[0:22] Noting that it's 7:04 p.m. on August 12th, 2026.

[0:30] I am calling the board of health meeting to order. And first thing we'll do is

[0:35] since this is a virtual meeting, all board members will announce their

[0:39] presence in alphabetical order. So Daryl Beardsley present.

[0:44] » Steve Constantine present.

[0:48] » Rebecca Conwell present. >> Good Chaporico present.

[0:54] » Okay. The next thing we have is um whether there were any items not

[1:02] reasonably anticipated by the chair 48 hours in advance of the

[1:08] meeting. Is anyone aware of anything that is

[1:13] timesensitive that should be addressed tonight before our next meeting?

[1:19] » Nothing from me. >> Okay. Yes. I am also not aware of

[1:25] anything. >> Mark is muted. I don't know if he

[1:30] » No, same here. I have nothing to add to the agenda for tonight. Thank you though

[1:34] for asking. >> Okay.

[1:37] All right. Um, do we have a presentation at 710?

[1:44] Is there anyone or who is here in the audience for something that is possibly

[1:51] brief as in five minutes worth?

[1:59] Okay. Uh hearing none, what we can do is let's take the appointment of Stantech

[2:05] as a supplemental health agent or 168 Woodland Street. Would anyone like uh

[2:14] any discussion needed among the board? We've done this before for Santech for

[2:18] selected projects as appropriate.

[2:24] Anyone have any comments or shall I make a motion?

[2:28] » I think I'm fine with it. I think a motion is in order.

[2:32] » Okay. So, uh, do we have a motion to or I I

[2:38] move that we appoint Stantech as the supplemental health agent for 168

[2:43] Woodland Street. >> So moved.

[2:48] » A second. >> Okay. Any further comments? Hearing

[2:53] none. Daryl Beardsley I. >> Steve Constantine. I

[3:00] » close.

[3:11] » Three minutes. Mark, 155 Maple Street update. Or is that too complicated?

[3:17] » Uh, it's not complicated. I was hoping the homeowner would be here. Uh we set

[3:22] some uh guidelines for this property and actually deadlines I should say or at

[3:28] least that they have the plan into us by the end of this month and it be

[3:34] installed by the end of the year. Uh I informed the homeowner and the

[3:39] contractor. Um I was hoping the homeowner would be

[3:43] here uh that we would be discussing it but she's not that I can see. But I can

[3:48] update her beginning of next week or tomorrow on the status. But uh I have

[3:54] not yet seen a septic plan submitted for this property. This is the property that

[4:00] has a failed title 5. It's now passed due for the installation of a

[4:04] replacement septic system. Um, so pretty much I'm hoping that I can report to you

[4:11] at the September meeting that the plans are in and you know we'll start the

[4:16] review process. It has to go to conservation prior to the board of

[4:21] health. I expect that's going to take a little bit because there's a pond not

[4:25] too far from that location with the location of where the septic systems

[4:30] going. >> Yes. Okay. All right. So not yet. Yes.

[4:35] keep us updated about if and when the uh plan comes in. So,

[4:40] » I will do that. Yeah, >> good to go for the next meeting.

[4:45] » Yeah, we can put that on at the end of this meeting. I'll just add that to it

[4:49] as well uh to give an update on 155 Maple.

[4:54] » All right. Since we have a the presentation coming up and Tom, I'm

[4:58] assuming that you have something you might want to show. How about if we

[5:03] experiment with getting the uh share screen?

[5:08] » I would I would love to share >> permissions over to you.

[5:12] » Okay, Tom, I just clicked to make you a co-host. You should be able to screen.

[5:17] I'm going to stop sharing. Let me know if you now have that ability.

[5:23] » Ah, it lets me do the share. >> Amazing.

[5:27] Then I will give it to you to take it away.

[5:31] Fantastic.

[5:37] » Well, thank you. >> One minute if you don't mind, just so we

[5:40] can >> No, I don't mind.

[5:43] » Oh, you can pull it up. I think we're close.

[5:48] » I I have pulled it up. Can you see? Uh >> Oh, I'm not seeing it yet.

[5:54] » I'm seeing it. Oh,

[5:58] » I I see it. [laughter]

[6:03] Okay, >> I see it.

[6:06] » I can see it. >> Okay,

[6:10] » Darl, I was on a farm pond committee meeting last week and some of their

[6:15] members had an older version of Zoom and they had trouble seeing it. H

[6:22] » yes, I did get a message today that when I said allow for audio and

[6:29] video, making the audio, but not so great on the video.

[6:35] I thought it was just not transmitting me. But anyway, I will listen

[6:40] attentively.

[6:45] » Actually, uh I sent the PDF to uh Sarah. Maybe she can email it to you. Yeah, I

[6:51] can do that. >> And and the rest of the board.

[6:56] » Yeah, >> whatever is easy.

[7:06] Didn't know we had an official start time.

[7:11] » Well, we're past it, so you can start at any time. Well, thank you for inviting

[7:16] the uh open space committee to spend a few minutes with you uh really giving

[7:21] you an introduction to uh our major redo of the plan which

[7:27] uh the current plan's about eight years old. I'm I'm here with our chair, uh,

[7:32] Sam Nelson, and our our purpose is to give you a

[7:36] little flavor of the revision. We hope to be finishing up this fall, and that

[7:43] we hope to have actually a a uh printed and edited document that we can send

[7:50] around for public comment uh before the end of the year. But uh in uh in

[7:58] thinking about how to start this, I thought I' I'd go with a couple graphics

[8:03] and one of the one of the more exciting things in the open space world uh in

[8:07] Sherburn, at least to me, is our newest property. I hope several of you have

[8:12] been to the new trustees property on Bullard Street, Melbourne Farm. It's 195

[8:19] » beautiful >> 195 acre beautiful farm. It straddles

[8:24] the uh Milis line, hence the name Millbourne. The uh original owners named

[8:31] it that Milis and Sherbornne. But uh it's an outstanding property. And

[8:37] the other exciting thing is it's our first Sherborn property with publicly

[8:43] accessible trails. the trustees did an outstanding job

[8:50] leveling some of the the trails and making them uh uh uh accessible. So,

[8:56] that's fantastic. I think many of you uh have lived in town uh for quite a while,

[9:02] so you I assume you're aware, but I wanted to show you some of the maps

[9:07] we're uh using for the plan. I mean, Sherbornne is uh ble blessed with a

[9:13] tremendous amount of open space plan. We're about 78 for 78% forested.

[9:22] And you know, compared to our neighboring towns, we we really have a

[9:26] tremendous amount of both private and p public open space. And of course one of

[9:32] the first benefits to that you see on the the right hand map uh basically a a

[9:38] heat map of heat uh showing relative surface temperatures and you know in a

[9:45] week like this we are really lucky compared to a lot of our neighbors.

[9:50] » Beautiful. >> We're a cool town. [laughter]

[9:54] » Cool town. Good. >> My my slight is not not advancing.

[10:00] [laughter]

[10:03] Sorry about this. Let me exit.

[10:10] Let me stop sharing and go back. I apologize.

[10:25] Okay. Uh I added this slide special to your

[10:29] committee. Uh uh I was uh getting involved a lot more

[10:34] with uh open space and I'm on the board of a land trust and I went to a land

[10:40] trust annual conference uh in the spring Massachusetts land trust coalition and

[10:45] this pediatrician just gave a fantastic presentation on the benefits of uh open

[10:52] space and recreation to uh to her patients. So if you're not familiar with

[10:58] some of this work given that you're in the uh public sp uh public health world

[11:04] you might might take a look at it but it was really really eyeopening what she

[11:08] shared. Now what is the open space committee? Uh I wanted to uh make make

[11:15] sure you're aware because we're not uh you know the most visible committee

[11:20] around since we just do uh open space plans about every 8 to 10 years. But our

[11:26] primary mission is the protection of our uh open space the environmental and

[11:33] recreational resources in Sherborn. We are required by the state to uh create

[11:39] this open space and recreation plan that in that includes you know our organized

[11:47] and formal rec recreational activities in town.

[11:52] uh in in in this planning process, we uh come up with lists of goals and

[11:57] recommendations and strategies and we assign those to different town

[12:03] boards, committees, nonprofits, etc. And near the end, I'm going to show

[12:09] you a couple things we're we're hoping to assign assigned to you for homework.

[12:15] And uh the the state had required these updates every seven years. It's now gone

[12:20] to a 10-year format. And that's the plan from uh eight years ago. Hoping some of

[12:26] you may have seen it, but if you're interested, there's the link. The

[12:31] committee itself, there's eight of us. Uh you see the membership here or one

[12:36] associate member, Kelly Mcclin, moved to Medfield, but luckily we still have his

[12:43] uh his help. But many of these names you probably know. Marian Nitra from the

[12:48] select board. Uh myself, I'm also on the groundwater protection committee and

[12:53] recently rolled off the energy and sustainability committee. Nick

[12:57] Rodenhouse is a retired uh Welsley College uh ecologist, professor. Nicole

[13:04] Weim Meer chairs our disability advisory committee. Kevin Stevenson's an IT

[13:11] professional. Dave Welch, many of you know from our rec commission. And we got

[13:16] some great uh support from a number of uh staff members that you know. Uh

[13:23] here's a busy slide. I want to quickly introduce

[13:28] or define what we mean by by open space and and and and really we're focusing on

[13:35] what lands are have some level of protection

[13:40] uh both at the uh local and state level. Sherbornne's roughly about 10,000 acres.

[13:47] Makes the math simple. Uh we have permanently protected right now about

[13:53] 30% of the town. About half of that is owned by the town and most of that is

[14:00] conservation land in this darker green or town forest in this lighter green.

[14:06] But there's plenty of other uh town lands besides that. The state has about

[14:12] 156 acres. 125 acres of that is Farm Pond, a great

[14:17] uh pond and and you go on and on. Uh Mass Ottabbon about 300 acres of the 500

[14:24] acre Ottabon. Trustees are close to 400 acres now with

[14:30] with Milbourne plus they have several conservation restrictions. Uh the

[14:36] Sherborn Rural Land Foundation has 250 acres uh land trust and the Upper

[14:43] Charles Land Trust 80 acres. Besides this third 3,000 acres, we have what's

[14:50] called temporarily protected land in special tax status with the town whereby

[14:58] people have put a portion of their land in chapter 61 forestry, chapter 61A

[15:04] agriculture or 61B open space protection and they get a break in in their taxes.

[15:14] So that gives you a lot a lot of flavor of uh the different uh land ownership,

[15:20] land uses and on top of that uh if you look at more more or less the white

[15:26] shaded area of the map with all the parcels cut out that that's all your

[15:30] properties as as you know you and many of your of your neighbors have plenty of

[15:36] open space. So that that's why Sherborn is in such great shape when it comes to

[15:41] open space. Here's just an outline on the right of the uh uh current state

[15:47] guideline for the open space plan. We're pretty much done with three community

[15:53] setting. Four, environmental inventory and analysis. I'm working on that with

[15:58] Nick Rodenhouse. And uh the inventory of of lands. Right

[16:03] now, we're finalizing our needs and action plans. And when we're done, we'll

[16:09] write the introduction and in summary and uh ask for uh public comment

[16:17] in in uh creating the plan. One thing that helped uh earlier uh around the

[16:24] beginning of the year, we did a major uh survey of residents. I hope many people

[16:29] on this call uh uh contributed to the survey. We got over 400 replies which I

[16:36] think is uh pretty good for Sherborn survey. Just one one example of uh one

[16:43] of the questions here. Uh but what bubbled up from the couple dozen

[16:48] questions in terms of priorities, they're listed on the right here. uh

[16:54] water water resources was was surprisingly uh the highest and things

[16:59] like organized uh recreation while while important of course to a lot of people

[17:05] uh fell down with with uh lower priorities.

[17:11] And from that uh analysis and all of our work uh we've got six broad goals that

[17:18] that you see right here. water resources,

[17:22] promoting biodiversity uh and resilience. Uh for the first

[17:26] time, we we had a lot of uh focus on climate change in in this in this plan

[17:33] and uh safeguarding open spaces and the scenic character and of course

[17:39] recreation and the uh uh uh facilities for our organized sports.

[17:46] I'm going to jump to uh the needs when it comes to needs and

[17:54] strategies and actions. Uh these are these are the seven major

[18:00] areas and and this is where we're coming up with different actions and uh uh

[18:06] thinking about what what towns uh boards and committees might might be

[18:12] able to help. and we we did this similarly eight years ago and and some

[18:16] of and some of the goals have carried on from there. When it comes to your board,

[18:22] it's the one that we really have a direct connection is water resource

[18:26] protection and less so some of the others. Although I think on things like

[18:31] open space, I can think of farm pond. I think we have you listed for things like

[18:37] uh cyanobacteria and and things like that that uh can affect the use of that

[18:44] resources. This is one example of the uh action

[18:50] plan section seven with the needs recommendations and possible actions.

[18:56] And I pulled up this one because it had your name uh against some of the uh

[19:02] actions and we'll share with this with you and

[19:07] we're interested in feedback now or later and some examples from the uh 2018

[19:16] plan. the groundwater protection committee uh did was not active at that

[19:23] time uh had gone dormant and one of the one of the actions or uh strategies was

[19:30] to reinstate the groundwater protection plan and uh and fortunately that was

[19:36] done and the groundwater protection committee has been working in many of

[19:40] these areas and so I'm not going to read all of these but uh uh certainly

[19:47] uh when it comes to both the surface waters and uh groundwater, we're really

[19:52] uh I think it's very important to document much more the condition of

[19:57] where things are that and actually that comes to one request. You may or may not

[20:02] like it. We're suggesting uh you consider uh uh updating your regulations

[20:08] to to uh uh require uh private wellwater testing at at time of property transfer

[20:16] like like the D uh recommends for uh for towns.

[20:23] So that is uh some of our recommendations the board

[20:29] any I haven't allowed any questions you're

[20:34] we're almost done here so any questions on what we're we're showing here

[20:45] quiet group Sam you want to add anything >> yeah I I guess I just would like some

[20:50] feedback from your group um We have um as Tom said, we are suggesting that uh

[20:58] there is a requirement for well testing at the at the time of home sale and we

[21:04] have actually designated board of health as being the lead on that. So we would

[21:10] be very curious to know if that is something that you are willing to take

[21:14] on. >> I think we should have a discussion on

[21:18] that. It's come up a bunch of times. Um, and I do have more experience in the

[21:26] commercial world with this or uh clients and what it means for a property. Um,

[21:35] it I would rather find a way to encourage

[21:40] people to test more frequently while they're living there and not wait until

[21:45] they're moving. So, in the interest of public health, to me, that's more

[21:49] important. There's also

[21:52] financial implications of being the one house who had to test because they're

[22:00] planning to sell and

[22:05] groundwater is moving. Groundwater is not only affected by the people living

[22:09] on the property and their wellwater is not a reflection of only their actions.

[22:15] So, I feel like it it has some downsides to those who go

[22:20] first in uh in the selling of their home.

[22:27] » We we definitely >> it's a little it's a little more

[22:30] complicated and it also is not getting at the idea of along the way people

[22:35] should know what they're drinking. Um, and whether that's setting up programs

[22:39] that make it easier for the uh, so people don't have to drive bar or hire

[22:47] if they don't want to hire someone to come and take the samples, whatever it

[22:51] is that would make it simpler for that $150 test or $200 worth of

[22:58] testing every few years. me that would be a place I would rather put some

[23:04] energy but it's very hard for us as a regulatory board to organize that

[23:09] because

[23:12] um it just is and it it also implies like obligation

[23:17] to report to us on findings or not. But really

[23:23] » my objective would be that people understand where their water is and what

[23:27] might what treatment might be needed if any.

[23:31] » Some some of our recommended actions uh somebody on the committee used the word

[23:35] aspirational uh you know we're not expecting this to

[23:40] happen in a year. This could take three, four, six years you know to get

[23:45] regulations changed. So it's it's just something we want to put out there and

[23:50] » have considered. I see Rebecca has her hand up.

[23:56] » Go ahead, Rebecca. >> Is muted.

[24:12] » Can one of the hosts unmute her? >> I got it. I got it.

[24:20] There's feedback.

[24:23] » Let's see if we can do it this way without feedback.

[24:28] » I think there is there feedback. Do you hear it?

[24:31] » I think I think we can still still hear you.

[24:34] » I'm moving that out of reach. See if that helps. Um, as a physician, I agree

[24:40] 100%. I think one of the problems um that is not only Sherburn's problem,

[24:46] it's also across the country is that private wellwater is considered private

[24:51] property. The land the laws are antiquated

[24:55] and it puts a lot of burden on the individual. But I think as a public

[24:59] service um it's important to know that

[25:03] information because not it's shared resources. And so I agree with you that

[25:08] it should be required at the time of transaction

[25:14] um for everyone to have awareness of what their situation is. Um I know that

[25:19] there are different opinions and there is some debate but it's required in

[25:24] other places where there's public water supply.

[25:28] So I'm not sure that I think it would be a good idea if we can upgrade those

[25:34] regulations. And I also think that there's some initiatives going on at the

[25:39] federal and state level to try to upgrade the to change some of the laws

[25:45] it because it's the vast minority of homes that have um our situation which

[25:52] is private wellwater and private septic systems. So sometimes

[25:58] pe people I was going to say patients but I think sometimes people don't even

[26:03] know the risks and that's an almost more important reason to get the information

[26:08] so that we can help them to understand how compensation could be made what

[26:13] efforts need to be taken to protect themselves from public health risks that

[26:18] could be happening to themselves or to their neighbors. So, I agree. Um, it's

[26:23] and I think part of the reason that it's complicated is because of the perception

[26:27] that although it's actually true, but this is where the board of health comes

[26:31] in, we should be making every effort we can to protect drinking water in order

[26:38] to protect property values in addition to public health because I think

[26:43] sometimes people's perspective is they don't want to affect their property

[26:47] value. But the reality is we can help with that by enforcing our

[26:52] regulations.

[26:57] » Great. I >> which I'll just add we do every time we

[27:01] meet and every day.

[27:05] I I think one of the other um concerns of the open space committee is that not

[27:11] only would testing protect the uh potential uh new home purchaser, but

[27:17] it's also a way to start to collect data on our our wellwater. If if if testing

[27:22] wells is voluntary right now, we're you know we may collect some information. We

[27:28] but it depends on volunteers. But if we are beginning to require testing at the

[27:35] time of home sales, then we are building up a um a database which could be very

[27:41] useful in tracking the quality of uh of groundwater as we move onward.

[27:48] Otherwise, otherwise we're just kind of relying on voluntary testing to try to

[27:54] create a database which um may may work but it uh it may not work. So, I think

[28:00] that was just one one of the other concerns that we were thinking about as

[28:04] we were uh proposing this this motion. >> Good. Thanks.

[28:09] » Some of the things that we've talked about in the past uh not the board of

[28:15] health, but the former groundwater protection committee makeup um

[28:21] was supporting some sort of testing program. again. I mean, one year I was

[28:28] going to pick up containers and I just called a whole bunch of people I knew

[28:32] and said, "If you want to participate, I'll get the containers and I'll bring

[28:35] them back." The lab, you just have to, you know, specify to the lab what tests

[28:41] you want run and pay for it. Um, and I showed people how to fill up containers

[28:46] and all the rest. But if it was not a regulatory body,

[28:51] it might be able to be organized so that people were getting the test results.

[28:56] And then there might be some way rather than pinpoint a particular property

[29:02] who participated in that um and have their data is to do kind of

[29:10] a grid and just have people note the grid that

[29:15] they were in. and the test results um to make it a little more anonymous.

[29:22] And also some of this comes from right out of grad school. I worked on

[29:28] something looking at how do you value um mun the water serving

[29:35] a town whether it's a municipal water supply or individual wells. How do you

[29:40] put a price tag on that for an industry who has contaminated the groundwater?

[29:46] And Wburn was happening kind of early on. Um, Actton is a a town more like

[29:52] ours that has a similar situation. And the housing market went drastically down

[29:59] in Actton. And I'm talking how many years ago? 40 years ago. So um

[30:06] or more uh so that is the impact I don't want to have. I want to have awareness

[30:16] of uh what people's um drinking water

[30:20] quality is like. It might help reinforce what we can do programmatically within

[30:26] the board of health. That can help us defend our regulations.

