Oh my >> welcome. >> I was going to say we weren't close to a quorum, but now uh >> um we have eight people. We need uh 10 for a quorum. Uh Jake dead.
All right. So, we have uh yeses from myself, Sean and Mike Sullivan, Phil, uh Bob, Mike Yagman, Jeff, line this up, Wendy. Oh. Um,
>> and Jake and so there about half have said they want to be reappointed. Um, and uh uh of the people here uh just um
uh just Jim I think needs to but you've just signal. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um uh why don't we start with pledge of allegiance if you join me.
>> I pledge allegiance 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. Um,
we have uh uh Oh, Constance is here to >> So, uh, >> really quick, John. >> Yep. >> Would you like to be reappointed? We were just discussing who's being reappointed for the next year.
>> Oh, can I um let you know in a few days? Sure. Like to know what comes out of this meeting. Okay. >> Thanks. >> Okay. U yeah what we want to do constants is send a kind of batch uh recommendation
to the select board of who wants to be reappointed uh but uh we a couple days fine to wait on that >> I thought the deadline was the 15th or something but that's >> 22nd I think >> uh that's when the select board acts
>> we have it has to be the Thursday >> Thursday before the 22nd whenever that is okay thank you Um and uh Dia uh if you could text uh Jake that he would make a quorum
um and I think there's only one vote necessary which is approval of the minutes and we can put that off till it gets here. >> Sure. Um so um uh thank you uh Deian Michael for
sending out not only the agenda but a lot of supplementary materials. I think it's clear uh uh not due to anything I've done that we're making a huge amount of progress in getting uh this
report uh to the finish line. And I really want to thank Jeff and Dia especially and and all the subcommittee heads who've been reviewing things uh to make sure they're uh line up with the uh
discussions in the committees that they have led. So thank you all uh for that. Um I so we will put off the uh uh minutes.
Uh we've uh talked about um the need for reappoints um outreach at Westport River days June 20th. Who who was going to lead that discussion? Dia. Yeah. >> Yes. Yeah. Would you like to discuss it now? Shall we go into it? Let's do it.
>> Let's do that. >> Okay. So, let me just pull up my River Days notes. Sorry, I thought I had the one up. Um but I've met with the Watershed Alliance and also with Nefelli and her two interns about this. So, I have a pretty good idea of what I think we should pull off, but I will definitely need some group discussion
right now on, you know, what we think about um the setup and, you know, who's who's available to help out. So, just as a reminder, um the River Days Festival is going to be next Saturday, June 20th at um from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. So,
I'm thinking 9:30 to 2:33 would be um the time given. And I personally actually have book club that day, so I'll just be doing a half shift. So you can do a half shift too if you want to leave at noon or something. Um but that's kind of the brief outline of how the structure goes. We do need at least
three people at the booth at all times. Now um Nefelli's two interns are going to be there all day. So I'll be there for one half. I think Jeff might be present for part of it. So anyone else who wants to come and just kind of be part of the group to engage residents to kind of like show face for what the CRC
represents, just let me know over email or you know you could call me. Um, you know, I'm not too stressed out about the structure of this because um I feel like we already have the staffing. So, this is just kind of something extra if you want to get um more more facetime with residents. Um, and I'll go over supplies
in a second. I'm just going to go over the activities. And this is where I'd love um your input on what we're bringing to the table. There might be too many things on here. So, number one, talked with Chief Dan Baldwin about Code Red. Now, code red is an emergency um messaging system that town government
can use to reach out for like any kind of weather weather hazards or any kind of like uh really um urgent messaging. And so I believe that um Chief Baldin did confirm with the select board that we are going to move forward with Code Red. I don't think we're fully set up as
a town, but the chief and I discussed it might be nice to get that resident base um on to Code Red at first so that when we do start to roll it out, you know, we have people there that are responding. and we we can you know solicit some feedback you know how is this working so I signed up for code red myself actually
super easy so I'm thinking we bring we have like six iPads in the office one of the iPads can be dedicated like let's onboard you on to code red um thoughts on that before I move on to the next one >> yes Mike >> do you the point about the code red at
the river center is to actually have people sign up could put their information into the system so every resident eventually has to do that in town Yes. Yes. If you want to opt in for these, we're not going to like force it or anything, but you know, if you want to, especially, you know, non-Westers who might have boats in the marina, that
that's another target demographic for this. >> Interesting. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Mike, this is your uh operation. Is that consistent with goals of Riverdale? >> Oh, it's I mean, we have a lot of partner nonprofits that are there and uh it's an opportunity to, you know,
actually expands the offering, if you will, of of activities and things to see. So, yeah, perfect. Okay, great. >> Yeah, Mike, >> just wondering if you could put some like a little index card with the link in case people don't want to take the time to do it there. >> Yep. >> Take that home and do it.
>> Um I actually Let me see if I can >> QR code. >> Yes. The chief actually sent a flyer. Let me just show you guys right now. He got this from Oh, he got this from Chris Vitali. So, I was thinking I might have like this print out >> displayed as well. It's got kind of the quickbacks >> and it's in, you know, the code red
format. So, great. Glad we all like that. Um, I'll come back to FEMA apps because I had a question on that. Um, another thing we discussed with Nefelli, which would I think be a great way to prompt discussion and gain some feedback on this report is she said, "Why don't
you put up or we've done this in the past, they've put up like um flood maps or just kind of like a somewhat detailed map of Westport and they've asked people with sticky notes to identify um where they've experienced like a climate hazard or where they experienced extreme heat or if they have like questions about this part of town. So, I thought
it was effective way to kind of visually see where residents are experiencing different um impacts. And the report is kind of divided up into those five impacts. So, I thought maybe I'll have like a couple maps like one focusing on this is where I've experienced extreme heat, you know, in town or this is where I've seen like high amounts of pounding
and flooding in a storm, that sort of thing. Um, so what I'm looking for with the committee for that is just kind of um what discussions do you want prompted so I can, you know, um make the titles all clear. I was I was thinking maybe like flood events, the extreme heat. Um
I wasn't really sure what else we really wanted to get from folks because this is kind of like a fun event too. So I don't expect people are going to be here for, you know, 10 minutes giving us data. So those were kind of the two punchier ones. I thought >> nuclear holocaust. [laughter]
>> I'll write that down. >> Yeah. I I think it might be instructive for us to find out what areas of town lose electricity. >> Mhm. Okay, that's great. >> And if people could identify if they are
in a place that loses it often. >> We have all the other reports. >> So if you really want that, we've got it. >> Okay. We we can't do temperature sensing, but we do have air quality sensors spread out in the neighborhoods and uh I could ask Olive, who's
in charge of that for the board of health, to see if there's a way that she could look at place, you know, the differential between locations with higher or PM 2.5 particulate kind of
>> I think she's looking for. You walk up to a booth and you want to put a sticker on like I've had a flood here or I live here and my power goes out a lot or something like that. >> So, I don't know that air quality is going to be >> Yeah. I don't know either. I'm just throwing it out there. >> Could flip it on like that. >> It's interesting data, but I'm not sure
that person would be able to do that. >> Yeah. I mean, in my experience, I feel like in the South Coast, I don't Besides those fires, I don't feel like I've um I'm remembering experiencing like air quality, but we could flip it and be like, where have you experienced >> I'm just saying the information is there if you want.
