land owner for that
>> continue to that. So we may not be a continuence for three mill. >> Well, I think if we could continue it and then we'll we have to confirm that. >> Okay. All right. That makes sense. >> We just want to make sure there's a possibility to have members here somehow. >> Yeah, I'm I'm with you because I think
that's coming up. There's nothing wrong with continuing and after if we have a conversation that we can't continue then we'll withdraw but for the purposes right now let's just continue and then we'll make a decision between now and then. >> Okay. And you're welcome to email me. I know um the admin's out for a few more days. So I don't want to bother her on
vacation. So okay happy to help on that front. >> Appreciate it. >> But and thank you. I'm sorry tell you in transit but I'd rather give it to you straight you know like you know go for >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Um, but that sort of satisfies Stew
Wheeler for you guys. Um, for now, pause and catch your breath. So, >> how could we vote on that last one then? >> So, you voted to continue it. So, you didn't actually close it. >> The One Depot. >> One depot was a start. Um,
>> tonight was the first the first meeting, the first it's a new public hearing tonight. The stuff we talked about one depot before closed and we reopened tonight. Tonight was meeting number one on that public hearing.
>> We get it, but we're voting on stuff that was so long ago we don't really >> The modification is brand new. >> It's the first time the modification came. Do you guys >> It's a new application >> kicking around if you want. And then if you had gone back to what was initially voted and it was before Yeah. >> Cindy's time. If it was a continuation
of the last meeting, then we we'd be in the same boat. >> The exact same boat. Yeah, >> it's it and I was saying this um before it it's really challenging with really important projects when you have you
know voting season and then you know COVID season or whatever H1N1 you know different people are in and out at times and it's it's almost unfair of mass general law to have these sort of guard rails because it it almost delays business which I have a catalistic problem.
>> So how do we circumvent this problem? >> You chase mass general law. No, no, no. We have to the the really big problem um is part of it is meeting the quorum rules and the attendance rules when when
we're doing adjudicatory procedures, which that's the rules. >> Sure. >> Is we can't miss any meetings when we're when we start a public hearing like when we restart these if assuming if we do then we we can't miss meetings. And during a during a public hearing
process, which we we need to have less meetings, we need to make decisions in a shorter period of time to reduce the risk. That's number one. But the the second thing is once you begin a public hearing, it you you're the people that
start out on day number one, that is your quorum. You can't switch people out. You can never switch people out. Look, it's not like a baseball team where you can bring people in out of the dugout. You your your four or five members that are sitting here on day one of a public hearing are the same four or
five members that have to vote when the decision is made and you can't miss any meetings. You can miss one, which the Mullen rule allows and that's the rule that allows us one member to miss one meeting. Before that, without the Mullen rule, you can't miss any meetings. But
and when you miss a meeting, which has not happened, we've you missed a meeting and Robert missed a meeting and Lance missed needed missed a whole bunch. But when we miss a meeting, if we have to miss a meeting, and we should try not to, we have to do what's called a Mullen
certification that's nicknamed a Mullen certification, that you've watched a video, read a transcript, or listened to an audio recording of the meeting you missed, and before the start of the next public hearing or session of the public hearing, you you sign under the pains
and penalties of perjury that you did watch. you didn't come up to speed on what the status is of the public hearing and then you can stay. You're not disqualified. If you don't do that or if you miss a second meeting, you're off the bench. You're off. You're off. >> So, can you have Beth send those links?