[30:30] Lots of good things. But it shouldn't be waiting till sale. It shouldn't be

[30:35] isolating the house that's on the market at the moment until everyone becomes

[30:40] more aware. Um, when we bought here, partially I'm in the field and partially

[30:47] lenders would require water testing for some period of time. I guess that

[30:53] doesn't happen anymore, but it was very easy to just tell a homeowner, I want to

[30:59] grab a sample. Um, and then you can make sure that, you know, you don't, most

[31:04] people don't even want to trust the results of the current homeowner. They

[31:08] could have gotten, you know, filtered water from somewhere and stuck it in

[31:13] test tubes and had the test run. So, it's actually better if the incoming

[31:18] homeowner does the testing if that's the part you want to get at is for the

[31:23] incoming people. But, I am concerned about who's here now. Uh and making sure

[31:29] that you know again if something needs to be done at either on a house by house

[31:36] basis for treatment or in terms of what we're aiming for in terms of regulations

[31:44] around um behaviors and different chemical use and that sort of thing then

[31:52] that's where I'd want to put the effort. I see the others causing a lot of pain

[31:58] without the desired effect.

[32:02] » Good. >> Yes, it would lead to gathering data. I

[32:05] agree with that, but it would be slower. >> This is a good starting discussion and

[32:10] we'll we'll separately maybe through the groundwater protection committee uh

[32:14] continue these discussions. But I just wanted to finish up with this slide just

[32:19] again reaching out if if you got any other ideas uh what what you like or

[32:25] dislike what's going on in the town regarding our open space regarding our

[32:29] recreational uh facilities and programs. please reach out to uh Samurai and we'll

[32:36] make sure we get uh things into the plan. And again, we'll be back to you uh

[32:41] later in the year hopefully with a uh a uh edited and complete uh draft for

[32:49] public comment. But thank you for your time tonight. C

[32:53] » can can I add one more >> can I make one more comment please? One

[32:57] more question. Um and that is um ticks. Um as you know um there is some concern

[33:05] about tickborne diseases and as uh the best way that we can reduce tickborne

[33:14] diseases is to reduce the deer population in town which is hugely

[33:19] overpop populated. And there are many reasons why it is um it might be valid

[33:25] to try to reduce the deer population. everything from the destruction of

[33:30] native plants to the amount of deer who are starving in the winter now because

[33:34] there's not enough food to eat. Um so one of the suggestions from the town

[33:39] forest committee is to expand public hunting and um we know that um uh depart

[33:48] the board of health is interested in public health and uh trying to expand uh

[33:54] deer hunting in Sherburn might be a big task um people love deer um and may not

[34:02] recognize the public health dimension of it But we were curious whether the board

[34:08] of health would be supportive of an effort by led by the town forest

[34:13] committee to try to expand hunting. Now, we don't have a we don't have a strategy

[34:18] yet. We don't know exactly what expand hunting means. They haven't come up with

[34:22] one, but if that were to take place, we were curious on whether board of health

[34:27] would be willing to sign on to that effort um or not

[34:32] » or at least consider it. say that was that's exactly the topic I wanted to

[34:37] bring up with you uh to find out because to me that is a good intersection

[34:42] between our open space and public health uh is the tick issue and whether it ties

[34:48] back to the deer or mice more or which one um

[34:56] » could it also >> I am interested in talking about that

[34:59] but I will and I don't know if it was recorded but sometime during

[35:05] COVID around this early period of COVID I think that's when it was and someone

[35:11] in town must know um the exact date is someone from the state fish and wildlife

[35:19] I believe came and spoke about what it means to manage deer populations

[35:26] and how much management would have to go on what the numbers are of deer that you

[35:32] would need too. Um all

[35:36] uh and then how and safety around that. So right now there is the program where

[35:44] the Rocky Narrows um woods I don't know if there are others in town but bow

[35:49] hunters are permitted in there. They have to be a certain distance from the

[35:54] trails and know not on Sundays or something like that. I can't remember

[35:59] exactly all the rules, but uh that's an option. There's a group that you can

[36:06] individual property owners can contact and they have vetted hunters for safety.

[36:14] Uh we permit a bow hunter or have had a few bow hunters on our property. um had

[36:22] some very delicious uh venison bordin I must say

[36:26] » uh some winters but it's and Dober has a program for uh deer

[36:33] hunting but the percentage of deer that are ultimately

[36:39] bolden do is a fraction of what it needs to be to really

[36:45] um according to this fish and wildlife person to really make a dent in IC

[36:51] population. So that's the tricky part of it is if you want open space to be

[36:56] enjoyed by everyone, although the deer hunting season is relatively short,

[37:02] um it would maybe pose a conflict depending on how

[37:08] widespread you want this program, but somewhere out there there may be a

[37:13] recording of that. And it was an excellent presentation.

[37:18] Daryl, I I think I attended that, but uh we can we can get that person or similar

[37:24] fish and wildlife resource out here again because

[37:27] » they're constant learning more and more about uh populations and and strategies.

[37:33] So, >> that might be something to do.

[37:37] » And is any anyone else on the board interested in

[37:42] pursuing this topic with open space and concom? I'm definitely

[37:49] » I'm very interested. But I was going to comment that one of the other problems

[37:53] that we're seeing is that the other vectors include all the mice and the

[37:59] moles and the squirrel, you know, like a the problem is that the nymphs are

[38:03] living on a lot of animals. And um it was kind of scary over 10 years ago when

[38:10] I was reertifying for my boards. The second time

[38:14] the there was some paper about um robin in England that was carrying a nymph. It

[38:21] was like really scary because there a lot of animals that are carrying the

[38:26] ticks and so it's not just limited to the deer. So and global warming is only

[38:30] making things worse. I don't really know. It's a little bit scary because

[38:35] [laughter] I'm not really sure what to do except

[38:38] I'm secretly hoping that all the wild turkeys are having feasting on the

[38:43] ticks, but I [laughter] have no idea. Anyway,

[38:48] » no, but but with 78% of forest, I I don't think we would expect anything

[38:54] else, right? And the neighboring towns, the forest car is dwindling. So, all the

[38:59] deer's coming in here. >> Yeah. That's true. We have the

[39:04] » right. So, so um but that's where we we choose to live with and and

[39:12] so so so introducing Turkey is maybe a good idea. I mean I don't know.

[39:20] It it sounds like you are at least sympathetic with the goal of trying to

[39:25] reduce um the tick population which is a you know a vector for carrying disease

[39:31] and exactly how that's going to be done. You might be willing to engage in

[39:36] conversations with open space and town forest committee to to think about a a

[39:43] possible plan. Is that is that right? >> Yes. And like Daryl mentioned, we

[39:49] probably should involve Mass Wildlife or >> some other organization that has more

[39:56] information and more technical knowledge about these things.

[40:01] » Um rather than you know I mean we could spend hours but there are people who've

[40:07] got PhDs on on controlling ticks perhaps you know. Well, we have some very good

[40:13] PhDs on the town forest committee who are uh very knowledgeable about this.

[40:17] So, >> Fantastic. Yeah.

[40:19] » Certainly certainly lead discussions on deer management and tick reduction

[40:24] strategies, >> right?

[40:26] » Maybe we should co-host a some kind of a panel with multiple different

[40:32] specialists. A few years ago, like long time ago, when my children were very

[40:36] young, there was something like that in at the high school where they had

[40:40] multiple different specialties. I think it was much more medically focused, but

[40:44] it didn't matter because it was the same subject. And I think there's a lot of

[40:49] interest and obvious and there's a good reason to be concerned. So,

[40:55] I mean, I would I could talk for hours, but I'm sure there are a lot of people

[40:59] who would be interested. I think it'd be very valuable even though there's

[41:02] controversy within the medical world. It's um we we all can see that there's a

[41:10] problem.

[41:13] » I had another [clears throat] thought about the water testing and all that. So

[41:17] when we moved into Sherban, I was extremely concerned about this because

[41:23] coming in from Boston where the public water is tested very often and you know

[41:30] they have to you know limit they have very strict limits and all those things.

[41:36] So, so we did do testing for the first 5 years every year just to ensure that

[41:43] that um that you know all the levels were okay.

[41:49] Now every area is different. So one of the questions I kept asking myself was

[41:57] what are the things I should test for? Yeah.

[42:02] um should we and so so we used one of the testing companies in Norwood to do

[42:08] these tests and I just said do whatever you can you know [laughter]

[42:14] uh so so so figuring out what to test for that's that and making a list of

[42:21] that may be a useful and um >> useful enterprise

[42:28] » if I could share uh I I als also chair the groundwater protection committee and

[42:33] we we have all that guidance on our website.

[42:37] » Oh, you do? Okay. The other >> Yeah. The the other thought I had was at

[42:42] some point and I was I was I was even yesterday talking to Mark Oram about

[42:47] this and Mark said, "Tom, you've spent so much time and effort and creating

[42:52] databases of of all these things. I mean, this is amazing work what you're

[42:57] doing." Um so so um >> so instead of trying to identify the

[43:07] property or the or the grid or the location let's say let's take Sherban as

[43:12] a whole and if anybody did water testing they could fill the data anonymously

[43:22] on in the database. it's got no implications to their property value.

[43:29] It's got nothing to do with it with any of this. Uh and then we would have a

[43:35] database. So So would that would that be a good way to do it? It's it's a great

[43:40] thing to do and the groundwater protection committee has learned a lot

[43:43] from two studies that we did uh one uh with the state uh and uh your board uh

[43:52] was uh involved with it also for PAS testing. Unfortunately, it was only done

[43:58] on like 35 properties in town, but we learned a lot and it was anonym strictly

[44:04] anonymous, >> right? And uh we we learned that we have

[44:08] a PAS issue in this town and and our levels were much higher than comparable

[44:14] towns. Uh and secondly, we had a uh a nonprofit in Worcester AAP. They did a

[44:22] uh more simpler broadcast survey of uh 13 common contaminants.

[44:30] Uh that was done on 41 homes in town an anonymously

[44:36] and from that we learned that 40% of the private wells uh exceeded one or more of

[44:43] the uh one one or more of the uh parameters. So we we learned that uh

[44:51] there's not enough testing going on in this town and and that

[44:56] there's there's water issues that aren't aren't being addressed.

[45:00] Right. And and like Daryl said, I think Daryl made a very important point that

[45:04] that people living here should be testing. It's not that you test when you

[45:08] leave the town. It's

[45:12] » I do encourage people. In fact, >> in fact, our cap is doing another we did

[45:18] a seminar for the town three or four years ago. Our cap is doing another one

[45:22] connected to climate change in Wells and they're certainly going to be talking

[45:26] about testing. That's actually next month. And uh I had that posted on the

[45:30] town website. Uh >> now if we the the other thing is if we

[45:36] could hire one company to to do the tests

[45:42] uh they may even be willing to have someone who would who would transport

[45:48] the water from the town or there we could have a collection center or

[45:52] something. >> Actually something that other towns have

[45:54] done, >> right? the the homeowner pay pays for

[45:58] the test but uh the agent takes the sample and ships it to the lab.

[46:04] » Yeah. >> Other towns do that.

[46:06] » So so yeah. So so we have multiple strategies uh if that is that is the

[46:12] reason for people not taking up testing but but I would love to do testing at

[46:17] least once a year, right? And maybe a neighbor a neighborhood gets together

[46:25] and they stagger the testing so that you know roughly around one test a month in

[46:32] a particular neighborhood >> you know would would be would be

[46:36] something that that's worth considering >> right

[46:42] » you know I just remembered I you know again being the groundwater protection

[46:46] committee uh I get at least once a month an email from a resident asking with

[46:51] questions about water testing. And I got a very unfortunate one uh two months ago

[46:57] for the very first time. I've I've looked at a lot of water data in this

[47:01] town, probably hundreds of private wells. Uh this uh family

[47:09] had nitrate above the 10 milligrams per mill uh

[47:14] federal and state limit. I've never seen that in my life. a private well over 10

[47:20] milligrams of nitrate. So, uh,

[47:25] you know, there there's there's reasons to be testing. We encourage people to do

[47:29] it, but there's just not enough. >> Sorry to interrupt. Would this maybe be

[47:35] better for a future meeting? I just feel like we're getting really into the

[47:40] nitty-gritty of everything and I agree that this is a very important

[47:44] conversation to be having. I just we could spend hours on this and I I don't

[47:49] want us to we have some people here for other things. Um

[47:53] this may be something we want to continue or not you know up to up to the

[47:57] board obviously. >> Um can I make one last point before we

[48:01] change the subject? The it's historically the collection of data for

[48:08] public health purposes um required by law with a transa with transactions is

[48:14] precedented. That's why premarital, you know, when people get married, they're

[48:18] required to do syphilis testing and other things because there's a value to

[48:23] the public good when the information is collected. And so it wouldn't be

[48:28] something that hasn't had a precedent if we were to to

[48:34] were to consider um collecting this information. And the I think the reason

[48:39] that the state for example requires um upgrading of I don't know a structure to

[48:47] code for example at the time of a building permit is to force people to

[48:52] follow to keep things um beneficial to the

[48:57] greater good rather than to just individuals. And that's I think the the

[49:01] board of health um might need to consider looking from that perspective

[49:07] because it's not although individuals might object it may have a benefit to

[49:10] the to the entire town with shared resources if we were to require it

[49:19] since um encouraging people doesn't always

[49:24] work.

[49:28] That's why making it easy was my preferred path. But anyway, yes, lot to

[49:33] discuss on that. >> Let's set aside time to do this um

[49:39] you know in more depth uh with more people also who would like to

[49:47] address this particular issue. Um but this has been good. Uh thank you

[49:53] Tom all these for illuminating. Thank you.

[49:58] » Yes. >> Thanks.

[50:00] » And there's some other things to talk about around open space, but we'll save

[50:04] that for another time. I'll chat with you on the side, maybe.

[50:08] » Thank you, Tom. We can connect about scheduling a time in the future to have

[50:13] this conversation with everybody. >> Very good. I'll uh I'll wear my

[50:19] groundwater protection hat for that one. >> Sounds great. Well, we can loop in Sam

[50:24] with his open space hat. Sounds good. >> Again, thanks very much, folks. We

[50:29] really appreciate it. >> Thank you guys. Have a good one.

[50:33] » Good night. >> Take care.

[50:35] » Good night. >> Uh so before we move on, because um that

[50:41] was our one scheduled item, I just want to see if there's anyone waiting for

[50:45] something who might be a little shorter. For example,

[50:50] one Whitney or 51 Western A. Mark. Yeah, I don't know if uh the person for one

[50:56] Whitney Street's available or the person for 51 Western A if they're here in the

[51:02] audience. >> If they are, if they could let me know.

[51:07] » Yeah.

[51:10] Before we move on,

[51:16] I don't see I don't see any hands going up and I don't hear any

[51:21] » I don't [clears throat] see the applicant for um one Whitney Street

[51:26] here. >> Okay.

[51:31] Or 51 Western >> or 51 Western. Let me double check.

[51:40] Okay. So then let's go to um how about

[51:48] Meadow Brook Commons as I did see

[51:54] Ian Bond unless they're here for other

[51:59] ventilating topics that we're talking about.

[52:03] » No, I am here for Metore Commons. Thank you.

[52:07] » Okay. All right. Okay. So, uh I had been checking in with

[52:15] peer reviewers that we the town and the board of andor the board of health has

[52:20] used in the past and had reached out. I have [clears throat] to say kind of

[52:25] return calls I guess just got a little slower because it was the summer, people

[52:30] are on vacation, uh other kinds of changes going on. In

[52:36] any case, uh, and so I've been able to contact,

[52:42] um, one peer reviewer who we've used before,

[52:47] not always as a peer review, but certainly as technical support for

[52:50] specialty issues related to Sherborn, uh, including water quality testing. And

[52:57] that would be, uh, Drew Smice from TRC. He's well acquainted with jurborn data

[53:06] conditions here. Um, and he has the additional uh distinction that I wasn't

[53:15] finding elsewhere of having worked with quaries

[53:21] on their um basically rock disruption activities and the impacts on

[53:29] groundwater and and other kinds of things. So that was unique in the um

[53:36] hydrogeeologist world that I was speaking to. The other

[53:42] one of the other consultants that we had used in the past was uh Dr. Pete

[53:46] Shanahan of hydroanalysis. He has

[53:51] largely retired and is not uh even though we were a client in the past for

[53:57] a number of things. I think concom also used hydro analysis for um a number of

[54:03] projects, but he had a very strong recommendation for Hodgej water

[54:10] resources and I did reach out to that person and spoke

[54:15] with uh with the owner and they certainly have the experience in

[54:22] the kinds of things that we might want to look at including

[54:27] um the bedrock disruption in terms of impacts and analysis related

[54:34] to that but not as direct um you know with both the activity

[54:41] of blasting or drilling or hammering and um groundwater modeling but objects

[54:48] water resources does a lot of modeling and analysis

[54:54] uh for issues So I both of them seem very strong. I am waiting to get

[55:02] a resume from one of them and then we can distribute that out to the board. So

[55:07] I don't know if we'll be able to make a decision this evening. And I also need

[55:10] final kind of hourly rates from them to make sure it's in line with what uh

[55:18] other rates have been. Um, so I've had partial information on that

[55:24] and it looks favorable so far, but I just wanted to have a more

[55:29] formal read on what that would be and I think they're both

[55:36] uh have time available in the near term. So that also works out.

[55:43] » Was that Hajes? H O D G S is that correct? Uh uh sorry I

[55:50] I was using kind of the possessive but it's hodge water resources.

[55:55] » Hodgej. Okay.com.

[56:00] » Thank you. >> Um

[56:03] » okay. But yes, uh

[56:08] Drew has Smite of TRC has more years in the field, but

[56:15] uh Hodgej has uh depth of of analyticals.

[56:22] So they're kind of funible. Uh and the other option that I will just

[56:29] throw out there for consideration is that

[56:33] again to keep things moving along um if there's any constraints on their time.

[56:40] Maybe we lit them up since they both are tuned

[56:46] into what our issues are from my discussions with them. So they know what

[56:50] it is we want to understand which is narrow fairly narrow. uh is we could

[56:57] take the bedrock person and have them work on that and we can take Hajj and

[57:01] have them work on on the irrigation issues.

[57:09] So, >> thank you for putting in that um

[57:15] research. It's helpful to have names. I do have a just a few quick questions.

[57:21] Um, just one I do want to introduce David Buckley. He's here with me from

[57:27] Toll Brothers. Jeff couldn't make it today. And we're also joined by Rick

[57:34] Roll, um, who is our blasting consultant as well. So, just wanted to make the

[57:40] board aware that they're here with me. Um in terms of the peer review

[57:48] consultant um >> don't have a preference on either to say

[57:55] um but I think it'd be helpful if we start defining the scope of what we're

[58:01] submitting. We have talked about submitting

[58:06] uh an earthwork permit, a well permit and I think there was still

[58:13] uh discussion on if we were formally submitting an environmental health and

[58:17] impact report. So I the consultant themselves are going to want to know

[58:21] that as well what they're being scoped to review.

[58:24] » Yeah. And then I would say in that idea of splitting the peer review, I think

[58:31] our preference is always to stay with one if we can. It's usually makes the

[58:36] process smoother where you have one consulting getting to know the

[58:40] documentation, getting to know the site and the constraints and can look at it

[58:44] holistically. >> Um, so

[58:50] so I think those are my thoughts on that. So, we're happy if you want to

[58:56] prepare a scope for them to respond to on peer review, but I think we should

[59:01] clarify exactly what we're submitting tonight as well if we could.

[59:08] » Okay. [clears throat] Uh yeah, I thought I had

[59:13] to double check whether the email went, but yes, we do need more information.

[59:18] » Absolutely. uh from you on um certainly on the bedrock side in

[59:26] particular >> um

[59:29] » you know how much from where uh I've seen some information that I

[59:36] guess was part of another report submitted to mass D possibly but I

[59:42] haven't had a chance to go through that to see if all of what we need is in

[59:47] there or if that's more broad strokes, but it seems like there's going to be a

[59:52] fair amount of material removed. So, you are correct on the earthworks. It sounds

[59:57] like it's going to be, you know, orders of magnitude above our 350 cubic yard

[1:00:03] kind of metric. >> Y

[1:00:05] » for triggering certain things. Um, so what's going to be removed from

[1:00:13] where? How's how are the fines or whatever

[1:00:17] you'd like to call it going to be managed on site uh while they're there?