>> Air quality hazard. Yeah. Okay. Um we can come back to that. Maybe I could reach out to the committee with a couple drafts or maybe just one draft of what I'm thinking and if you like it, give me the okay. if you want it tweaked or to you know um kind of target a specific question we can adjust to
>> I think a flood plane map is always you know it has various purposes but it's useful >> uh for every and everyone I think is interested in >> in it whether they're you know insurance issues or whatnot >> right right yeah
>> Jim do you want uh people to say when they've lost power or when they haven't lost power there probably fewer people who haven't lost power frequently. Sorry, that's rhetorical. >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't think that's helpful. >> I think it's less of an information
collecting activity than just a participating getting people thinking. >> Yeah, >> that Yeah. >> Yeah, >> that is true. That is true. >> Okay, >> keep going. >> Sure. Sure. So then UMassd has created a little data flyer handout with some of the like dashboards we've used as um
data for this report, like some of the projections dashboards. So, she's made her own USD. I don't have a copy of it right now, but I'll circulate it when I do. And it comes with QR codes, and she's going to be helping people navigate those viewers and how to read the data and how to, you know, source information that you need for your area.
Um, Westport Ready, I don't know who's familiar, but um, we had a grant, MVP 2.0, where we ended up forming this kind of weatherready campaign called Westport Ready. So, I have a lot of handouts from that, so I thought I'd just keep some, too. Michael knows. Yeah, Jeff knows. So, we'll have a couple of those out.
Um, and then here are two kind of like uh getting people's information. I want to call for photos so we can start sourcing a lot of beautiful images for this report. And then in the same vein, I wanted to give people like a signup option so they can stay informed on like when the public engagement process is
coming for this report, when the draft is ready for release, that sort of thing. So those could kind of be I was envisioning together on the same flyer. you know, you can do a QR code, put your um email in, and then you can email me for updates, and maybe it links to a
drive for photos or something cuz I've had a little success getting photos from folks that I'm not directly connected with, like the committee or um planning board, that sort of thing. And then I know that we wanted to do kind of like a what is the town doing? So, I thought that could kind of be another moreformational poster like here are
ongoing climate efforts in town. And maybe that could link to signing up to the website's newsletter, you know, signing back up to this. So that's what I thought for adult activities. Are there any comments on that or >> Yeah, at our last meeting we talked about my coast and having a
demonstration. I didn't hear you mention that. >> Yeah, that actually totally will onboard folks or I'm envisioning that'll be more like the data flyier handout like how to how to use the tools. Excellent. So like I said, we'll have a couple
iPads. So one can be, you know, one dashboard, one can be my coast, one can be the code red. Great. >> So >> go ahead. >> With this report coming together finally, um >> do we want to preview it?
>> You know, we don't have anything final to show people, but right, >> you know, what has our process been, >> right? >> Where are we at? Um you know, what are some of the risks that we have identified in these different categories? I think we mocked up some kind of poster that could show that. >> So, you you thinking a poster?
>> I I don't know what others think of that. >> Is it too early or >> Yeah. Uh >> are we far enough along with it to have the introduction to it? >> Publish.
>> We have it, but I I'm not sure. How hard would it be to produce what Jeff talked about which is kind of a summary. >> Do you have that sample slide? >> I know you have it in your email somewhere. >> It was just each of the five categories and then examples of risk,
>> you know, effect people, agriculture, water resources. >> Maybe reminding people how we came to exist from the >> Yeah. >> report from the select committee. >> Is this what you meant? No, there was just one slide. I think it was more
recent than that. >> I probably haven't. >> So, while you're looking um we had um in in the five categories, do do we
have forest fires as a separate category? Because we got kind of a discreet report from the chief. We have we have fire risk that kind of comes across. There's some discussion in health because people caught up in fire
>> infrastructure obviously. >> Um I think it's mainly the discussion is spread across those two categories. >> Uh what do people think about that? Because what I saw in the recommendations was not very much on the
fire. When the chief when he gave his presentation, especially the summary presentation was I looked at and said, "Wow, there's a lot of very specific stuff that a homeowner like me could do to reduce fire risk."
>> And u and it was all there. He'd done all the work. So >> yeah, that's not showed up yet in the action items. >> Yeah, >> that to touch on that today. >> People have any thoughts on whether uh forest fires or fire risk, whatever you
want to should be separate or uh put into other categories. >> Do we have a do we have forest fires? >> Uh >> we have a lot of brush fire. >> Brush fire. >> Sorry, say that again. We have a lot of brush fires
>> when people start >> typically they're burning and it gets out of control, but that's not the only reason, >> right? >> We're not California. We're not like forest fires. >> My neighborhood. >> Well, I mean, so if we get a real
drought, our forests are likely to go. Yeah, >> they are so full of old vegetation >> that um thank god we don't have droughts like that or at least we haven't but
doesn't mean we're not going to >> I think what um >> you say >> you know the chief said as he as he showed ground plantings around a building with uh that kind of plastic covered wood and he had a picture of a
Dunkin Donuts where there were a lot of discarded cigarettes in the leaf matter right next to it. You know, it's uh if if we're not California, there are still risks uh that can make a big
difference. I I know when I I talked to Trip Milikin about, you know, how theirs was the only house that didn't burn in Hawaii, it's because he said, "Well, we weren't thinking about fire, but we were uh rehabbing our house and we just
happened to do things like a four to six foot barrier of crushed stone around the house instead of planting and that saved our house. So, um, you know, just being educated about that risk can can make a big difference.
>> But John, when you say a separate category, do you mean you don't mean a separate another subcommittee? You're talking about >> No, no. He was like a he came in, gave a great presentation in one meeting, left a series of recommendations about what
anyone could do to reduce the chance of uh uh fire. And it seems to me it's useful information. And uh with uh a warmer
atmosphere and drought, you get more lightning and you have drier trees and drier brush. And so the incre the threat of forest fire increases. Now, um I I just we have the information. I'm
just saying where do you want to put it? >> You could tuck it in infrastructure and safety. >> Yes, you could. Yeah, that's that's the intent. >> I think as far as this goes, as of now, we've >> pretty much honed in on what the risks are. We've done our prioritization. >> Yeah.
