Conservation Commission Meeting February 7, 2023

and I think because of that I'm GNA start the meeting here and I'm calling to order the town of Dartmouth Conservation Commission meeting uh for Tuesday February 7th um due to numerous executive orders including one that was uh signed back in July 2022 we're allowed March 31 2023 to conduct our meeting uh by remote access uh this particular platform allows folks who want to be heard to use the raise your hand feature

and if all else fails the actual wave your hand and we'll recognize you you can then unmute and discuss what you want relative to the topic at hand so we are the conservation commit so we don't deal with things with Etc that being said our first order of business is to deal with the administrative items and the first is to approve the minutes of January 9 2022 secondos opposition that motion passes

unanimously mik you uh Mike I'm sorry to interrupt you but I think somebody's uh somebody's got a lot of noise coming from their computer um I don't know who that might be be it might be at me I'm in hotel lobby in Florida I'm going to mute myself okay Mike you're now on mute so we can't I think you're talking sorry how did that happen how are you Nate good I

don't know that happened but thank you for letting me know the next is the approval of the minutes of January 10 2022 so moved so moved we have a motion seconded all in favor I I opposed no opposition that passes unanimously next we're going to go for the approval of the January 24th 2023 field trip reports so moved second have a seconded motion all in favor opposed no opposition that passes

unanimously uh finally we have the receipt of the minutes of the January 24 2023 meeting so moved second second motion all in favor I opposed no opposition that passes unanimously we have two field trip reports I don't know if Mark's up for them or not but you can do it just by uh by by vo Mark you don't have to turn the TV on uh the first is a request for certificate of compliance D file 15-

11157 from Richard J Ray for work at map 11 lot 3 that's otherwise known as 2548 a pamsa road um is all the work in order Mark all the works in order recommending uh complete COC Commissioners make a motion for a complete COC second we have a seconded motion all in favor no opposition that motion passes unanimously the second uh request is a request somebody go dead yeah Mike you muted again yeah I'm

not sure why it's doing that I'm not touching it my hands are off the computer but okay it might be something on my end for sure I think you to start again on that one yeah the second item is an extension permit request on D file 15- 2497 from Mil Creek Renewables for ground mounted solar array it's on land describ described excuse me as map 60 Lots 2 2-3 4 14 and 19 it's Otherwise Known is

450 451 Highland Avenue Mark what's the uh what's the staff's recommendation this's a little complicated um this is it is the Double S farm on Highland Avenue just north of the railroad tracks actually it straddles the railroad tracks um we issued under 2497 an order of conditions for a solar field which is due to expire on February 19th of this year we the property in question is a

composting facility and farm which may or may not have significant violations to disposal and wetlands and the like uh Board of Health or excuse me Department of Health myself and several members of d solid waste W ons and uh the groundwater division are going out I believe on the 23rd to look at this site while we issued an order for a solar field which has next to nothing to do with these

violations um I think it behooves us to be a little bit careful on how we extend this because I don't know what the enforcement issues are going to ultimately result in excuse me um secondly as with many solar uh companies they don't understand environmental permitting and while they filed in enough time I was prepared to issue a limited extension when I got into the weeds they do not have a recorded order

of conditions although they recorded to amended order of conditions so we have nothing to tie this extension back to because as you know amended orders of conditions don't extend the life of the permit they change the permit within the time frame so the original order of conditions for which this extension is being requested was never recorded So having said all that we been back and forth with these guys there was

one Solar Company they sold it to another and I believe they sold it to a third so at this point I'm recommending to continue this to the um 21st to see if we can get this squared away because there's too many Loose Ends Mark I mean I want to be clear that would still give them enough time if it were deemed uh appropriate to Grant the extension well they applied 31 days prior to so

they met that deadline but not an issue uh and we would extend back to whatever date it was so I think we' be we'd be hearing this two days after the expiration but I think we can certainly allow for that extension gotcha thank you Mark so you heard the rec recommendation of staff I I think it is appropriate given the fact they're going out on site and you know there's some questions

uh procedurally so rather than just vote up or down an extension I think it's warranted to continue this until the next public hearing I would agree with that when is the next public hearing Mike uh this is February 13 February is the that's the bylaw oh it's the 21st 21 yeah that did sound awfully familiar to me um can I make a motion to continue this extension permit request until February 21st 2023 at