[1:00:23] Are you planning to use it for fill anywhere on site

[1:00:28] um

[1:00:31] for the

[1:00:36] season the high groundwater relative to foundations? And certainly if you're

[1:00:44] thinking of putting foundations into bedrock, like carving out bedrock and

[1:00:49] dropping in a basement, um that for drainage, it's I would

[1:00:55] assume going to get very difficult. and our interest in the drainage and the

[1:00:59] reason for the two-foot separation between the bottom of the foundation and

[1:01:04] historic high groundwater, not just observed groundwater at any particular

[1:01:09] time, even if it's in a wet season. Uh we want we're aiming for historic,

[1:01:14] especially following drought years, um is to reduce the chance of mold in

[1:01:24] people's holes. So that's the point of that. So if you could think about it

[1:01:29] that way. And again, the only time we have permitted

[1:01:34] uh foundation to be on bedrock is when one side of what I'll call the

[1:01:41] basement was open right out to ground level. So that then there is the

[1:01:49] potential for channeling the redirecting water around the

[1:01:55] basement and then out to grade and it's more gravity a gravity system rather

[1:01:59] than relying on pumps and more extraordinary measures especially in

[1:02:04] spring weather um periods. >> Yeah. So those are some things that

[1:02:09] would be helpful to know and you should know that for the board of health. Uh we

[1:02:15] would not rely on uh you know numbers that maybe you've

[1:02:20] been collecting along the way about where that historic high groundwater is.

[1:02:26] That is something that gets observed by the agent for the board of health out in

[1:02:32] the field. So, if you're planning on doing that, you can do it once by having

[1:02:39] the agent with you when you're doing it. Um,

[1:02:43] » does that make sense? >> It does, but I do want to speak about a

[1:02:48] few things related to that regulation. Um,

[1:02:54] first, it does fall within your regulations that are applicable to title

[1:03:00] five systems. So, it's written in on your additional bylaws for septic

[1:03:06] systems. This project is served by municipal sewer, so is not

[1:03:11] jurisdictional to those specific requirements.

[1:03:16] However, Toll Brothers does share your same concern and understands that a wet

[1:03:22] basement is going to result in an unhappy homeowner. Right. This is a

[1:03:29] development that will be operated by a homeowners association.

[1:03:35] Um, and they will be installing foundation

[1:03:40] drains which are open to gravity around all the perimeters of their foundations.

[1:03:45] It is their policy to do this whether the homes are in groundwater or without

[1:03:52] groundwater. Um, so it's something that they've

[1:03:55] learned through there are multiple developments throughout the country that

[1:03:59] helps alleviate that concern. So I think we'd be working through to the same goal

[1:04:06] on that. Um, we have just found a different method.

[1:04:13] I do have Rick here to speak about just processing of bedrock on site. The

[1:04:22] document that was cited was part of our uh final environmental impact report the

[1:04:29] FIR that was submitted to the Meepa office. So this is part of our whole

[1:04:35] broader intervation transfer act permitting that we're going through to

[1:04:40] be enable us to bring water to the town municipal water and that was I'd say a

[1:04:47] quick highle estimate. We will be fine-tuning

[1:04:51] our earthwork estimates as we go through this process. Um, and we'll be

[1:04:56] developing kind of like heat maps showing you in depth of anticipated

[1:05:01] bedrock cut as well as cut to fill. We are working through the efficiency of

[1:05:07] the site to help try to balance it to the best we can to minimize that

[1:05:12] earthwork. And we're also working with our neighbor at Koolage Crossing to

[1:05:17] support them as well where they do have a need for material. So trying to get

[1:05:23] that um I'd say more efficient and we are happy to report those details as we

[1:05:29] work through this. Um so I'm hearing we need to detail more about our

[1:05:35] earthworks, >> detail how we're protecting our

[1:05:39] foundations. Um I guess just again to my and we're

[1:05:45] going to be submitting a um

[1:05:50] earthwork earth removal permit as well as a well permit for the irrigation

[1:05:55] well. Is it also an environmental health impact report or are we how is that is

[1:06:04] that what the board is looking for?

[1:06:09] it. You know, most we've done few EHIRs in town, they have

[1:06:17] typically been tied to larger or otherwise unusual septic system

[1:06:24] situations. >> Okay. For the most part the that section

[1:06:30] is you know some of the requirements that we had for the EHIR was targeting a

[1:06:38] dense you know large scale of dense effluent plume um from a septic

[1:06:46] that does not apply here the area of impact analyses and nitrogen loading

[1:06:51] calculations that sort of thing and what the steady state level of nitro rogen

[1:06:56] would be in the effluent um and how far down gradient from the system. Uh so

[1:07:04] the rest of it has been left to be determined based on the project because

[1:07:10] there is such incredible variability even with our single family homes in

[1:07:15] town incredible variability from one property and project to another. So we

[1:07:21] have tried to make it so it would be more flexible.

[1:07:25] I don't even know yet. I I don't except for the things that we're mentioning

[1:07:29] that we would like to see and then have some analyses done on what the potential

[1:07:34] impact is of the bedrock disruption um you know might be or what other kind

[1:07:39] of best management practices we might want to see or checking along the way.

[1:07:44] not sure yet which is that's what the peer reviewer uh would be helping us

[1:07:50] with for practical measures to take because it's a known phenomenon that

[1:07:59] even just drilling a well uh the disruption of the rock or the

[1:08:06] bore hole um can result in elevated levels of

[1:08:10] various minerals for a relatively short period. period of time

[1:08:16] when installing a well. So, it's not uncommon to see a spike, but when you're

[1:08:21] removing this much, and there have been other things in Connecticut and some

[1:08:27] other locations where it's just suspected that bedrock disruptions can

[1:08:32] sometimes result in leeching at a very high rate and manganese is of particular

[1:08:39] concern for the kind of rocks we have around here. Um

[1:08:45] so really our regulation very specifically right now is just that

[1:08:51] uh as the the the applicant will need to alert

[1:08:58] uh get a list from the assessor's office. We can give you different

[1:09:02] guidelines of how to go do that and and the timing and all the rest and what the

[1:09:06] notifications it should say. But uh you will need to send out

[1:09:11] notifications to

[1:09:15] property owners within a quarter mile of not just the center of the site but of

[1:09:20] the site. So any edge of the site and the assessor can provide that. They can

[1:09:26] figure that out and just give you a list. And people just need to be

[1:09:30] notified that if they want before and after testing pre- project and post

[1:09:37] project activities that they need to do their testing, you know, by such and

[1:09:42] such a date before you start doing that. So that's where our regulation falls

[1:09:46] just so people have something about a before and after status.

[1:09:56] So that's We're concerned about it. We've seen

[1:10:00] things happen in town with a few projects.

[1:10:04] So that that's what it's all about.

[1:10:10] The bedrock disruption specifically the earth removal

[1:10:14] that's also a concern because removing uh certainly I assume you're not going

[1:10:20] to be removing top soils but we don't want to see top soils removed because

[1:10:24] they limit you know the filtering capacity. um for rainwater before it

[1:10:29] reaches groundwater and recharges our supplies.

[1:10:37] So I think to respond to your questions related or your concerns related to

[1:10:43] blasting, we do have Rick on the line who can

[1:10:47] speak to general procedures that will be followed.

[1:10:51] » Um >> Rick, if you want to jump in here.

[1:10:55] » Yes. Um, thank you. >> Okay. So, you don't have to do every

[1:11:00] detail because what >> I'll be using this information and

[1:11:05] especially because we didn't include like a presentation on the details.

[1:11:10] We're going to talk about the peer reviewer. So, but whatever information

[1:11:13] you give me, think of like what will help us

[1:11:17] uh tightly define the tasks for the peer reviewer.

[1:11:24] Does that make sense?

[1:11:30] or is that possible? >> Um

[1:11:37] I mean you can define you know whether you're doing a mix of blasting,

[1:11:42] drilling, hammering, you know, uh uh what do they call it?

[1:11:48] Like expansive grouts or something that help fracture things

[1:11:54] that would be helpful. Um, no,

[1:11:58] » we can certainly include that information. I guess I just don't want

[1:12:03] to >> delay the process, right? So, I think

[1:12:09] » we'll get our materials compiled, but in the meantime, I do think it would be

[1:12:14] helpful to have a scope to give those peer reviewers so we can get them lined

[1:12:18] up, get them drafting their proposals, get them under contract, so when our

[1:12:22] materials are ready, there's not that >> typical potential like two week to six

[1:12:29] week gap of getting somebody else under contract as well.

[1:12:34] Um, >> I just didn't know whether

[1:12:39] uh was it Rick was going to speak about a

[1:12:44] lot of details that we would be writing down now or will we get something in

[1:12:49] writing? >> You'll absolutely get something in

[1:12:53] writing. We just want to, >> you know, give the board a chance to

[1:12:57] hear >> from our expert how things are going to

[1:13:00] happen and we can respond to questions now as well.

[1:13:04] » Okay. No, and to me that feeds into the peer reviewer process, but if it was too

[1:13:10] much detail, I would feel that we should have listed it differently on our agenda

[1:13:14] because we are not for open meeting law supposed to discuss

[1:13:20] things that don't fall under our heading. So that's

[1:13:24] » okay. >> Concern. I'm just trying to stay on

[1:13:27] track on a regulatory requirement front. But I think

[1:13:32] describing what's coming um in a way that we can use that to start prepping

[1:13:38] the uh both ask more questions of the uh peer reviewer choices um

[1:13:47] and and get that moving would be good.

[1:13:55] Agreed. We would like to get it moving. >> Yeah.

[1:14:03] » Okay. So, uh Rick, you would like to speak?

[1:14:12] » Hello. >> Hello. Yeah.

[1:14:14] » Can you hear? >> Can you hear me?

[1:14:17] » Absolutely. >> This is Rick Gro. Uh I'm Richard J. Gro

[1:14:22] Technical Services. I'm an industrial seismologist that is specialized in the

[1:14:27] uh preliminary uh procedures for blasting of rock in construction and

[1:14:35] mining and uh New England. Uh Massachusetts has a very extensive set

[1:14:41] of regulations on both uh the environmental respect for sites and

[1:14:48] surroundings and also for the active drilling and blasting, hammering or

[1:14:54] other means of uh the excavation of rock.

[1:14:58] uh Massachusetts probably has the most extensive extensive set of regulations

[1:15:04] in the nation and it the reason being is a we have a high water table a high

[1:15:11] population density and a lot of rock and there's a demand for the land that that

[1:15:17] rock occupies. So uh this is a very common procedure. It's handled by men

[1:15:23] who are uh are highly experienced, licensed, and tested. And in

[1:15:31] Massachusetts, they have a zero tolerance policy on infractions uh

[1:15:37] related to any aspect of blasting. So, it is a very very strictly regulated

[1:15:43] process. This is not taken lightly by any regulatory authorities and they are

[1:15:49] overseen by everybody uh the food chain and the government. Uh

[1:15:55] they have a number of bosses that watch everything they do and they have to

[1:16:00] account for their explosives annually to the ounce. So there there's very little

[1:16:07] room wiggle room for the blasters that do this work. it's done in a very safe

[1:16:13] and professional manner. That being said, the first thing that they that you

[1:16:18] have to do is your preliminary. Uh in this case, you're very concerned about

[1:16:23] groundwater because you're heavily dependent on it for your drinking water

[1:16:27] resources. Uh and as such, the site plan has already incorporated into what what

[1:16:34] is known as the SWIP, which I'm sure you're very aware of the SWIP. They've

[1:16:38] put uh silk fencing all the way around the site. There's zero discharge. Uh

[1:16:43] they manage their uh sediment so that it doesn't leave the site. They manage

[1:16:49] storm water so it doesn't leave the site. And that is a continuously

[1:16:56] uh scrutinized component of the site dur during the

[1:17:00] entirety of the construction process. Then what they do is they assess how

[1:17:06] much rock has to be excavated. A rock rock excavation is about 10 times more

[1:17:12] expensive than soil excavation. So it is behooves the contractor to minimize rock

[1:17:18] excavation to the greatest degree possible by working with existing

[1:17:23] grades. And as you've seen their plans that have been submitted, they have

[1:17:29] conformed all of the streetways, the elevations of the foundations so that

[1:17:35] they're all relatively similar in depth throughout the the breadth of the site.

[1:17:41] uh and that way they can uh best utilize the uh material that's excavated to

[1:17:49] bring about uh their final grades that are useful and uh structurally sound. Uh

[1:17:57] so then after that we have to notify everybody that they're offered

[1:18:02] inspections. You're mentioning a quarter mile radius from the property boundary

[1:18:07] for water testing. Uh that's actually not uncommon. Uh more commonly that's

[1:18:13] done in a mining situation, but it's in a large construction site, they would

[1:18:18] also do something of that nature as well. Uh not everybody will take you up

[1:18:22] on it, but again, it's not unheard of. Uh but in the Commonwealth of

[1:18:28] Massachusetts, everybody who owns a home or any kind of improved property that is

[1:18:33] within 250 ft of any blast site, any bore hole drilled with the intention of

[1:18:38] loading it with an explosive charge has to be offered a pre-blast inspection.

[1:18:43] And this is a regulatory uh requirement to get a blasting permit.

[1:18:49] The blasting contractor has to take a letter from the person that performs the

[1:18:54] inspections to the fire department to demonstrate who was offered an

[1:18:58] inspection, who had one done, and who didn't. And at that point, they issue a

[1:19:03] blasting permit to the contractor for 30 days. Uh there there are many many steps

[1:19:09] involved in this process and there is an enormous amount of scrutiny. It's very

[1:19:14] carefully planned and executed. uh every foot of hole that they drill

[1:19:19] into the rock they charge for. Every ounce of explosive that goes into the

[1:19:24] ground is charged for. So there are a lot of people making sure that

[1:19:28] everything is done to a very tight specification

[1:19:32] there. There's very little room for um for uh or space for second guessing the

[1:19:41] this is a very very strictly regulated process. Uh, as far as the continued

[1:19:47] blasting, while they're blasting, the contractor has to maintain seismic

[1:19:53] monitoring at the closest structure for every blast. And they have to make that

[1:19:58] available to the fire department on request. That's the regulatory authority

[1:20:02] in town. Uh, within six hours of when the blast takes place, should the fire

[1:20:07] department request it. That's a regulation as well. So, there's no just

[1:20:11] taking a measurement and sitting on it. uh they have to be able to make to

[1:20:15] produce it quickly. Uh as long as there are no issues with them exceeding their

[1:20:21] limits, uh no li uh no problems with things such as uh fugitive rock material

[1:20:27] coming off of the site, which is controlled through the use of uh what

[1:20:32] are called blasting mats. They weigh 11,000 pounds each and they typically

[1:20:37] drape about eight to 10 of them over a small construction blast to limit the

[1:20:43] material from escaping or becoming fugitive from the site. It does

[1:20:47] ventilate enough that it allows the gases to escape from the explosion

[1:20:51] process, but it acts like a net that keeps the solid materials from being ex

[1:20:56] uh cast off of sight or or even out of the the blast area. And as long as they

[1:21:02] adhere to all of these uh restrictions for safety and precaution, they are

[1:21:10] continuously allowed to blast on the site. They just go back every 30 days

[1:21:14] and show demonstrate they've not had any complaints that are unresolved and

[1:21:19] they've not had any issues with exceedences on limits for ground

[1:21:23] vibration or air blast or any um fugitive rock issues. At that point, the

[1:21:28] fire department is compelled to renew the permit for another 30 days. And that

[1:21:33] goes on so on and so forth until the completion of the project. Uh, and

[1:21:38] that's basically what what we do. This is a this is a standard procedure

[1:21:45] that is done in Massachusetts every day all over the state. Uh, there's 11

[1:21:52] million pounds of explosives used in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts every

[1:21:56] year. So there's a lot of blasting going on. They've got this right, especially

[1:22:01] in this state. There very little to be worried about.

[1:22:08] » Uh well, we're we are aware that when it comes to blasting that the fire

[1:22:13] department is really the lead for that. Um, however,

[1:22:18] uh, per our regulation, I guess you've seen, we will require SDS's for whatever

[1:22:24] blasting agents are going to be used. That will help us develop the

[1:22:29] notification that you will be mailing out to people, informing them about what

[1:22:34] they might want to test their water for. And we sounds like there's uh the

[1:22:40] inspections I assume of like people's foundations or whatever. Uh the pre

[1:22:48] blasting contractor that goes out. I assume that's structural investigations.

[1:22:53] But for the board of health, we're just um preparing people with that kind of

[1:22:59] baseline of what their water quality was pre activity. Uh so that

[1:23:07] is really just mailing and informing people that it's coming is the

[1:23:12] requirement that we have for you. Um and then we will be happy to hear about any

[1:23:17] kind of good management practices that would prevent the leeching

[1:23:21] that's leeching of minerals from and what do you refer to the material fines

[1:23:28] or debris or I have no what it's called in

[1:23:32] your field. Well, uh, as far as the explosives

[1:23:38] products, the vast majority of the explosives products are comprised of

[1:23:44] ammonium, nitrate, fuel oil, and water. Uh, that's called a bulk explosive

[1:23:49] product. Uh, they may or may not be allowed to use those on the site

[1:23:56] depending on what what is discussed and what is finally agreed. Uh they don't

[1:24:01] use any perchlorate containing explosives in Massachusetts.

[1:24:06] Uh the expansive grout that you mentioned has also been barred in

[1:24:11] Massachusetts because a it doesn't work and b if it's misused it can cause uh

[1:24:17] shards of rock to be cast into the air unexpectedly because it locks up against

[1:24:22] the collar or the hole and creates a a bursting effect on the stone that

[1:24:28] confines the material at the collar of the hole. uh as far as hammering is

[1:24:33] concerned. That's also what we call secondary breakage uh takes a lot longer

[1:24:38] to do secondary breakage than uh blasting breakage, primary breakage. And

[1:24:43] typically they try to design every blast so that the rock they need to get out of

[1:24:47] the way is out of the way once because the blasting contractor does not get

[1:24:52] paid to break the rock twice. He does that at his own expense. So they have to

[1:24:58] make sure that their [cough and clears throat] designs

[1:25:02] safely and effectively break the rock to the satisfaction of the general

[1:25:07] contractor.

[1:25:10] [clears throat] And in doing so, the explosives products are entirely

[1:25:15] consumed in the explosion process in the bar hole. And what you were left with is

[1:25:20] carbon dioxide, water, and some NOX gases which escaped the site.

[1:25:27] Excuse me. So there there should not be any

[1:25:32] leeching of explosives products after the blasting takes place. That is all

[1:25:37] evaporated with the explosion process. There should not be um any chemical

[1:25:44] reactions with the rock as a result of the explosion process.

[1:25:50] The rock is not going to change in composition simply because it's

[1:25:54] disenfranchised. And whatever chem what ground chemistry

[1:25:58] you have out there now, you will have after the blasting is done because it's

[1:26:03] still the same rock. It's still the same overburden and it's still the same

[1:26:08] groundwater that you've had there all along. They're not bringing anything in

[1:26:12] extra.

[1:26:15] Uh we understand that it's more that the surface area of material that is exposed

[1:26:22] to rainwater um there's just more leeching potential

[1:26:28] if if the material is something that would uh

[1:26:35] » well be you're you're making a point that it's the surface active area of the

[1:26:39] of the newly broken rock that is >> a potential leeching hack. hazard, but

[1:26:45] it's the same rock that they that it's sitting on top of there. There's no

[1:26:50] difference in the chemistry of the rock and there's no chem difference in the

[1:26:55] chemistry of the of the groundwater or the precipitation.

[1:27:02] Where where's that change come from? Can you identify the a source of new other

[1:27:09] than the explosive product that's used to do the breakage material, but

[1:27:14] As I started out in the beginning, it's even it's acknowledged even for

[1:27:20] drilling wells in bedrock that it's not uncommon to see

[1:27:29] a temporary rise in mineral content in the water that is coming because you've

[1:27:36] just chopped through rock and exposed more surface and little pieces are

[1:27:40] present. That's that's documented. So this is just a very similar thing. It's

[1:27:47] not just a bore hole. It's a large area with a bunch of smaller pieces of rock

[1:27:52] with I'll be dramatic. Okay, let's say there

[1:27:57] salts in the rock. Certainly that would change if it's embedded and encased in

[1:28:03] in rock versus exposed on the surface of the rock. lots more surface

[1:28:10] » as a result of being broken up. And I don't know what kind of size you get

[1:28:13] down to with blasting or if it's a complete mix of

[1:28:18] from dust to huge chunks. Um I don't know. I haven't witnessed

[1:28:24] » related question >> lasting up close. So

[1:28:29] » ask a related question. our concern and again you don't have to we're just

[1:28:34] trying to provide data to the people around it. So that's why you have to get

[1:28:40] a permit from us so that we can monitor that to get the permit you have to

[1:28:44] notify the neighbors within a quarter mile to do testing of their border.