>> You know, we may play with that a little bit. What we haven't really finalized is our recommendations. We've got, you know, a lot of things thrown against the wall. I think part of tonight is >> that's tonight is about and what you sent out. All right. So if we're going to do that, that's great with me as long
as the information that the chief gave us is good is in there. >> River day and report, you know, communicating the activities of the committee, we can talk about we got these five categories. This is how we've analyzed things. Yeah. And these are examples of the risks that we were we're looking.
>> Yeah. But uh so that piece would have to be written, right? Because we don't have it. >> Just be one poster board. >> Yeah. So Dia, can you >> I've got it somewhere. >> You've got it somewhere. All right. Well, we should h we should have that there if we've got it. >> Does the chief have a handout for this?
>> Uh, no. But it wouldn't take much to turn it into a handout. >> If we went back to the minutes of his uh presentation, it's like >> Joseph, how are you? >> Thank you. >> Uh, Joseph, one quick uh one quick thing
before you get [clears throat] to it. Uh we are trying to determine who wants to be appointed or reappointed to the CRC. We covered that before you got in. >> Uh you've been very active and very helpful. >> Uh if you want to be reappointed, we're
going to send a list to the select board on the like the 18th of June. >> I think I've done what I should do at this point. And >> no, no, I haven't. all week this year. >> Okay.
>> Beyond that, I think that's some propos. >> Well, I I couldn't agree more, but uh we're not going to publish this the report before, uh the end of the fiscal year. So, uh if you want to stay on till the end of the report, that entails
getting into the next fiscal year. So, let Michael know. >> All right. >> Yes. But you were going to say something. Go ahead. to comment on forestry because I was part of the extension on agriculture and forestry and one thing
I've noticed in the past 50 years in uh the little component westport area is that there's been a dieback of trees and if you notice that this lykan and almost like a little Spanish moss >> which are actually not they're not
symbiotic they're parasitic and uh this is something that's you don't see it in other areas. So, it's affecting South Coast. And you'll notice that when the trees are infected with that uh or infested, I should say, with that, uh
that the limbs dry out, they die because it's sucking you see the the fluids out of out of the tree limbs. And so that's going to add to the uh forestry issues because trees are dying here because there's a parasitic
lychans, moss, etc. that are infesting the trees here. And you'll notice them on the trees and you'll notice them falling. The branch is falling when they've sucked up and dry. And you can save it by sort of pulling it off, but
it's beyond doing that unless you're a homeowner. They could be saved. And what's interesting on it is that even when they drop >> um if you moisten them, they come back to
life and then they start sporing. So, so they have sort of a life of their own. So, that's something that's a little scary, but uh but And that's something I'm going to work with some botnists on to get a little deeper into that. But
that's just observations that uh the force are being affected and it's within my memory and the first I saw it was in Little Compton years ago and it spread from little compon swamp area by the
dump uh and now it's infested all different around here ones that are weakened perhaps. the latest temperature changer. It could be it could be tied in with the botist and others who
have a scientific. >> Well, I think that's a really good point. I'm calling my wife right after I get out of this meeting because she says, "Look at all this mo these lychans on our trees." And I say, "Oh, that's
okay. Don't worry about it." And now I'm going to call her and say, "Oh, >> I was wrong. You were right, Laura. [laughter] And now I've got an expert who's uh saying we got to watch out for this." But in Colorado, it was a uh I
think a powder post beetle that killed 90% of the trees. And and so they're standing dead and lightning hits and you've got in Colorado huge fires because of just what you're saying, a parasite in the trees. It kills the
trees. So yeah, that's Thank you. >> The little Compton swamp monster, right? >> Yes. [laughter] >> Up to David. >> Yeah. So that it it's impossible to get them out, get it out of trees cuz the canopy
is 40, 50, 60 ft high and you can't get up there. >> Um, but the the same trees, mostly oak trees I've seen. >> Yeah. >> Are like u second generation trees from
recovered farm fields. And what is killing them too are gypsy moths and winter moths. And we've had big sws go through and gypsy moss starting like 40 years ago. And the
winter moths can decimate them. And now the beach trees are being affected by nematode. So >> right. >> Yeah, they're dying. I know they're dying. I didn't know that was. So, >> yeah, we're we're fortunate that
>> then we have the deer that are eating any new growth that comes in the forest floor. So, >> all right. So, uh to get to this issue, uh Dia and Jeff are Jeff probably has something that can be uh uh used to
summarize what we're doing so that people can say, "Yeah, I'd like to sign up when we get to the public engagement." So, we can do that. They'll know what they're what we're about. Anything else on this do you? Yeah, >> just the last three. These are a lot lighter. The kids activities um the
watershed alliance is going to organize for us. There's going to be like a fishing for climate elements and then like a salt marsh activity. I thought we could also do draw your climate memory or just leave that out. That was my first thought before I um talked with Nephlly about the identify you know your
hazard. Um, so let me know if you think it would be helpful, not helpful, but just like relevant to have kids also draw their climate memory and they can paste it up. Or we could just get rid of that one and just keep it to the fishing and the salt marsh activity. >> Oh, okay.
>> I don't think you need it. >> I don't think so either. Okay. Yeah, let's take it off. Great. >> So, yeah, I'll try to have some candy and oranges, but I told Nefelli, um, so this holds for you guys, too. I think I'll reach out maybe on Monday with or maybe Tuesday with some of the materials and I'll try to have them in a draft
form and stuff. >> We've got someformational pieces and then we've got some interactive pieces including the kids activities. So, >> how many people do we need kind of at a time during that 10 to two period? >> I I feel like four maybe three or four. So,
>> could be the two UMass interns. >> Yep. >> Okay, that's good. >> Yep. And some of this is predicated on us having good Wi-Fi there. Am I correct? >> We're next to the outlet and we're next to the waterershed and they said the Wi-Fi should reach. >> Okay. >> Yep. And we have an awning. >> We are close to
>> Yep. Um I believe we have a table, Michael, in the office. >> I have a table. >> Do you have a table? >> We don't have a table. We have a tent, though. >> Okay. We don't need the tent, but Okay, Jeff has the table. So, would you mind bringing that, too? >> Yeah, we don't have a table. I mean, I'm sure we have one somewhere that we could use, but not not
>> I mean, we've just spent a lot of time what we're going to lay out for people to pick up. So, I have >> Tiff has a table. Okay. >> We have a banner. Um uh but what about easels? >> We have three and I asked Nefelli if she has a couple. And then um Kim from the
waterershed was like, "You can also there's like a railing." She's like, "You can affix them to the railing, too." So, I as Nefell if she has any >> kind of straps or anything. Um, could we get maybe one more person or two more people to commit to either like a half shift or like the whole thing? >> I'm going to be out of town
unfortunately, but >> I'm at the board of healthcare. >> Mhm. Okay. Yep. >> I can do half a day. >> Okay. Thanks, Jim. >> Thank you, Jim. >> And thanks for time, but I'm also at another I'm at the bike path table, too. >> Sure. Um, Jim, would you prefer first
half or second half? >> I guess first. >> Okay. Shauna, would you be okay coming second half or do you want to stay with the bike? Okay, >> I'm kind of committed the whole time. >> That's fine. I bet you are. Yeah. Um, great. Thank you everybody. I I I
feel good about this. I'll keep you posted um on all the things. So, yeah, we can move on from this agenda item, I believe. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, should be a good opportunity to increase engagement with people of [clears throat] Westport.