>> Yeah. >> Right. Why don't Why don't we just put in every >> Because you can to from every meeting. >> Yeah. So, like if you were like, "Hey, I'm on vacation next one, but I watched it sign the affidavit." Right. It it might become something that I encourage
all like I think of conscoming board every group CBA we should all be doing this because people have schedules I got you got lives like these are volunteer roles for you guys like >> and it's okay to miss that one meeting but we need to be disciplined oursel we're not like we're voting on you know
the select board you know making a a one-time vote on closing a road for a parade I mean it but this is a you know we're a judicial >> Noir member that's out tonight didn't plan on being out tonight. You know what I mean? We couldn't we couldn't have voted anyways, but >> Oh, I know. But I'm just saying it's
>> a good idea to just include it. >> Just include it. >> But the way to prevent this is to make sure that we understand what board we're on and that when we're dealing with the public hearing and I'm not criticizing anybody because I just found this all out by the training that I took last week. It's like holy cow. >> So, how many times did we violate this
law? >> The only person left >> I'm going to try to get back to Lberg. >> I'll get back. >> All right. The only people that are left that can vote on three-wheeler road or 22 West Meadow is Carol. Everybody else is disqualified
because of failure to do the certification, the Mullen sol certification. And then I never should have been in in the first place because I was newly elected and I if you look at how many meetings can you miss? If you just look at that rule, the first three meetings, first three meetings of public
hearings, I was not on the board. So I could there's no way I can get out of that. Uh but as as a new member of a of the board I can't anything that was ongoing I can't participate in um but for the rest for everybody else and unfortunately we had an election in the
middle which made it even more challenging for this board because we lost Hartley and >> immediately after like here are the things Mullen rule >> so and even an associate member has to attend all the meetings as well because they're they're in they're in it they're
if they fall off then they're gone. We can't bring people back and we can't like we can't bring Lance in at the end. Well, what at the end? Well, no, you don't. >> We can't bring you back. You know, you're So, the people in the rule the the
adjudicator procedures is you you end with the people you started with. You can't >> I don't remember missing a meeting, but it's it's you know, I'm miss >> you weren't sworn in. It's only Carol and I. That would be the
>> Oh, 54 little nuances that are just kind of the >> Yeah, you didn't come on 54 after the election. You missed you skipped that meeting right after the election. >> Yeah, you had one in for that meeting. So, >> and that's like the the business person
like it's just if it were like a a project like a road project, you'd be like, "Well, you're slowing down the contractor and it's paving season." I have philosophical problems with that, but I'm not the governor, so he's just dragging on and on and off.
>> These rules are by judicial like there isn't as far as I know, there isn't like an actual master law that says you have to show up to these meetings. I think there's a there's a CMR that talks about administrative procedure. I spent the day reading today
but um there's an administrative procedure CMR that talks about that about how that's came up but most of the the the actual conduct that happens is which is you can't find that master law because it's not there but it's judicial
case law basically has ruled out and that's where the Mullen rule came in from Mullen versus Brewster. So it's and we Thompson accepted that law back in 2006. So >> any means >> this isn't new. It's just new to us. >> Just for my information, are you saying
that there aren't three members that have been members since the first public hearing? But this >> they're the members, but they've missed meeting. >> Have they missed more than what? >> There's two Robert now missed two. >> This one doesn't count. >> They missed but they miss Well, tonight
Yeah. But I mean up until this point we have a bunch meeting this one and no certification. They don't do a mon. >> Well, they can do a certification now. >> Not not three later. It has to be before the next meeting. >> A meeting when we take test testimony.
Anyways, we'll review the record. So, uh well, if we need to resubmit, we'll resubmit. But we'll just check to make sure that's not the case. In the meantime, can we continue to the 13th? Is that what you said? Okay. >> We need to make a motion for that or not.
>> I would say that Carol, >> do I need to open the meeting and then make >> You do need to open. >> No, no, you don't need to open. You can just continue without testimony is what you're going to call it. >> I'm going to abstain anyway because I was >> continue without testimony.
>> Okay. I'll make a motion to continue without testimony. >> I second it because I guess I'm going to miss one meeting and >> all those in favor. >> And one abstension. >> I
two stated say yes. >> I appreciate it. Thanks very much. And we'll just talk to see if some way it's possible. It sounds like it might not be, but we'll at least just check to see if it is. And if it isn't, the problem is that I'm going to want to submit it right away so that we have enough time
to do notice. >> Yeah, >> I'll be in Dutch. >> Yeah, >> appreciate it, guys. >> It almost feels like restarting it. Yeah, >> which I know that was frustrating, but yeah, that's okay. >> I hear you. >> I appreciate it. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you.
>> And thank you for the lesson. >> With everything in, I mean, isn't it like if we started, but if everything was in, doesn't it seem like we wrap up the one meeting? You just have to present everything, all the facts. We just have to do fact finding >> and the peer review's done. >> We've already got all the stuff >> peer reviews done. So
>> included in evidence in that first meeting it >> and we could make a decision that night. We should be able to open >> review land owners >> and everybody's in everybody's back in
like I can I can >> you can you can deliberate >> I can deliberate on and I can vote on the decision >> and it's good that we have with you. So >> um so hopefully we can just vote on it. It might be um something I share with
Beth just to double down and confirm with your you guys as well as any other members that you're going to be here that >> we're going to make sure we have enough people. >> If not then it's like all right the next one after that just >> yeah I would get this >> the largest not a minimum I would go
with if we can get four of us that would be nice. I think it's Yeah, it's a tough time of year and summertime's always catching people these ways. So, so we could bring Lance in, right? >> No. Oh, for the new I'm sorry for the restart.