[1:28:51] » Can I ask a question which is related to the point you're making Darl? Yeah.

[1:28:56] » U this is for our speaker. Um you said in your presentation which

[1:29:02] thank you very much is excellent. Um that the material is removed from the

[1:29:08] site and confined. How do you do that when the water table is high?

[1:29:15] How do you cope? >> Because the blasting causes the rock

[1:29:21] which contains lead, manganesees, other heavy metals and other elements into

[1:29:27] very small particles which can which is how it gets into the overburden.

[1:29:33] » Well, first of all, the the rock that you're talking about this is volcanic

[1:29:38] rock. uh principally is an orthite,

[1:29:43] silica, um some other other minerals [snorts]

[1:29:49] aside from that that that have all been extruded from mantle. Uh the if there's

[1:29:57] lead in the rock, there's it's going to have been there all along. It's not

[1:30:01] going it's a blast is not going to produce lead in rock. They, as far as I

[1:30:07] know, they don't even use lead in any of the explosive products.

[1:30:10] » No, no. The rock that you're breaking apart has heavy metals in it, manganese,

[1:30:18] lead, and other materials, which is the reason that we, the board of health, are

[1:30:27] require some of these this information. And I was curious because obviously you

[1:30:33] have a lot of experience with it. What how you compensate for the material? How

[1:30:40] do you keep it confined to the site when the water table is high? Because you're

[1:30:45] blasting the rock apart into little pieces that are not found in nature,

[1:30:50] which is the reason that these heavy metals are released is because these are

[1:30:55] » what you're referring to is re is known as mobility.

[1:30:59] uh the the individual constituents of the rock you are afraid are becoming

[1:31:03] more mobile increasing their concentration in the groundwater.

[1:31:07] However, what first of all the the material once it flows through the

[1:31:12] groundwater or through the ground, it is coming in contact with other rocks and

[1:31:17] it is being filtered back out just the same way that uh vados water water

[1:31:22] percolating through soil from precipitation is scrubbed by the soil

[1:31:26] and the rock that it flows through. It's not go it's not going to create this uh

[1:31:32] pool of contaminate contaminant that's been leeched out of the rock and taken

[1:31:36] off site. First of all, the uh site is designed so that water doesn't flow on

[1:31:41] the surface offsite anywhere. It's called 100% capture. The second thing is

[1:31:48] is that you have water that's already in the ground when there's a high water

[1:31:52] table that is putting uh resistance to any more water flowing into the ground.

[1:31:59] It's more likely to flow off the surface or just stay wherever it's being

[1:32:03] retained to like within the sweat. So there's there's not going to be this uh

[1:32:09] spike in any minerals. and you take the the readings before and after in the

[1:32:14] local wells to demonstrate that that's a that's a common uh that's a common

[1:32:19] procedure >> that there's a little out outside of

[1:32:25] America but in other countries where mining activities are quite common.

[1:32:29] There is evidence of blasting and other mining activities that when the rock was

[1:32:36] broken into small pieces, it has contaminated the local groundwater,

[1:32:41] which is the reason we're asking these questions because we are trying to

[1:32:45] protect the drinking water. But when the bro the rock is broken apart by the

[1:32:51] blasting procedure, the very small particles leech or leak and they can um

[1:33:00] get into the overburden in quantities which would not be otherwise found in

[1:33:06] nature. And so that's how they get into the drinking water. So that's why I was

[1:33:10] asking how you you said you have 100% capture. How do you accomplish that?

[1:33:15] They put a a ring of hay bales and silt fence entirely around the site before

[1:33:20] they start digging. That's the first thing that's done. They It's the It's a

[1:33:26] regulation. I believe it's federal that they do that. It's not just state. It's

[1:33:32] the they have to capture all their water and contain it on site that and in doing

[1:33:39] so a lot of these problems are mitigated. Uh the second thing about

[1:33:45] this is is that if there were any of these contaminants in the rock, they

[1:33:50] would have been liberated by the act of the people who drilled the wells and

[1:33:55] then drew water out of them daily for years and consumed them. They

[1:34:10] site. And the reason being is is that they

[1:34:14] to the rock that they were blasted out of than to the surroundings that lay

[1:34:18] outside the site area. Okay. All right. Let's not go down this

[1:34:25] path much more. We've just seen with projects in town that the the rise

[1:34:32] manganesees has been the problem that has showed up on a number of occasions

[1:34:36] and it was dramatic and it impacted the use of the water. So we're just trying

[1:34:42] to make provisions for that. So

[1:34:46] » yeah, >> we're good. It sounds like you're going

[1:34:49] to do some protective things. I just want to mention when he's talking about

[1:34:52] SWIP that stands for SWPP which is a storm water pollution prevention plan

[1:35:00] that uh state and federal regulations have requirements for different

[1:35:07] activities that you need to control storm water quality and construction is

[1:35:13] one category of that that is covered there industrial various industrial ag

[1:35:20] agricultural categories etc. So that's what the SWIP is. Um so storm water

[1:35:26] pollution prevention plan which it sounds like. All right. So you're going

[1:35:29] to work on that. Just a quick question. It sounds like do you typically do

[1:35:34] testing of uh some wells in the area beforehand?

[1:35:40] Because our regulation is to provide that in the absence of that being done

[1:35:45] but we haven't had blasting before. So, uh, is there any,

[1:35:52] you know, if you do that as a routine measure for your projects?

[1:36:00] » Here, here's how a pre-blast inspection is handled. It is a visual inspection of

[1:36:05] the property and you can look at the wellhead, you can look at the filtration

[1:36:11] system in the house, run the water, things like that as a visual inspection.

[1:36:17] If you're going to do a >> but it's not it's not a take a sample

[1:36:22] and bring it to a lab for analysis. Well, that's if you're just if you're

[1:36:27] just incorporating >> overlapping requirements that you're

[1:36:31] already doing something that we're going to then

[1:36:34] » right if there's a water well on the property

[1:36:38] if there's a water well on the property the person doing the pre-blast

[1:36:42] inspection has the uh has an obligation a professional obligation to look for

[1:36:48] whatever he can see of that system and to document its condition.

[1:36:54] That's part of the regulation. The regulation is written in the language of

[1:36:58] the regulation such that it says it understands that certain things are not

[1:37:03] readily visible to the inspector because the inspector is saddled with doing

[1:37:08] everything within 250 ft of a blast site. it the job might be enormous

[1:37:13] already and it's just not physically um um or not functionally convenient to the

[1:37:22] contractor to do that much work. However, that's where when they specify

[1:37:28] a water test be done beforehand, you can you can take care of that at the same

[1:37:34] time that you take care of the pre-blast or you can have two separate entities do

[1:37:38] it as well. I've seen it done both ways. >> Uh so just so we're clear, our

[1:37:46] regulation does not require that the applicant carry out the testing of water

[1:37:52] in all of those homes. We just require that folks get notified so they can go

[1:37:58] get their water tested. >> Yeah. That that that we would not be

[1:38:02] expect we would not anticipate doing anything more than our regulations as

[1:38:06] there as we were just saying. Normally it's a visualized inspection. I mean

[1:38:11] we've we've done blasting numerous times on many many different job sites. So you

[1:38:16] know we would we would not be involved in that. That's not typical.

[1:38:21] » Okay. But you do do the structural inspections of people's home

[1:38:25] » as as we just mentioned as a requirement >> before you start and after you.

[1:38:30] » Yep. That that that's a requirement. It's 250 ft. Um, it's not a quarter mile

[1:38:36] for for for structural, but you know, that's that's regulations.

[1:38:40] » Are you aware, if I may, Darl, are you aware of our regulations? Uh, I'd

[1:38:45] suggest you look at them for bedrock disruption. It's 305-3.10

[1:38:51] in our regulations and that will help guide you to what you need to do in my

[1:38:55] view. Thank you, Darl. >> Yep.

[1:39:01] And as I said, we will prepare version of the the letter that you send out. You

[1:39:06] just are responsible for sending it out. Okay. Um All right. So, this uh has

[1:39:15] explained a fair amount that you will be capturing material

[1:39:22] again. Are you planning on reusing any of that removed material as still

[1:39:27] elsewhere? or you don't have to tell me all that

[1:39:32] now, but if you could include some information in whatever you write up.

[1:39:36] » Yeah, absolutely. >> So, we understand the movement of

[1:39:38] materials around um the property and it sounds like it'll be across the two

[1:39:43] properties and that's fine. We do kind of think of this they're very different

[1:39:47] projects, but they are intertwined. Um

[1:39:52] so, that would be helpful.

[1:39:59] Okay. >> Okay.

[1:40:02] » So, we >> um so we are submitting the well permit,

[1:40:10] the earth works and then is the board then considering granting us a waiver to

[1:40:16] the EHIR or what's the path for that? >> I think requiring the EHIR because it's

[1:40:24] such a big project. Okay. Just wanted a yes or no so we noted how to proceed.

[1:40:30] » The vote might board might vote on it. >> Could we

[1:40:35] do that today? Uh,

[1:40:41] as I was saying, we've had very few EHIRs. They've been

[1:40:47] more formulaic when it's the septic system that we're on top of. But this is

[1:40:54] something entirely new for Sherborn the kind of a project. So I don't know

[1:41:04] that I mean I have not yet come up with something that I would specify uh but

[1:41:10] I'm only one board member. other board members could speak up about what they

[1:41:14] think might be on the horizon, but I don't think we know enough to specify

[1:41:20] what those requirements would be. We've talked about some of the bedrock.

[1:41:25] Certainly again would like the the peer reviewer to take a look at um you know

[1:41:32] since they are familiar uh presumably at least one and I think it would be

[1:41:37] essential to have that particular peer reviewer for that expertise alone um and

[1:41:43] familiarity of just verifying about the procedures

[1:41:50] that you're going to have in place for managing that and minimizing this

[1:41:56] potential leeching of materials from material that has been broken down into

[1:42:04] a greater surface area. So, uh that's that is part of what why we

[1:42:11] want that um regular consultant with that expertise. So,

[1:42:18] but it may be covered mostly covered by the other rules and regulations that are

[1:42:24] in place. And that goes for storm water uh also to some degree since we have

[1:42:31] often relied on what planning board and conservation commission are able to

[1:42:37] accomplish. like to remind >> interest

[1:42:41] » at our first meeting that there was an agreeance to

[1:42:46] defer to the other boards to the planning board as well as the

[1:42:50] conservation remote uh conservation commission for

[1:42:55] » the um storm water regulations but I'm

[1:43:00] interrupting and Mark has his hand up as well.

[1:43:04] Go ahead, Mark. >> Darl, all I was going to explain is that

[1:43:08] whatever the board decides, the regulation I cited 305-310,

[1:43:15] that's in the EHIR regulations. So to eliminate the EHI regulations could

[1:43:22] possibly eliminate the need to do bedrock disruption process processing

[1:43:27] with what was mentioned earlier you knowifying near butters a quarter mile

[1:43:32] around and so forth. So, I'd suggest the board if you're going to eliminate the

[1:43:37] EHIR, which I don't suggest unless it's duplication for other boards, is that

[1:43:44] you at least designate the bedrock disruption as being required. Thank you.

[1:43:51] » Okay. And I guess right, I'm looking at our regulations differently and I view

[1:43:55] that as a requirement. The EHR was for like extra steps of analysis.

[1:44:02] um try to predict

[1:44:06] impacts of a project and again that prediction of impacts from a large

[1:44:12] septic system there's plenty of examples about the modeling mod flow all the rest

[1:44:18] you know so there are methods for that this one there are

[1:44:25] less clear methods for predicting what the u mineral content in bedrock

[1:44:31] fractures will be post having blasted apart

[1:44:37] uh rock above that bedrock and the bedrock fractures. So I don't that's the

[1:44:42] part I'm not sure we can wholly accomplish but there are other

[1:44:46] approaches such as managing how one does it uh judicious judicious use of

[1:44:54] blasting agents. Um, so there there may be other things that we would require,

[1:45:00] but we don't have enough information yet to specify that. Not like we're trying

[1:45:05] to save up and have something

[1:45:09] a monumental surprise later on. We're really trying to make something

[1:45:14] practical for this project. And again, we're just starting to get going on more

[1:45:20] of the information about the details. I do appreciate the practical approach.

[1:45:26] This is the third meeting where we've asked this question and we are trying we

[1:45:32] just want to work with the board. So I do see Rebecca has her hand

[1:45:35] » but we had also asked for more information about

[1:45:39] » how much was going to be disrupted and how and we did not know that a report

[1:45:44] had gone to NEPA that contained some of that information until just a few days

[1:45:49] ago. So, we didn't know that that we were

[1:45:54] supposed to go find it to that other route. We didn't get any emails that I

[1:45:59] know of containing that. So,

[1:46:06] must Sarah unless we got something earlier, but I was watching for

[1:46:10] information to come in and watching for what the irrigation plan was going to

[1:46:14] be. I gather that was also in the FEIR um to some degree. I don't know if it

[1:46:20] has all the details that we'd want to see, but that's that's what we needed to

[1:46:26] be able to start to formulate. So, we just hadn't seen it.

[1:46:35] » Rebecca, >> I'd love to have been specifying it now.

[1:46:40] » Yeah, I agree that it would be really helpful for us. Part of the reason not

[1:46:45] only would it be beneficial for you to design the project for the site, but

[1:46:52] also it would be beneficial for us because of our responsibility to the

[1:46:57] abutters.

[1:47:04] So we'll do our best to take the information if you can.

[1:47:10] Uh, the FBI I think is fairly tightful. Do you think the FBI has all of the

[1:47:16] information that we need? >> The FBI does not address blasting.

[1:47:24] » Okay.

[1:47:34] So, it would be helpful for us to have that. Uh is there

[1:47:41] how extensive is the irrigation plan?

[1:47:46] It addresses irrigation I think in a very high level way. We were scoped by

[1:47:51] the water resource commission, the state authority that will approve the inter

[1:47:55] race and transfer act to explain the relationship of the private wells that

[1:47:59] the um applicant has installed and how those

[1:48:04] will be controlled or acknowledged when we have drought conditions and how we

[1:48:09] are minimizing the irrigation flow. But it does not um

[1:48:16] quantify

[1:48:19] exactly projected flows. Um, >> and are is it clear to you that because

[1:48:29] those wells have been drilled, but they are not regulated by Mass D because

[1:48:34] you're not using them for public water supply

[1:48:38] that it's under our jurisdiction. >> Yes.

[1:48:41] » And we don't permit we don't permit wells for irrigation unless for

[1:48:46] agricultural >> did. So,

[1:48:49] » can you point me to the regulation that does have that prohibition? Um, I have

[1:48:55] been through your regulations. I have actually engaged council on this

[1:48:59] question because I've heard it multiple times presented in the town and from

[1:49:04] what I can see, you have a de facto prohibition on irrigation where you

[1:49:09] allow one well per property and that well cannot serve both portable and

[1:49:15] irrigation demand. And in this case where we have our boil source

[1:49:23] served by the water district that we are creating and bringing in and investing

[1:49:29] $9 million to provide to the town. Um we don't rely on our wells for irrigation.

[1:49:37] So I just I haven't found that regulation. I've heard it stated. I just

[1:49:42] haven't found it. Uh I don't know the numbering offand

[1:49:50] Mark if you have it at your at your uh fingertips but we will send you that. Um

[1:49:57] it's also uh

[1:50:02] if it's not explicitly written out it's how we have applied it.

[1:50:07] We made it clear in our documentation that

[1:50:12] the need for irrigation has to be justified to us. The burden of proof is

[1:50:17] on the applicant. Yeah,

[1:50:20] » we have treated wells on people's properties as supplying their needs for

[1:50:27] um for the dwelling and people obviously do some watering to some degree, but we

[1:50:34] don't allow a second well on the concept of somehow there's magically more water

[1:50:41] uh because you've sunk a second well and that water wouldn't otherwise be used uh

[1:50:46] for the drinking water of your neighbor. Um, we view it as a shared resource. Uh,

[1:50:53] we're working off of bedrock fractures, not easily mapped, not hard to know what

[1:50:58] the quantities and yields are. Certainly, different parts of town have

[1:51:02] different yields from their wells. Uh, so it was a a measure to

[1:51:09] get people more aware of water use. And from what I saw the number of

[1:51:17] something like 12 to 18,000 I don't remember exactly gallons a day

[1:51:22] anticipated being used by the system. That is essentially for irrigation

[1:51:29] a loss of groundwater that's going to affect that transpirate that's going to

[1:51:35] be gone and not be like a septic system where

[1:51:40] we somewhat have a closed cycle of pulling water out of the ground and most

[1:51:43] of it goes back in by a septic system. So that is our concern because we have

[1:51:49] seen a lowering of water levels in bedrock fractures. People have been

[1:51:54] deepening their wells lately or having to drill new wells or

[1:52:00] make taking other measures to get more water, but deepening has

[1:52:06] and certainly happening with greater frequency of waves. Um,

[1:52:11] and that's our concern. We only have fractures. We don't have any major

[1:52:15] aquifers in town that we can tap into. And we don't

[1:52:22] I I won't say we because the whole board hasn't deliberated, but I'll tell you my

[1:52:27] perspective is that

[1:52:32] certainly when one we're okay with establishment watering to establish any

[1:52:37] vegetation that you're planting that I know will be required probably by concom

[1:52:43] um in certain areas of the property because of the wetlands etc. But

[1:52:50] mostly people's landscape is surviving just

[1:52:54] fine without being irrigated for the most part in town. So

[1:53:00] irrigation systems lead to a lot of overwatering

[1:53:04] um frequently. >> Darl, I see Mark has his hand up as

[1:53:08] well. Can we >> maybe give him a chance to speak too?

[1:53:13] » Sure. >> Thank you. Um, thank you for your help.

[1:53:17] I am chair. [laughter]

[1:53:22] But if if I'm becoming repetitious, then I'd happily switch over. Take it away,

[1:53:27] Mark. >> Okay. I No, one second.

[1:53:32] » I always I always await my chair to direct me when I can speak. It's the

[1:53:36] chair that runs the meeting. Uh, in respect to your question, Darl, it's

[1:53:40] 305-2.7. the amount of wells allowed. So, it

[1:53:46] specifies everything you just mentioned, including that even a business, a

[1:53:50] multiple lot to treat it as a single lot. So, um I'd suggest your lawyers and

[1:53:55] you're welcome to call us, too, but you review that with your lawyers. That

[1:53:59] regulation 3052.7 talks about addition.

[1:54:10] Looks like we just uh lost Mark.

[1:54:16] Um I know that he is in a in a location with not the best internet connection.

[1:54:24] So um Darl, how would you like to proceed

[1:54:29] here? >> Uh I think we can keep going. Um you

[1:54:34] know, he's not part of our quorum and I assume he'll try to call back in. So, if

[1:54:38] the co-hosts can just keep an eye on when he is trying to get into the

[1:54:43] meeting. >> Of course.

[1:54:46] » Oh, here he is.

[1:55:02] » I do also just want to make a note of the time. Um, we do have a number of

[1:55:07] other items. >> It is getting late

[1:55:10] » and I apologize to everyone. I apologize. I apologize for the

[1:55:16] disconnection. I don't know how much you heard. I'm just referring everyone to

[1:55:20] 305-2.7. And if any questions come out about or

[1:55:24] please continue to keep um our whole staff in the email loop as well because

[1:55:28] I'm not getting all the emails. I appreciate that as well. Thank you all.

[1:55:34] » Okay. So the general message is we're not keen on seeing that kind of volume

[1:55:40] loss of water from our shared resource

[1:55:46] for large scale irrigation that is more cosmetic

[1:55:53] for establishment. Again establishment is a different thing. One must water to

[1:55:57] get the plants started but after that we don't want to see it.

[1:56:03] And in droughts, we don't want to see watering.

[1:56:12] That would be my guidance at the moment. But I've spoken plenty. Uh are there

[1:56:18] other board members who would like to weigh in on any concerns?