Um, item three is review uh, chapter 7. I I think I hope everyone got the uh, uh, material that D and Jeff sent out. Jeff, are you going to walk us through this? How do you want to do this? >> Well, I think uh, as of the last
meeting, we had shared and um, gotten some comment on sections one to six, >> right? >> I think we're in reasonably good shape there. Section seven is the assessment of the risks. Um I personally found that that came in in all different forms and
shapes and sizes. So I did uh do fair bit of work trying to >> file things down, make it consistent. Got a little help from co-piloting on that on the formatting. >> Um so what we have here is uh the result of probably
say 40 pages combined boiled down to maybe 15 at this point. So there is some stuff on the cutting room floor which uh I want to know >> you're talking about the recommend >> chapter 7 you boil from 40 pages down to 15
>> roughly got >> um so if there is stuff that is not showing up in there that you feel is critical um when you review it please flag that. >> Yeah we'll find a way to put it back. I've done some text boxes we can probably do more of that. Um, there's still placeholders for graphics and
charts. So, if you have recommendations for what could go in there, um, there's little call out boxes already that I think add some, you know, draw your eye into, you know, what this chapter is about or sections about. Um, so I'm I'm
looking for feedback on overall how does it look and is there anything critical that's been left off? >> Was that the action items draft attachment? >> No, that's chapter eight. Ah thank you const >> so if you want to talk about that um we
have recommendations that come out of the subcommittee reports um I circulated something that summarized those as well as pulled related action items that we've found or seen in other climate reports or some of these uh
>> portals that have >> you know action items available >> and What do you u I marked mine up. >> Okay. >> I don't like track changes. So, unfortunately, it's on this piece of paper. >> Uh >> but uh
what do you want on on the recommendations from members of the committee? >> Well, I had some instructions in that highlighted box. Um I think some of them are in good shape as far as being welldeveloped. Um you know, it's not
just we should consider this. It's this is how we would do it. >> Um >> I I want to make sure that where there's Westport specific detail, we add it in there. Like we're already doing this, so we can add on to this and you know, this
would be an easier lift for us. Um or we're going to want to coordinate with other departments or programs or initiatives. Let's identify those. I don't think it's helpful to just have a lot of ideas thrown against the wall. And there's some of that in there. Now,
um the other thing and going back to the fire recommendation is um I think it's important this report have uh action items that the town can consider but also individuals, >> right? >> And I think they're there. You know, I think if we're talking about health
awareness of ticks and uh where to go if you you know, it's an extreme heat event, you don't have air conditioning, there's a cool just those kinds of things. um infrastructure, you know, clear the brush from around your house. Um take a look at the line coming off the pole to your house. Is there are
there tree limbs that are uh at risk during a big storm? Because you're going to be on the hook to get that reconnected, I believe. >> Yeah. >> Um so those kind of things I want to make sure we have and I don't I don't think you know the people who um have put their subsection together
necessarily um found enough of those. So I'd like I'd like to know at least I'd like to have the ones that we know of that are obvious that can be put in. >> All right. So uh in the uh breakout that
said what we've completed this >> uh it it seems to show hey we're pretty close to there. >> Yeah. The last chapter of the recommendation we have I'll call it a deliverable from each of the subcommittees. >> Yeah. but they're not to near final form
yet. The other ones I think were pretty good shape. >> Yeah. So, any questions, Phil, on either chapter 7 or eight? Yeah, this is like on the chapter seven stuff and related to the coordination piece um
which is that and what could be improved which is that at least from my perspective there's none of the leads when I you know fire police Matt from the board of health the town
administrator um who have really plugged in to what's going on because that really happens behind behind the scene like the you know the fire at um >> yeah at Mid City there was a lot of a
lot of stuff that went on as an example of you know an like an an emergency response kind of thing. And if we're going to try to describe or ask those folks who are really have the
inside knowledge of where it's working and where it's not working because it was really hard for me from from the board of health perspective because I'm not part of those discussions and I'm not part of that process to really give concrete
discussion of here's how it's working. Boy, it would really be good if we could have some additional tools or what whatever it is. >> So, are you saying though we need to solicit input from them on >> if we're Yeah, I mean,
>> exactly. Yeah, I I think that would I think that would really help. And we have a new administrator and maybe he has ideas about what he would like to see across all the departments, you know, as far as coordination on because
it overlaps the whole hazard response, you know, kind of thing. And so >> anyway, >> so Phil, >> sequencing and next steps. >> Yeah. >> Like what what are our next steps? Are we all going to review it and say this looks good, let's go to the next step. What is the next step? Do we want
additional review from people like that, from other organizations in town? That's something we need to discuss. >> Yeah, I think that um Bill, you make a really good point. Um, and
I think when we get a complete draft and we're close to it, uh, then the word draft is important because what you're pointing out is in terms of public engagement, there are different
constituencies. So there's the general public where if we have a draft, we can have a couple of public hearings, public meetings, go through it and solicit citizen input. But you're pointing out there's a very
narrow constituency of people like Matt and uh and others that are going to look at this in a different way like what what does this mean I have to do? It probably goes beyond >> all right. No way I have the resources
to do this. Do you want to go public and does the you know as a committee we think you should do this without really >> reaching out to somebody and saying you know no this this is we're here this is here you know for I mean some are recommend we need better coordination
among departments. Well, that's a little naive. There is a lot of coordination on the department. We need to reflect what's going on. And that goes back to my >> point about making all these recommendations more specific >> reflecting what's going on. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Phil. Bob, I know you sent
out an email this afternoon. I think it's pretty uh detailed in terms of your thoughts on this. You want to summarize for people who haven't had a chance to read it? >> Uh I mean, basically in the uh >> there it is. if you want to. >> No, I I I have it on my laptop, but
thank you for putting this. I I made a couple of points in the tables just sort of updating things in the water section. It said that uh the uh the Gooseber causeway issue is
being studied. In fact, the study's been reported and we have the findings. And also I think in that same section uh particularly for East Beach is that there's now an agreement with the town on the restoration of all the wash
materials onto the properties that are on the south side. So So >> that that's because some of these recommendations been you know sitting for 12 14 months. >> Yeah. No, they have to be reviewed and updated. I I realize that I I just, you
know, want [clears throat] to update where we know that those things have happened, we should just make sure that they get in inserted before we go public. If someone said, "No, that's that's already done." Um,
>> and that's part of the request back is to review what what you've recommended and if it needs updating, updated. And >> then the the sort of chapter eight Hopefully we could have real action items and I I think your
point about having individual action items as well as recommendation to the select voter recommendation to the town officials um you know it's it's just a essentially the the town's shorthandedness
is is a liability that's had to overcome. >> Yeah. And um hopefully that's reflected in the risk. >> Yeah. And I think you >> the unlimited, you know, we just need to make it clear that
the the ability of the highway department to respond in an emergency, clearing roads, that kind of stuff is limited. And probably the same with the police and fire. Although we we now have
updated emergency response plans and and those those things have while they were 20 years old, they've all been there's been action over over the last year on on those kind of issues.