>> Let me rephrase that. A restart anybody all we can have >> everybody but Andrew >> because all of a sudden someone's sick. >> Yeah. I don't know if Lance will come. I I think he's been he or his wife have been having some health
>> issues, but we can ask and see if we can get him to come. >> And I like the idea of including them a form and then the link to every meeting. >> I think every meeting minutes >> or even just like a l like a link to the landing page. Click here to get the landing board meetings.
>> Crafty idea. >> Did you get sent the form that I I made I made up this form? They stole it from another town. >> I saw when I Googled it, it said that you can reject the uh Mullen rule if you
affirm a legislative 2006 general law. >> That's the Mullen rule. >> It says you can reject it. >> The town accepted it. >> No, the town accepted it. >> No, I guess that I know that, but I know that >> the law that you were just quoting is the Mullen rule. >> The I I guess
>> the affirmation is the Mullen rule. Google has implied to me that it could be rejected at a town meeting if the town wished to reject. >> Oh, that was back in 2006. We accepted it. >> I know you're saying that we accepted it, but can we reject it? >> You don't want to reject it. Rejecting the Mullen rule would mean you can never miss even one meeting.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> The Mullen rule is what allowed us to be able to miss one meeting without before the Mullen rule, you could not miss any meetings. That is what the rule actually is. The Mullen rule provided the opportunity that you're allowed to miss
one meeting and only one meeting. So you don't want to you don't want to go back to town meeting and say we don't want to be able to miss any meetings because that would apply to all of our boards. >> This thing is telling me if a town accepts section 23D board members are no
longer disqualified solely for missing one session. >> That's right. However, okay, you must uh >> you would be disqualified before that, >> but you're not disqualified for missing one session as long as you miss no more than one single session. >> Mission
>> as a board, I think we have to do better and start pushing this stuff through. >> This is the >> I made up that or it's um if you have like if you know once a quarter you put all your public hearings on it and you just say all right >> and we seats that night it's going to
come. have appointments if we want to go if we think I mean if we can look at our our life schedule we can say you know when do we usually meet and keep Beth informed >> or even each other informed that gee I'm
going to be away that day I'm going to a conference I'm getting out of here you know I I'm not going to be available and then we can be open to adjusting our meetings >> based on that >> as Sooner the better that we know what
we're doing in our lives. >> So now that so that we can avoid >> and we can't get sick. We can't we can't get sick on a Monday. >> So I guess I have no life since I've been here 100%. >> Or you have the most dedication. >> That's right. Something >> good. >> Certainly dedication.
>> So is this what we're going to adopt? >> Well, I don't know. I That's a form I stole from another town. >> I have to kick that. >> We had a town. We had a form. I mean I've signed things. >> You signed an affidavit form? Yes. In the decision, I said that you guys sign signed an affidavit, but this is a form that I stole from another.
>> What's the difference? I mean, I know what the difference is an affidavit in this form, but is an affidavit not appropriate? >> Oh, it's fine. It's just filling out a form is a lot easier. >> Okay. >> Check boxes versus like an actual >> So, >> you just have to fill out what the case and date. >> Um, could Beth, I'm not a big techie,
but could Beth turn we, if we choose to adopt this, could she turn this into like a Google form so we just fill it out online >> on our portal? Um, I'm not sure. Um, >> I know I meet you probably so long as we have a copy of it in advance of the
meeting. So like Brett, you said, "All right, I'm not going to be there." >> Not not in advance of the meeting. You're going to miss them because you won't have seen the video. >> You missed the last one. So you said, "All >> right. So you can I can sit at home, watch a video, fill this form out after I watch your video." >> Yeah. >> Do it all. >> As long as it's submitted for the record
the the next session of the public hearing that it was that you missed. So, if you missed the last meeting and you're like, "Hey guys, I'm going to be there at 22nd." I've watched the meeting minutes. I watched the recording. >> The meeting minutes aren't good enough. You have to watch the record. >> I watched the recording and then I you know, I sent this to Beth. So, I'm
qualified now because I missed one session. I'm qualified to to deliberate on the 27th. >> So, she could click put the YouTube link on there and then put an online form right next to Google for the Yeah. Google form. Yeah. >> Right next to the YouTube video. We done
something in >> it can be that simple. >> It could be a current for all the different >> whatever works for the person filling out the form. You can fill it out or >> bring it to the next meeting or >> email it in the I'm just speaking on myself. Problem is I I forget it at
home. >> You know what I mean? It's like crap. If I fill it out online when I watch a video, it's done. I don't even have to worry about bringing it >> or like you know like I listen to meetings while I'm driving. So I always do it and then they're like oh >> while you're driving. Yeah. >> And then then get get home be like, "All right, quick."