[1:56:26] » Yeah, I have just just listening to the presentation that was made. Um

[1:56:32] I I know it was brought up that I can't remember how many tons of explosives

[1:56:36] were used for um this kind of work in Massachusetts, but um the one thing you

[1:56:43] really have to remember is that the town is very unique. I'm sure only a small

[1:56:47] fraction of those explosives were used in towns that are are similar in a

[1:56:54] profile to to Sherbet. Um, so that's something that that I think

[1:57:00] really needs to be looked at. And then the other thing is I' I'd love to try to

[1:57:04] find or see what studies have been made um

[1:57:10] with towns similar to Sherwood. In other words, having wellwater and seeing

[1:57:17] what was the impact. Did an impact happen immediately? Did something happen

[1:57:21] two years down the road? Um, things like that. It's just just more information

[1:57:25] that I'd like to see. Um it again, we we we live in a fairly unique community in

[1:57:33] Massachusetts. There just aren't too many towns that are 100% private. Well,

[1:57:38] um and the impact of something like like this could could be substantial.

[1:57:48] I will add that when they found out the the issues with

[1:57:54] perchlorate, um, mask just had all the public water supplies across the state

[1:58:01] run per chlorate tests so they could get a handle on what the distribution was.

[1:58:06] that was tightly tied to um where blasting was done, where you know the

[1:58:14] cuts of 495 through uh bedrock outcrops um say in the northwest of Boston. uh

[1:58:24] high levels there. It was tied to particular companies and

[1:58:31] uh the highest levels were tied to particular companies where they think

[1:58:35] they weren't using the uh blasting agents as efficiently

[1:58:40] uh so that they might be destroyed through use. I don't know what if the

[1:58:45] dynamics of chlorate are different from whatever um

[1:58:50] ammonium nitrate or whatever else is being used. uh in

[1:58:55] the agents that will be used for this project, but

[1:59:00] does it really all go to NOx uh and and enter the atmosphere and does it

[1:59:05] precipitate back out on the ground? If it's raining, does that change the

[1:59:09] dynamic? Anyway, we're still concerned about nitro rising nitrogen levels and

[1:59:14] groundwater. So, these are our concerns.

[1:59:20] Do you have any comments? >> Yes, there perchlorate containing

[1:59:25] explosives are illegal in Massachusetts. They they have to submit their MSDS

[1:59:33] sheets on every product they're using when they apply for a permit. And if it

[1:59:38] cannot contain any perchlorates because there was an issue with the con uh the

[1:59:44] presence of perchlorates in groundwater about 20 years ago and it was from a

[1:59:50] project in the Blackstone Valley Mall I believe. So yeah, you're you're not

[1:59:54] going to see perchlorate containing explosives. As far as nitrate is

[1:59:58] concerned, you have a far bigger problem with nitrate coming out of uh septic

[2:00:03] systems, golf courses, um even automobile exhaust than you do

[2:00:09] from remnant nitrate out of an explosive because the explosive is entirely

[2:00:14] consumed. The nitrate is the oxidizer that makes the nitrogen or makes the

[2:00:19] explosive burn. So that's where the nitrate goes. So you there's not going

[2:00:25] to be any pollution from either of those that you have to worry about. Plus that

[2:00:30] these are very shallow cuts. The deepest they're going to blast is

[2:00:35] about 20 feet or less. The kind of sites that you're worried about are big pits.

[2:00:41] They are 50, 60, even 100 feet deep and have far broader and higher uses of

[2:00:49] explosives than you will see on a site like this. This site would use a

[2:00:54] relatively minor amount of explosives compared to the uh what's done on large

[2:00:59] road cuts and quaries.

[2:01:06] » Okay. And um are there diagrams in the FIR showing this? Because

[2:01:13] until you just mentioned 20 ft, I had no idea of the extent.

[2:01:21] Well, uh, as far as the site plans, >> uh, the site plans demonstrate the

[2:01:27] existing ground surface and where all of the utilities are going, so you can see

[2:01:32] exactly how deep they're going to have to dig.

[2:01:37] Uh the the vast majority of this site has is the flank of a uh solid rock

[2:01:43] landform and the areas that are closest to where

[2:01:47] they're to the surrounding homes are going to have little or no blasting

[2:01:52] because that material is all natural overburden. That's all sand and gravel

[2:01:57] down at the flanks of of this landform. Everything in the flat the valley flats

[2:02:01] is four feet of sand and then another four feet of gravel underneath it.

[2:02:09] Okay, not the best filtering, I assume.

[2:02:15] Anyway, okay, fine. We'll have the peer reviewers work on that. Um, Bose,

[2:02:23] any comments from you?

[2:02:27] No, >> I think we've raised we've raised a lot

[2:02:29] of interesting questions and Richard's so confident in making the point that

[2:02:35] there is no potential threat but do you have say a site where you did something

[2:02:43] similar and you've tested water around the area and there were no changes.

[2:02:47] Um do you have data that you can show us?

[2:02:52] uh like like what Steve suggested, you know, is there historic data? Do do

[2:02:56] these changes happen within 6 months or within a few years?

[2:03:02] So, >> so, so these these these are the

[2:03:06] concerns and as you expose more rock, there's more area for water to interact

[2:03:12] with rock and and the point that Daryl was making was that there is more

[2:03:18] opportunities for leeching into groundwater.

[2:03:22] C can I just may though you you're you process a construction site, you dig

[2:03:28] down, you expose your rock, you blast, you either remove it or you process it

[2:03:32] and you reuse it on site and then you grade it with normal wood fill and then

[2:03:38] you build a home there. It it's not like you're leaving a blasted ledge sitting

[2:03:43] there for years and even then it it's the same rock. But it's not just sitting

[2:03:48] there. I know you have this, you may have this visual, but it it filled over

[2:03:54] and >> filled. David, what what you're

[2:03:57] suggesting is actually even more terrifying

[2:04:01] because you're pulling this rock out that was sitting hidden from water for

[2:04:07] maybe centuries, right? And no escape route for minerals

[2:04:13] that were contained in that rock into groundwater unless there was a fisher

[2:04:18] there. And now you're breaking it into small pieces and spreading it all over

[2:04:22] the place. So that is an even terrifying situation, isn't it?

[2:04:29] » That same rock has been withering indefinitely in the past.

[2:04:34] » And yeah, this is this is an endless

[2:04:37] question uh endless discussion. But but you know uh you see where we're coming

[2:04:43] from though from >> Yeah.

[2:04:45] » Yeah. And we will, this is why we will have the peer reviewer who can spend the

[2:04:51] time with us to explain it or allay our concerns. And

[2:04:56] so [snorts] I think

[2:05:01] I think you've heard the kind of information that can be helpful to us.

[2:05:05] If you can pull that together, we'll do our best to turn around quickly and ask

[2:05:10] more questions if we see gaps to

[2:05:15] formulate something for the peer reviewers to get them going. Peer

[2:05:19] reviewer or um

[2:05:23] and and just start working on this. Are there issues or not? We're just trying

[2:05:29] to be precautionary because once things go wrong, it's too late.

[2:05:35] and our job is to just um protect our water resources essentially.

[2:05:42] It's our primary job. So, um,

[2:05:48] and so as you're pulling together

[2:05:51] information about what we've been talking about, the things that you think

[2:05:54] will address the concerns that we've expressed, if you have more questions

[2:06:00] for us about, you know, do you want this or not, please do just send an email or

[2:06:06] something, let us know. And uh I'll also be asking, you know, is there anyone

[2:06:14] else on the board who would like to help with

[2:06:18] review? Well, I mean, we should all be reviewing the information as it comes

[2:06:21] in, but we can't all talk about unless we're in an open meeting. So, I don't

[2:06:26] know if there's anyone in particular who wants to

[2:06:31] uh communicate on this

[2:06:38] or you can think about it. >> Yeah, we'll get back to you.

[2:06:42] » Whether you have time

[2:06:46] to do it and when Julie's back, we'll check with her, too.

[2:06:53] So, um,

[2:07:00] so these are probably not all the things that you wanted to hear this evening,

[2:07:03] but Liz and and Rick, uh, do you have any other

[2:07:11] questions for us now? Otherwise, we still have a

[2:07:16] » no work to get done tonight. I think just when is the

[2:07:24] next meeting and getting us on the agenda for that as well.

[2:07:28] » You're right. So, um >> September second.

[2:07:33] » Yeah. >> Yeah, that's what I thought. Great.

[2:07:36] September 2nd. Um we will be working in the meantime. We can have a subgroup of

[2:07:41] two work on something to to you know >> okay

[2:07:46] » get some information back but we can't go beyond to again for open meeting law.

[2:07:51] So >> you could put a there is a north shore

[2:07:56] water sewer district commission meeting cited for that as well. So if we could

[2:07:59] just work together so we're on the agendas at split times that would be

[2:08:03] helpful. >> Okay.

[2:08:06] » I can coordinate with them. >> Appreciate it. Thank you.

[2:08:09] » Worse. >> Okay.

[2:08:13] » All right. >> All right. Well, thank you very much

[2:08:15] though for bringing uh this was helpful to at least get I feel like I know much

[2:08:21] more about what the project might be looking like. But um again, if you can

[2:08:28] point us right to what we should be looking at in the documents

[2:08:33] um >> we'll help get you what you need.

[2:08:38] Um, you know, and I appreciate the board's help and appreciate your

[2:08:42] concerns. I definitely believe, you know, a peer reviewer will significantly

[2:08:46] help you with your process here. We are eager to get them on board so that you

[2:08:49] can help get the guidance that you need. Um,

[2:08:53] » you know, we are advancing numerous other approvals right now. So, as you

[2:08:58] can understand, you know, that that's part and part of why, you know, a little

[2:09:02] bit of the I would say frustration, the urgency in our voice of trying to make

[2:09:06] sure we sort of advance things, understanding what our requirements are,

[2:09:10] which is why we'd ask the question about EHIR, if it's required or not, because

[2:09:14] if it is, we just want to advance it and get it going. If it's not, then yeah,

[2:09:18] it's not. We we just >> No. And I don't want to hold you up on

[2:09:20] that, but I also don't want to have you doing things that aren't necess.

[2:09:25] » We we don't either. We we agree. I just think for us and to give you some

[2:09:29] perspective from from our end, timing is very critical. There there's a lot of

[2:09:32] moving pieces and a lot of different state entities that we're up against

[2:09:36] some other timelines and that's why we need to advance all the different

[2:09:40] channels. Your your board being one of them um expeditiously and we're

[2:09:45] concerned that we don't know the permit that we or not process what we need to

[2:09:51] submit I guess to you that that's what we're

[2:09:56] pressing. >> Yes. Yes, I can appreciate that. So, uh,

[2:10:01] as someone who works on permitting for industrial facilities, I understand that

[2:10:06] stress. >> You understand?

[2:10:08] So things that would really help is if you're going to stay on attempting to

[2:10:15] get irrigation, if you can please,

[2:10:20] you will shorten your process if you can orient it right from the start to be

[2:10:25] something that is merely to address establishment of plants. That will be

[2:10:31] different for us. uh other board you know members had

[2:10:36] expressed that at a prior meeting. So um but a a largecale

[2:10:42] constantly used irrigation system is going to be very difficult

[2:10:49] for us given what we see happening with the water resources in town as

[2:10:56] the town grows and as climate changes or whatever the reasons are or frankly

[2:11:01] anywhere on the planet practically where groundwater is being pumped. pumped up

[2:11:09] to the surface for use. There is never the recovery in the groundwater levels.

[2:11:15] Uh wells just continue to be deepened phenomenon across the world. So um

[2:11:22] that's what we're trying to avoid. It would be outrageously expensive for

[2:11:28] us to run water from the MW

[2:11:33] into town. We have 60 miles of roads and there's a lot of bedrock.

[2:11:39] So it is and a relatively small population

[2:11:44] and frankly not everybody can be tapping into the MWA system. So we're trying to

[2:11:49] be as sustainable as we can be. We practice it for the most part folks in

[2:11:54] town based on the behaviors we see in town. We'd like you to be part of that.

[2:12:01] I guess that's the pitch.

[2:12:05] So, um, the more you can do to get to that, that will make the process go

[2:12:12] easier so and faster.

[2:12:22] Oh. Um, but again, all with questions, ideas, links to things we've discussed,

[2:12:29] whatever else, please feel free to to send it over.

[2:12:40] Okay. Um, and I'm not hearing anything else

[2:12:45] from anyone on the the project team. So, I guess we're going to move on to

[2:12:54] another agenda item. Unless you want to,

[2:13:00] Liz, I see that you're off. >> Just going to say thank you.

[2:13:06] » Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you for uh coming to inform

[2:13:10] us. That was very helpful.

[2:13:15] Okay.

[2:13:21] All right.

[2:13:24] Get to

[2:13:28] Okay.

[2:13:34] Okay. Let's do

[2:13:40] one. Whitney Mark. >> Sure. And I apologize. I know I my uh

[2:13:46] audio for some reason doesn't work on my cell phone versus the computer, but the

[2:13:51] computer just lost power. Uh one Whitney Street. Uh the board had reviewed it and

[2:13:56] asked the question. Uh just to give you a little history, this is uh the site

[2:14:02] that has a septic tank and a cesspool after it. Uh so no design flow.

[2:14:07] » We're going by the four bedroomedroom assessment that was done on that house.

[2:14:12] And um they were planning to put just a master bathroom in the second floor. And

[2:14:19] they have a sun porch below it that's conditioned. And we've been told now

[2:14:26] that they can't do the bathroom upstairs without reconstructing the sun room

[2:14:32] that's conditioned on the first floor, I guess, due to support issues. And the

[2:14:38] board did note that that wouldn't be um the that there would be a need for

[2:14:44] another decision by the board if that was the case. And that's why I'm

[2:14:47] bringing it back to the board >> and

[2:14:53] » because now they're >> D have any specific guidance?

[2:14:58] » Yeah, they did. They did. They Yeah. And they said as long as you're not

[2:15:02] constructing a room, a bathroom is not considered a room. That bathroom would

[2:15:06] be okay, the master bathroom on that second floor bedroom.

[2:15:10] » But this is a room. So that changes the whole scenario of when DP wants the

[2:15:18] local entities to require updates to the septic system is when you're redoing a a

[2:15:24] room. So and this is a room and that's the issue.

[2:15:28] » Yeah, >> they put it in our laps unfortunately

[2:15:33] and >> they're tough decisions at the local

[2:15:36] level. the state had originally just said cesspools not allowed then we

[2:15:41] wouldn't even be here they would have to update this

[2:15:44] » but that's not the case and so we have to take a case by case and it's usually

[2:15:48] during the process of a building application so now that

[2:15:52] » the sun room has to be reconstructed that is indeed where it triggers the

[2:15:58] septic system to be upgraded unless the board feels differently

[2:16:05] Okay. So from D's perspective and and this is in a different territory than

[2:16:11] the um that flowchart that we have uh about percentage

[2:16:18] um of house expansion or remodeling that goes on and how much starts to look like

[2:16:25] new. >> We don't necessarily just apply because

[2:16:29] this wouldn't meet that 50% I don't think for this. No, this this would be

[2:16:34] okay with the 50%. What it is that reconstructing a

[2:16:38] » sun room that's conditioned and to reconstruct a room

[2:16:42] » creates now and triggers the need for an upgrade to the septic system. Since one,

[2:16:47] we don't know the design flow. We don't even know if that sun room, even if it

[2:16:52] falls into the assessment of the four bedroomedroom, if it would even be a

[2:16:56] septic system that can support four bedrooms. That that's the unknown

[2:17:00] because it's accessessful without >> with a tank in front but without any

[2:17:05] design flow. So is it a two-bedroom? Is it a threebedroom? Are we allowing them

[2:17:09] to recondition a room that may not even fit into the room count of the unknown

[2:17:13] design flow? That's the reasoning behind it. I know it's hard for homeowners to

[2:17:18] understand this, but it's the unfortunately it's the objective of D to

[2:17:23] upgrade septic systems at the point of building construction of rooms. The

[2:17:28] bathroom was different, but this is a room and it's a reconstruction of a room

[2:17:32] that we don't even know if the design flow will allow for it. So that's that's

[2:17:36] where this stands. >> Now, are they going to reconstruct?

[2:17:42] » Very tough. >> Are they going to reconstruct the

[2:17:46] foundation, too? >> Yeah, they have to do that. And I think

[2:17:50] they were hoping they could keep the sun room so there would be no need to

[2:17:56] reconstruct it because they understood the consequences if that was the case.

[2:18:00] But they came back to us to explain the owner uh came back to explain they do

[2:18:06] need to reconstruct the room, the first floor sun room that's conditioned.

[2:18:11] » Yeah. For safety, I would assume. >> Yeah. I don't think they can hold on to

[2:18:16] what's Yeah. I don't think they can hold on to what's there uh the way they're

[2:18:20] proposing it because uh >> No, but if they if they build rebuild

[2:18:24] the sun room, is that okay? >> No. According to the state, that's not

[2:18:30] okay because that's considered a room. >> And we don't know the design flow of the

[2:18:36] septic system. >> Okay.

[2:18:37] » And rooms come into the bedroom count totally. Uh it's you add up the number

[2:18:42] of rooms and then divide by two and that's how you determine the bedroom

[2:18:46] count. If we had a design flow for this property, it'd be a different story if

[2:18:51] it was a fourbedroom and they were just reconstructing this room.

[2:18:55] Uh but we don't have a design flow. So we really don't know if this room would

[2:19:00] even fit into the design flow of what's there because cesspools have no design

[2:19:06] flow. They never did per test. They never did any deep holes to consider

[2:19:12] groundwater. And so that's why you sell the house. So, and this one is a

[2:19:18] cesspool which had a septic tank put in front of it years ago, but that didn't

[2:19:22] give it any design flow. The original system is a cesspool with no design flow

[2:19:28] if that helps. >> So, so Mark, when you say

[2:19:31] » and it's interesting, so Oh, go ahead. Sorry.

[2:19:35] » Oh, just real quick. So, so Mark, when you say upgrade, um, that means a whole

[2:19:40] new septic, correct? >> That is correct. A replacement septic

[2:19:43] system. That would suffice. They may need waiverss, but that would um be a

[2:19:49] replacement septic system to answer your question. Even for one, even for one

[2:19:54] additional room >> with the elimination of the the cess

[2:19:57] poolool and the septic that was put in front of them.

[2:20:00] » Yeah, the septic tank they might be able to save. I don't think it's a two

[2:20:04] compartment and that's not the expensive part of a

[2:20:10] septic system. It's the the designing doing the soil testing and designing a

[2:20:14] septic system to be the appropriate distance from groundwater and to be

[2:20:18] designed large enough to meet the perk rate. So if the perk rates a very high

[2:20:23] perk rate, slow perk rate, then the system has to be larger. If it's a

[2:20:28] faster perk rate, then it it doesn't have to be as large. Uh but that is it's

[2:20:33] it's a it's not an easy it's not an easy uh overview with the homeowners and and

[2:20:39] you know but it is the objective of D to get sessables out of the environment

[2:20:43] because they're not environmentally sound.

[2:20:46] » Yeah. >> Thanks Mark.

[2:20:48] » You're welcome Steve. >> So the the sun room is currently

[2:20:53] conditioned right? >> I believe so. Yes.

[2:20:57] » Yeah. So, we're it is really just replacing

[2:21:01] the room as is, you know, with a better foundation,

[2:21:05] but that's still not in D's model because of it being

[2:21:10] assessful. It was an assess pool, >> that would be okay. Okay.

[2:21:15] » So, that's kind of one step here. And then um

[2:21:18] » and I yeah >> if they

[2:21:23] integrated that room into the rest of the first floor somehow

[2:21:28] » possibility >> bigger room. I don't remember I don't

[2:21:32] have it in front of me now what it looked like. Um

[2:21:35] » exactly. I remember vaguely, but >> yeah, they could

[2:21:40] » if they changed that >> the threeseason room, would that

[2:21:46] eliminate it as a room? >> Yes. Yes, it would, Darl. That's

[2:21:50] » I'm trying to think of options for them. >> No, I that's a very good option to not

[2:21:54] condition the sun room would be better. You know, it would be creating a sun

[2:22:00] room, seasonal sun room, so there's no conditioning. So, it wouldn't be

[2:22:04] considered a habitable room uh per DP. But if it's a habitable room, um that's

[2:22:10] a whole different story. And you know, we just saw this on another property in

[2:22:16] town where we uh the board saw two systems and but at least they had well,

[2:22:22] one was put in not correctly, but we you know, but we knew the design flow of the

[2:22:26] other one. So, it's a little different. This one we don't have any records of

[2:22:30] design flow. So that that's the whole issue here is can this system support a

[2:22:36] four bedroomedroom say nine room house and you know it's

[2:22:41] unknown that's the unknown and that's where the state feels that that's the

[2:22:45] time to upgrade the septic system. >> Yeah. Yeah.