>> So your comment as I read it is related to what Phil brought up which is we've talked about there are recommendations for the town, their recommendations for individuals, there are recommendations for organizations. So there there are
different constituencies and what you're saying is that when we deliver this to the select board which is the town >> that we uh make it easy for them to see these are recommendations that affect
town government um and are therefore ones that you can the the town can take action on. I think that's what you >> Yeah. And it's it's you know can we build public support for town meeting actions? Can we you know
the those kinds of those kinds of activities the report should also do that and and we're we're about you know this this will get published
this fall some soon. We're about to undertake the the master plan. So they'll there'll be this public activity and usually all of this can help support the select and support the town
meeting. >> I hold on constants. You had your hand up. >> Um are you up? Yeah. >> Um, yeah. I I didn't really understand what chapter 7 was about. I looked at it
and I didn't really understand. I actually called in to find out. I didn't hear back. But um so I focused on what I guess is chapter seven, I mean eight, which is um the the draft items. and uh
read through them all pretty carefully and there were some really I thought some really good suggestions. I thought the agriculture uh piece was uh particularly good. Um but the one that worried me the most was the water section and uh which I've worked on uh
which I've been a part of with Mike and um there are a few items that I'd like to ask you about specifically right now. Um there's four I think. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Um so I I'm just
I don't really know how to interpret some of these. Uh so one I think what I'm beginning is um is >> do this >> is um start conversations with homeowners on changes that are
occurring and how they will impact access to and [clears throat] value and use of their homes in future flooded areas. elevation and retreat options, moving utilities,
issues with roads, etc. And my reaction that was what? Uh I mean this sounds pretty radical and also kind of confusing and scary. Um and and then require so I'd
like to talk a little bit about that and what that means. um requiring flood proofing as a condition of a certification of occupancy for structures in the flood plane. For
example, when renovation cost or 25%. >> That's an example of something that's been recommended elsewhere that we put in that column so that we could look at and say, is this something that's part of the instructions? Take a look at these. Are these things that, you know, we want to think about here? It's not
something we've identified yet. It's just something we've identified that other people are doing other locations. >> Okay. Well, I just it they're a little alarming. Um and I'm like floodproofing, you know, what what does all does that entail? Um
and and then identify, harden, and water seal critical infrastructure, especially electrical, heating, and ventilation hardware in the flood plane. Um, I'm not even sure what all that means and how
one would do that. Um, especially with a lot of the cottages that are pretty much right on the river like mine. But, um, and then, you know, where where exactly is the flood plane? Um I you all do know
that the intergovernmental panel on climate change finally admitted that their uh RCP 8.5 was completely implausible and uh they stepped back on that way >> unlikely to occur is that
>> no implausible was the word that they used highly implausible and they stepped way back from that and uh and I believe that of course that doomsday scenario 8.5 is what the state uses in their
flood planes. Um and of course the insurance companies love doing that because then they can collect a whole lot more money from everybody. Um but if you look at those >> doesn't predict the future at all. >> Yeah. what >> the existing flood plane is almost
identical to the the future and it it doesn't it doesn't predict does doesn't take any of the climate change effects into account. >> Okay, good. Well, that's good. That's good to know because I didn't I mean I know that the flood plane has or
whatever they say what the insurance company char has you know charged you what they've included in the flood plane is expanded incre a lot since um well since uh hurricane Katrina I mean they just basically gobbled up most of the
coastline and said oh now everything's at risk and now you have to pay a whole lot more insurance. Um, so I I would, you know, I didn't see any reference into what is the floor the flood plane exactly. And I'm glad to know that it it
doesn't that it's not just an amplification of of scaryness. >> Um, >> well, that's a good reason why Dia mentioned uh on river days, one of the things we might display is what is the flood plane? >> So that people can see it.
>> Yes. And um but it it is very confusing because I know that I didn't you I mean I know that a lot of property wasn't in the flood plane before Katrina and now it is and that insurance rates are really really high. The federal government has increased the level of
the flood plane throughout the country and the uh town of Westport has changed their uh flood plane bylaw to coincide with the FEMA regulations.
