Recording in progress. >> Okay. Call to order the July 20th, 2026 meeting, the Armouth Board of Health. And first item is quorum as usual. Scott, would you be here? >> I'm here. >> Why are you here?
>> Hillard's here, Mary. Okay, we have a quorum. First item is public comment. As usual, if there's anyone here who's a resident who or owns a business in town, this would be opportunity to come forward
um and address the board and I prefer not to have any comments right now about the property on Milane. Okay. So, we have some other things could be someone online or here. Please feel free to come on out. Okay, line is forming here. Um,
>> I see no hands up. >> No hands up. Should we say we're done with three? Okay, let's go to number four. Here we go. Barry, you want to take it from here? >> Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh we had the pleasure of inviting user cattle.
Come on up. Um he is a horiculturist uh in Tomminiologist. I got that completely wrong. I'll let you say that. Um he is a tick expert. Um right now on the Cape, we all know about the wonderfuls of ticks. if you can just introduce
yourself into the microphone or pick it up and he's going to give a quick little uh presentation on tix and how we can work with this. So, and everybody there's wonder about a farm. This is good information for everybody about ticks. So, >> can everybody hear me? Okay.
>> Absolutely. Welcome. Thanks for coming in. >> Hello. Thank you for having me. Yes, I was here at the uh board of health doing a presentation on tickborn disease awareness, tickborn disease safety here on Cape Cod. As we know, ticks are a
year round problem here on the Cape. And uh this year is no difference, but also we've been seeing more tick encounters here in the Northeast than we have in the last 10 years. Uh this is a record year in
comparison to each year of the last 10 years for people who have gone to the emergency room both on Cape Cod and in the Northeast in general for being bitten by a tick. Now, we won't know exactly what the disease profile shapes
up to be until tick season is effectively over. However, the diseases that people are catching appear to be consistent with previous years. Uh this is for now pretty good news, but as the weather continues to be warm, as we
continue to get tourists and as we continue to be outside and in our communities, in our gardens, on the farm, we will be faced with the problem of ticks. So, we went over at the talk when I was previously here, we went over the three kinds of ticks that are here
on Cape Cod. And I do have my uh I do have my little ticks here for you to look at if you please. Um they're very small. So small that I don't think the camera will pick them up. Uh but we are currently in nymph and laral season for most of our species of ticks except for
the American dog tick which is still going on strong in its adult stage. Uh our different ticks give us different diseases. For instance, the blacklegged tick or deer tick that we are currently seeing in its laral and nymph stages. uh give us some of the uh more common
tickborn diseases such as Lyme disease, anoplasmosis, bzziosis, pawsan virus and a few others. Uh there was a bit of concern about lonear tick because they have been appearing more and more out here on Cape Cod and uh they are known
to uh trigger what we call alpha gal syndrome in patients who've been bitten by this lonear tick. The current thinking is that alpha gal is triggered by the injection of the tick's saliva into the skin because there's alpha gal
in the tick saliva and this induces a delayed allergic reaction to uh mammal products. So red meat or potentially dairy. In severe cases it could be as well wool or leather or even just smell
volatiles of mamalian protein. um as well as a couple of kinds of red algae. So not only animals but some vegetarian or vegan alternatives. Um currently alpha gal is a reportable condition. So if you do get diagnosed it
does help scientists learn more about how to figure out how to stop us from getting alphaal syndrome. Uh it may not be permanent. Sometimes cases can um subside over time, but getting bitten by a tick again will make your symptoms
come back possibly even worse. So, talking about how to avoid ticks, one of the things you can do is get peromethine treated clothing. You can get your clothing treated professionally by companies like Insect Shield or you could treat clothing yourself by getting
a bottle of 0.5% peromethine spray at a outdoor hardware store. This protection uh will give you about a 90% reduction in tick bites. The the pesticide that is impregnated onto your clothing and gear
will uh make ticks uh feel kind of like they're on fire and then they will try to get out of there. Eventually, they will also perish. So, this can prevent you from getting more tick bites, as well as dressing more ticks smart,
having your long pants, long socks, your closed toe shoes while you're out and about. Uh maybe tucking your pants into your socks, making that barrier so that ticks cannot climb up to parts of your skin that are exposed. And then on parts that are exposed, using a repellent like
DE or picaridin on your skin. Uh all of those things as well as doing thorough tick checks while you are out and when you're ready to come in can prevent you getting bitten by a tick. If you do get bitten by a tick, you can remove the tick immediately with tweezers. If the head gets stuck in you, don't worry.
Your skin uh expels it naturally with new layers of skin much like it would a splinter. And then you just look out in the next couple weeks for symptoms uh so that you can tell your doctor that you need medical attention. And those symptoms are uh kind of akin to the
summer flu. You start to feel kind of crummy. You start to feel feverish or headachy. You may get chills. You may get nausea. If you feel sick during the warm season, maybe think ticks. Uh I do happen to have many resources at
Cooperative Extension for anybody that's interested in them, but I will let you all get on with the meeting for now. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for coming in. And I do have some of his cards if right out here on the bottom of the stairwell. I have a little uh table that has some
information on that. If you when you leave, if you want to grab it, you're more than welcome to. So, and you don't have to stay for this whole meeting. If you want, it's going to unless you want to get some entertainment. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you for coming. >> You're not here to be tortured. Okay. Really, thank you for coming in. >> Thank you.
>> Everybody stay safe. Thank you. >> Okay, number five, Barry. >> Yeah, number five, we have the director of the Yarmouth Department of Natural Resources, David Kdone. Um, I just had him come in. Thought it'd be a great
idea since he kind of works with the ponds and stuff. He's going to give just a little overview um of his history, what of his knowledge of the ponds and what he's gotten from the uh the fisheries and stuff like that. It's a complete third party
non-biased just a quick presentation. Thank you Dave. We're still friends by the way tomorrow. >> Hi. Good evening. I'm Dave Conan, director of natural resources for the town. Um yeah, I guess I'm not really
sure what I'm in for tonight, but um I can talk a little bit about what, you know, natural resources has to do with Mil Pond. Um, we have it open for commercial shell fishery uh every winter. Um, it's typically closed all summer. It's a area
that the division of marine fisheries classifies as conditionally approved. So, um, some water bodies are um, approved, meaning they're open or could be open all year round. Some are prohibited, meaning they are closed all year round. Uh there are some that are
conditionally approved which is like Howitz Mill Pond and some that are conditionally restricted which is I don't believe we have any of those in Yarmouth but um we have all different all all of those types of um classification areas uh that is set by
the division of marine fisheries um based on all sorts of things but generally water quality is the biggest um influence obviously uh our local marine biologist or our area biologist
for division of marine fisheries tests howitz mill pond along with most of our other water bodies more than they technically have to. Um I did get a email just today. Um just want to so she's required to sample the growing
area five times a year. Um she samples more than that just because she s samples while it's closed. Even though we know it's closed, she samples then anyhow. Um and the data that she has from the last she sent me the last two years from January 24 up through 2026.
Um and all the data that she has indicates exactly what one would expect where the water quality deteriorates in the summer with, you know, more people around, more septic systems, um the water's warmer, things are more apt to grow. Um, so it's that's why we're in that conditionally approved. So it
closes in the summer and we open it in the fall, like I said, in the fall. It pending water quality results, which have historically been um indicative of uh cleaner water, we open it in the fall for the commercial uh shell fishery for
the winter. Um, I mean, that's kind of the long and short of the water quality. Um, is there any dare I ask for any questions? So, is it um sampled immediately before you open it for the winter? >> Correct. Yeah. So, she again, just
looking at her results, what she sent me today, um she tests it multiple times in the in the month of October before we open uh or before we could open. We don't we don't have to open when they tell us it's conditionally approved, but our our
regulations kind of follow the opening. But either way, she tests it. Yeah. Multiple times before it would open in the fall. >> And this is for commercial shell fishing only. >> Correct. I mean, again, that's just our regulations. We have it open for commercial. >> Um, but because it's classified as
conditionally approved. When it is open, we could theoretically open for recreational, but we just rotate certain areas for certain fisheries, but typically commercial for there. One of the concerns by uh neighbors would be the quality of the water for
swimming. Perhaps you can address that. >> Yeah, I mean I can't speak to the water quality for swimming. I can only speak to what Division of Marine Fisheries has sent for shell fishing. I think that might be a better Barry question. >> Thank you. >> Okay, that doesn't surprise me. That's fine. Okay.
And so, um, we have the report, but the audience and the people out in the TV world don't have the results. What kind of results has the tester been getting on the water? >> Again, I'm I'm no expert on water quality, but she indicated that she,
again, I keep saying she, our marine, our biologist for the division marine fisheries, Holly Williams, indicated that it's exactly what she would expect. Um, and again, I don't dare try to explain any of the math because I'm not a biologist, but um, she indicates that
the data is exactly one would expect for a seasonal opening and closing of a water body. >> And I again, I didn't get this email till today, but I'm happy to share it with Barry and he can >> you know, send it out to you guys or who anybody who needs it. >> You
any other questions, Larry? >> No. >> No. >> No. So every year it's conditionally closed. It just because that's >> the area is classified as conditionally approved, meaning it can open when the water quality allows, which again historically has been in the winter.
>> Okay. >> All right. >> Thanks for coming in. >> All right. >> Thank you, D. >> Okay. The next item is a continued discussion on the property at 88 and 100 mil lane. Uh the owners of the property
have an application in um for a stable license and goat license. Uh just one second, sir. Sir, let's we're going to do this a little differently. Okay. Why don't you have a seat where you were? Let's just take one step at a time.
This this board was very generous with their time at the last meeting. Anyone could come up, anyone could speak any length, and we were here a long time. So, I need to change the format a little bit. Um, if the owner would like to come
up, if they're here, please come up, have a seat. Um and anyone who owner um or certainly anyone representing the owner can certainly speak tonight. Neighbors can speak.
People representing the neighbors as as well. Just keep your comments brief and it's got to be about the stable regulation which is what this board is responsible for. And that's all a lot of discussion at the last meeting was about
the conservation which is already dealt with by the committee as well as DP that's not our responsibility. So the majority of the time was spent on that. Um please remember
the four of us are volunteers board of health. Okay. Um last meeting I felt like I was in a courtroom quite frankly where people were um presenting their verbal verbal
arguments. I mean we're cited cases we were um chapter numbers were provided for state regs. That obviously is meaningless to us unless we are at home looking up state regs and figuring them
out which we're capable of doing. But I don't think it's appropriate. This is not the courtroom. This this is town hall. Please keep that in mind. So to stay focused, it's the stable regulation and this board is responsible
decide whether to grant um the license for the coming year. That's our responsibility. So, um, >> and and we'd prefer to hear from people that have not spoken before.
So, because we certainly did listen to everyone before >> and if board members speak up. If people are repeating something we've heard already, then just speak up. Okay? Listen to So, we hear new information,
received a lot of letters. We have them. This board is very conscientious. We've read them. So, keep that in in mind. There's been a lot of information provided. It's very difficult to put it all together because one document was
back in 1988. So, it's a lot of history. It's was that 38 years worth. Um, okay. So, it's not all put together. Needless to say, things get lost, documents disappear. It's making it quite difficult for this board to figure it
out. So, we're taking our time and take it very seriously for the people in the neighborhood as well as the owners who are uh looking to to start a farm board members. Anything to start any
comments just to get started? >> No, I think that summed it up. >> Okay. So, um, this is the opportunity to make some comments and absolutely go to the mic, introduce yourselves for the record, and let's start. Uh, good
evening, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for that little discussion. I think it was helpful. Uh, again, can can the board members hear me? This >> go a little bit. >> Let's see. How's that any better? >> Aim it up towards you a little bit.