[2:22:52] » It's not an easy sell to the people. I tell you I I I understand.

[2:22:56] » Right. >> But I can ask the you know I wish they

[2:22:59] were here tonight. They did know about this.

[2:23:01] that if if they can't be maybe we'll have them at the next meeting but ask

[2:23:06] them can you design that space below the new bathroom ba bathroom the new master

[2:23:13] bedroom bathroom can you design a space below to be part of one existing

[2:23:18] habitable room >> because then they wouldn't be changing

[2:23:22] » either that >> or make it three season

[2:23:26] » yep that's a nice option >> so now there are three options

[2:23:31] uh one bigger room somehow downstairs that looks like one room and not like

[2:23:36] multiple rooms. Um or functions as one big room does have to look functions as.

[2:23:42] And then >> the three season sun room unconditioned

[2:23:47] space um or redo the septics upgrade the septic.

[2:23:56] » Yeah. And these are hard cells. Maybe eliminate a room somewhere else.

[2:24:01] » Yeah. >> Is it tied to that room like if they did

[2:24:04] other adjustments? >> Yeah. I don't know that

[2:24:07] » except that room but lowered the one. Although that seems kind of counter to

[2:24:13] what the ET is saying, >> which is you can't just straight away

[2:24:18] you upgrade that room. >> Yeah.

[2:24:21] » Um >> because it's already there. I don't

[2:24:24] know. I don't know. >> It's a tough one. It really is. And but

[2:24:27] it's nice that now we can call them. I can get back to him beginning of next

[2:24:31] week and >> let him know the three options, you

[2:24:34] know, that they have >> and see what they can do. They're

[2:24:37] working with a septic installer who works in town quite quite a bit.

[2:24:41] » So I I think they hopefully they're getting I'm sure good guidance. I mean

[2:24:46] » in all respects someday if they ever sell the house, they may have to do it

[2:24:49] anyways. So you know, >> yeah,

[2:24:52] » we try to explain that to them. We don't want to make them force them to do

[2:24:56] something as a whole new septic system replacement, but sometimes it it might

[2:25:02] be that the septic installer might has had maybe he's already discussed that

[2:25:07] with them as well. And I guess the other point is that if

[2:25:12] it's a cesspool there, >> yes, it with a tank

[2:25:16] » likely a pretty old system and it really has

[2:25:20] uh probably run its lifespan already. >> Mo most likely if they have to mention

[2:25:27] being underperforming, but >> yeah. Well, and when you see them

[2:25:30] putting septic tanks in front of these cess poolools, it tells us that or

[2:25:34] leeching lines off them. It tells us the cesspool was already in some demand for

[2:25:41] better functioning. You know, septic tank does help to help the waste going

[2:25:47] into the cesspool, but it still isn't environmentally sound because we don't

[2:25:52] know where the groundwater this property.

[2:25:54] » Do we do we have any records of when the septic system? We we we do not

[2:26:01] » think >> I could then usually we have those but I

[2:26:04] could not find any records for when the septic tank was added to the ces pool.

[2:26:08] » So we're very limited on what we have on this property.

[2:26:17] » Right. And what's what's the >> what's the average length of cesspool I

[2:26:22] mean of a system? I mean the average system is 30 by 40.

[2:26:29] Yeah. If you were putting in a replacement system and you're going in

[2:26:33] between say the 10 and 30 minute branch rate, it's usually 20 ft by 30 feet of

[2:26:38] leeching area. It either could be a trench, a bed. A bed would need a

[2:26:42] variance from the board and shallow pits will not work. The state does allow

[2:26:47] shallow pits, no longer deep pits. And that's where cesspools don't play into

[2:26:52] the regulation either. All they allow now is a two-foot septic pit. And so

[2:26:56] most people will design systems with leeching trenches.

[2:27:02] You get more more for that. You know, more square feet for your gallons needed

[2:27:08] per day.

[2:27:12] » Okay. Yeah. Could just be great. >> Yeah. depends on where they want to comp

[2:27:22] I mean it is a big jump in cost for their

[2:27:24] » Yeah. Oh, I I get it. I truly respect that and it's and so when I do call the

[2:27:30] owners, I'll give them the options the board discussed and and also offer them

[2:27:34] to come back and meet with the board themselves if they so like.

[2:27:37] » Yeah. >> Yeah. And sketch out they could do some

[2:27:41] rough sketches if they wanted >> of options that we could go over with

[2:27:45] them. Okay.

[2:27:48] » And if I hear anything different, I'll try to reach out to Claire

[2:27:51] » and explain this got expanded. I'll see >> where they go with reconstructing rooms

[2:27:57] that have no design flow because that that is its own little definition in a

[2:28:02] way. >> Try to give them the benefit of the

[2:28:05] doubt with anything possible.

[2:28:10] » All right. Uh, does anyone else have any other ideas or questions on that?

[2:28:17] Otherwise, we can go on to 51 Western. >> I know it. We're not too far. It's in

[2:28:23] the same neighborhood. Actually, they're all within All three of my items on the

[2:28:28] agenda are all within a mile of each other. 51 Western A. board. Uh I

[2:28:33] actually approved a building application had noted that the room was not to be

[2:28:38] conditioned because they wanted to insulate it back I think it was a few

[2:28:42] years back and and then you'll see from the letter from the building

[2:28:46] commissioner that he went in to view something over there and I guess he was

[2:28:51] planning to do an he's planning to do an addition where or changes to the kitchen

[2:28:56] reduce the bedroom by making a master bedroom. So, two bedrooms are going into

[2:29:00] a master bedroom/c closet. Um, so he's actually reducing. It's a good thing

[2:29:06] what he wants to do, but what was discovered is he put conditioning into

[2:29:11] the room over the garage. There's no water according to the building

[2:29:15] commissioner or connect septic connections, but it's still a finished

[2:29:19] room over a garage. And so with that said, I didn't know

[2:29:24] » well I knew that it would be best to share this with the board and see how

[2:29:28] you want me to proceed since now there's been a violation of building something

[2:29:31] without permit. Not building it per se, but putting in conditioning without

[2:29:35] permit.

[2:29:40] » Yeah, go ahead Sarah if you may. If I may, Darl to Sarah.

[2:29:43] » Sorry. I just want to check uh you I cut out my sound a little bit for a second

[2:29:47] there. We're talking about >> uh 51 Western

[2:29:52] » Western >> um 51 Western AB

[2:29:58] is We don't have the plans of the garage.

[2:30:03] » No, we don't. All we have is the All we have is what Chris defined it as. And I

[2:30:08] agree. We do need those plans to see what it looks like. Yeah.

[2:30:10] » But we don't have the plan. I'm just going and thank you Sarah for bringing

[2:30:14] that point up because I'm just going by what Chris Tanny's reporting back to me,

[2:30:18] our building commissioner. >> Right. I just wanted to double check to

[2:30:22] [laughter] make sure I wasn't >> No, I appreciate that. No, we have not

[2:30:25] seen that plan yet. And I think that would be important to make sure it's not

[2:30:29] two rooms, you know, and make sure it's just one large room over the garage

[2:30:33] » or more than one room >> and make sure that the garage is only a

[2:30:37] garage and not like an office in one corner or something. Um,

[2:30:43] » yeah, >> you know, another room that we might not

[2:30:46] expect there as well.

[2:30:49] » I I see that by what they want to do is actually helpful. It does reduce the

[2:30:56] room count, but again, um it I I'm only reporting it to the board because it was

[2:31:02] a failure to draw a permit out to condition that room. And they were

[2:31:05] specifically noted in the building permit. I specifically noted the room

[2:31:10] was not to be conditioned. So, it's a violation of what was stated and and

[2:31:14] approved for. Uh but >> yeah,

[2:31:17] » it's done. It's, you know, something that the board needs to know and the

[2:31:22] board could actually say rip out the conditioning. But in my view, I would

[2:31:26] suggest that if the room count stays within Well, it's getting reduced that

[2:31:32] this room over the garage should all fit in. But at the same time, I'm only

[2:31:36] reporting it since it's unique in its own way.

[2:31:40] » Oh, I found a sketch. It's not really >> I thought I saw something. It's just one

[2:31:47] lodge area. Correct, Sarah? >> All they showed us was um

[2:31:53] it was hidden in an email. I'm pulling it up right now. It's loading in

[2:31:57] PowerPoint. It's really just a They just sent us a square.

[2:32:03] » Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah, it should be defined what it's used for.

[2:32:07] And that was a good point. >> I asked for pictures. I think we asked

[2:32:11] for some pictures as well. >> Excellent. So, pictures and a plan would

[2:32:14] be great, but I I do want to Yeah, go ahead. I'm sorry.

[2:32:19] » Yeah. Oh, right. I was thinking, is there a basement here?

[2:32:25] » No basement one way or the other. No basement at all.

[2:32:29] » Yeah, that's what they've told us. I don't know if there's no basement, but

[2:32:32] there's no finished basement is what I was told.

[2:32:35] » Okay. I guess it'd be nice to verify that given what just went on.

[2:32:38] » Yep. Yeah, I can. Hopefully Chris also walked in the basement, especially after

[2:32:43] he saw the upstairs of the garage. So, >> yeah.

[2:32:46] » All right. Uh, right. Garage, upstairs, and down.

[2:32:51] » Okay. Oh, the whole thing's a slab. >> Okay. Well, that makes that simpler.

[2:32:56] » Well, that's We tested the soil right across the street from this house, and

[2:33:00] ground water's high, so I can see why they probably are on a slab.

[2:33:05] » Yeah. Okay. >> And then it looks like the sun room is a

[2:33:09] four season since they didn't call it out any differently and whatever. They

[2:33:14] don't show a door. >> Yeah, I agree. I assumed it was a

[2:33:19] finished a condition room. >> Yeah.

[2:33:24] » Maybe why they needed that room close. >> Yeah. So,

[2:33:31] » but I'll wait for the direction. >> Yeah. And then I guess just the kind of

[2:33:36] reasonleness card without dimensions, too. The new

[2:33:41] kitchen looks quite extensive and looks like it fills up

[2:33:45] » all the way to the utility room. >> Yeah. And that was a question I had too.

[2:33:50] What is the utility room? But I think the room count will still be okay.

[2:33:54] » But it you don't see >> Yeah,

[2:33:58] » but it is on a slab. So maybe it's >> Yeah, it could be their their well pump

[2:34:04] unit and all that. the pressure tank. >> But I should ask them what that utility

[2:34:08] room is or explain what's in there. And is it

[2:34:15] » Yeah, somewhere in the kitchen design stuff.

[2:34:20] It looked like from the kitchen there's a sliding door

[2:34:25] or something leading in. So you can see from the kitchen in. So it can't be

[2:34:30] completely undone, but it might be just a very nice laundry room.

[2:34:35] Yeah, true. >> But I can question that too. I wish they

[2:34:40] were here. I No one wanted to show up tonight

[2:34:43] » and they were all notified in the middle of

[2:34:48] » Yeah, I get it. I get [laughter] it. Understand.

[2:34:52] » All right. So, enough information for now to get to the

[2:34:58] next step with questions. Sarah, you pointed out things to ask them for and

[2:35:03] whatever. So, >> yeah, Sarah, if you don't mind, the

[2:35:09] three bullets need pl pictures and plans of the garage. We know the basement's

[2:35:13] not finished. So, that and what's in the utility room. If you want to reach out

[2:35:16] to the homeowner before I get back on Monday, you're more than welcome to do

[2:35:20] that. >> Sure, I can do that. Hopefully, they'll

[2:35:23] get it to me by Monday. >> And that would even be better. Thank

[2:35:27] you.

[2:35:31] Okay. >> And then 46 Western a is off. Correct.

[2:35:36] » Yes, that's correct. But Bose just asked a question, Darl. I don't know if you

[2:35:41] heard him. Was that you, Bose, that was asking the question?

[2:35:44] » Yeah. Yeah. Mark, uh, is that a detached garage or is it attached?

[2:35:48] » It's detached. It's It's I believe it's detached. I worked right across from

[2:35:52] there. I believe it's a detached garage. >> Sarah, do you know that? I believe it is

[2:35:57] cuz they would have shown it off the house.

[2:35:59] » Yeah. Um it's a detached garage. Let me see if I can um

[2:36:05] » Yeah, I I would draw it up, but my computer just died. So,

[2:36:10] » let me see if I can find the It's a detached garage, and there's um some

[2:36:16] steps from the garage. It's a little bit

[2:36:20] higher up, it looks like. And I'm trying to find

[2:36:24] where where I saw that. >> Okay.

[2:36:29] » I believe it is. I mean, I worked right across from there. I believe it's

[2:36:32] detached. >> Here we go. Let me I was able to pull up

[2:36:36] their >> building permit when they built the

[2:36:39] garage, which is when it was uh permitted to be not conditioned.

[2:36:47] » Yes. Thank you for doing that. Um, so this is the front view of the

[2:36:54] garage and this is the back view.

[2:36:59] And this is like the

[2:37:05] » Okay. Well, I appreciate that, Sarah. And and we'll try to

[2:37:09] » Yeah, we'll try to get some more answers, but I just want to make sure

[2:37:13] the board's okay if um I'm okay to approve it, even though they violated a

[2:37:18] permit. Um with the changes in the house I think whatever happens the if they

[2:37:25] don't change the house then the room has to come the conditioning has to come out

[2:37:29] of that room. If they do change the house

[2:37:31] » and cut down one bedroom then I see that as the solution to having the garage

[2:37:38] room over the garage conditioned. If the board's okay with that.

[2:37:45] How do you enforce that >> uh through the building commissioner? He

[2:37:50] would have to assure that they're not in any way uh deciding to change what the

[2:37:56] building permit has requested.

[2:38:04] » Okay. >> I don't know who just asked that

[2:38:07] question. Was that you? Um Rebecca, how you enforce that?

[2:38:11] » Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's how it would happen.

[2:38:14] they would have to comply with the building permit being issued. If and

[2:38:18] we'll have to let Chris know if they decided not to do this, then we have to

[2:38:22] come back and readress this of removing that conditioning in the garage because

[2:38:27] by what they wish to do, that will be the solution in my view as long as the

[2:38:31] board's satisfied with that. Now, does the board have jurisdiction to

[2:38:40] to look at um if the building deviates from

[2:38:46] the permit or is it the building department that has the jurisdiction to

[2:38:50] » the building department in most cases Bose will do the final inspections and

[2:38:54] we rely on them to make sure they're followed as as approved. But there have

[2:39:00] been a few cases if it's a new house, we go through the new house to make sure

[2:39:05] the building plan was as accurate as it was when originally approved. But for

[2:39:10] additions, we rely on the building commissioner finalizing those. And

[2:39:16] » I can ask the building commissioner if when this does get approved, if the

[2:39:20] board's okay with that, is to uh confirm when all the work is done as as noted by

[2:39:26] the permit that was uh pulled out for that was obtained by the applicant.

[2:39:38] I hope that helps.

[2:39:43] » All right. I was trying to remember. I know, Scott. What's the

[2:39:50] current sizing bedroom wise of the system?

[2:39:54] » Oh, I don't have that in front of me, Darl. And that's the one thing I was

[2:39:57] looking for before the meeting started. I believe it's a

[2:40:00] » Yeah, >> not for sure. I believe it's a

[2:40:02] threebedroom. >> Sarah, you don't have the septic

[2:40:06] information with you, do you? >> I can try and find what I do have.

[2:40:12] » Okay. Okay. So, actually, if they wanted to call it a bedroom, I think

[2:40:18] they could because they they're down to two bedrooms.

[2:40:22] » Yeah. >> Yeah.

[2:40:30] » We can look at that.

[2:40:36] We have a septic plan

[2:40:41] from here. I found it.

[2:40:48] 1970, but it's

[2:40:51] » okay. I thought it was old. Yeah. >> Mhm.

[2:40:54] » Is it Does it show Do you know a threebedroom?

[2:40:57] » It is a threebedroom house system. looks like it

[2:41:06] don't know if it has a design flow of

[2:41:12] looks like it has the estimated flow is 300 gallons per day.

[2:41:16] » Yeah, that that sounds like the old way of doing things. But I I can look at

[2:41:20] that when I get back. So, if you want, don't worry about this. We can hold off

[2:41:24] till Monday. I was hoping the applicant would be at the meeting, but I'll I'll

[2:41:28] take if I'll ask Jean to pull the plans and Oh, you can pull the plans, Sarah,

[2:41:33] and I'll take a peek at them. >> Yep.

[2:41:36] » Okay. Thank you. >> Okay.

[2:41:40] Uh, all right. Let's take care of food permits because those are timely,

[2:41:46] timesensitive. So, um,

[2:41:52] let's pick something

[2:41:58] to Sorry, at this point I can't remember

[2:42:01] all my notes on them.

[2:42:06] » Do you want me to reshare the agenda? >> Uh, no, that's okay. So, we have the

[2:42:11] Tasty Gelato truck. Mhm. >> And I don't think I saw anything that

[2:42:18] stood out to me as unusual there.

[2:42:23] Um, oh, uh,

[2:42:28] best of your understanding, is this one ready to be voted on?

[2:42:34] » Everything's in any conditions. um for the tasty gelato truck.

[2:42:42] I believe

[2:42:46] that their um ice cream truck vending permit expires on August 13th.

[2:42:53] However, that can't be renewed until the same day. Um but we have worked with

[2:42:59] them previously and we know that they'll get us the the ice cream vending permit.

[2:43:04] So, I would just say conditional to receipt of a of an updated ice cream

[2:43:09] permit. >> Okay.

[2:43:13] All right, then. Um, does anyone else have any other questions about that

[2:43:18] before I make a motion?

[2:43:22] Okay. So, do we have a motion to approve the temporary food establishment permit

[2:43:31] for the Tasty Gelato truck conditional to receiving their updated certificate?

[2:43:40] » So moved.

[2:43:47] » Second. >> All right. Excellent. Uh any further

[2:43:51] discussion hearing? None. Daryl Beardsley I.

[2:43:55] » Steve Constantine I. Rebecca Hanwell I >> Bakali.

[2:44:04] » And then we have Nic uh Catholic community who is going to have an event

[2:44:11] at um Sweet Meadow Farm which I know Sweet

[2:44:17] Meadow does periodically. And

[2:44:22] check if I had a question. I was a little confused about something on this.

[2:44:28] Um,

[2:44:32] make sure they had checked off

[2:44:40] uh preparation and retail sale of time

[2:44:45] temperature controlled foods prepared on site.

[2:44:50] Uh,

[2:44:53] is this a food truck? I didn't think it was a food

[2:44:58] truck or anything. Are they barbecuing or

[2:45:01] » they're barbecuing? >> I just didn't think Sweet Meadow had

[2:45:04] ample >> barbecue

[2:45:06] » water and all the rest. >> Um, but Sweet Meadow Farm does have a

[2:45:11] food permit, a food establishment permit. So there, if you look at their

[2:45:15] uh application that's in the meeting documents, they have a facility approval

[2:45:20] letter from Sweet Meadow Farm that allows them to use their bathrooms and

[2:45:24] handwashing sink. >> Um, and they have a valid license permit

[2:45:29] with >> Okay.

[2:45:33] » But they are barbecuing. They have a grill.

[2:45:37] » Okay. All right. So it's not super

[2:45:41] water intensive. Okay, great. So, um, anybody else have any questions, further

[2:45:47] questions about that? Okay. So, then do we have a motion to

[2:45:53] approve the temporary food establishment permit

[2:45:57] for Native Catholic community? >> So, moved.

[2:46:04] » Second.

[2:46:07] » Um, I do have a question. Sarah, are there any conditions we need to impose

[2:46:11] on this? >> Just remaining in compliance with all

[2:46:14] applicable laws. >> Okay. Uh all right. So friendly

[2:46:20] amendment to the motion is the compliance with all applicable rules and

[2:46:26] regulations. Are we ready to vote?

[2:46:31] » Yep. >> Okay. Daryl Beersley I.