And anybody if if if we had to do that because the town if it didn't approve it then nobody in town would be able to get flood insurance and it has to do with uh where if you're
going to build new you have to build above the flood plan and it could be different in different areas of town right >> whether it's a velocity zone or not. and >> or upgrade >> or upgrade if you upgrade as as the
thing said more than 25% or 50% value. >> It used to be 49% or whatever. Now we're saying 25%. You can't >> as Jeff said that is a recommendation that he has searched and found other
efforts at climate resilience have come up with that recommendation. And so he said somebody else thinks this is a good idea. Do we want to think it's a good idea? It's not in the report until we decide to put it in the report. >> I think it's a recommendation that if
you're if you're spending 25% of the value of your house that you ought to take that into account. The federal government says or we say 50%. Isn't that right? >> Yeah, that's correct. So it the town law is that if you increase the value of
your house by 50% or more, you'd have to comply with a flood plane bylaw, which is the same as the federal flood plan. And um when it talks about the utilities and the heating and all that stuff, I
think that just makes sense. You don't want all your utilities and heating equipment to be flooded. And I don't think you have to get it above plane, but you have to get it high enough so that it's unlikely that it's going to be
flooded based on the vagaries of when things happen. But >> well, >> so Constance, you said you had four. >> Yeah, I just have a couple more here. Uh so also like plan to relocate critical
facilities in high-risk areas using a frame in line with their expansion or refurbishment cycles. I just don't obtain easements on properties at risk of flooding and use those areas for water retention and drainage. So we've
seen those ideas elsewhere and they're documented here so that we can look at them and say it'll be up to the committees to look at them and say are these things that >> well I would say that those things are incredibly alarming and it seems
overblown and it just will just scare the heck out of most people. And if we want to completely tank the real estate values of of Westport and if we don't want I mean maybe we should just like I mean you know one of the suggestions was
not allow any more building in the flood plane so that's fine. I already got my house in the flood plane so whatever. But uh it just I don't know these when I was reading these I I just didn't know where they came from and they were
confusing and used a lot of terms that I didn't understand and frankly incredibly alarming. And I I hope that's not the intent or what we're going for in this um in this report is to just scare the
be Jesus out of people and and you know say okay doomsday is coming. Not only is your house gonna flood and everything, but your a forest bar is gonna take it too. So, cut back all your trees. I mean, I you know, I'm hoping that like with some of most of what I saw in the
agriculture and some of the other ones, it's like pretty common sense good practice, not we're all going to die and uh you know, I'm just hoping that that's more the tone of this than than what I read in the water section, which I was a
part of. And I don't want my name on that. >> John, >> yeah, go ahead. Constant makes a good point, but Jeff's homework to us is to consider these things and we will as a as a subcommittee and make a recommendation to the committee about
whether we think they should be added or not. And um I I I think some of these things are are pretty aggressive and maybe deserve to be considered. >> And there probably areas that have seen, you know,
Superstorm Sandy. You know, parts of New Jersey were just completely destroyed. So, it only makes sense to say if this is likely to happen or possibly could happen again, we've got to take some radical. >> Yeah. I'll say is that is that the subcommittee should look at the
suggested ones that fall the ones that fall into our subcommittee and and we can take a look at them and and in the next meeting which we can do fairly quickly >> and concur or or suggest that they be taken out and even if they if we say they should be taken out, I think they
you know some of these things might be considered down the road as we get more serious and we see more evidence that that things are heading in that direction, right? Doesn't have to we don't have to have it in the first report if it's if it's an action that is
say interpreted as a little bit you know an overstep in some cases but we will discuss this among our ourselves and get back to it. Yeah, Mike. >> Yeah, I just want to say that I've been very involved in the discussions uh about what's happening in the seapport in Boston and it's not hypothetical.
Every time there's a big flood or a big rainstorm, the children museum, I'm on a board floods. >> And we've just gotten grants totaling over $14 million to basically totally reshape, move the first floor of the museum up, move all the infrastructure
up to the roof. I mean, it is not hypothetical. It's real. the uh the damage uh potential damage to the museum is extraordinary >> and uh it's why um we've we've gotten the funding to actually make substantial
changes because we know that you know we haven't even had the the supertorm that we're worrying about. This is just with normal tidal uh and rainstorms. So can I suggest u um a way that uh we
um approach this given that there's not likely to be unonyimity on everything and I think there's about three levels of review. The first that's going on right now is that Jeff and Dia are
taking information from the subcommittees and uh editing it and lining it up so that we have a readable document. Uh and
then we have something that we can comment on just the way constants did. Um, and you did mine. Um, then I would guess like you know the budget at town meeting when
the moderator goes down through all the items individually and people say I want to talk about that one. We're going to find that 80 or 90% of the recommendations are like consensus.
You said hey I love the forestry thing. you know that there'll be an awful lot of them where everyone says, "Yep, this is a good idea. We don't need to debate this cuz everyone agrees on it and then we're going to get to the ones where
there is some disagreement. Uh but it won't won't be all of them. It'll be I think a minority of them and then uh the subcommittees weigh in. But this report is a report of the entire committee. So
ultimately the entire committee uh I think makes the decision on uh do we include this in it or not and comments from individual reviewers are important and need to be listened to and comments
from subcommittees like water forestry need to be listened to. But uh as we are putting this draft together for public release, it's uh you know if we have to take votes on things uh then we'll take
votes on things. But I I think it will be uh only a few that are contentious. I don't think if I don't know how many recommendations there are if there 80 recommendations you know we we may have an argument about five. So, let's have the argument about
>> I hope we don't I hope we don't put this draft out. >> I know. But I hope we do. So, you see, we're gonna have an argument. >> But, I mean, if we if we put out what is listed right now underwater under the water thing, it's confusing. It's alarming. It's it's there's no point in
doing that. >> People should be alarmed when there are things to be alarmed about because ignoring a threat doesn't protect you from the threat. it. Well, >> again, the things you've flagged as alarming are things that other areas
have recommended. So, we haven't adopted those as recommendations. >> Well, I've been on the water committee now for years. We've been working on this. And you asked uh you sent some documents first to look at. I do my homework. I read it through it. I I
looked at the water thing. I couldn't recognize the water thing. It was like, "Okay, wait a minute. Where did all this come from?" I got in touch with Mike and I said, "Mike, could you explain some of this?" asked me where did this come from and what what what does this mean? Can you tell me what this means? And
actually he said he could not and that it looked like boilerplate recommendations overblown I believe what you said and uh you you know you're much more um politic here but you were a little alarmed by it too and you didn't
know what it meant either and so uh you know that's all I'm saying it it's like >> this table show additional strategies identified through searches of state national resilience active learning houses other best practices so they're from other areas We should look at what other areas have done. That's
>> this is not there's nothing wrong with what you've done, Jeff. I had read it at that point. I'm not saying there's >> it's just we we have to do our homework and take a look at them as a committee and um and we will get back and you know but but const another good point and
that is that um this uh UN you know organization that follows this stuff >> has made some drastic changes quietly but made some drastic changes to their predictions and um to the degree that
they filter down to the state level RCP especially sea level flood ride we've been talking about that two or three years we pointed out that there's just no connection between those predictions and the realities we're almost at the end of the first prediction which
predicted a foot and a third of sea level rise by 2030 we're almost there we've had an [clears throat] inch and a third >> Bob point just finish >> yeah go ahead just finish >> we previously talked about having
negative communication with the state and and gently chiding them to reconsider some of these and reframe some of these because we have to work to those predictions. >> Um they might need a little prompting to
get with the program here and to give us a new realistic prediction for the next 20 30 years because those predictions are what we're trying to make recommendations around. Bob, >> a couple of points. Um,
>> thank you. >> The the first is um I I don't find the report to be critically alarming and and not is a tone that we're all about to die. If you look at the uh uh the which
is which is what you said constant and if you if you look at the the uh uh the section on the flood maps and who's affected by the flood maps it is you know an incredibly small percentage of
the towns area number one and and a an even smaller percentage to the population. >> Yeah. the let Bob the effect that we're all going to die and you know as as an
action for the town as an action for the town meeting there are things that we can do but it it is it it essentially the se sea level rise issue is is and from my experience is that
nobody is is taking that there's none of the state agencies are taking the most radical. You know, if you look at what the state agency's projections are, >> not for the south coast, which is
smaller, that is we we we're projected to have a smaller increase, but for the east facing Boston Harbor projection, it's 30 in. It's not 10 ft, it's not 7 feet, it's 30 in in 50 years. And if you
think well you know we're actually seeing roughly looking back we're seeing 11 in a century. So that you know that's that's a possibility if it increased.