7M second second and motion all in favor I no opposition being heard that passes unanimously we're moving on to the public hearings and the first is a continued public hearing the file 15- 2659 on the notice of intent from Potter Street solar LLC for a single family dwelling and a ground mounted solar panel array on the rear portion of the lot within bordering land subject to flooding and the 100 foot buffer zone to

bordering vegetated Wetland it's on land described as map 138 lot 14 before it's on Potter Street the reading motion to weigh the reading second all in favor I opposed no opposition being heard that passes unanimously I believe the there's been a request for continuance on this Mark um as well as yes they have requested a continuance on this and the next two they submitted all their documentation yes

so it missed the deadline for tonight for the revisions they also have to do we have to get a uh peer review for drainage we just received that check today excuse me I don't know that Gus will be able to turn it around in two weeks so uh we can certainly continue it to the 21st in the with the idea that Gus can get it done or we can set it out another month to March

7th well it seems to me we're asking an a a lot of Mr raposo to turn it around that quickly and the likelihood we'll be we'll be continuing it again because we're waiting for his report I'm more inclined to push it out a month and have his report in hand so we can actually make a decision I'm with that I agree with that make a motion to uh continue uh the public hearing file

number 15- 2659 until March 7th 2023 at 7M a motion we have a second on the motion please second motion is seconded all in favor I I opposed no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously the uh second uh public hearing is a continued public hearing the EP file 15- 2660 it's on the notice of intent from Potter steel solar LLC for a single family dwelling in a ground mounted solar panel array on the rear

portion of the lot within bordering land subject to flooding and the 100 foot buffer zone to bordering vegetated Wetlands the land is uh map 138 lot 1441 it's also on Potter streets entertain a motion to wave the reading for this one so moved second we have a second and motion all in favor I oppos no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously as with the previous the applicant has requested a

continuance and uh again we're going to be using our peer reviewer so I would I would assume we'd want to continue it for the same March 7th meeting um if Mark has no objection uh make a motion to continue this public hearing uh D file number 15-26 60 uh to March 7th um at se March 7th 2023 at 7M have a motion do we have a second on the motion please second motion seconded

all in favor I I opposed no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously the third item on the agenda is a continued public hearing D file 15- 2658 it's on the notice of intent from Potter Street solar LLC proposing a ground mounted solar panel array on the rear portion of lot within bordering land subject to flooding and the 100 foot buffer zone to bordering vegetated Wetlands it's on land described as map

138 lot

144-20 I opposed no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously again as with the previous two I'll entertain a motion to continue this matter until March 7th 2023 at 7M so moved second we have a seconded motion all in favor I I opposed no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously fourth public hearing um we don't have an a DE file number um but at least not on the agenda so um we won't

we won't be able to close but it's a public hearing with no D file number from little moth properties real estate trust for the construction of fixed Pier gangway and Float on land described as map 18 lot 14-1 it's otherwise known as 7 Cedar Avenue entertain a motion to wave the reading some mov have a second on that motion second thank you all in favor opposed no opposition being heard that M

that motion passes unanimously is there someone here on behalf of the applicant uh Mr chairman uh they also requested a continuance via email and I sent that off to the commission they've got to revise some plans and uh do some additional work they requested a continuance till February 21st all right we have a request by the applicant to continue their public hearing until February 21st make a motion to

continue um uh the public hearing for DP file 15- no file number uh until February 21st 2023 at 7M have a second on that motion second we have a seconded motion all in favor I I opposed no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously we're now moving on to um the fifth public hearing which I I will recuse myself from um so Patty if you will sure over uh this is a public hearing D file number