>> Yes. >> It doesn't want to move. uh >> the table if you need to. >> Yeah, I'll just How's that? Any better? >> Yes. >> Closer. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very good good evening again, Mr. Chairman. Again, for the record, my name is Bill
Heny. I represent the applicants. Uh Mr. and Mrs. Brmps. Mrs. Brms is sitting at the table next to Dan Ogdula. Uh with me is Mr. Ogdula, uh attorney John Kenny, and Mr. Kunis, who you heard from last week. Um, having in mind the chair's uh,
admonition, I'm going to try to keep it to a quick recap and a couple of new things and then I think Mrs. Brmps would like to make a brief presentation about her farm practices, which I think is probitative on the question of what you are all trying to decide, which is whether or not a stable license should
be issued for this location. Um, uh, for the record, Mr. Chairman, we had a hearing back here on the, uh, I believe it was July 6th. Um we um conducted a site visit on July 13th. Two of the board members were able to attend. Two
members were not able to make that date and I don't know whether uh either of the two gentlemen who couldn't make it had the opportunity to go over there and take a look. But uh if you did that's great. If you didn't we understand and everybody has a busy schedule >> scheduled. So >> yeah understood Mr. Chairman. Um,
we um are also in receipt of a large number of emails and I want to draw the board's attention to two in particular, one of which I don't think you have. Um, on July 8th, uh, Mr. Greg Bilzikian, I don't know whether Mr. Bill Zikian is
here tonight. He is. Um, I'll let him speak for himself, but he submitted a very nice email to the board and I have multiple copies for your um for the board members and >> we have it. >> Miss Craig is indicating you have it. Thank you. Um, so I don't want to
belabor that, but I have copies for the record. Um, and um, I also have, and I'm just going to submit for the record because uh, the YouTube video is very long, a a transcript of what happened here last time. I'm not going to read it. I'm not going to refer to it, but I
just want to place it in the record, Mr. Chairman. So, we have that. Um, I do want to point out to the board, you know, cognizant of your admonition and the the many people from the neighborhood who are here tonight, um, my clients received over the weekend,
um, multiple copies of an email from something called our Yarmouthport. Um, it was an email address called our yarmathportgmail.com and it relates to the hearing. And I I want to make a little point of this just because there are many good people here
who have concerns that are a little wide of the mark, but they're they're here in response to what has been going on in the neighborhood. I just want to give the board a little flavor. Dear neighbor, many have asked about the status of the 88100 mil lane project to
establish multiple businesses including goat breeding, a dairy, a crearyy, a goats keeping invasive species management business and a retail store. After the count's conservation commission approved the plan, a
challenge at the state level D over the past year forced some helpful changes, but still let the project proceed. You all have the D decision. I'm not going to belabor that any further. That is not what happened and you have the document. On July 6th, the Armas Board of Health had a first hearing on the matter and
some neighbors expressed their concern. But I must submit this for you. Many people who have appeared before the board have advised that it'll only act against the project if a whole neighborhood shows up, fills the seats, and speaks up. Your in-person
participation would be greatly appreciated. Therefore, please do all that you can to attend the Armouth Board of Health meeting this Monday, July 20th at town hall. So, this is the reason why we have all of this controversy. There are folks in the neighborhood who are
making these representations to their neighbors and their neighbors are showing up out of concern that this is what's going on here. You you have the application. None of what's proposed in here is true. None of it is before this board. None of this was before
conservation or any other board that has the authority to approve this matter. And if any of these things were to happen, my clients who are very good citizens will go to the appropriate boards and seek permission to do those things. But none of that is contemplated. None of that is planned. And I'm I'm just taking a moment, Mr.
Chairman, to to make the point that there are good people here expressing genuine concern about things that are simply not correct and are not going to happen. And I think Mr. Belzikian's email spoke very nicely to that as well and I'll let him speak for himself later on if he chooses to. Um with that, Mr.
Chairman, uh what I would say is um other than the site visit, um we have our representatives here. Mrs. Brmps wants would would like to make a little presentation. She has a little handout. They're multiple copies. I asked the staff if they could um make them available on the screen. They couldn't
do it, so I printed them out and we have them here for you. Um, and other than that, we're here to respond and, uh, we really don't have much to add to what we said before. Um, I do think Dr.
Venezia, I'm going to I >> Venezia, >> I'm sorry, sir. I I did it again. um may have some information based upon a conversation we had at the site visit may have some information on um goat scat and donkey scat for the board's consideration but I obviously leave that
to the to the board. Uh thank you Mr. Chairman. I'll sit down and uh ask Mrs. Brms to make her presentation unless the board has any questions of me or you want to hear me talk some more. I suspect the answer is no. Anyone? >> Okay, let's let's go.
>> Thank you. Hello. Can anybody hear me? Doesn't sound like Oh, you can. >> I think it's on. >> Yes. >> I'm feeling very boomerish right now. I apologize. Um, hi. Uh, it was very nice to receive
um, two of you at the farm and I really do hope um, it gave you a sense of what was already there. And I noticed uh you may not have a sense of who we really are and what we do. So for the
benefit of the people in the audience um I just sent some pictures of our farm. That's all they are. Pictures of our stables, pictures of our goats, pictures of the flowers that we grow. Um, and I did that because
I'd like to give to um my council's point everybody some comfort that we're living here. Um, we care about the same lakes and waterways and
roadways that everybody cares about. Um, and we very much welcome any questions or concerns people have tonight or anytime. Um, as many of you hopefully know, we
our family, my husband and I, and as we like to joke, our farm labor left when my kids head off to college, unfortunately, four years ago. Um, but the two of them are still very involved. Run a small farm registered with the
state of New York. They do county registrations all the way up to the state and we've been registered since 2008 with them. I myself come from multiple generations of farmers on both sides of my family. I have spent my life
absent my period of college and the 14 years that I practiced law living on a farm where my house was in the middle of it and the farm surrounded it and we were uh my husband and I, my father before him and his father and my mother and her father. I mean literally members
of the community community and very valued members of the community. So I'm trying to give people a sense that you don't come by that by chance. You you have to work to um establish
relationships with people and through practice. Um and that's what we've done. I believe like very firmly and I was raised to believe this that when you care for animals, you live with that
responsibility. You wake up to it. You look out your window at it. You walk the land every day. You know when an animal isn't quite right before anybody would notice. It's a small thing, but a farmer will tell you it's probably your most important job. You go out in the rain.
You go out in the cold. You go out in the middle of the night. You do that not because somebody tells you to or you have an order to do it. You do it because you care about them. Um, and I would say this the same is honestly true of these best management practices. I
didn't need to prepare them for the commission or for you. It's the way that we live our lives. So, it's not an artifice and it's not uh something that was difficult to attest to. It's just the way we live our lives and the way we
raise our family. For more than 10 years, we've operated Good Hope Farm at uh we're basically an hour north of New York City, right on the Connecticut, New York border. Um, we have taken enormous pride in our home, our land, our animals.
We've hosted animal husbandry course visits from a local community college. We've welcomed, again, not on a regular basis, once or twice a year, a preschool or a set of young 4 children that would like to understand a bit more about
farming. I was encouraged to do that about seven years ago because I had very strong relationship with the head of the small animal department at Cornell because she had helped us a lot in the development of our farm practices and she really
urged us to share the farm because she admired the way that we were running it. Just recently completely unsolicited our veterinarian which is a practice that is an entire it's only a farm practice. They see only small and large farms all
over New York, sort of from an hour and a half north of New York City, all the way through the edge of Massachusetts. And he wrote me in connection with a dough that had passed away that uh was a very sad, nothing to do with care, just age situation. And at the end of his
note when he described uh her passing, he said, "I just want to say how much I appreciate the level of care you provide your animals at Good Hope Farm. It is clear how attentive and dedicated everyone is to them." And that meant
more to me than a lot of things to a lot of people. I have thought a lot about that note in the past few weeks and I've reflected on the last year because while a veterinarian who
actually knows us who has come to my farm at 3 in the morning if we had a animal that wasn't well which is again very infrequent who does the annual vaccinations with us who is very involved with our farm knows our
farms and knows how we conduct our animal is telling me that our dedication and clear is clear. There's people circulating images of rats and waste and harmed animals suggesting that's who we are. And that happened over a year ago
and we decided not to engage in it. But at the last meeting, there were people actually attesting to my character and that's pretty upsetting. I have two children that cannot be at these meetings but watch them. And I'd like everybody to remember they're also going
to be visiting this community and wanting to feel welcome here. So, someone took the time to create those flyers and their falsehood and spread lies about us. They had the time to do that, but they didn't take the time, not once after a meeting, not once
as they acknowledged when we walked on the road and spoke to actually get into the detail of our care. I want to emphasize something that sometimes seems to get lost in all of this. As I mentioned in the beginning, this is our home. We will live there. We will wake up there. We will drink the
same water. We will breathe the same air. We will walk the same land. We'll look out the same windows every single morning at the farm. No one has a greater interest in keeping that property clean, healthy, beautiful, and responsibly managed than we do.
We believe in caring for the land. We believe there should be a not one place, many places in Yarmouth fart for a small, beautiful, responsibly managed farm. We're not asking you to take a chance on people who've never done this before. We're asking you to look at our
record. Look at the professionals who know us. Look at the care of the animals. Look at the detailed plans and commitments for best management practice we have put before the commission. Good Hope Farm will do what my family has been doing doing for very many
generations. We will care for the land. We will care for our animals and we'll be responsible stewards. So if you have any questions now or during the night, please I'm here. >> Thank you. >> What members questions?
>> Um are are you going to be breeding animals there? So yes, we breed um the last few years it's been three or four doese's and the the babies stay with them about 8 to 12 weeks and then they
go into homes preferably together ultra preferably with their mothers sometimes. Um so they're rehomed to responsible homes. The reason I'm asking is is obviously uh number of animals that would be present
on the property. That's why I'm asking. >> Okay. >> What about any milking of any animals? So I again um I hand milk and I sometimes machine have machine milked
with a little small tiny machine but it's for my family's consumption and uh it's literally not frequent and um no no commercial milking is intended at all.
>> Okay. There there is one statement in the regulation addressing that. >> Okay. Okay. So, we can I can look back >> to the extent that I don't I cannot hand milk anymore and make a cheese on occasion, it is not the end of the world.
>> I'm happy to discuss that. Okay. >> Yeah. Has distance guess where the milking takes place. Um I can look that up. We can I I will commit to the board that I won't do any milking at all unless it's agreed the
house and the winds are in line with it. And again, it would not be an everyday thing. It would The other thing that people don't appreciate necessarily is Nigerian dwarf goats are about 65 75 pounds. The amount of milk is a cup or
two that I'm producing. We're not talking about large amounts of waste or risk um at all. I think the uh regulations concern the um proximity of milking to a residence.
>> I have it here. Um page two. It looks like it's 202-2E. Stables, corral, and paddics shall be located not less than 50 ft from any room where milk is handled. >> Okay.
>> Okay. >> Perfect. Yeah, >> if we and and we'll we'll ensure we comply with that if and when we decide to do it. >> Anybody any questions? I see a finger up, not a hand. Okay.
Good evening, chairman, uh members of the board. Uh Dan Ojula. I'm a surveyor and civil engineer with Down Cape Engineering in Yarmouthport. And uh you had asked um at the last meeting for full-size plans. So the next morning, as promised, we ran over um full-size sets.