But if you look at if you look at the flood maps now today to to you know the the existing flood maps that FEMA produces they're not if you look at what that cover we have that
>> right we we can produce a map that has nothing to do with projections of the climate projections and you can see what the flood area of the town is and it's relatively small and you can see the current update, the ones that Jim's
talking about that we've had to update. So, our bylaws look like that. And you'll see it is a very small addition to the flood plane. So that so that you know it it affects
yes those who sit on the beach or those who sit close to the beach they're at high risk but it is a relatively small percentage of the population and the local street flooding and things like that the real risk and and and and
I think the tone is is is really that climate change for us that is residents of West are really only multipliers on the risk that we
already have. You know, it's if if your house had 10 ft of water in it in the 1938 hurricane, so nothing to do with climate change, right? The 1938 hurricane
occurred. It that's a fact. If it had 10 feet of water, if if it has 10 feet 5 in of water in 2050 50, are you materially different? And that's
what we're talking about. You know, the people that are at risk are at significant risk, but if you're if you're a few feet higher than you were in 1938, you're you're at no risk.
Well, the risk is not from flooding. The risk is you're going to lose power for 10 days and how do you live in your house without a well? That's the risk. The risk is it blows down all the trees
and we lose power for extended periods. That's that's the risk. So, let me suggest I'll try and phrase it a little differently. the point about decision making and that is uh you raised a
couple of issues uh uh constants one was things were confusing and I think if something is confusing then we need to write it in a way that it isn't confusing >> so that people need to understand it
that's absolutely legit so if you're confused by it other people are going to be confused by it so we got to write it in a way it's not confusing. uh then uh there's an issue of we're going to have x number of recommendations
and uh there may be uh some people who uh support that recommendation and other people who don't support that recommendation and I think ultimately while we want to listen to individual views on that we want to listen to subcommittee views on that uh the
committee should decide what recommend recommendations end up in the committee report. Uh so I I think this is very close. One of the things I found confusing for example is so many of the recommendations are just repeated over
and over and over again in different sections. So that >> that that makes it look like oh god we got 200 recommendations here. It just it's intimidating. Uh and if we eliminated the duplications and just had a recommendation
put down once uh and we can note uh well this is in the water committee it's in uh the you know it's in different committees but you only see the recommendation once then I think that eliminates some of the of the confusion
and then I think um I don't know how many meetings from now it would a case of constants you saying uh and there I don't think there's anything in here that talks about 8.5. So um
>> I just didn't know what the flood plane was based on what the state was mandating. >> Yeah, it's not based on the future as Bob said. Um, but I I think that you would offer I I move that this recommendation be deleted
and then if someone it then we'll debate it and we'll vote on it. And that's the way this committee should make a decision like you know any Democratic body operating you know with Robert's rules or whatever. And so people would
say, I think this should be added as a motion or I think this should be deleted or I think this should be amended and we can move it, second it, debate it and vote on it and then put it in the rearview mirror because we do have to go
forward. And I I'm not naive to think that all of these recommendations are going to be consensus recommendations. I think that the tone of the report is of concern. I just would when when will we get I think that the um the
introductory the introduction will be very important because that frames it all and I know that you're writing that right. Well, I I uh I don't know what it's called, whether it's the introduction or the chairman's letter or whatever, but I wrote it and it's been distributed and I put based on your
comments and others. I I changed it from the one I did a year or two ago. So, that wasn't about climate change. It was about resiliency, you know, ways that we can be more >> I think I read it. I would like to read it. >> Yeah. So, that got sent out a couple months ago. Okay. And Dia, would you
send it send it again so you can look at the tone of that and see what you think about that? >> I think that that worries me the most. >> I know because I worry cuz I wrote it. So >> how we Well, [laughter] how we frame it, how we set it up. [clears throat] >> Yeah. Well, I changed based on your
comments and Jeff's >> from a focus on climate change to a focus on resiliency. So I listened to you and I tried to change the way to pre present it based on in part on your comments. to you. >> Well, I just want to say, Constance, you know, thank you for sharing your thoughts, but um just want to advocate
for Jeff a little bit. Um this is kind of still super draft, so I totally hear your concerns about tone, uh clarity, making sure we're getting the right message out there. We're not repeating ourselves. Um so, just wanted to say this is super still kind of in the mix of all that. like we haven't even started looking for tone and stuff cuz
we want to get all the content first. Then we'll kind of rewrite it and kind of you know give it that warmth, give it a unified voice, you know, start thinking about the angle we want to presented. So just wanted to get that out there that it's it's not really at that stage yet. So >> good point for future
>> for comments on the on what you sent us. Therefore, I wrote it and given you my comments. [clears throat] Don't take it personally. I'm [laughter] just you know it's I need to own this. just it's not something that done. I apologize if the you know presentation wasn't explained
enough but you know this this was information pulled from what we have already and then side by side we have this is what other places have said take a look at it if there's anything that you think is appropriate let's bring it and talk about it does it belong here in Westport
>> Phil had his hand up >> something that would be alarming >> I was just so um you know I'll speak personally of saying going through the torturous process of ranking what the priority what the priorities
were and I think that we need to align the all the recommendations that were made things that we might do with the priority that we've assigned to things >> you know so we all know that ticks are a
really big problem you know so if I was going to pick that I would say yeah it's here it's now there are things that we should be doing about it. And yeah, mold is a problem, but it's, you know, you know, it's down or threats to >> drinking water from salt intrusion. It's
real. It's going to happen >> over time. How intensely, but it's not >> the first thing on our list. And so I think that that is going to be a big >> and a good, you know, constraint. And it relates to
uh like we like one of the things I recommend recommended is a would be to create an implementation subcommittee that is going to um you know make presentations to the
finance committee and make presentations to the select board for things that we would want to get money to do because we have no money to do 99.9% of the things that we're proposing. And so we do need to drill down. That
doesn't necessarily mean that the I think that the report has to be limited to uh you know what's happening the next year, but I I do think that we can control it within the framework that we have designed already.
>> Yeah. Jeff, do you want to respond to do do the recommendations line up with the priorities when this comes together? Phil's first point. >> I think that's another issue is that we may have a lot of recommendations for what we've defined as relatively low
priority risk. So, um maybe we should >> which would not make logical sense. Yeah. >> But, you know, on the other hand, if it's something that's easy to do, even though it's low risk, >> yeah, >> threat, um maybe it's worth mentioning.