[2:46:34] » Steve Constantine I. >> Rebecca Honeywell I. Those

[2:46:46] Nash bowls

[2:46:51] and is this one all set to go? Any conditions we need to

[2:46:58] » with this? Okay. Actually, I did have qu at the top

[2:47:02] of the application on permit type,

[2:47:07] unless you know it was just a very light check off.

[2:47:11] » I wasn't seeing any check offs. >> Um, it's it's a new manual

[2:47:18] » and they're technically ice cream bending.

[2:47:24] » I think it's just really light. I just don't think it's scanned right. You've

[2:47:27] been having some scanners. >> Oh, okay. Okay.

[2:47:30] All right. Yeah, I could see like little weird markings here and there. Just

[2:47:36] » No. Okay. So, it's all set otherwise. >> Yeah, they have nothing outstanding.

[2:47:40] Everything's all set. >> Okay. All right. And do we have a motion

[2:47:46] to approve the annual mobile food establishment permit

[2:47:52] for Nashville of New England conditional to compliance with all applicable rules

[2:48:00] and regulations? >> So moved.

[2:48:04] » Second. >> Any further discussion?

[2:48:10] Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I. Steve Constantine. I

[2:48:14] » Rebecca Han I

[2:48:22] » um All right. I'm going to do the minutes

[2:48:27] because we have to re make sure we review or vote on the I believe the June

[2:48:34] minutes. Um,

[2:48:37] » we technically could push them till September because we voted on the June

[2:48:41] 3rd minutes at the last meeting. >> Okay. Uh, is anyone else ready to vote

[2:48:48] on the other June um 15th meet minutes? >> Ready to vote.

[2:48:56] » Oh, I'm ready. >> I had no edits.

[2:49:01] » Okay. I had relatively minor edits. Sarah, did you have any questions about

[2:49:07] the edits I sent in? Maybe you didn't get to see it. I just sent it this

[2:49:11] afternoon. I'm >> looking over them now. I don't see

[2:49:13] anything.

[2:49:17] » Yeah, I think it was kind of small.

[2:49:21] » Okay, then let me just get the right date.

[2:49:26] » June 17th.

[2:49:30] » 17th. Okay. Uh so do we have a motion to

[2:49:37] approve the June 17, 2026 minutes with the uh minor edits that have been

[2:49:45] submitted? >> So moved.

[2:49:51] » Second. >> Any further discussion?

[2:49:56] Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I. >> Steve Constantine I. Rebecca Hanwa I

[2:50:06] » and is anyone ready to vote on the July 7 15 17 I can't remember what number it

[2:50:14] was 15 I think

[2:50:17] » I know >> I readal

[2:50:29] Anybody else? Or shall we defer to the next meeting?

[2:50:33] » I'm good with that with the July ones. >> Okay,

[2:50:37] » let's defer. Yeah. >> All right.

[2:50:41] And I just need the actual date or or someone else can make the motion if you

[2:50:46] know the date. Exact date. >> July 15th.

[2:50:51] » Okay. It is the 15th. All right. So, do we have a motion to approve the July

[2:50:56] 15th minute 2026 minutes um with the administrative edits as submitted?

[2:51:06] » So moved. >> Second.

[2:51:12] » Any further discussion? Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I.

[2:51:17] » Steve Constantine I. >> Rebecca Hanwella I.

[2:51:27] Uh so now we have bunch of things that are more

[2:51:32] complicated that are left. Uh and it's 9:55.

[2:51:40] So I guess one I would probably want to take now because we need to get moving

[2:51:47] on this opioid baitment fund use. >> Yeah. Um

[2:51:54] so one question is is there a subset of board members who

[2:52:01] are interested in working with staff and we also are getting support now from

[2:52:09] um you know there are others in the Charles River public health district be

[2:52:15] able to ask questions of and we've had outreach from the state because they can

[2:52:20] see that a lot of towns are not using the funds just because it's a lot to

[2:52:25] figure out and so they're eager to get the ball rolling of expenditure of that

[2:52:30] fund. So there's also been outreach to us by email of uh any questions or help

[2:52:37] that um we might need. So, I just don't know if there's anyone who's intrigued

[2:52:42] by figuring out where to spend the money and on what. And and we have talked in

[2:52:49] the past with Dover about buying some of the monies to the

[2:52:55] regional school system uh jointly to see, you know, to do the

[2:53:00] outreach to kids. That's

[2:53:05] something that's been discussed for years uh about that the monies. It

[2:53:10] doesn't have to be 100% on that. >> I just think people to look at the

[2:53:16] choices and what the tradeoffs are and local needs and what makes more sense to

[2:53:22] just leave it to regional centers for some kind of help.

[2:53:27] » Restrictions too. Are there any restrictions with how it's used?

[2:53:32] Yeah, there's a lot of >> they have been loosening up. Yeah, there

[2:53:35] are but better than it started out which was really restrictive. It has improved.

[2:53:43] » Okay. >> I think it's really important

[2:53:46] interested. I don't have a huge amount of time right now, but I might in a few

[2:53:51] months or, you know, in the future. Um there was a group of parents when my

[2:53:58] children were young that did a fantastic job of

[2:54:04] um they had like posters and all these things that were distributed in the

[2:54:08] school system um about the sort of normalization of substance abuse risks

[2:54:17] and it was great. It was really creative. It was really effective. Um,

[2:54:21] several of those families have are no longer in the Dover Sherburn area. And I

[2:54:26] would love to see if we could use some of those funds to even repeat the exact

[2:54:32] same materials. We could probably have access to some of them and just send

[2:54:37] them out again if we have some funds. That might not be very labor intensive.

[2:54:43] So Rebecca, there is there is a group of parents who have such programs within

[2:54:49] within the school now. >> Well, that's great. Um because my kids

[2:54:53] are grown up, I don't know what's happening now, but I I think it's great.

[2:54:57] I'd love to >> be involved if there's a group. Um I

[2:55:01] just don't know if I can do it by myself.

[2:55:04] » Right. No. So So there is a group and they've

[2:55:07] » they they're doing amazing stuff with the kids. It's it's really impressive.

[2:55:11] So I mean they they they could be recipiented of the funds for sure.

[2:55:18] » Yeah. >> The board used to have in its budget um

[2:55:23] » some thousands of dollars each year that we would give to those groups to to

[2:55:29] print up the materials or invite in special speakers or have other kinds of

[2:55:33] events. So um or do the social norming surveys and and outreach. So

[2:55:43] » and also I think the school hires consultants to do you know uh surveys

[2:55:50] with kids about substance abuse and other behavioral things. Um that could

[2:55:57] be another way to spend this money >> unless there is restrictions on how much

[2:56:05] can we spend on education um rather than you know

[2:56:13] » um >> sorry

[2:56:15] » no no you're totally fine there's just no restrictions on that um

[2:56:20] and >> I well what I was going to say was

[2:56:24] unless there is there pressing issues with with opioid addiction

[2:56:30] um among individuals within our community and they would be well served

[2:56:36] too with the money and with some support and

[2:56:40] » we do

[2:56:44] » sorry >> go ahead

[2:56:45] » I just wanted to say um I do have two drafted uh program proposals that have

[2:56:50] been discussed in town hall um and have been brought brought to us

[2:56:59] uh by us, the board of health, um specifically outdoor just increasing

[2:57:05] access to the sharps disposal kiosk and also um using the funds to help support

[2:57:12] our the availability of nlloxxone and um harm reduction tools for residents

[2:57:20] and um for our first responders as well because there's um some issues there.

[2:57:28] So,

[2:57:32] not issues rather. >> Do you want to

[2:57:35] » is that the kind of >> I get the container the sharps container

[2:57:39] thing and maybe making it so it could be outside, but I guess

[2:57:46] I'm not sure. I think that's that I feel like spending more money on

[2:57:51] that when we have a serviceable kiosk that we already bought. And two

[2:57:59] like to see the funds go to some new dimensions. Um

[2:58:04] » well um the the kiosk that we have has um will in the in the long term

[2:58:14] has well for primarily the kiosk has re I have received feedback that there are

[2:58:20] some accessibility issues in terms of getting into the police station and also

[2:58:26] in speaking with a representative from the state technical assistance there's a

[2:58:31] stigma around having a sharps disposal kiosk as a harm reduction technique in a

[2:58:37] police station. And so I've spoken with some other towns in the area,

[2:58:43] specifically Hopkin, who moved their sharps kiosk from the police station to

[2:58:49] an outdoor location. And they've had a really positive response from their

[2:58:54] residents as well. Um, and they've just seen more engagement in harm reduction

[2:59:01] practices in the town through relocating their sharps kiosk from the police

[2:59:07] station. What is the best way for us to know what

[2:59:13] you're be what you're learning when things are submitted to you um, etc.

[2:59:18] Because I would love to know what's happening. Um, yes.

[2:59:23] » Um, >> um, well, so the police, the not the

[2:59:27] police chief, apologies, the fire chief gave me a phone call earlier this week

[2:59:32] um, saying that they were having a that they needed to purchase more uh,

[2:59:36] nlloxxone for the ambulances. and we began talking about uh potentially

[2:59:42] expanding that outreach program to purchase Nlloxxone for all of the first

[2:59:47] aid kits in municipal buildings and on public lands in town. So for the

[2:59:52] library, town hall, the police department, things like that, just

[2:59:55] having more nlloxxone available. And there's a program called Massachusetts

[3:00:01] Clearing House, which is through the Department of Public Health where you

[3:00:05] can get free resources about Narcan. So that just happened this week. Um, and

[3:00:10] that's why I I put it on the agenda for this week as well. Um, and also the

[3:00:15] sharps kiosk happened last or two weeks ago

[3:00:21] when I when I reach I personally reached out to Hopington because we have

[3:00:26] something called the municipal opioid abatement dashboard where you can see

[3:00:32] what different municipalities have spent the money on. And um I was reading about

[3:00:39] how they used the funds to support the outbur. So that was all uh sort of a uh

[3:00:46] in office initiative that was conducted and if you would like me to loop you in

[3:00:51] on that more I'm I'm happy to do that. >> That'd be great. Thanks.

[3:01:00] So, as always, anyway, if there's people interested in diving into this, that's

[3:01:06] great. Sarah, continue collecting the information as you have been. That's

[3:01:10] been good. Um, and

[3:01:14] right, I I know we have these funds, but I kind

[3:01:20] of want to just my nature rather than spend $4,000

[3:01:25] on a new thing. I wholly agree with moving the current sharps um container.

[3:01:31] I'm not sure why people feel more self-conscious because

[3:01:36] right now I'd say most of what gets dropped off there is for just people's

[3:01:41] medications. So I don't know that uh you know the act of putting sharps in

[3:01:49] the the unit is indicating anything about other than

[3:01:56] that you could potentially be abusing drugs

[3:02:01] or you just need something and maybe that's still private or revealing or

[3:02:06] you're dropping it off for somebody else. I don't know. and for the

[3:02:11] relocation um maybe being somewhere where when the

[3:02:16] clerk's office is open late like it is for some time part of the year on one

[3:02:23] night just so people have access to those services. Um, you know, they could

[3:02:28] still drop stuff off kind of after work hours.

[3:02:35] » And kids and certainly providing the the additional supplies for the ambulances

[3:02:41] sounds great. Having more of that around town.

[3:02:45] Um,

[3:02:49] » Darl, I was >> feel like we kind of have this sharp

[3:02:51] thing largely covered, but >> maybe that's the wrong interpretation,

[3:02:56] but >> uh, if someone else wants to dive into

[3:02:59] this topic though, >> yeah, just real quick,

[3:03:02] » step back, >> I I agree. I think because it's not

[3:03:08] it's not just people that have opioid problems, it's people with di diabetics.

[3:03:12] It's a lot of different things. Uh, and I think the nice thing about the police

[3:03:17] station is it's open 247. So people can go after work, they can go on weekends,

[3:03:24] they can pretty much go there anytime they want.

[3:03:26] » So the the issue with the police station is is it is open 24/7. Um, but the I

[3:03:32] don't know when the last time you were actually able to go outside of 8 to 4

[3:03:36] normal business hours is you have to ring a doorbell,

[3:03:40] » right, >> to get let in. and the doorbell is

[3:03:43] connected to a regional um dispatch center and they don't know necessarily

[3:03:48] that the sharps disposal kiosk is located in the police department and I

[3:03:53] have experience as an administrator it's my responsibility to maintain the kiosk

[3:03:57] so I do perform regular checks to make sure it's not full make sure the

[3:04:01] batteries aren't dead make sure that you know it's still working properly um and

[3:04:06] I've myself had to wait for upwards of 20 minutes in the little vestibule

[3:04:11] waiting for someone to let me in. I rang the doorbell. I told them I was there

[3:04:15] for the sharps kiosk. I ended up waiting there for until an officer actually came

[3:04:20] and let me in. Um, and that happened several times to the point where now I

[3:04:24] have a key fob to let me into the building just that front section to

[3:04:29] access the kiosk. Um, and I've had several residents who have attempted to

[3:04:34] get into the police station to get to the kiosk and they were unable to do so.

[3:04:38] And so they actually brought their containers to the board of health and I

[3:04:41] was able to put them into the kiosk because again I have that administrative

[3:04:44] key fob for the front door. Um so when I say there's a bit of an access issue,

[3:04:50] that's what I mean is that there have been multiple reports of individuals who

[3:04:55] have come up to us in the office and have shared that they had a hard time or

[3:05:00] were waiting a while to get into the lobby of the police station. Um, also

[3:05:06] » maybe that's something we should bring up with the police because I think

[3:05:10] that's an issue. Um, >> sorry I interrupted you.

[3:05:15] » That's okay. Um, it's it's definitely And then additionally, if you recall, we

[3:05:21] did that uh initial survey when I first started about a year ago and there was

[3:05:26] some feedback about the location of the Sharps kiosk. And so, um, if it's

[3:05:31] something the board is interested in, I have more information on it. But if the

[3:05:35] board is happy with it being in the police station and would rather explore

[3:05:39] other avenues, then um, I will support that as well.

[3:05:44] » Yeah, I'm just I'm just having a hard time trying to think of a better spot. I

[3:05:48] know getting into the fire station is difficult. Um, doing something at the

[3:05:53] dump, you've got you're only open five days a week there. Um,

[3:05:57] » so we have a couple proposed locations. Um, the first being the the DPW. They

[3:06:04] have an enclosed porch area that is completely covered.

[3:06:09] So there's no impact of weather. Um, and it is open 24/7. Um, and it is private

[3:06:16] to the point where, you know, it would sort of remove that stigma aspect to it.

[3:06:21] and it was we were told by the Department of Public Works director that

[3:06:26] that would be okay. Um, and it's easy to monitor and access. Additionally, we

[3:06:32] could put it outside of town hall, which is again, it would be outdoors,

[3:06:36] accessible 24/7. The goal with relocating it would be that it is

[3:06:41] accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, rain or shine. um

[3:06:47] and people could just drive up, drop it off and and you know, wipe their hands

[3:06:52] of it for privacy reasons. That is sort of the

[3:06:56] » would we >> would we be able to use the current

[3:07:02] thing over at the DPW and not have to spend an extra 4,000 save for other

[3:07:07] applications? >> It is possible. I

[3:07:11] » covered enough that it's that it would survive and not be destroyed by weather.

[3:07:17] I spoke with our representative of um the the organization or company that we

[3:07:23] use is called Chrysalis and I spoke with the manager of Chrysalis about

[3:07:29] relocating to that area and she explained to me that the kiosk I don't

[3:07:34] know if any of you have used it it's electric so

[3:07:38] when it is full there's a sensor that locks it and it relies on batteries and

[3:07:44] there's a concern with it being outdoor that that could be impacted um just with

[3:07:49] you know when wind and rain is it could go underneath the overhang. However,

[3:07:56] » I would feel that

[3:08:01] it would be okay to do that. Um, personally, I would

[3:08:07] feel more comfortable if, you know, we had someone

[3:08:12] sort of take a look at it and see if there was anything we can do to the

[3:08:15] existing kiosk to make sure that it would be okay underneath the overhang.

[3:08:20] However, the kiosk that is designed to be outdoors is um larger and it actually

[3:08:28] accepts more sharps than the existing kiosk. So, we would be able to um

[3:08:37] spend less in between pickups. It would be a little bit easier to maintain. Um

[3:08:42] that's just one of the benefits. And also just for reference, the

[3:08:50] total cost of the kiosk for the next 10 years is only about 12% of our total

[3:08:58] opioid funds that we would be receiving just as a reference point for cost.

[3:09:06] » Yeah. >> Sir, what's the cadence for pickup?

[3:09:08] » I I just want when you're done, I want to say something. Go ahead.

[3:09:11] » Oh, sorry. the cadence for pickup has been increasing. Um

[3:09:16] I have the numbers here. Right now we're looking at about every

[3:09:22] eight weeks. I would

[3:09:27] » work. I didn't even realize this was an issue, but I my I would say let's start

[3:09:33] by talking to the police and find out if there's a way to improve responsiveness

[3:09:38] because maybe it applies to other issues. I mean maybe there are people

[3:09:42] who have problems and they're not getting a rapid response. That would be

[3:09:47] an important thing and we could just have a conversation it seems and find

[3:09:52] out what you know what is the process because obviously the easiest thing path

[3:09:58] of least resistance is to just improve responsiveness so that we you know it

[3:10:04] just works the system works better. I think

[3:10:07] » it's worth looking at. Yeah, definitely.

[3:10:12] Yeah. The other thing just so people know the background too. Um when we

[3:10:17] decided to do this kiosk, it was uh I think there was an opportunity of

[3:10:27] some sort. Um, it was about safety for people at the

[3:10:33] transfer station and and elsewhere that sharps were being disposed of

[3:10:38] improperly, but there was concern within the town

[3:10:43] and I think we had some special monies or something for it. So,

[3:10:50] however that worked out across advisory and select board and

[3:10:56] others, there wasn't huge support for the idea of

[3:11:01] underwriting, you know, with tax dollars.

[3:11:07] um stuff that most people in town could afford to dispose of them, you know,

[3:11:13] with the mailers. Somearmacies provide the services. You

[3:11:17] could buy a little container to put it in and drop it off at the pharmacy. Some

[3:11:21] doctor's offices take things. So, the idea of the program growing is fine, but

[3:11:28] it's for it's funds for a specific set of people. So,

[3:11:35] there's a little bit of that, you know, but overall, we don't want the sharps

[3:11:39] floating around and people coming in contact with them. Um, but just to let

[3:11:45] you know, there's that mixed sentiment out there. I don't think it's really on

[3:11:49] many people's radar unless they're listening to this discussion. But, uh,

[3:11:55] anyway, >> I mean, there definitely some public

[3:11:59] security risks by not having it. I think there's some advantages to having to

[3:12:04] being at the police station

[3:12:08] and so I think >> the police originally wanted it.

[3:12:13] » What' you say? So that the police originally wanted it there because

[3:12:18] » yeah, >> they just like the idea of having

[3:12:20] oversight over both the unused medications

[3:12:26] and um which again are collected and disposed of properly. Hopefully people

[3:12:32] aren't dumping anything down their drain uh given that we're on septics. So, um,

[3:12:39] but in any case, it's right, it's a chance for them to oversee that. Not

[3:12:44] that these devices are easy to break into for people to get the sharps.

[3:12:51] » Darl, so what you brought up was um about doctor's offices and and

[3:12:57] pharmacies. Maybe maybe it's a it's an education thing. Maybe the primary

[3:13:02] source is going to be the police station, but if people feel

[3:13:06] uncomfortable about going to the police station, then we

[3:13:11] need to spell out what the alternatives are.

[3:13:14] » Yeah. And you can buy little ma return mailer things like online x number of

[3:13:24] » little containers. They're pre-labeled and you mail them off to sterycle or

[3:13:28] whatever it is that takes the stuff and make sure to thermally treat them and

[3:13:33] kill off whatever might be there and um recycle the metal or whatever.

[3:13:41] So yeah, there there are alternatives. This is not the only.

[3:13:45] » Okay. >> Well, the So, since we have a company

[3:13:50] picking up these sharps, why don't we just move it to the

[3:13:54] transfer station? People collect it in At least that's what we do in the labs.