I guess they're been trying to reduce paperwork, but you know, in this case here, this is set up for a full-size sheet and so is is much better in a full-size format. So I saw some of you had it at the site visit, but um in relevant part, I think the most
important thing for you folks to look at is uh is note E on the plan and that proposed uh fence swale that goes around the barn area. the reason that you have setbacks. >> We could use more help making sure we're, you know, looking at the right
part of the map. Um, >> okay. >> So, note E is is highlighted here and here and it it shows and out in the field you'll see the pink flags running from the stone wall down across the field and over. And what that does is um
you know the whole question here and in in my opinion it sounds like most of the concern is uh howitz mill pond and potentially any pollution that would go to there and you know why the extraordinary setbacks of 250 ft to the barn and so forth. Well that's because you don't want water running you know
from the barn down into a shellfish habitat. So to that end, um, no E calls out a carefully constructed burm, which is there's a detail on how to build it here, and then a bigger cross-section, but you're talking about over 12 in high to the low point, and then sloping up
the hill, you'll have a large triangular cross-section to funnel all the water. So any water that's coming uh towards the mill pond will be intercepted by this and run downgradient at approximately 1% and increasing in slope across the drive and then be caught by the large swale which follows the
elevation 12 contour on the east side of the site. And that's very important because uh in the past there could have been a chance of some some effluent going down the hill and into towards the mill pond. This intercepts that water, shunts it off to the north and puts it
on the other side of a large hill from from the mill pond. There is no hydraulic connection from here to here unless you go, you know, you'd have to mount the swale, which won't even happen in a 25-year storm. But if it did through a freshwater wetland, a small saltwater wetland, and then a long
series of salt marsh, uh, and again, uh, that will not happen because of the drainage system with the swale and the filtration that we've set up. But uh that's a very important aspect of it because you know u obviously hellis mill pond there's a lot of water fowl and
seals and foxes and dog scat and everything else that creates that but uh you the last thing you want is additional going in there so this shunts it off and puts it so it's very very safe design. >> I need to interrupt for a second only that um
our stable regulations has a lot to do with storage of manure. Yes, >> these issues really are for conservation. They're crucial issues, but that's not really what our responsibility is here. >> Well, what I'm trying to do is increase
your comfort level with realizing that the >> bar everyone I don't want to be interrupting you. You and I have worked together for years. It's not been a problem. Yes. >> Okay. But I'm trying to keep it focused because we have a lot of people out there >> and I don't want to keep saying you need to stay on on topic. You need to shorten
it and so on. your your points are well taken. They always are. Uh but that's not what we're here tonight addressing. >> Your regulations you I I agree. And and then so the the other very important one is note B which calls out down on the
other side of this hill away from Mill Pond in a low spot. Uh there's a a concrete pad with a with a roof on it and a drain and that's the manure storage. So there's zero possibility of the hydraulic gradient leaping over a hill and going down into the mill pond.
So uh note B and note E are the most important ones in this plan and uh will help guarantee the safety of Helitz Mill Pond that um you know while there'll always be some feal collar form and you know other things in there from many many sources uh the farm won't be one of
them. So I'd just like to stress that you've got the full-size copy. Take your time look at the flags on the site. If you have any questions, ring our office. Uh I'll be away next week, but uh there's plenty of people that can help you out if needed. >> Anything that's
>> Yeah. And so um with respect to the manure storage, again, that your regulations call out for once a week removal. This is a covered um a covered um um uh cart that's taken away. It's a small like a little bit bigger than this
table trailer. You fill it up. There's a cap on it. It leaves the site once a week. There's no compost pile. No chance of odor. This is a this is a closed unit and there's no chance of precipitation getting in because uh the roof and uh if it did get in and leaked out, there's a
drain which picks it up and infiltrates it into the ground safely. So, state-of-the-art um collect it, keep it sealed, get it off the site. It'll be uh simply a non-issue. >> The only question I had was um it's saying proposed fence. I was a little confused why that term was used
proposed. >> Well, there was a fence um all around the perimeter, but the goat fencing is much smaller. So, that's like the portable uh farm fence that you would you would put to to contain animals. You know, it'll let rabbits and little things underneath, but it'll keep the
goats in. Am I missing something like proposed? >> No, I think I am. In other words, is this is this stationary? What's being proposed? Is this movable? So, >> um it's movable with effort, but um you know, it's it's it's basically it's a farm fence that's designed to be put in
place and stay there. Um if it had to be moved, it could be moved, but um you know, it's it's stable enough. The wind won't knock it over. It's uh I don't know. Is that a good enough answer? >> Once again, why is it proposed? It's going to happen. >> I think it's not that it's just what we're proposing to put in. It's not any
deeper than that. In other words, versus existing, it's the proposed. Proposed to you, proposed to the board, proposed to Kings Highway. We're not >> new. New >> the green is is all, you know, the the
the horses and the um and again, your regulations contemplate, you know, one acre or two two farm animals per acre. Those could be horses. We're talking about little tiny goats. those regulations are kind of a one-sizefits-all and we don't really fit in that category. But yet we do meet
that particular regulation, but no, the fencing was always along the edge of the clearing and it was this large rail that would keep in a a cow, but it would never hold a goat. Goats will climb on anything, cars, you know, you name it. So, it's important to have a a vertical slatted goat fence. So, that's what
we're proposing. And it'll go everywhere that everywhere that there's green that kind of outlines different little pastures where we can move them. And then we move the feeding station around. And they don't like rain, so we get a little run-in station there. They'll go in there if there's a a passing uh rain shower and then come out when the sun
comes out. >> And and that's proposed because you have to go before the old King's Highway >> and because we had to have it approved by the D and the commission. So >> it's in the Yeah, it >> proposed is is just means we intend to
do it and given permission, we will do it. Yeah, >> that's all it means. And if you're not given permission, >> um well then it would be not constructed. >> We were I mean we were given permission by the commission and the D. >> Okay.
>> And so all old kings will look at is what that fence looks like. >> Looks like Yes. Okay. >> The portions visible from a public way are subject to their jurisdiction. >> Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, I was just going to say I'm sorry just to clarify on that proposed fence. So um we had an
obligation to show mass D that there would be no alteration of any resource area. Resource areas here include the 100-year flood zone if you can imagine that. So the proposed fence is the location of the burm outside of all wetland resource areas including the
100-year flood elevation from coastal storms. So it was proposed in that location. It's proposed here as a delineation of the pastures as Dan said and as Natasha would say. And with regard to further approvals, the only other approval that it needs is from Old
King's Highway and we will go through that process and that as that is as to the appearance. That's it. >> Is that does that help, Mr. Chairman? I >> No. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I just had one other question on that
milk handling issue that you brought up. So this is relation to location requirements. uh the owner would be in compliance according to these instructions here if she milked that goat 50 feet away from
the stables. I think this inclusion here was for a commercial dairy when we were dealing with brucyosis and uh other bacterial diseases that carried in the milk but I don't think it refers to a personal collection of milk by the
owner. So >> yeah, that's case if you wanted a literal a literal interpretation, all she'd have to do is take the goat 50 feet from the barn and milk the goat and that would solve it. But I I really
don't think that this situation, the the uh intention of this insert was had anything to do with milking these goats for personal use. It's a good point you brought it up though.
Just as a, you know, as the way biology works, the moms don't produce milk unless they have a kid. And if they have a kid, the kid usually drinks the milk. >> Is that from an engineering point of view? >> I read a lot.
>> All right. We'll let that go. Anyway, >> okay. Anything else? We have someone been standing there very patiently. Just introduce yourself. >> Yeah. My name is Vincent Miles. My wife and I, she's sitting over there, own 48 mil Lane. So, there's one lot between
our house and the subject property. Um, I'm going to very strictly abide by your admonition at the beginning of this discussion and refer to a chapter. I'm sorry. >> What you're saying? I don't know. Maybe the mic's too close. I'm not sure. >> Okay. >> I don't know.
>> Is that better? >> Hello. Hello. Okay. Right. >> Um, so I'm going to abide very closely to the admonition you gave at the beginning of the meeting. I will quote a chapter but it's chapter 202 which is
the regulations for stables and the one factual thing which has not been clear to me as we've had all the discussions is the regulation states there will be a maximum of two animals per acre and uh if I do the math it sounds like
the density that's proposed will be significantly higher than that >> okay so >> so that's 202 to >> you're on 202-2A area requirements. >> Yeah. The minimum lot size shall be one acre. There will be a maximum of two
farm animals per acre. The definition of farm animals includes goats. It doesn't distinguish the size of those goats. So I was trying to figure out how it can be possible to uh meet that requirement with the number of animals which are being proposed. Yeah, if I may speak
because our lot size is over 16 acres. >> Yeah. >> Okay. 32 >> and that's the same I'm sure the Belgians will be speaking but it's the same reason I'm sure in 1988 that they applied for 32 animals
>> that they applied for >> a stable license of 32 animals. Their original license was 32 animals. So in other words, >> I understand what you're saying. I can just tell you the stack of copies of licenses the the most I could locate I
think were 16 animals just that's what I saw. You may have provided the information in that packet which had a lot of information for us. I don't remember many 1990 whatever it was that was the highest number of all the licenses that I guess you gave us.
>> Okay. I I think I only included two to four but we'll look at that. But regardless, I don't know if Bill wants to speak, it's lot size which we have. >> Is it not the area which is actually confined by all of the restrictions
associated with wetland and so on? >> Just show them. We'll send it in. >> Could you say that again? installed at least. >> Yeah, I I may have misunderstood something along the way, but I thought that there were some restrictions about how much of that 16 acres could be used because of the uh restrictions that
applied to wetland. And when you look at the area which the animals would be on within the corral as it's stated in this regulation, I thought it was not sufficient to meet the two animals per acre restriction. That's a good >> I could add >> um on March 28th, 1988, there was an
approval for 32 animals. >> Uh got it right here. Stable application March 28th, 1988 to the Belzikians. There were eight sheep,
two herfords, 12 chickens, four ducks, six turkeys. >> Yeah. Yeah. I I don't think we're dealing with poultry here. I don't think so. We can make that. >> They're animals. It says animals. >> I I freely I I acknowledge the fact I was unable to
download all the historical documents from the town website. It's very very hard to navigate your way to documents, but I just wanted to be sure that this was a factually correct interpretation. >> Yeah. No, I um that warrants some
interpretation from my point of view that there are houses here that have I'm sure in their backyard have 60 you know poultry. I mean I'm sure it exists. Um so the I didn't have that in my packet. I don't know if anyone else did. I don't
know where you located it but maybe >> I think it was in our packet. >> Yeah, it was that sheet I didn't have. That's all I've got is what I was given by the >> Okay. Yeah. Once again, it wasn't here for me. >> I might add chickens, ducks, and turkeys
manure is heck of a lot more nitrogenous load than goats. >> I I just for what it's worth, I operate under the same restrictions at home. And you have your lot size and on the basis of that lot size, you have a number of
animals. That's how it works. I don't know if Bill has anything to add. >> Do Mr. Chairman through you, Mr. Chair. >> May I ask is that the lot size for the entire property or is that the amount of the lot which is free of uh restrictions
associated with nearby wetland? >> That's um a a good point. If you know if someone had property it's 15 16 acres and 15 of them are you know wetlands yeah then there's something to be said about that. I don't know what usable
acreage is here. Mr. Chairman reason I was also asking about the fence that was proposed just you know what is the acreage for the for the animals it's >> about on the application is 1.44 can I Mr. Chairman >> say that again I didn't understand >> yeah about an acre and a half Mr.
Chairman >> an acre and a half of usable land for the animals >> I have a direct answer to your question >> oh great >> that by the way was the number I saw 1.44 44 in the application. >> There is an answer to your question and it's in your regulation. The regulation says, and I'm reading directly, it's
202A, the same section the gentleman cited to said the minimum lot size shall be one acre. There will be a maximum of two farm animals per acre. So the regulation speaks to lot size, not
upland or wetland, not usable or any such definition. It speaks to lot size. And the point of Mr. Ojula's reference and the and the gentleman's reference so I don't say your name improperly again the gentleman's reference to the March
28 1988 approval of this board which is in the packet it's part of the application is that the Belzikians applied for a mix of 32 animals and I concur with my client's observation that is undoubtedly related to the lot size
limitation of two animals per acre with a lot size of 16 acres equals 32 animals. And two, the issue of well those weren't uh goats, those were poultry. Your definition of farm animals
actually doesn't include um uh poultry. But as the gentleman observed, it does include sheep, goats, ponies, horses, bovine animals, mules, donkeys, and llamas. Llamas of any age or no alpacas, you got to fix that. But but um the
point is is that the regulation deals with the lot size, not the size of quote unquote usable acreage. There are a lot of zoning regulations that do. This one does not. >> We have a responsibility of the quality of life for the animals. Okay. So if
there are 15 acres that are underwater, that's relevant. That's all. So there's some interpretation needs to be taken. I'm not sure that really would apply here, but if you have a half acre of usable land, I you certainly would have a problem for how the animals were
treated. I don't think that's >> that's necessarily relevant to this particular property. >> No. And and in general, the these lot sizes were set up theoretically for the because the animals were eating off the land, right?