>> Okay. >> I'm with Phil. Uh, Joseph had his hand up and Mike and then both mics. >> Joseph, >> vocabulary is important and the way that you wrote the introduction I thought was
spot on. I thought it was very readable for people of all generations and abilities. For one, it was apolitical and uh, it set the tone. I think without
being alarmist uh but also hitting on the important points and so I I think that that was successful very successful. >> Well, I want a motion to adjurnn so that we can adjourn on that.
>> No, keep going >> because when it goes to town meeting, >> you know, there's there's always the possibility of it being politicized for one reason or another. >> Yeah. um they're believers, they're disbelievers, but to write it for the
agnostics, I think would be way of doing it. >> Yeah. >> Well, I tried tried. >> Thank you. >> Just a reminder, we are trying to write this to like a 10th grade reading level and that is something that like >> software can determine. So, we are using
that to help us make it easy to understand and digest. >> Okay. Mike, you had it. No, I just want to be just reiterate. I appreciate the work that Jeff has done to get us this far and to come up with Dia and Michael
and um but to you know to add to augment what we've done to take a look at that. That's our task. That's on us to take a look at and uh appreciate you giving us a little bit outside perspective on what we've come up with. So thank you. Let me uh I had a couple of comments
myself and I'll hand this to you and and Dia. I'm sorry for not doing track changes, but uh one I mentioned that I I I think we should list a recommendation once so it's not repeated. Um and uh
then um I I think we should work I I really appreciate that what you did was to say here's what the subcommittees recommended but here are what other towns have also recommended
and u uh because that's useful information and I think the subcommittees can look at those uh recommendations. ations that come from quote outside and say, "Oh, wow, that's a good idea, you know, or it isn't a
good idea for Westport or it would be a good idea if it were 50% and not 25%." Because I think ultimately we shouldn't have two lists. We should have one list of recommendations. So, uh, as as each subcommittee looks at
the outside suggested ones, they should say, "I'd like to incorporate these from that list and add it to our list." So, it's one list, and there are three or four of them I don't think fit Westport.
So, I don't think we should do that. So that we can take two lists and merge them into one list which I think you know gets to the issue of understandability reduces confusion and uh something's either a good idea or it's not doesn't
matter so much where it comes from it's just is it a good idea or not. So, I I hope people will look at those two lists and and you know, like going through a buffet line, there's something there you want to eat, put it on the list.
>> All right. Other uh Yeah, Mike. >> Yeah. I just had one suggestion which is rather than worrying about the hypotheticals of what uh flood plans are going to change, one of our recommendations can be for Westport given the limits of our feasibility is
to actually collect data on what's happening with our uh our sea level rocks >> um and what gets flooded. I think uh you know we certainly had a root awakening this winter with that snowstorm which is not unrelated I think to climate change
and put >> two snow storms >> but yeah two in terms of that worst point and put people really at serious risk. Um so I just want to come back to Jeff and Dia because we had worked on the uh MVP grant >> and there were two recommendations there. I don't know if they're in this
report, but one was better communication by the town to everyone broadly about things that are happening. >> Yeah. >> Um number one and number two, uh modeling on Little Compton on emergency posting emergency access routes. Um, so
those two very >> and at the meeting last month, >> uh, to Mike's point, Mike Yagman's point, uh, the my coast, uh, is a way that citizens can add to data. Right?
Here's a photograph of a flooded uh road or here's a photograph of um electric wires that have come down in the storm or you know whatever it is and here's the date and here's what it looks like and it's easy to do. Grab your cell
phone camera, take a picture and um input it. And you're starting to do two things. one, build up the database that you're talking about and two, the more people who are involved in that, the more citizens are getting used to observing
and uh that's a good thing, too. >> And it also builds community. >> Yeah. Yeah. Third. All right. Uh what else you got Jeff? >> That's it. I mean, we need we will need to discuss once we all get consistent on
this. What is the next step? Do we identify and should we start building a list of people we want to look at this to make sure we haven't overlooked something that they can help us with? Um who are those people and is that the first step or do we >> the select board with the report?
>> We haven't really discussed that. >> Yeah. But I think that in the discussion, you know, about different constituencies like the the uh uh town officials who have
responsibility get one kind of targeted approach at looking at this. The general public gets another kind of approach. Um, and the materials may be different, but I think we're close to having a
draft that's readable. And then people can kind of look at it and go through it and they can say, "I agree with this. I disagree with this. You know, I think this would be okay if you if you changed
it a little bit." and and it'll really start to focus where we have consensus on stuff and where uh we have disagreement and how do we go about resolving it >> with a firm deadline to get your comments in. >> That's right. I I have one uh question
on on the chart this chart that shows Wow, we're checking off lots of boxes. It looked like UMass Dartmouth was only checking off one box. Is that >> No, it cuts across those five areas, right? >> Oh, all right. >> So, so we don't have to nudge them to do
more. >> We are nudging them to do. >> Okay. [laughter] >> That's the wrong conclusion. >> All right. Okay. Uh yes, Phil. I just have one postcript in the previous discussion which so I supplemented
the health report substantial I think between what um Jeff and Dia put together and I don't know if it makes and I haven't gotten feedback on but I don't know if it makes sense to circulate that >> more you know more broadly than
>> I I would circulate it uh through Jeff and >> I you know so >> I haven't had a chance to to look at. >> Yeah. So when they get a chance to look at it >> Yeah. >> they can decide what to feed us >> and particularly becau because um the
in part of the infrastructure part and power loss and all is is also in the health section. So and I agree with you it would be good not to have that repeated but anyway just so there may be a supplement to the health part that people can look at too.
>> Yeah. All right. Uh, I do want to come back to just one piece of business, the minutes. We have a quorum. Um, I I read them. I thought they were complete, accurate, but I don't know if pe people have had a
chance to look at them, if there are any changes or emissions, people who were there, who weren't there. Otherwise, I'd love a motion to approve the minutes of uh, April 30th. >> So, moved. Second. filled. Mike seconds.
Uh, any discussion? All in favor say I. I. >> Okay. Thank you very much for that. >> I haven't got the copy. So, >> uh, >> you don't have your unprepared for class. >> I haven't gotten copies for this meeting
or anything. >> So, do you know how to get in touch with the planning board chair? >> Do you have this correct email? >> I do. I sent it to both. [laughter] Your inbox is stuffed. >> It must be stuffed.
[laughter] >> All right. Uh, next meeting, uh, July 23rd. We >> we're going on, you know, about a month because it's the sprint to the finish here. >> Um, and so appreciate especially in the
summertime, uh, folks doing that. And uh uh we will uh is there a motion to adjurnn? So move second debate. All in favor say I. We are journed till uh July 23rd. Thank you all.
>> Thank you all.