>> Exactly. Yeah. >> Then you kind of check it out to the next. >> Okay. Sounds good. >> Thank you guys. Thank you, Cindy. Um, do we have uh 4.1 notices from absence or are these only the old notices? >> I don't have any.
>> Okay. I didn't see any >> I Yeah, I didn't see any in the portal when I was looking. >> Um, so I think 4.1 4.2 two um either nothing new or nothing to share. 4.3 Cindy as our representative. Any
brief commentary from the MRPC MJTC? >> Nothing. Nothing important. Nothing. >> Um normally we do have something about the citizens training planning collaborative and you did attend a training. >> Oh yes, I I attended. >> Do you mind briefly just I know we've
talked about one big thing that you've learned. Has learned anything else? Um it I mean the CPTC trainings this is the first time I attended one of them and I think it's well worth attending. >> They're good because I've taken a few um >> it's in person right? >> No it's online it's online maybe years
ago they were in person but now they're all online >> and it's on Zoom and just went over you know roles and responsibilities. I got a copy of the PowerPoint. I got a copy of the um they're they have a guideline which I'll I'll get to everybody. Um I I
don't know if I said it to Beth or not, but we could probably get it up on the SharePoint and um but just going over the basics real I mean real basic stuff about just being on on any board they went over the the big danger you open meeting law conflict of interest things
like that spent a lot of time but enough that you know for a new board member because this one the roles and responsibilities is for really for new board members to get their feet wet and just going over some of the just some the things that zoning boards do and and
planning boards do and the differences and some of the zoning act stuff. I don't remember all the the details. The thing that just kind of blew my head was the quorum issue that I've you blown away everything you with with the
information that I got. But I mean I'm glad I'm really glad that I did go so and getting that information because I think it's really >> I think it's too >> helps us get back online. >> It does. and going in the right direction. So, >> awesome. >> Um, but yeah. >> All right. Thanks, Indie. Uh, next
meeting scheduled for July 13th, July 27th, and then August 10th, and August 24th. >> August 2 and 2. >> Mark your calendars, make sure you're not sick. >> I might remind Beth just to um,
you really confirm with folks that are feeling okay to come and be present. Um and just it's something we're seeing in some other groups as well just because people post school summertime. Um people rather be on the Cape or up at the lakes if they can. So
>> So do do you actually have to be present or can you zoom in? >> You could zoom in. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um yeah, sometimes if you're again if you're on vacation, you know, out in the Bergkur, you can hang out and watch this on >> I don't know if they have service out there. >> They may not have zoom out. You never know. So
>> be careful where you go camping. >> Yeah. But um >> yeah, you can certainly >> and I think for our next meeting, we've already heard that we may have a couple people not coming. I think we need to or Beth needs to verify how many people we need for a decision on whatever hearings
we're going to have. So that if we need because you have to have the quorum the same quorum you start with is the same quorum you end with. So if we need four people minimum to make a decision, we need four people on the 13th,
you know. Yeah. Yeah. Because the special perimeter would have you have to have four. >> Yeah. >> Andrew will be excused >> if we do. Yeah. If we do three >> and and 22 West Meadow as well. Um and
what else? I mean, I think there's other things coming up, but >> Road, how does this how is this going to affect SA Road? Sure. >> Do we have to >> I mean, because it'd be nice to let these people know, right, instead instead of like having them off. We we definitely need a decision. We have to
have four affirmative votes. So we if we could >> if we can have five people. >> Did it start with you, Cindy? Did see >> No, no, it was no before. >> Was it? >> Yeah. >> What? Wayne I remember Wayne presenting and I was online that night. >> Oh, so I can't do that one either. I
thought I could do that one. >> But you you were there. You were there. I think you were there, too. So that's three. >> I've been I think Robert was there. where he kind of discussed some of the >> that he might have missed. >> They've all been continue well largely
continuences >> nonsubstantive. I don't know. >> No, wait a minute. Didn't we start over the night May 10th? Wasn't that the first night
of the public hearing on No, I don't. >> No, I don't I don't think you were here. have had been elected when we first >> I think there was actually a couple too but >> yeah okay >> that's my gut >> because you weren't you didn't go you weren't here for the site visit when we
all you were in elective then that was hotley was there >> so yeah so there's there's there's another reboot >> you might need to reboot that one too >> yeah because I know was on the site visit because he had problems with his
trying to get out of there >> but Robert, you and I and Andrew, >> therefore, >> yeah, >> assuming one of the continuences that if any of us missed, >> we didn't miss. >> We'd be safer. >> So, someone could can hook that up and
then we should know first. >> It would be safer though. >> Well, it'd be safer as of right now. >> We'll have five if I can restart. >> Yeah. I I guess I don't know. I don't know if I have enough information. I'm prepared to make a decision. I don't if we got to
restart. Well, I guess you could do it a lot in one meeting. >> I had to restart three. >> I think where this is contentuous down there all of a sudden we start it like I I we know a big deal but like
whatever. >> I think it's better for because I don't think it we know what the answer is. >> My purse. >> Oh no. I don't like where's my >> I do that every time I leave here. >> Um
>> sorry. >> I don't know. I think it's I mean it's just my opinion of having the most members possible. But if we can if >> is scary as it is, restarting puts me in the game and we have f we're starting
with five members. >> Yeah. as opposed in that if somebody disqualifies like misses two meetings they're out >> and if we're only start with four we're out we got to start over anyway >> and I can't remember if froick missed one meeting
>> he missed >> so I have like notes check planning board member attendance for Sver road sver road continuence and then three-wheeler it sounds like that one's going to re restart and then 22 west I know is on the periphery as well um so again I just will nudge that to check
attendance, make sure that we're we're following some of these things so we can do it once, do it right, and not drag on the the attorneys, the >> right engineers, and make it painful for you guys as a board. Open the open these hearings, close it. Can she send that information out to everybody?