[3:14:00] We generate sharps all the time. We have a sharps container that we drop the

[3:14:06] sharps into. And once a week there's a company that comes and picks all these

[3:14:11] boxes up. But in this case, you fill up your box and you take it to a transfer

[3:14:17] station and drop it into a designated box in the transfer station. That that

[3:14:22] would be the simplest, isn't it? I also think that there might be a value

[3:14:28] to getting the police input to the reasons that they

[3:14:33] um think it's valuable for them to have oversight because I think there are some

[3:14:38] other issues that play into that and it might be and I think we just let's why

[3:14:43] don't we just start with communicating with them get more informed

[3:14:47] » but the thing is >> prevalent is this problem

[3:14:49] » Rebecca the moment you say that that explains why there's a stigma to

[3:14:56] going to the police station. So the body shafts that are being dropped in the

[3:15:01] police station may be insulin syringes and

[3:15:04] » although of course I don't I don't know what the prevalence of the pro of the

[3:15:07] issues. That's why I'm asking. I'd just be interested in what they're in what

[3:15:11] their um what their is what are the issues that led to

[3:15:16] » just to be clear the police have absolutely no oversight on the sharps

[3:15:21] kiosk. It's just in the station. um they don't make any of the decisions in terms

[3:15:27] of picking it up, maintaining it. Um so >> it's all all me.

[3:15:33] » When you say you monitor it, you're just monitoring how full it is or are you

[3:15:38] monitoring the contents of the box? >> I have um looked at the contents of it.

[3:15:43] Um a lot of it is just sharps containers. There are some, you know,

[3:15:50] laundry detergent bottles. Um, it doesn't accept loose sharps and I have

[3:15:56] not experienced any loose sharps in the several times that I have looked at the

[3:16:00] contents. Um, I'm not a medical professional so I don't know.

[3:16:05] » Just a second. Just a second. Just so that I understand. So, people are

[3:16:09] collecting sharps into laundry detergent bottles and dropping it at the kiosk.

[3:16:15] » That's one of the accepted containers. We've also had people put them in

[3:16:19] ziplockc baggies. Um, we've had people, but the appropriate is

[3:16:24] » perfect. So, so why don't we just move the kiosk to the transfer station? So,

[3:16:29] it's I mean, >> because it's electric, so there's a

[3:16:33] concern with it being placed outdoors, which is the the concern. And there's

[3:16:38] also um that is why I would propose to purchase an outdoor kiosk. The outdoor

[3:16:44] kiosk also accepts individual sharps. It has its own collection for that and it's

[3:16:49] slightly larger. Um, I do not know if Chrysalis would allow

[3:16:56] us. It wasn't made exactly clear to me. I can follow up more on that as well.

[3:17:02] » Okay. >> Could we have more than one? Like one at

[3:17:05] the one at the transfer station and there's more access like how and how

[3:17:11] much did I'm sorry if you said this. I apologize.

[3:17:14] » Did you say the cost? Could you tell us the cost of an out of a waterproof

[3:17:18] outdoor indooroutdoor um

[3:17:22] machine? >> Sure. So, the initial cost will be

[3:17:27] $4,545 for this year, which includes the

[3:17:33] initial cost of the kiosk. And I budgeted for an additional four pickups.

[3:17:39] Um, one pickup is $100 or $110, excuse me.

[3:17:45] And that will be for this year. And then for the rest

[3:17:51] of the per foreseeable future, it will likely cost around $990 to maintain.

[3:17:57] Because at the moment, we are doing pickups every 6 to 8 weeks, more on 8

[3:18:03] weeks, leaning towards 8 weeks. Because it's a larger kiosk, I'm expecting

[3:18:08] around 8 weeks for pickup. However, for the budgeting purposes, I did overbudget

[3:18:13] assuming nine pickups per year at $990 total. So, uh that's where those numbers

[3:18:19] came from. And also on the towns that have moved their locations,

[3:18:26] um maybe their numbers would give us an indication of the advantage of having

[3:18:31] more anonymity um for drop off. Is that was there a big

[3:18:35] increase in that? And does that represent like the overall society in

[3:18:40] incidence of use or does it capture um the population that was missed

[3:18:46] because of its location? It's hard to know that and differentiate that.

[3:18:51] It's hard to differentiate it because once it is moved outside um specifically

[3:18:56] with the town that I did speak with Hington, they have a contract where they

[3:19:02] just do an they do a monthly pickup um and so they don't do any further

[3:19:08] investigation because it is used more frequently. So

[3:19:14] that is the understanding that I got from them. I am more than happy to

[3:19:18] continue conversing with other towns. Somerville had the first outdoor kiosk

[3:19:24] through Chrysalis. So, I'd be happy to reach out to them as well

[3:19:29] and other towns who have outdoor kiosks. Yeah, because that's an interesting um

[3:19:34] question and obviously it can represent both of those mixed or missed um the the

[3:19:45] data like is it an overall trend or is it a loss of a a specific subset that

[3:19:51] isn't using it? But anyway,

[3:19:55] » the other thing I wonder is whether the people who really want anonymity,

[3:20:01] and again recognizing that we largely have a pretty affluent community, you

[3:20:08] really wanted anonymity, you'd buy the mailers

[3:20:12] and you'd mail them in without it's untraceable.

[3:20:18] So, um I don't I just feel like the money

[3:20:23] could be better spent on some other things than

[3:20:28] than a new kiosk. Uh and just also to back up, the oversight that the police

[3:20:33] liked is just so people wasn't about seeing who was dropping off uh unspent

[3:20:39] medications and sharps. It was about people not tampering with the machines

[3:20:44] to get out those unused drugs or the have access to sharps that they didn't

[3:20:50] have to buy for people who didn't have the money to go buy sharps. You you know

[3:20:55] on an addict side of things um because you're not getting

[3:21:00] prescriptions right that are getting filled and coming with the sharps. So

[3:21:06] it's kind of a different um They were just trying to prevent people

[3:21:12] from reusing cont already contaminated needles because they were desperate for

[3:21:17] more needles

[3:21:23] and not for doctors issued medications. So anyway, yes, tricky. It's all tricky

[3:21:31] though. And what else are we going to spend the money on? But I like to think

[3:21:36] there's some way we could help people more

[3:21:38] » if we had more people. That would be the benefit of having more

[3:21:43] access for the general public. Um, which could have an advantage. Would that

[3:21:48] decrease the demand for need for pickup? Could that if we have more containers,

[3:21:54] maybe we could do fewer pickups and that would lower the cost of maintenance

[3:22:00] after the obviously initial investment. But I'm just curious.

[3:22:05] » In theory, yeah, that would be the case. That would only work if all of those

[3:22:10] containers filled up at the same time. >> Otherwise, if they're filling up at

[3:22:17] staggered times, you're still having someone come out just to pick up one

[3:22:22] from one container within the town. But if you could time it so all all of

[3:22:30] them, Sure. Then it would cut the if they you had two, wouldn't it? To pick

[3:22:35] up two at once, you'd have the pickup cost perhaps or not quite half, but

[3:22:41] close.

[3:22:44] So anyway, okay. So that's just one of

[3:22:49] that's probably to me the tiniest part of our opioid funds issues. [laughter]

[3:22:56] As somebody mentioned earlier, maybe was Bose about, you know, we can

[3:23:01] We could send someone to a treatment program that could probably use up, you

[3:23:07] know, if someone really needed extensive treatment

[3:23:10] uh for rehabilitation, then that could use up all the funds we have, frankly,

[3:23:17] you know. So, there's got to be something in between that we could be

[3:23:20] doing. And I'd really like to think we could do some prevention stuff, and it'd

[3:23:25] work. Um, I don't think the town is anonymous and

[3:23:31] I don't know for providing much care to people in town.

[3:23:36] I just can't imagine someone walking in or something to the room. Yeah, we're

[3:23:42] just not big enough. >> Well, the town knows have some input

[3:23:48] about this. Oh, lots there is a lot of information

[3:23:54] out there that people have written up all different, you know, different towns

[3:23:58] have produced stuff about what they've been doing. There are a bunch of groups

[3:24:02] early on who mobilized to write up guides or different things that towns

[3:24:09] could try. So, there's a wealth of information out there.

[3:24:13] » No, to make it specific through it and seeing what would fit for us.

[3:24:18] » Yeah. So, so what's the ground reality in Sherban? Uh, is there is opioid

[3:24:27] addiction a major concern? Is it I mean, HIPPA laws would prevent us from

[3:24:34] figuring things out like who is um addicted perhaps. So,

[3:24:41] » yeah, we won't know who. >> Yeah.

[3:24:43] » And it's hard for us to even know how many,

[3:24:46] » right? Because you know in bigger cities you get

[3:24:51] numbers differently because it's like you know 332 people showed up at this

[3:24:58] hospital with X problems and you're just going to assume they're kind of from

[3:25:02] somewhere nearby there but for us >> we're close to all sorts of medical

[3:25:08] centers and again >> you know you're right there's nothing

[3:25:13] right here that would tie our data Yeah. And then they're also not reporting

[3:25:19] things below five as much as they used to. I don't know if that applies to this

[3:25:23] too, but we could ask our public health nurse what she's seeing. I know that

[3:25:29] there

[3:25:32] uh I feel like there was some some count of like someone with an

[3:25:39] overdose and a bad reaction something at some point, but I honestly don't

[3:25:44] remember what the number was. >> One

[3:25:49] one in some number of years. I don't know.

[3:25:54] » Yeah. So that data actually is available

[3:25:58] through um the through BSAS. They collect hospitalization data and they

[3:26:05] use patient information about where they either have primary residence or um

[3:26:13] their permanent residence. And we do know that in between July of 2024 and

[3:26:19] June of 2025 there were 32 substance related hospitalizations.

[3:26:25] Now a substance related hospitalization could be anything from alcohol to

[3:26:28] opioids to um anything within sort of that is

[3:26:33] considered a substance related hospitalization in the emergency

[3:26:37] department. They do say that those numbers are

[3:26:41] collected um specifically from two different data sources. Um I just

[3:26:48] want to make sure that I'm quoting these correctly.

[3:26:54] Um, >> could substance also be a prescribed

[3:26:58] medication that wasn't, you know, that just had a bad

[3:27:04] effect or is it abuse? >> It's generally they generally track more

[3:27:10] acute cases. So, anything that would have to do with a chronic condition is

[3:27:14] not going to be considered a substance related hospitalization through the

[3:27:18] emergency department. Um, that's my understanding of the data set. I'd be

[3:27:22] happy to send it over and uh if you want to look at it more together, we can. But

[3:27:27] just to sort of answer your question as to the prevalence in Shervern, um there

[3:27:32] have been several overdose deaths in Sherburn that we know of through the um

[3:27:40] through the burial agent work. Um,

[3:27:47] » really? >> I know that there there is one cuz

[3:27:50] somebody spoke up at town meeting once when we were talking about when we were

[3:27:56] first getting the opioid funds.

[3:28:08] » Okay.

[3:28:12] So >> the other thing we wonder is whether we

[3:28:14] could help fund programs in another town that

[3:28:19] then we somehow recommend that people go there again if they want the anonymity

[3:28:39] anyway. Okay. Um, now it's super duper late.

[3:28:45] » Uh, all right. So, lots more

[3:28:51] on that. Um, I don't see too many people on and I'm kind of wondering

[3:28:59] if >> there's nobody from the public still

[3:29:02] here, Darl. It's just the board and >> Yeah.

[3:29:06] » And myself. Lightning. Yeah. Um,

[3:29:11] I was thinking that we can move our presentation of on discussion of mass D

[3:29:20] method for determining limited septic system capacity

[3:29:26] » when design records unavailable. >> Sure.

[3:29:30] » Another time and the same with if it's okay with people only because now it's

[3:29:36] 10:33. Um

[3:29:40] and then the permitting solid waste haulers. We do need to move on that to

[3:29:45] some degree. Did look over the forms. Um >> I like the carile form.

[3:29:54] » Yes, I like the car the best by far. >> It's got a lot more information than the

[3:29:59] others. >> Yeah.

[3:30:04] And then the only thing I'd like to see is not tonnage but volume capacity of

[3:30:10] trucks. I think we'd do better with volume

[3:30:16] than with someone else's estimate of tonnage because there are, you know,

[3:30:21] kind of average weight of a cubic yard of of uh recyclables

[3:30:29] and versus solid waste. Um, I think we'd do better that way than them trying to

[3:30:36] maybe underestimate or not having any clue as to how much it weighed. I don't

[3:30:42] think we should rely on their tonnage. >> Personal opinion of working with

[3:30:48] » companies waste. >> The only comment I had was I wasn't sure

[3:30:52] why why they asked for workers compensation insurance.

[3:30:58] I would say that's pretty standard for our permits. We require workers

[3:31:03] compensation insurance for our um this for our SE hauler permits as well. Um

[3:31:11] and for for some of the food permits we require insurance as well.

[3:31:16] » Yeah, I would think you want the vehicle insurance.

[3:31:21] » The vehicle insurance is required in Dover. um

[3:31:27] the vehicle registration and then the certificate for insurance for public

[3:31:33] liability and their property insurance is required in Carlilele Dover here.

[3:31:38] Sorry, I thought I was sharing my screen. Um

[3:31:42] so when it comes to insurance, >> certificate of liability insurance that

[3:31:46] Carile has uh indicated and then it'll say you can ask for that.

[3:31:53] Well, the certificate will list what the insurance is that someone has and what

[3:31:58] it covers. >> Yeah. So, this is a little

[3:32:04] » Yeah. vehicle stuff >> information.

[3:32:08] » Yeah. No, that's pretty standard for a lot of

[3:32:12] things, especially stuff like this. And then for the workers, they are

[3:32:17] if people are not managing their sharps properly, you know, they've got to make

[3:32:22] sure that they're doing something for their

[3:32:26] workers, some protection, hopefully training,

[3:32:31] and appropriate u gloves and all the rest.

[3:32:41] And I had a couple ideas about some additions for this.

[3:32:46] » Yeah, I'd love to hear your ideas for additions because um my goal would be to

[3:32:51] have the first draft to the board for the next meeting. So that way um we can

[3:32:57] get the board's feedback on the initial draft and then I can bring it to the

[3:33:01] working group and the other stakeholders in town to get their secondary feedback

[3:33:06] and then bring it back to the board um in October per the initial timeline we

[3:33:12] discussed. Um >> so like we're here so I would like to

[3:33:17] have the initial draft by the first meeting in September

[3:33:22] and so on and so forth.

[3:33:26] So any feedback is is welcome. I've been taking some notes.

[3:33:30] » Yeah, I have some notes. >> Yeah. Also feel free to send me an email

[3:33:35] with it. >> Okay. And then um

[3:33:41] again, if people are dying to talk about food permit fees and applications, we

[3:33:50] could. I'm still finding it, you know, it's a complicated thing. I'd love to

[3:33:56] find a way to simplify it. I did on that at the beginning of the summer

[3:34:03] and June or whatever whenever that was first available and I haven't looked at

[3:34:07] it again, but there's still I still think there are things we might be able

[3:34:11] to simplify a little bit more. >> Um, I did create two documents that were

[3:34:17] in the meeting document folders that were sort of just summaries. um they

[3:34:21] were a little bit more concise in explaining rather like the full

[3:34:27] » Yeah, I still think there's some room for further streamlining.

[3:34:33] » Okay. >> But it's not simple because it's

[3:34:35] complicated bunch of information. Um kind of repetitive but with some nuances

[3:34:42] here and there. So, uh, feels like it's there's maybe an easier

[3:34:49] way though. Maybe not. I don't know. Um,

[3:34:56] okay.

[3:35:01] Are people okay? If we're not, you know, we have some things we can slide next

[3:35:06] time, maybe with more amendments so that it'll be easier to rebuild faster

[3:35:12] in a meeting.

[3:35:18] And is anyone feeling badly about having a discussion about the determining

[3:35:23] septic system capacity and design flow records are unavailable?

[3:35:28] The simplest answer for that is our standard procedure and the one

[3:35:35] recommended to us by D is that when you really have no plans,

[3:35:40] no asbuilt plans that were definitely uh for approved plans on record

[3:35:48] that you go with the um

[3:35:53] records as close to when you think the dwelling was built. because there are

[3:35:59] noise accessories records for some of the antique homes in town. So, we might

[3:36:03] not even have that. But you get as early as you can and see what they thought the

[3:36:08] building once. >> Yeah, if I can answer.

[3:36:13] » Yeah, that's 100% correct. And that's the process that we've been using all

[3:36:17] these years. So, you go with the assessment records.

[3:36:21] » If there's nothing else available, confirmed by DP many of times, there's

[3:36:26] nothing else. So that's that's all we have to our options, you know, to look

[3:36:30] into bedroom count. But no, I agree with you 100%.

[3:36:35] » Yeah. >> Okay. Um but we'll have opportunities

[3:36:43] soon to apply that methodology and go through it in detail. And we did it, you

[3:36:49] know, recently kind of through other properties.

[3:36:55] Doesn't come up so frequently, thank goodness. But again, with our older

[3:37:00] properties in town, it has been a challenge.

[3:37:08] Any chance anyone would like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting?

[3:37:12] » Darl, did you want to talk about the next meeting agenda?

[3:37:16] » Yeah. Well, now we're going to be moving a few of these things on there. The fee

[3:37:22] waver policy and this and the waist haulers.

[3:37:27] » Um, for sure and and possibly that discussion about the methodology, but

[3:37:32] again, maybe we'll have an example come up and we'll just get to play it out in

[3:37:36] real life.

[3:37:44] um >> uh peer reviewers.

[3:37:48] » Yep. >> Hopefully for next time. Does anyone

[3:37:52] want to be part of reviewing the peer reviewers?

[3:38:00] I could believe Julie would be possibly willing to do that, but I won't

[3:38:05] volunteer her in her absence. Um we also from the public health nurse

[3:38:12] will likely be um having some uh an update and sort of a discussion on ticks

[3:38:20] and tickornne illnesses. Um >> stemming from the conversation that we

[3:38:25] had today. Uh this I did bring this up to her last week and uh she would like

[3:38:30] to you know come to a meeting and we can talk about it some more and answer

[3:38:33] questions and just >> reminding people that tick season

[3:38:37] doesn't end in September. Uh Rebecca you're still muted.

[3:38:44] » Still muted. >> Sorry. No, I know. Sorry. I forgot I

[3:38:47] actually just muted myself a second ago. Um the I'm also happy to talk about some

[3:38:54] of the clinical part if anyone's interested

[3:38:58] » on >> but if that is better in the if that's a

[3:39:02] better um subject for like a clinical presentation like a if we have an

[3:39:09] evening or something

[3:39:13] » that could be yeah maybe it'd be easier right

[3:39:19] Okay, that that could work. Then people could ask them, you know,

[3:39:26] » I could give a big I could give a whole on it, but um you know, because it's

[3:39:31] complicated, but it's also really relevant and interesting.

[3:39:41] » Okay.

[3:39:46] Actually,

[3:39:49] maybe you should meet with the uh public health nurse about

[3:39:53] » That's what I was thinking. I'd be I'd be totally happy to meet with her about

[3:39:57] it. We could maybe put something together.

[3:40:01] » And I'm sure >> there do it that way.

[3:40:05] » Sorry. >> I think I think it'd be more productive

[3:40:08] just going to that route rather than at a meeting. And also

[3:40:13] because our meetings are going to be getting longer and longer as we're

[3:40:17] dealing with these two projects. >> Maybe Sarah and I I'll call Sarah and we

[3:40:24] can do we can figure out the best way to do it.

[3:40:27] » Yeah, that works. >> Okay. All right. Thanks.

[3:40:31] » Perfect. Okay.

[3:40:35] Anyone ready to move the closing of the meeting?

[3:40:39] » Uh yeah, I can make a motion. Uh like to make a motion to close tonight's adjourn

[3:40:46] tonight's board of health meeting. >> Second.

[3:40:53] » Any further discussion? Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I.

[3:40:59] » Steve Constantine I. >> Rebecca Hane I.

[3:41:06] » And >> all right. Good night everyone.

[3:41:09] Thanks. >> I didn't really know that the uh folks

[3:41:12] from Metobrook were coming tonight. Did you know, Sarah? I didn't know that they

[3:41:18] were going to come. >> I did not know. No, can't say I did.

[3:41:21] » Yeah, but I am very happy that they did because I we needed all this information

[3:41:28] that we hadn't seen yet. Um >> just for the minute.

[3:41:34] » Sorry. Just wanted to note for myself in the future that it's 10:45.

[3:41:39] » Yeah. Well, everyone have a great night. [music]

Sherborn Board of Health Meeting August 12, 2026

Transcript