And they wanted to make sure they had nutrition. My animals here will live and my animals at home live exquisitly happily. I can promise you. And the animals here will live on more acreage, rotating acreage than they have at home. And they'll be
fed second cut hay. I it it's there is no risk to the happiness or the lifestyle of my animals. I I've had several people, it's a funny thing to say, but say, "I wish I were an animal on the Bronx farm." So, um,
>> okay. Thank you. >> I I may have misread it, but when I went on the website, just the summary of the application, I thought it said it was 1.44 acres, which was the number just cited. So, definitely this number of animals would not be appropriate for
1.44 acres as cited in the application. >> So, to be if I could through the chair, >> yeah, Dan Oel. Um, so that that particular thing didn't ask for the land area, it asked for the corral area. So, uh, they asked me to go around the green
areas. And as you heard testimony at the last meeting, it's a very similar size, uh, pasture to where she has more goats now, and it works absolutely beautifully. This is a it's a irrigated pasture. It's healthy. They're not going to trample it like big horses or or cows
would. They have these little hooves, and uh, it'll remain a plush and beautiful place. uh is our strong belief uh with this number of animals. It's entirely appropriate and she's uh going to have a vacuum cleaner that cleans up the scat and uh be you know before every
rainstorm. Uh there's a number of things that go above and beyond and and this will be immaculately run. So no concerns on on this size acreage. I I would also sort of like to point out that again in terms of remate between
conservation and you guys best management practices is in place to make sure that animals are healthy in addition to the environment. Right? So that's why we do all of these things. That's why I clean up the area around it. That's it's it's in place to give
them a really great and healthy life. And I don't think anybody would find it reasonable to suggest that each goat or two goats needs an acre of land. That is they'd be lonely. First of all, they're hurt
animals. They'd be miserable if you did that. It's just and maybe Mr. Kunis can speak to it, but it doesn't it's not the way a farm works. You know, they're hurt animals and they stay together in their pasture and you have that acorage. So, you rotate the pasture for the health of the pasture and the health of the animals.
Thank you. >> Dan Oil again through the chair. >> Um, and we're not counting there's they do own a couple of parcels on Helitz Mill Pond, the private salt marsh. We're not including that acreage in the 161. It's just the continuous portion uh north of Mil Lane.
>> Thank you. >> So, I know I'm being pigheaded about this, Bren, just working from the regulation here. So for example the word corral was just you used and if you look at uh 202D it says that uh stables corral
just to say that shall be located and carry on towards the end of the sea and not less than 250 ft from the high water mark of any source of shell fishing and as we know there is a source of shell fishing nearby. I don't know what the distance is from that but that would
define the area that would that the corral could not be covering. And then there's the other provision in section F. The corral shall be not be less than 100 ft from wetlands. So if you were to draw on the map on the plan uh the area
which is uh not more less than not less than 100 ft from wetlands and the area which is no closer to shell fishing than 250 ft. It would seem to me that would be the area available for the corral and
that would seem to me the appropriate area to consider for the density of the animals. One of the things to keep in mind is regulations are from 2007. >> So some of there are variances or not at
the time depending upon what the regulations said back then but these be my opinion they grandfathered in. >> The variances are what's that >> the variances are? Yes. >> Yeah. >> They are to the property. >> Um right or wrong that previous
>> what was the date of the previous approval? It was before or after the these were approved. It says on the website these regulations were accurate as of 2007. >> Variances aren't listed in the regulations. They're they're decided
upon case by case. >> Right. That >> does that make sense to you? Because that's that's important. This board spends a lot of time. I don't know the historical sequence of things. I just wanted to make sure that the regulations were were being interpreted appropriately in this application.
>> Right. That can be confusing, sir. Just because >> what's happened in a history took took place long before these regulations. That's all that a board of health made that decision and that's why certain
licenses took place back then. Maybe they would not. Now based upon the regulations I don't know if they needed variances or not but it was granted those licenses were granted. >> It would just be nice to be sure that the history is as you've described
that's all. >> Okay. Thank you for coming up. Mike is available once again. Let's have it with new material not something we've heard before. Okay. >> Some of this you may have heard before because I've been before you before. >> I know, but I'm saying that that's not
what we're here for. It's not fair to the people here or this board. >> No, no, no, no, no. I haven't spoken before. Excuse me. My name is Lisa True Grady. I live at 415 Route 6A in Yarmouthport.
And I've been sitting in the back of the room observing the conservation committee process and now the board of health application for 88 Mil Lane. People give impact statements because they need to feel seen and have their concerns heard. It's not easy to stand
up at this podium against a front line of attorneys, including the owners and an engineer, treating these hearings as if it was a trial to discredit the legitimate concerns of neighbors. Many have lived in this area for decades. It's not been a process of building trust or relationships. So, thank you
for your opening comments. When asked what the owner's plans are for the property, which I understand to be a commercial farming operation, they're moving from New York to Yarmouthport. I've heard the phrase for now, which this former corporate girl knows to mean more to come later. They're just not
disclosing the full extent of it, which could be greater than what's being described at this point, but here we are. They talk about a pristine time capsule, which it has been, especially over the past 13 years after the Bellazakians sold it, from which point there were no
animals on the property. And that's about to change. I hear a defense to operate their business plan based on permits once granted to the Bellazakians farm. According to the board of health records, the last permits that I could find were issued in 2008, expiring in
2009. There was one poultry license that allowed 25 chickens and seasonally 25 turkeys and a second permit for the stabling of five miniature horses, one cow, which was seasonal, and one donkey.
That's seven animals. And that's a huge difference from the 30 miniature goats and two miniature donkeys on this application. Because I'm not a direct debut, you might think that I have no skin in the game. But that pond, that designated scenic road, that place of solace that
residents and tourists have been enjoying for years was because somebody cared to preserve it, and it belongs to all of us. I'm also here to support the very real concerns of my neighbors of the corelling of 30 plus animals on what the DP has ruled and defined as 1.44
acres of allowable space. and that's what's on the application. You'll remember that in 2022, this board of health denied a stable permit for two horses on one and a half acres at 414 Route 6A, which is across the street from our place. And I want you to
picture that corral now and try to imagine it with 30 miniature. >> Interrupt you right there. That application was never completed. >> Application, >> okay, on 6A >> that >> Okay, so >> I've got a little bit of history here that goes into other stuff. This board did not vote on that. That application
was never completed and was so >> actually it had to be taken to court. >> If I remember correctly, it was taken to court to get resolved. >> But I have something besides that that I would like for you to imagine because I know you all know that space and you know what we went through. Um, you'll
remember that it was only almost a year and a half of a butter showing up to hearings and countless complaints to the board of health administrator about the stench of the urine in that small area and the poor practices affected our quality of life. We all know about nice
neighbors, experienced animal owners with good intentions that dry up the minute they leave the meeting table. We know about people stating their right to farm, which is subject to approval of all of the town regulations. We know that manure management becomes inconvenient sometimes in how animal
urine drenched soils fill the air. So much so that we couldn't sit outside and enjoy our own property during the pandemic. You can confine animals to an allowable space but the stench does not recognize buffers or boundaries and our matter and closing to address your point. I said
our matter was not resolved until the town took it to court. Thank you for your patience. I can't begin to tell you the stress that it created, but I recognize the same stress from our neighbors around Milane. What the DP has allowed has defined as
allowable space of 1.44 acres is nowhere near large enough to corral this many animals. Under the current town stable bylaw, the number of animals to be allowed is totally at the discretion of the board of health. And I ask that your decision speaks to the welfare of the animals as well as the health of the
people and the environmental resources of the surrounding area. And I ask that you deny this application for this property. Thank you for your time. >> Okay. Thank you for coming up. >> Hi. Uh my name is Ted Noise. I'm not a direct abuter, but I live on Kevin Lane
and I grew up on a farm and I I have nothing against animals. uh I'm just concerned about putting a commercial venture which I know isn't your uh your purview but one of one thing I'd like to say is the stable permit is not
transferable according to your documents your application so it says right here the uh stable permit is not permit not transferable and new applicant must submit a written request addressing how variances will be addressed and what
steps will be taken for compliance of the intent of the regulations. The board will review each request on a case-by case basis, which I guess is what we're doing now. But my point is the variance I don't believe transfers to the new owners. So it's kind of irrelevant what happened in 1981,
I think. And the other thing the other uh concern I had was if a commercial venture goes into this entity in addition to to to things outside of this board such as traffic and noise and um
things like that we have runoff from into the into the house pond. Is there any uh compliance issue that the board here will require to for like an annual test or
to see if water to see what what levels of toxins go into howitz pond for example? Also concerned about additional traffic. If there's additional traffic, there'll be additional dirt, salt, sand. None of that's used down there because it's an aquifer. So what will happen with that? Is there any way to test
that? And are the applicants, you know, will they will they test for that stuff, >> Barry? >> That's I think that's what the Department of Fishery tests for. Um that's what they do. They test for all that stuff. Like
uh the director said earlier, they they're have to test a minimum of five times. They test multiple times more than that a year at that pond. So >> that will continue. >> And that will continue. So >> you you made reference about variances.
Um are you familiar with it? Anyone? Because I didn't know where that was uh you were quoting from, but I certainly would like to see if you get a copy to the uh health director. >> It's here. It's here where it talks >> of the variances >> where it talks the license is not transferable.
>> Mr. Chairman, is section 202. >> Yeah, you need to apply every year for it. >> How variances will be addressed? >> Sir, no one's going to be able to hear you, so you have to go to the mic. Okay. Um, yeah. No, you need to apply every year regardless of, you know, who's living
there and wants to have a >> That's what they've done. They they have done that. They they have >> somebody said earlier the varian has already passed. I believe >> No, the variances are were in the past and they go with the land. The variances convey with the land.
>> Does it just say that the >> That's not part of our regulation. That's part of >> Right. That's where I was I was confused with what you said. >> Stable application is what I'm looking at that I that's from your website
addressing variances and regulations. >> It's number two uh >> 202-4. >> Right. License required in fee. >> We understand what you're referring to.
>> Okay. So, what what do I need to say else? What else? >> What are you asking? >> No. Is so the variance that was established for the Bzikians automatically passes with the property. Is that what you're saying? >> Yes. >> Like a septic variance does. Yes.
>> Okay. So even though there's there's a dramatically different animal there than the wild the the birds and things >> that doesn't get reassessed. >> We'll certainly consider that. >> Okay. And the other the other question is who which board does uh talk about
like uh running a business in a residential neighborhood? What what is the board? >> Zoning. >> Zoning. Okay. >> Yeah. All right. >> Thank you. or if there was concern someone mentioned about traffic, that would certainly go to the police department if
there was a a problem. And the term commercials come up a couple of times. Is this something you can address? Is this a considered a commercial farm? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you'll be selling product.
>> Uh I grow flowers, I grow vegetables. Yes. >> Anything else? >> No. >> Okay. So, it's it's all grown there. I'm just making the public record. Okay. >> I'm sorry. I apologize. And baby goats. >> The baby goats. Yeah.
>> Hi, Jean Young. >> Welcome. >> Yarmouthport. I just have one uh quick remark. Um I'm sorry I don't know your name, but in 1988, the Lazians own all of the land on uh both sides of uh Mil
Lane. They owned the property that these people intend to farm and they owned the property on the other side. So any applications that they made for animals back in 1988 would have gone to a much larger piece of property than any
application today. It's not the same property. It's like asking if you could put it on my property. So, an application in 1988 that was approved for stables and animals would not apply
today because the farm is not the same farm and Greg knows that. >> 16 acres. >> Excuse me. Excuse me. >> Sure. Sure. Hold. Okay. >> And I remember you stop.