>> Oh, yeah. I'll put it in my notes. Relay, you almost like think of a doodle poll like that. >> Check box. And we should be able to restart any earring quite quickly, right? Like you just posted you got to resend
everything and then because the substantive a lot of things have been done of course we have to reintroduce the information fresh. >> Yes. >> For the purpose of the hearing but aside from the length of the meeting. >> Yeah. >> Which should be pretty routine. >> Yeah. And next year when we around
election time, don't start a hearing like the the month within 30 or 60 days of >> depending on when an applicant is interested in doing work. Well, yeah, but I mean if it's risky, if we're risky on like if if somebody has a conflict or if somebody, you know,
>> Oh, yeah. If we already know these things going in, you know, you don't want to shrink the pool because going into an election, especially with this board's track record of doing a lot of write in stuff, you don't know who's going to be sitting on the board.
>> So, I mean, so here's my thing with it. You're >> so people want to run for like if you want to run for reelection next year. >> Yeah. Because you only did a one-year term. This is Yeah. >> So here here's my take on this whole thing. >> Or if you decide to leave, then it might be right in circus again.
>> No disrespect to you, Cindy at all, but >> you just because we restart this, let's say we restart it, right? >> Right. Like are like who's going to get caught up with every even though we restarted like are you going to do do
you probably would do the due diligence. Use me as an example because I wouldn't do the due diligence. Like just because we restarted does that mean like what you know what I'm getting at? >> So these can still happen. >> Well restarting it but yeah you still don't know the prior history to that project because we restarted it. Now
everybody can vote, but you're not as >> you have to you have to present findings of facts. You have to present. >> It's kind of like a whitewasher. >> You still have to present and put it on the record. All the documents need to be loaded and if there's things that we need somebody needs to read like
statements of fact like what what do we already know? >> That's great. But there's been so many discussions on it like your >> deliberative discussions. >> You're right. You wouldn't be you whoever the person is not necessarily you. I'm just I'm just you wouldn't be privy to the discussions
that were had to get where we are today. Just my opinion. You know, I don't disagree with you, Brett. I think that's one of the functions of state law that is generally uh disappointing or difficult that just exists that feels
forced down upon. >> And I'm not picking on you or Cra wrote, Cindy. I'm just trying I'm just trying >> I understand that. I do >> using as example. >> This just goes with I mean this is is the challenges of I think it's the challenges of being on a board like this that and the
>> So Cindy I feel like I probably know your I think we do know your opinion. It would be to restart C road. >> I I think reviewing we'd have to >> Can we even talk about this right now? >> Oh no we shouldn't be. >> Okay. >> Yeah we probably shouldn't be. >> So let's uh
>> Yeah. >> What's yours? >> Yeah. I think we covered everything. >> Yeah, I think we >> So moved. >> Motion made by Kieran. >> There goes another one. >> I'm not a resident. I got yelled at a town meeting for that. Like, you can't talk. You're not. >> Yeah, I think I made that.
>> I made that move. >> You had a motion? >> Yeah. >> Oh jeez. >> I'm so moved. Let's adjourn. >> Motion to adjourn. >> 7:49. >> Any second? >> Second. >> Second by. All those in favor? >> I think I can vote on that.
>> Yeah. All right. Thank you, TCAM.