>> Okay. This is recorded meeting and everyone deserves to be able to hear what everyone's saying. Okay. So, sir, if you'd like to come up, absolutely. But that conversation, the rest of us can't hear and the people at home listening cannot. That's all. Feel free
to come up any any time. I at one point I thought there was the animals had to be brought over to the other side if I'm not mistaken. Um >> they were they were in >> Mason maybe who was the assistant director back then. I think at one point
the animals had to be moved >> over from to the north side if I'm not mistaken. Not >> well. >> You're shaking sir. You're shaking your hand. You want to come up and tell us educate us. This is what we're here for. >> Okay. So just I'm going to sit down and
I'm not going to talk again but that's the way it was set up. The barn was very close to Water Street. Yes. Not Mil Water Street. And there the door was very close to the gate. They would open the barn door, >> walk the few feet to the gate, open the
gate, cross uh Water Street, open the gate on the other side, and the animal, usually the cow, would be led into the grazing pasture on the other side. It's that other side that they sold off. So when you're applying today, you're not
talking about the same piece of farmland. You're talking about an entirely different piece of property. >> Everything on the north side of Water Street is what um the current owners uh are going to be farming. >> That was my understanding as well.
>> Thank you. >> Okay, >> that was my only point. To go back to 88 just can't apply even if the license was transferable because the farm is not the same farm. Thank you. Sorry if we can just have Yeah, >> Mr. Chairman, do you mind? >> Yeah, sure. >> I'm sorry. Just just in brief response,
we we've provided you with the entire 1988 application and that included an engineered plan showing the location of the pastures. It's in your it's in the your packet and in the application. It's publicly available and and you'll see if you look at that and compare it what's
before you now. The 1988 application is for the identical pastures that are before the board. Now, now there did appear, and Mr. Belzikin can probably speak to this better than I can, but from the records, it did appear that there was some land across the street where cows were grazed. And I think the
board required an additional application for that pasture, which the board reviewed and granted in conjunction with the 1988 application two years later. That's why you have an 88 and a 1990 application. But the record is clear that not only was everything that we're
applying for tonight, my clients are applying for tonight approved back in 1988, but then there was additional land across the street that was also approved by the board. And my understanding is that that property is now a house lot and it's no longer farmed. >> Okay. Thank you. And if I could just state Danel for the record, if you look
in your packet on page four of the board of health meeting minutes of March 7th, 1988, it clearly is just the north side and it says the total area being fenced is 1.98 acres. So just under two acres. That's very similar to what we have proposed now except we tucked it in to meet the flood zone. If you look on page
six of the board of health minutes of August 20th, 1990, that's when attorney Larry Murphy representing the Bill Zakans came before the board for request for the stable request for end to water street. So that's when they wanted on where I had testified before Emilyn
Gra's property is now that was all cleared and uh attorney Jerry Garnick spoke in favor and his wife uh of that and that for many years had horses over there. So, two separate permits were on the 1988 one where the barn was already there. You can see the plan. All the
variants were granted. They run with the land. And um every other stable permit, they didn't come back and ask for the variances again. You're just renewing your stable permit. You don't have to go back and and re relitigate the barn and the fencing. So, I think everything is in order in my opinion. >> You're referencing the letter. It was
from Murphy and Murphy the law firm. >> Is that the August 2nd, 1990? >> It is in there. >> No. Is that is that what you're referencing? >> Larry um no just the minutes of the board of health meeting very very great specivity on them and um on that 1990
meeting uh the page number I believe it was six uh the bottom is where uh the minutes start on that. So that's a different lot. It's they called Water Street. It's south of this Locust. Totally different animal. >> It's interesting only because you
brought it up. I a letter was provided um perhaps by the owner, I'm not sure. And this was from Murphy and Murphy. This went to the health director August 2nd, 1990, stating it is intended that the property will be used for the keeping and grazing
of not more than six beef cattle. It is intended that the number of animals will not be exceeded without further approval from the board of health. So that uh >> that's for the water. >> Clarification would be helpful on that. Uh it it's for the Water Street property and they also required if you read on
that those same animals were housed back on the other side of the street. So they were allowed to graze on the Water Street property and they were housed as she said they crossed the road in the barn. >> Okay. >> Everything starts in the packet which says 1990 stable application and
variance documents. And so there you're right. Um everything is there. It it calls for six white-faced heards, two goats, 16 laying hens, 18 turkeys, and eight sheep. And um it goes on from there, but the minutes clearly show that that what what they were there for on
that was the southern piece. >> Okay. Thank you. Yes. >> Good evening. My name is Mary Chakowski. I live at 54 Thatcher Shore Road in Yarmouthport. First of I want to thank the board for your time. This is the first time that I've been at a meeting.
Uh, and also, uh, I did watch it on Zoom previously, um, but my first time speaking here, Natasha, I want to welcome you to the community. Thank you for being here. Um, I think there's been a lot of misinformation. I think there's been some confusion. I think for me here
tonight, I'm trying to learn and understand um, not only the regulations, but also um, something that was brought to my attention through a neighbor, and I just want some clarification. and it has to do with this farm being used as a
commercial business. And I think Natasha just recently stated that it um will be for flowers and vegetables and goats. Um a neighbor brought me to the attention of and I don't know if this is true or
not. Um, Natasha's the owner's Pinterest board. And on the board of that, it has blueprint plans for a milking facility, for a goat milking facility, as well as
a cheese plant. And I have copies of supposedly this Pinterest board with documentation of the plants. And the description reads go. >> Hey, sorry. Can I should I just mention
this? I'm not even aware of that board. And if I made it, it was when we were considering a crearyy in New York, which we didn't go forward with. And I would honestly respect expect people to respect my privacy. But I can say in front of this board, it is not
contemporaneous. I have not looked at that thing probably in a decade. And I don't particularly want read into the record. I thought those boards were private. I will be addressing all of my boards are private, but there's nothing
to do with any of this in those boards. So, creative sleuththing. Unfortunately, it has zero to do with this application >> and and I'm just looking for clarification. So, what I'm hearing is there are no plans for >> that is correct. As we've said, >> for a plant. Okay.
>> Correct. >> That's all I wanted to know. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you for coming up. Good evening. My name is Paul Fitzgerald. I live on Kevin Lane right at the at the edge of the bridge in Kquid. and I spoke at the last meeting
regarding my concerns. If you do approve the request for a stable permit for 32 goats and possible offspring located near a critical agricultural and recreational resource in a residential
area, the stable is too close to the resource and the applicants have not applied for the required variance necessary for the stable. I am I'm also concerned about the runoff of feces and bacteria into the pond. My
concerns extend to the safety for swimming, commercial shellfishing, and fishing in the mill pond. And the estuary that fills and empties the pond. I'm concerned about the number of pests and rodents the farm will attract. I am
concerned that there will be an issue in traffic which may endanger the many who live, recreate, walk their dogs to the Kevin Lane Bridge. I am concerned about the constant noise goats make. I'm concerned about the uh
finally I'm concerned that the applicants have made no offer or proposal to monitor the pond and estuary from contamination from feal bacteria or that they would be responsible and
respond to any issues should they occur. Thank you. Okay, >> thank you for coming in. My name is Rick Banako. I live on Vesper Lane. We've lived there 32 years. We
20 years as a resident in the summer and the last 12, 13 years full-time. Prior to moving um to uh Yarmouth Port, I was a full-time resident in a town
called Upton in central Massachusetts between uh Framingham and uh Worcester. Uh we moved there in 1984. Upton was all farms basically. There were some people, two
3,000 people at the most. We had one traffic light. We had two policemen. A lot of farms. I got onto the board of health as well as other boards in the in the in the town. Um I was on the board of health 12 years.
I had dozens and dozens of situations that involved farming issues. Obviously, we had wetlands, we had ponds, we had rivers, we had to contend with a lot of
situations. Um, we had a lot of horses, a lot of cows, lots of goats. Anyway, I am so in favor of having this farm at
that spot. I've walked past it. My family, my sons climbed on the Billzikian wall even though the signs told him not to. I bought chickens from Dorine. She doesn't not chickens, eggs. She doesn't remember me because I had a lot of hair.
It was a beautiful and still is a beautiful place. I have every confidence in you, the board of health, which of all the boards I ever served on was the
most black and white board in town. Any attorney, any real estate person, any restaurant owner knows the authority and the ability of a good board of health. whatever you decide
can easily be fixed, mitigated, um, and done immediately if whatever you decide is not enacted. So any concerns that the public has about something
happening and not being taken care of, they shouldn't they shouldn't worry about it because all you need to do is your agent goes out, identifies whatever issue it is, and a cease and desist can happen and
the problem can be mitigated at once. I can give an example, many examples of what happened on my board where in one instance we had a pond where the town swam Kowana's pond, Kowana's beach rather. Um
there was a horse farm that was above it. The manure ran down, went into the pond. The algae bloom exploded. People were getting all kinds of stuff. One day we issued a cease and desist. We
took away all the manure. We forced them to do it and the problem was mitigated. Um and then of course we we addressed the issue in the future and and and eliminated the problem full-time. Anyway,
I I I very much would love to see the farm. I you know not not just the farm but think about what can happen to that piece of property if it doesn't become a farm.
Think about you know other developments. Everybody says I ran into two people last night walking and talked to them about the meeting tonight and they had concerns about the traffic and I said well you know yeah it it
might have some traffic. No question there's there's going to be some cars, but have you gone down to Wararf Beach recently? Have you seen the 20 to 30% increase in traffic in the last 2, three years because they've closed the beaches
are all filled up or or too expensive to go to. So, people go down to Warp Beach. Have you seen the increase of of of all kinds of things going on and issues? People talked about contamination to to
the ponds. Well, I researched that here and for instance, motorboats being mored in the inlet near the gentleman's home that that spoke earlier have more chance of contamination
on shellfish and the and the inlet than goats could ever. dolphins going into an inlet in one day. Two dolphins, look it up. I'm sure all of you who have AI,
you can you can check my numbers. Two dolphins can do more damage in one day than 20 goats could do in a year. the way urine and feces are handled. I heard people testifying about feces in
the past. No question feces could be a problem. But what do we do? What is the leading contaminant of our waterways? It's nitrogen. What is nitrogen? Nitrogen is urine. what I
learned at seminars on the board of health and I went to no less than 20 40 seminars in the 12 years I was on. We pump the urine into the ground above the aquifer and what happens? It leeches
into the aquifer. The number one contribute to to pollution is urine. Number two um fertilizer. And then it goes on. But no question if if if you want to look at other
contaminants that are way above the possibility of animals peeing on the surface where the surface the sunlight eliminates a lot of the toxins. Similar to what happens to a to to our urine and
feces at a sewer plant when they pump it up and blow it into the air and it eliminates the toxins. And then they sometimes put other obviously ash and other things into it. But anyway, I can go on and on and on and on. I don't want
to. These are nice people. And the last thing I will say, these are nice people. I've I've talked to them. They they have every good intent. Hopefully, you guys are a good judge of character. And
that's part of your charge is basically to to make determinations on individual basis. I encourage you to give them a positive review. Thank you. >> Thank you for coming in.
>> Good evening. Thank you for your time. Really appreciate it. Um I know it's a thankless task. >> Your your name? >> I'm Joshua Stain. I live at uh 128 Water Street, which is directly across the street from 88 Mill Lane. >> Welcome.
>> Uh thank you. Um like to make a few comments. Um if I might. Um the board has I think everything it needs here to deny this permit request. Um the application I think is procedurally deficient. I mean the stables regulation expressly prohibits as people have
pointed out hoofed stable animals within 250 ft of a shell fishing source which it is and more than two two hoofed animals per acre which it's 1.44 acres. I want to highlight on that rather than just repeat that that you know beyond
the lawyering one needs to sort of take a common sense approach to the regulation and ask why is there a two animal per acre requirement there? It's about animal density. So if somebody owns 50 acres and wants to put a 100
animals on one of those acres, there's a question of animal density. It's not just, well, the regulation seems to be, you know, a little bit vague, so we're just going to take advantage of that. As you noted, Mr. Chair, uh it's a question of public health really, not really just
uh compliance with flat blackletter language that's vague. Um I think that um the emphasis here should be this is a commercial breeding operation. Both those words are important. It is commercial. That's very different than the Bellazakian's use. It's also a
breeding operation which means that 32 is the starting point or 30 goats is the starting point, not the ending point. We've already heard there will be more kids on the property. We heard last hearing that there were 50 goats on their current farm and they're
downsizing, but this is a breeding operation. Uh I want to point out that really the the only path forward here given the plain language of the regulation is a variance. And I didn't see anywhere in the applicant's 59page
application that they filed that they even requested a variance. And their argument that prior variances transfer with the property is incorrect because the stable regulations expressly state that they are not transferable. They require each applicant to apply. So it's
a little more understandable that the Belellisakians got renewed because they were the same applicant, not a different applicant. And they require the board to consider each request case by case. This is a new case. permits issued 20 to 40
years ago under different regulations and for today's understanding of the environmental and public health risks are just not controlling. Also, zoning variances are very different from use permit variances. Just as a matter, even if you look in basic Massachusetts law,
there is a completely different statute governing zoning variances and it explicitly says it doesn't apply to board of health variances. There's a separate section for board of health variances and that is referred to if you look in the your regulation where it says look at the state sanitary
regulations. Uh that is where you would find that particular provision if you look there. Um so let me say first you know this is actually pretty straightforward. The regulations prohibit the pro the proposed use and no required variance has been requested. So
the permit should be denied. Now, um, you know, if the applicants later do choose to seek a variance, the result should be the same. And I'd like to talk about that a little bit if I could. Um, their claim that it's a stable building or an old zoning variance authorizes this use is incorrect. Again, a
construction permit or a variance to have the stable building be closer than 50 ft to the road is not a permit to keep hoofed animals. Those are completely separate. Animal uh use is governed by the stable regulations and
those require that any variance satisfy and I just want to this is worth writing down 105 CMR400.800 that regulation which is about variances for boards of health says the board can grant a variance only if enforcing the regulation would create manifest
injustice and it puts the burden entirely on the applicants. They cannot bear that burden and I want to tell you why. There are two key criteria. One is that there is no substantial hardship here. The regulation does not provide any um any reasonable use of this
approximately $8 million waterfront property. Um the previous owners enjoyed it for more than 15 years without operating a farm uh or close to that and the current owners can still grow flowers or pursue countless other lawful
uses. That's not a substantial hardship. nor is the ability to operate this particular commercial goat uh goat breeding business or the loss of the anticipated profits or the sunk costs or whatever somebody might say on the business front enough to establish
hardship. If they want to operate the business, they can do it at a more suitable location away from the fragile waterways and intense public recreation. Nor can they show the another key criteria which is no detriment to the public good. You've heard a lot about
that this evening, but this proposal would generate more than eight tons of manure each year before accounting for the offspring or the bedding waste. It would create risks of fecal caulifform bacteria, nitrogen, and other pollutants reaching Mil Pond. The site has
documented culverts that free flow into Mil Pond. It has wetlands. It has hydraologically connection hydraological connections underwater street. Uh, it also creates increased risks from rodents, flies, mosquitoes, and associated disease concerns. As others
have noted, it threatens the town's substantial investment and years in restoring Mil Pond for shell fishing. If you go back to the 2011 Yarmouth annual report, you will find indication of all the effort and time and money that the
town spent to try to reopen that uh shellfishing source for after it was closed for 30 years. And the manure management plan, what if you can call it that, contains no sightsp specific analysis or enforceable measures to prevent pollution during ordinary
operations or storm events, despite we all know that there are floodprone conditions uh and Massachusetts agricultural guidance makes clear that the three-sided shed is not the watertight fully contained shed that is recommended by best practices.
I also want to note that despite claiming that um that they had you know sort of years of experience with farming uh at the conservation commission they did not produce any substantive detailed best management practices. They produced
a single page that had a list of generic practices most of which said in and of themselves if you went to them do not use this in and of itself. You must tailor it to your site. Um, finally, the applicants have relied on
several arguments uh that simply do not change this analysis that I just proposed. The right to farm statute protects existing farms. It does not give a new commercial farm priority over existing neighborhoods. Mass DP's policy
91-1 decision, which Mr. Henry talked about at the last hearing, was only a procedural wetlands decision. It did not determine, even though it was claimed to be perfect, it did not determine that the manure management plan is adequate, that the stables regulations are
satisfied or that shellfishing waters will be protected. Their own notice of intent described this as a new agricultural project and the conservation commission rejected the claim that the farm farming had continuously existed on the property. So
this is a again a new applicant with a new project. Prior um shellfishing setbacks variants you'll find one of them was for 190 ft and that was from the 250. That's still
bare compared to what they're now asking which is much closer if you look at it. Also that variance was granted I'll note when Mil pond had been closed and it was still closed for shell fishing. So there was a different sort of weighing of considerations by the board of health at
that time because they knew that that shellfishing source had been closed for a long time. The BMS and swailes that have been discussed are not a cure all for this. They will not ensure no runoff which the division of marine fisheries has expressly required. And that is
especially true given what we all know are kind of microclimate weather conditions on Yarmouth's north side where it you know when you look up the weather it doesn't always match what you're looking at out your window. And um if you you know review the past
permits as I think this was noted by the board you'll see that the hoofed animals um the number of hoofed animals were far fewer than 32 as the applicant claims and they were not 32 hoofed animals. The applicants simply have not shown manifest injustice. They have not
carried either of these conditions for a variance substantial hardship uh or um no detriment to the public good. and they have not met their burden. And so we ask you to deny this permit. I also just want to put into the record one
more uh piece here. You know, there's been a lot of talk about, you know, sort of being uh welcoming uh to folks and I want to welcome them and make them feel uh very welcome in the neighborhood. However, I do want to point out that there is some color and since Mr.
Henchie offered some color early on. I'd like to provide some additional color. And that is, you know, last fall the applicant threatened to report our lawyer in our D appeal to the bar, the professional bar. >> I think we were off subject here with
that. As I said, you're in town hall. You're addressing four volunteers on the board of health. Okay. >> Completely understood. I just want to make sure that there's an understanding of sort of what's going on behind the scenes is not all >> not something the board of health is
going to >> it's important because the board the reason I mention it is it's important that the board of health understand who they're going to be relying on to manage this property and that's what's important here is representations about how great somebody is are not what's
before you and I agree with that and so I just want to highlight that there are things all around atmospherics that change how that might affect things. But fundamentally when you look down at this matter, you will see that they have not asked for a variance and even if that
the variances don't carry with the land under the law and the regulation says that explicitly that the reg the variances differ in terms of variances that do carry with the land versus use car that that don't. And finally, that
they haven't satisfied the conditions for a variance even if they were to apply for one. Thank you. >> Sorry, could I just I'm gonna let Bill my nice attorney respond, but I I would just like to say based on my earlier discussion once again, Mr. Stain is in
front of the board and in front of people creating a sense that we are not good people, which I think is childish as best. Uh, second of all, second of all, I would like to say every single thing
he brought up, he had experts bring up in front of the Conservation Commission and in front of the Department of Environmental Protection. And, you know, I think we need to be fair to everybody in the room. If we're going to ask them not to repeat themselves, he should not be permitted to do so
either. I'll let him go over. >> Okay. >> Mr. I'd like to submit a letter if I could. Should I do that to you or to Barry? >> Mr. Chairman, I >> just I want to just respond to a couple of points that are sort of gerine to
this discussion. Um, you know, Mr. Stain is a lawyer. Um, he doesn't tell people that when he stands up there and speaks, but last time he told you that I had sued Mr. Gable, that was false. He just told you that I threatened to report another attorney who unfortunately the
man I'm going to interrupt you. I mean, there too many I mean, this can't this Okay, this is not what we're doing here. And I I can tell you some of the things that you stated may not be true. Okay, that's why this board is is taking a long time and will continue until we
make the right decision. So, there's been a lot of information. Someone's not giving us the right information. It's going back and forth and we have to accept that as a board to try to figure that out. We treat all our applicants equally.
If it's someone who owns a eighth of an acre and needs a septic system because it's failing and they have a large driveway over, what are we going to do? We're treating that person the same as the owners of a property that we're describing tonight. >> I appreciate they were very careful to
treat everyone equally and to spend the time on all such matters. The gentleman just told the board an untruth statement about me and as a point of personal privilege I must respond. What he said about me threatening to report another
attorney to the bar is factually false. Now to the to the issues that he raised relative to the application he cited 105 uh excuse me he cited um 105 CMR 400.800 that is the variance
provision. and I'm sure the board is very familiar with it. That is the variance provision under title five of the state sanitary code. And that is the governing provision that you address whenever you're addressing variances, setbacks to wetlands, setbacks to property lines, variances to
groundwater, adjusted groundwater, and so forth. I know you're all very familiar with that, but that is not the standard here. And all of the standards that he cited are completely irrelevant to the matter under consideration here, which is a new stable permit for a
property that has a variance going back, as we've all discussed. Um, he related to you chapter 48 section 10. I'm sorry, I am a lawyer. That's the that's the section of the state law that deals with variances from zoning. We're not applying for any variances from zoning
and none of that has anything to do with this application here. There was some specific statements about what was presented to the conservation commission regarding BMPPS and so forth and again without relitigating the conservation issues. The conservation commission approved the order of conditions and it
was not appealed. There was an appeal taken to D under the state law by Mr. Stain and some of his other neighbors and I I have no idea what he's talking about with regard to D policy 91-1. Uh that policy deals with amendments of plans while on appeal. I don't know what
that has to do with anything here. But you have D's decision. So my my my point and I'll just stop there is that you know again you're being told by a member of the bar a whole bunch of things that as you pointed out Mr.
Chairman you're you're a group of volunteers none of your lawyers as far as I know. It's very difficult for you to appreciate which lawyer is telling you the correct information. And so I I appreciate that you know it's difficult to assimilate that stuff. But I assure you, the state sanitary code and chapter
4A have nothing to do with this application. And all those standards that were just cited to you have nothing to do with this application. Bylaw is what's relevant to this application. And um I just have to respectfully disagree with all of that and uh point it out again to the to the board.
>> I sorry I would just like to add as a homeowner and an applicant, you say that you don't know what's true or not. Everything I have put before you is a matter of fact and everything we're hearing here is a what if and what if
you everyone's accusing each other of something. Okay, that'll end up being our problem to figure that out. I can't solve that. People are disagreeing or whether the information providing is correct or not. And that is our burden.
It's our responsibility to figure that out. Basically, we need to we have a six page regulation here and we have to decide whether to grant a license or not. Are any variances needed or not? That's
our obligation to the town. Okay, it's pretty simple and that's what we will have to figure out as a board to simplify things here. >> Anyone else who has not spoken, this is your time to please come forward.
Everyone's being very patient. People waiting a long time. I appreciate everyone coming in. >> Okay. Uh I'm Dorene Visian and uh previous owner of 88 Mil Lane. Um
if you indulge me a little bit, I'd like to go down memory lane. A little bit about Yarmathport. I lived in Yarmouthport for 38 years. uh from 1970 to 2008 in three different residences uh
in the town. Back then we had community. We had um a a sense of community and in our neighbors. Um and sadly and I can tell you about the children who grew up
together because we're all young. I'm I'm don't want mean to ramble, but I didn't really prepare to speak and I don't have a speech prepared. But I think it's important to tell you that what was then in Yarmouthport doesn't exist today, unfortunately. And you can
talk to all of the children because we were all young families with children. The kids grew up together and they're still friends today and they will tell you what it's lost in this community as it transitioned into new neighbors. I
think myself I said I'm 87 soon to be 88 and the only other living person I think is Alice George whose husband was Tom George who was moderator for the town of Yarmouth. I'm sure some of you remember him. Uh otherwise you have all of these
new people who have come in. Um we had a we had the farm. Uh we had all kinds of animals. We had sheep, we had donkeys, we one donkey, two uh small
ponies. Uh we had goats. Uh I think we had everything. We ran through everything. We never had a complaint from a neighbor. Not about a stench, not about runoff. No one came to count how many animals we had. I applied for my
certificate for this here at the town and I received my certificate and we stayed within the rules. But there were never one complaint. Now I know Mr. Fitzgerald is an old neighborh and even in those days he
never complained. We'd never had any. So the talking about runoff and stench we had maybe we didn't have 30 animals at once but there was no complaints about anything at that time. And the trigger
here is the word commercial. If this weren't a commercial business, I don't think you would have any complaints either. But traffic, we had foot traffic. We had people coming from our neighbors across the street from the library would walk down every day to
feed their ponies or whatever there were. So, we didn't have car traffic, but we had plenty of foot traffic because everybody enjoyed coming and visiting the the animals and petting them or whatever. Um, so
I I I the barn is not a historic barn. It was built by a fellow by the name of Ray McKon who also built a house on the counter of Thatcher Street and Thatcherore Road. It's a beautiful barn, handbuilt, and it's a pristine,
wonderful addition, I think, to the town. And that it has a thatched roof even adds to its glamour. So whatever you decide uh there are stories that are going around that are just not true. Uh
and I think you have to look at this application based on the evidence that you have before you and not hearsay and there's a lot of hearsay going around. So thank you. >> Thank you for coming in.
Um, I'll be brief. My name is uh John Grady. I live at 415 Route 6A in Yarmouthport. And uh I'm reluctant to speak because uh this applicant may come before me on the Old Kings Highway Commission, but uh I'm
going to speak anyway. Um, there's too much contention in this whole process. And I think if we could get the lawyers out of the room and just let the applicant speak for herself and let the abutters speak for themselves that it might go more smoothly. And the
bottom line here is we've got 1.44 acres approved by the D for um the farm operation. And uh I've never seen a plan that shows that. I understand you may have received some tonight, but that's not posted anywhere for the public to
see and I think the public has a right to see that. So, if you could make that available on the town website, that would be wonderful. That's all I have to say. >> By all means, we'll make that happen. Then, >> it's already on there, sir. >> It is already. >> It's under Yeah, it's under the 88 mil
lane. It's under there's a whole file labeled stables. So, >> you're more than welcome to The plan that shows is from uh 2011. The D refers to a plan January 6th of this
year, 2026. That's the plan that I can't find. >> Well, we'll look into that. Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, the plan that was filed, the little PDF that you were trying to figure out last time, page eight. It's page eight of the application for the gentleman if he goes on to the town's
website and looks at the packet. It's a it's a PDF of the same plan that you have before you. And that is the 2026 plan that was approved by Mass D. >> Certainly certainly anything that's in our packet is public information >> from last from the last meeting. Yes.
>> Yeah. And and Dan Ojela from down this one. >> It's it's Yeah. It's page eight on the application. It's called site plan of 88 and 100 mil lane and it's uh 1526. That's the D approval plan. It is a small plan when printed out, but if you go into the electronic copy, uh it's a
it's a raw PDF. You can zoom in and see every every nit and tit of the text on it uh if you have a computer. And if not, you can ring my office and would be happy to provide you a free copy full size. No problem. >> Thank you. >> Okay, let's
>> Thank you. For the record, my name is Leo Kakunis, local agricultural advocate. Um I just want to bring a couple of things to the attention of the board. the regulations that many boards of health have adopted across Cape Cod.
uh thousand pound animal per acre or roughly two animals um uh are requiring an acre uh for animals um derived from a study done by um uh Massachusetts Department of Agriculture
through the uh UMass Dartmouth and I was a member of the Farm Bureau at the time. I was state director at the time. I was the guy that had to collect um not only urine but manurea from a thousand pound animal to determine what
that volume was. Um and then subsequently with a lot of help from outsiders and people interested in it came up with some general ideas of how to limit or or the impact of a thousand
pound animal on an acre of land. Um, unfortunately, a lot of that was not transposed verbatim to when the town local boards of health picked it up. Um, but I will assure you that we looked at
regulations currently in place, especially with title 5 and where they look at lot size and they say, well, if you have a 1acre lot, you can put a four bedroomedroom septic system on it. If you have a halfacre lot, you can put
without variances required. Now, you can put a uh a 220galon per day septic system on it, a two-bedroom septic system. So, we looked at things like that to come up with that um uh variant, if you will. When it got transposed, um
it absolutely does mean lot size, not area of where the animals are confined to. Um and it would have been we would have never been able to come up with some kind of uh generalization had we tried to focus on that because
everything is just so different. So we stuck with the current rules and regulations especially for septic system and used lot size and that's where a lot of that came from just to let you know. Um, as far as to bring the board back,
because I know you started out saying that you were going to only focus on what you're here for tonight, to bring the board back a little bit. Really, you're here for tonight, I think. Anyhow, is an adequate,
really good manure management plan. something that you the board in the future will be able to look towards as other applicants come forward to you with applications not only for small animals but possibly even chickens and
uh and large animals who have animals like horses. Their manure management plan covers the removal of manure from the site. It covers that. It'll be put in a enclosed trailer, which means the
trailer itself is going to have a a rainproof top on it, if you will, attached to the trailer or being able so that the rain won't uh um go into it and create runoff from the bottom of the trailer. Things like that is really what
this board needs to focus on. Really good manure management planning. And um I would hope that you would bring it back to that. I think we can probably bring in a hundred more lawyers to discuss whether the variance goes with
the land or not. That's a question that you're going to have to answer. If the variance goes with the land, your town attorneys said it did. Our attorneys say it do. Others attorneys stay up here and say it doesn't. That's one determination you're going to have to make tonight. If you
make that determination that it does in fact go with the land, then I highly suggest that you look at the other factors which are equally important, the manure management plan, how is it being dealt with and how is this applicant going to rem removing manure from the site and I would hope that you would
grant the uh uh applicant. I would like to just clarify one other thing too. Sometimes when I clarify things I tend to confuse them more. Massachusetts general law under 48 section 3 and under 1281A and I don't mean to be a lawyer up here reciting
verses but I happen to do know um laws governing agriculture. There is a difference between a commercial operation and a homeowner that has a pet pig.
And I always tell my applicants and the people that I represent, you have to express yourself as a commercial operation because if you do, you then become eligible for a lot of exemptions under Mass General law as opposed to
having a pig or a horse even as a therapy animal or a pet because the law is clear. It defines a commercial operation. So to say that it's commercial, just
don't jump to the conclusion that there's suddenly going to be lines of people coming here as if we're opening up a new market basket and they're just going to be lined up to buy baby goats and to buy goats and there's going to be all kinds of new traffic. It's not the
case. The term commercial agrica uh a agriculture not only with this applicant but every applicant that I represent is really important because that abides them certain exemptions on the mass general law and that's why I advise them
and they are using the term commercial operation but um once again really look at the stuff that that's under your purview manure management is number one and I think this plan is exemplatory and I think when you approve it tonight. You should probably use it as other
applicants come forward to you. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Kathy Herity, 122 Water Street. Um, I know we kind of already talked about these numbers of the 30 goats and two donkeys, but one of the things that came up with conservation was that there was actually going to be a lot of breeding
going on. So, if there's 15 goats who are breeding, we're up to like 47 animals in this 1.44 acres. So, I just want to find out, you know, what the board thinks about adding 15 more
potential animals. Um, and the other thing I just wanted to bring up is there's been so much talk about this commercial venture. Well, the reason people are all bringing it up is the original application with the conservation commission talked about a commercial three-year plan and it also
ended with a crearyy. So that if anyone wants to go back, it's on record. You can look at the plan. There was a three-year plan and it talked about what was going to happen each year and on the third year it was going to be a crearyy. So it's not made up. That's what everybody's keeps referring back to and it sounds like things have been changed
and omitted at this point which is great but I just want to bring that to everybody's attention because it seems like everyone can't remember why people are talking about a commercial venture. >> Thank you. >> I can assure you the board would address any developments like the example you
just gave. Um, so if there changes to a business, they need to come to the board of health and that's very common here that goes on. So I I can assure you that would be the case right now. That's not what our
application shows. What people have presented to us is not what we're looking at at this time. >> No, that that's correct. But I'm just saying that's why everybody in the audience has been talking about a commercial venture because that was what what was in people's mind as to what the project was going to be.
>> I understand. >> Uh my name is Greg Bizikian. I just wanted to address the board of health and say that uh I get inspected for my coffee shop, for my retail store, for my federal express building and other buildings. The board of health's job is to come and check and make sure we're
doing the right thing. And they and Phil and Carl and a few other guys come around and they do their job. And if there's something wrong, we have to fix it. And that's what happens. And that's what town government does. Thank you. >> Thanks for coming up. Okay. Appreciate that,
>> Mr. Chair. We do have two hands on Zoom. >> Hey, let's go. And if you want to let Rachel in. Hi everybody. Um again I am Rachel Rosen. I am a gastronurologist. Um I
want to put my credentials into the record. I um went to Harvard undergraduate. I went to Dartmouth Medical School. I did my fellowship, my residency at Duke and then I came back to Harvard for my >> Excuse me. Excuse me. Okay. You're not applying for a job. Okay. You're back.
You need to hear it. I'm speaking. Excuse me. I'm speaking okay right now I'd like you to stay on target we don't need to know your education okay so what is your point and you have our ears >> so um as the farmer mentioned his
credentials um I think it is important for you to know that as somebody who is a full professor and has published extensively on the feal microbiome >> I no you need to listen >> no no no I'm running this meeting
okay Dr. Rosen I assume it is a doctor >> that's what a gastronurologist is yes >> so as I mentioned as a fecal expert it's not the bacterial content is not based on how much feces weigh it is
based on the number of bacteria per gram that matters significantly when we're talking about contamination of the waterways okay it is Excuse me. Were you listening to the whole meeting? Okay. This this was addressed by Conservation
and Department Environmental Protection. That's not what we're addressing tonight. You may disagree with their decision, but they made their own decision and that's not what we're doing tonight. >> So, I've heard two people say that don't
worry about the water. If we make a mistake, we'll just fix it. It took years to fix this. years to get these waterways open. And again, nobody is more qualified to talk about feces than me. And I'm telling you, we are
extremely concerned about the fecal contamination with E.coli, Salmonella, cryptoperidium. That is in the purview of the health department. >> Okay. Our responsibility certainly has to do with storing manure and removing it from the property. It Okay. And
that's what our responsibility is. Department of Environmental Protection has already made their decision about runoff and so on. That's not what we're doing tonight. Please don't make me have to say that again. >> Dr. Rosen, are you there?
>> I'm here. I'm here. Anything else you'd like to to state? >> Nope. Just that as a feces expert, I'm incredibly concerned. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We have one >> two hands. One more hand. >> Yeah. One more hand on there.
>> Great. >> Gable, are you there? >> You're muted. Excuse me, Liam. Are they still on there? There we go. Hello. >> Yeah, he's on. He's just not muting.
>> Hello. >> Hello. Were you there? >> See muted? >> No. I mean, has he muted himself? >> Mr. Chair, I don't think we're going to get them on gone or not.
>> All right. All right. >> No. Okay. Anyone? >> No. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Just introduce yourself. >> My name is Ron Gable. I am a retired physician and my property abuts 88 mil
lane. My message will be brief, clear, and simple. The applicant stable does not comply with the Yarmouth stable regulations because it is located less than 250 ft from the high tide mark of a
body of water where shell fishing is done. In the past two years, commercial shell fishermen have harvested 390 bushels of cohogs from mill pond. The applicants do not have a variance to
deviate from the stable regul regulations for two reasons. First, the billian variance is non-transferable. And second, in their 59page application, the owners have not applied for a
variance. The evidence that the owner's application does not comply with the stable regulations is compelling and the request for a permit should be denied. Thank you. >> Thank you,
>> Dr. Venezia. I don't want to put you on the spot, but I'm going to. It's not a question actually. Um, and it's just something that uh you joined the board fairly recently and the timing could not have been better and I just thought the public should know a little bit about
your background actually and and about farm planning and large animals. Perhaps you can take a minute and just say what your background is because um we're really very lucky you're on the board. If >> you can just bring the microphone a little closer to you too, that would be great. Pardon?
>> Microphone a little closer to you. >> Sure. Well, you know, of course, I'm a veterinarian, but that wouldn't really qualify me to to u make a judgment uh in a situation like this. But I also have a bachelor of science in agriculture,
magnical from Kansas State. Um, I know that's Kansas State's not uh uh noted like the Ivy Leagues for sciences and arts, but they certainly uh have national recognition for agriculture.
And my major was animal science. And um I have to say that this plan that's been presented to me I think uh you know one of the requirements when I was a senior at U Kansas State was we had to present a a farm plan a management program and
um I think that uh uh this farm plan that's been uh presented is exemplary. Um, and I also think that the fact that they've put it in writing shows that they're compelled to stick to this uh
plan. Um, and I agree with the um gentleman uh uh from Farm Bureau, I think uh when he says that our major concern should be uh the disposal of feces. Um and uh that's well addressed
in this farm plan. I think recently they uh let us know that uh they will transport all the u uh feces off the property. Um I think you also had a plan to uh manage the pastures and keep feces
under control. I I would assume that you know based on the fact that you have this veterary service that you um employ that seems to have done a very exemplary job in vaccinating your your animals etc. They would also um keep you a
breast of what your parasite load etc is with your goats and and with your horse and you must have some sort of a health plan uh as far as parasite control with uh your veterinarian. Um and those are all things to be considered. I I think
that um you know we visited the um uh the farm and uh it's clear to me I know there's been a lot said about uh water quality and and worry about uh contamination etc. But um the pond that
really in question here, the water would have to flow uphill uh to really contaminate the pond with the program that you've implemented or or you've drawn out here. The the plan that uh Daniel's uh shown us. So, um, you know,
that's just my opinion of what I've seen going to the property that I think it would be, in my opinion, minimal >> issue with contamination of that pond. >> Great. Thanks. Anyone else? Um, well, board members,
how do you want to proceed? What What do you think we we should do to work our way through all this? I I'd like to propose a a work meeting, a work session with the board members. Um so we can get together with all of these papers and um
maybe some questions. I I have a couple of questions that um I think I'd like answered by probably the town attorney and um then be prepared to make a decision as quickly as possible.
So >> yeah, I think it's important to note that we're deal dealing strictly with whether or not we're going to grant a permit for a a to keep goats and a donkey. That's it. Uh beyond that, that's sort of beyond our perview to go
any further than that. And that's >> but we have to look at the application and and decide that it is complete. >> And I think it's important that we do sort out this variance issue that we've been hearing about tonight. I think that's a question I would have to get sorted out. >> Yes, me too.
>> Yeah. For me as well. >> So, I would second. >> Okay. >> Mary's motion. >> Okay. >> How about that? >> Not bad. >> Was a motion. >> Okay. >> Any further discussion on it? Why don't we vote on that? All in favor of us having meeting. All right. Until we have
a session. Yeah. >> A procedural question for you, Mr. Chairman. Um, obviously if the board wants to meet and just deliberate, that's entirely your business. Is the public hearing closed or is it still open? I think that's important because I
speaking for myself. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Speaking for myself, we've heard a lot of information, but this is the board's call, but I would just ask the board to consider whether or not the public hearing is closed or whether you want to have it remain open. That's obviously the
board's purview. Question for you. What qualifies as a public hearing? In other words, this was for discussion purposes and maybe my feeling was to give people floor time. This is an opportunity for people to speak up. So the applicant as well as
neighbors that where else are they going to go with all their questions and information and so on. So does this I think a technical question. I mean, I'm not sure this is really a public hearing or this application needs a public hearing. This is for our learning of how
to make a decision. So, I think that's all this is >> if that's if that's the board's view of it. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Public hearing typically we have to advertise in the paper and it's typically for regulation or policy. >> I mean, you're right. I don't think the break calls for a public hearing. So, if
this is a public meeting and obvious So, thank you. That answers my question. Right. We just want the community a chance to speak up. It's hard. Where else do people go with questions and comments? >> I understand. >> That's why, you know, it's 7:15 and that's, you know, I guess my decision to to conduct it this way. That's that's
all >> that's completely within your discretion and you've answered my question. So, thank you. >> Sure. >> Thank you very much. >> Um, so we need to schedule our session. What's the best way you think to do that
everyone to put this together? We need a window of time that the four of us >> I apologize. I do not have an answer to that. It's >> first >> I don't know what the requirements are. So I'll find that out. And since for Are
you aware of it? >> No, I was going to say I can look into it tomorrow and email everyone >> and just send an email out and we'll kind of get some times windows of times we'll put this together. and then we'll decide, you know, when to have this discussion at another meeting
and eventually, you know, obviously vote on this. People have been very patient, but it's complicated. Okay. So, >> Mr. Chairman, you just need to comply with the open meeting law and you can schedule a meeting at your at your discretion. >> Say that again. >> I think you just need I think the board just needs to comply with the open
meeting law and you can schedule a meeting at your discretion, >> right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. In other words, two of us are going to the farm at a time, not four of us for just that reason. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. >> That's okay. >> You want Did you want time for a site?
>> Just pointing out >> we'll work that through staff if you need to. >> I'm sorry. >> If the board wants to if the remaining members want to do a site visit, we'll work that through. >> No, I just make the point that four of us didn't come at the same time for the reason you just mentioned. >> I understand. >> That's all. >> I understood exactly why we're only
That's all. So, two at a time. >> Yep. Understood. >> Property. Okay. Okay. So, I think we're going to call it here at this point and move on. All right. >> We'll be here at the next meeting. >> Um Well, we'll see what the next when I don't know if it'll be on the agenda for
the next meeting right now. Okay. So, um >> our best to do that. >> Yeah. M Mr. Chairman, I do have a uh open meeting law concern though. I do have an open meeting law concern. If two of you are going to meet at your kitchen and
discuss this applicant and then one of you are going to report to the other two your feelings on it, that's a chain deliberation. It's a violation of open meeting law. My suggestion to the board
is that you post a working session where the four of you meet in public forum. You as chair sir can state no testimony from the public will be heard. It's
strictly a working session. So the for you can discuss and deliberate the issue. The public can come can sit but they are not or I'm hoping they will not be allowed to speak. That is the best
way to handle that kind of situation because again, chain deliberation is violation of open meeting law. And it sounds like you guys are going to want to discuss amongst yourself and report the town attorney's position on certain
things and your position on certain things. So that's my suggestion that you do it that way in a public forum with no testimony from the public. >> Okay. Appreciate the suggestion. Okay. Uh let's let's move on the agenda. And
>> just a one more question, Mr. Chairman, and we'll get out of here. So, how will we know when you're going to convene again? Should we be in touch with staff? Will the chair, you know, just watch your agendas? Um >> we'll post it. >> You certainly be posted obviously and
that's um that doesn't change. I don't know how to answer the question. We need to figure that out whether it'll be on the next agenda because it's if we don't have more information, it doesn't make any sense to put it on the agenda if we haven't made any progress. I don't need
to waste everyone's time. Um, so we need to see if we're going to make some some progress in order to to move forward. I don't know where this is going. >> But appropo of Mr. Kunis' question, how would you get more information except in an open meeting? >> We're going to look into it. We're going
to look into the whole issue >> sooner. Go ahead, Mary. >> I'm gonna figure out a way. I'm gonna probably end up scheduling a closed not a closed meeting, but one where they don't take any testimony so that they can work through this together without >> being distracted. Not a hearing.
>> Yes. Not a hearing. >> And we have not scheduled it yet because our town council is very busy and he has a very busy schedule. So, we want to make sure that he's able to be present. >> Okay. It's a delay getting information from town council which you know really well.
So I don't know when this is going to be on the agenda. We're dependent upon town council for certain issues that came up tonight. >> Okay. All right. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can I only say that my clients have been working through appeals and permit hearings for over a year now and we would like your prompt
consideration. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> You too. >> Night. Okay, everyone. Okay, >> let's move ahead. Okay, review and approval of minutes. Does anyone have
any edits, additions, anything? >> I I have one on that meeting. I'm just figure out where it is in my I had so many notes here this uh I'm trying to here. from the last meeting.
>> That's the draft. Or is that >> That's not That says number nine on it. It's not >> That's not the last. >> This is what I was looking for. >> That's the original nine. >> Mary, is that the original? >> This is not a recent >> See the front of it? >> Yes. Please make sure which version this is. >> I took the rest of them away. So,
>> well, what I what I had what what I was going to bring up I think is on here. >> This was this is the version in the packet. >> In the packet. Nothing from today was added to the pack. >> You got it. Thank you very much. Yeah. So the point of I think it was Mr.
Leo Kakuna said he mentioned something about rat problem >> and um I think we need to clarify that he wasn't talking about a rat problem in this particular case. He was talking in general terms >> of the cape >> on the cape and that's sort of not clear
>> in that paragraph. >> And what page is that on? >> Uh it's on the second page. uh Leo Kakunis, an agricultural advocate of Harwitch. >> I think if we just had to clarify that he was talking about a Cape Cod rat
problem in general had no reference at all to this case. >> So just say that all Cape Cod has a rat or the entire Cape Cod has a rat problem. >> My interpretation was that he was interpreting the fact that Cape Cod
generally has a rat problem. >> Right. But it had nothing to do with this um case that he was discussing. >> What we need is actually the words that you want corrected or the edit so Mary can put that in. That's it's not an interpretation of what took place.
>> Okay. >> A short sentence to correct it. That's all. >> Or just the word generally and that Cape Cod generally has a rat problem. >> Generally. And there was and the reference was not to this >> farm. >> Farm. Okay.
>> Or it was no way in connected to this farm. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We're great. >> I'll bring these edited to the next meeting. >> Okay. That's the only thing I could see on here. >> Um,
what do you want to do about it? Do you want to vote? >> I I move that we accept the minutes with the um change that Larry has indicated. >> Second. Okay, good. Let's assume everyone okay agree. Let's pass it. Good. It's done.
In reference um to the minutes, Dr. Venezia, I must tell you um that you have a new position now. Uh you're the clerk on the board of health. >> That could be scary. >> Now, the responsibilities are vast.
>> Oh, yeah. >> Um >> does an increase in pay? Well, the um >> No, it's really >> Larry. No, it's the medical coverage is better. Uh the
>> retirement plan is is phenomenal. That package >> dental coverage. I had to have some work done. >> Um that goes into effect on Thursday. Just kidding. >> Um and the one thing you will get though, seriously, is you get to now park in executive parking. Okay. So, you
put the truck wherever you want now. I'm >> not going to be able to sleep tonight. >> Okay, that's clerk Venezia up. Great. All right, this time for some other announcements. >> Somebody will have to tell me what the duties entail. >> You know how to write your You can write your name.
>> That's about it. >> The former clerk's out to your right. >> You sign your You sign the minutes. That's >> I can handle it. Okay. >> I can't smile right now though until I get my teeth. >> Don't do anything till you have the coverage. >> Right.
All right, >> announcements. So, we are continuing with our health awareness month. Um, August, we're going to do skin awareness. Um, I have a wonderful local um nurse
practitioner. She's a nurse practitioner. >> I just want to clarify it's skin safety awareness >> safety. So, we who specializes in skin. She's going to come in and give a nice presentation to us. I've reached out to uh a few companies are going to give us
some sample products for um some lotions and stuff like that and we're going to Mary's going to make the board shine like she always does. So >> great time of year. Great. >> Yeah, it's perfect. And then after that, um the following month, September, we're
going to do dental hygiene awareness. Um >> there you go, Larry. >> I was thinking about you, buddy. >> Um again, we got some more samples coming. Um, I'm trying to work with 4C's, their dental hygiene uh program to see if they can come in and maybe give a
little talk to our our um citizens. Uh, when I was getting my teeth done, I think they have a competition to see how many questions they can ask you. But I was telling what I kind of wanted to do and she said like the population of Yarmouth, they don't realize like when they get dentures, they still have to
continue to go to uh get checkups um gum >> gum cancer and stuff like that and and oral cancer is is uh very prominent. So they're I'm going to try to get the 4C's in here to um we got some other stuff coming down the line. So, health
department's chugging along and anybody out in the audience or watching on the Zoom, we do have an open seat. It's a voluntary position. Um, always looking to fill the get a nice full board. So, thank you.
>> Somebody >> I move that we adjourn. >> Second. >> No discussion. >> No discussion. >> All in favor raise your hand. Say I. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you. >> Recording stopped.