15- 2664 from Anthony J Garo for the after Thea notice of intent for wetland restoration the removal of tree and the installation of a split rail fence within the bordering vegetated Wetland on land described as map 123 lot 152 otherwise known as one Clark's Cove Drive can I get a motion to weigh the reading so Mo second all in favor I any opposed hearing none that motion passes

unanimously and is someone here for the applicant um yes Madam chairman thank you and members of the commission uh my name is Dave pet and I'm here representing the applicant and also the property owner uh Anthony goo um this notice of intent is being filed as a result of a violation that occurred on the G's property um which wasn't necessarily something they did and I'll explain in a moment if I could

share my screen I'm going to bring up a photo of the uh of the site here of course thank you sure see

here all

right sorry about that I'm just getting this situated here we go okay so this um can everybody see that yes yep okay so this uh is the G property which is the address is one Clark Cove Drive and this is the G's residence right here which is on Clark Cove Drive but their property extends all the way back behind these homes that are along William Street and what had occurred over the course of some years

is that the property owners in these three homes who didn't necessarily have a good sense of where the back property line was uh encroached into the G's property um they ended up cutting some trees down even doing some landscape activities uh within this area and Beyond into the Wetland itself um so Goos discovered this situation and ended up contacting um Mark Garrett about it who obviously recognized it as a

violation um issued an enforcement order so that a notice of intent could be filed to restore the altered Wetlands um and so that's the main purpose of this application so I just wanted to give everybody a sense of um the setting and and how this situation has arisen so that the alteration basically is Right within this area here I'm going to bring up the actual site map um and show the that in better

detail uh does anybody have any questions about this before I jump off this Frame okay so far all right let me bring up the other plan

here

okay so this um is the site plan submitted with a notice of intent and so again the G's house would be over in this area and these this lot this second lot and the house sitting on this third lot um are where the violation occurred into the G's property back here so the extent of the alteration extended as far back as this hatched area that you see here on the plan um and so some of the

work did actually end up going on the other side of this intermittent stream that sort of runs along the back of property um it's a pretty it's a pretty good little stream and um kind of strange that these people would have gone that far back but nevertheless that's that's what occurred so um there was roughly 680 ft of actual Wetland that was altered and then there was also some land within the buffer zone to the

Wetland that was altered which is this sort of hatched area here this closer line hatched area is the actual Wetland itself that was altered and the rest of this that's um cross-hatched is buffer zone so the objective of this application is to replant this whole Zone both the wetlands and the buffer zone uh with trees and shrubs to restore the altered Wetland and buffer zone areas um also as part of the property is

it's proposed to put a split rail fence along this back property line so that going forward into the future everybody's conscious of where that property line is so that there's no future encroachments by either these or Future Property Owners of these other Lots um and lastly there's a large tree um situated right here on the edge of the Wetland that is fairly close to this home here and it poses a threat to

damage if this were to come down and so the gas are um asking that this tree be allowed to be removed as part of this application um so the um Wetland is going to be in buffer zota be restored with um trees and shrubs according to this plant list down here all of the planting work is going to be done by hand um and so that will hopefully take place

in the spring uh if an order of conditions is is granted to restore this in response to the enforcement order so that's um essentially the situation and I'd be happy to answer any questions if anybody has questions about the situation here thank you very much um Mark can we hear a staff recommendation on this sure uh Dave and I have worked very closely together on this and I fully support the

program which Dave is proposing to restore the buffer zone and some wetland in this area uh and I sent the commission some recommended conditions which is our standard conditions uh special conditions 20 through 42 which include uh excuse me uh which include uh a planting uh completion date of May 19th I believe and also the installation and maintenance of the fence perpetuity we did have some

discussions with one of the neighbors if they could work on on the other side of the fence and I said emphatically no uh even if the G said it was okay he would have to file for permit so I think everybody understands what's going on out there I think they've did a great job so I'm recommending a standard order of conditions uh conditions one uh 20 through 42 in accordance with the plan uh as

dated December 16th 2022 thank you Mark U Commissioners uh do you have any uh questions or comments for either the U engineer or Mark and uh uh Mr pitchet I think I I think I pronounced your name correctly would you mind just uh taking this thank thank you very sorry about that didn't know if anybody had any questions that's all no thank you very much uh Commissioners do you have any questions

no is there anybody in the audience who wishes to be heard on this application hearing and seeing none um um uh can I get a motion to close the public hearing so Mo I get a second I need a second second all in favor I any opposed hearing none that motion passes unanimously and this public hearing is closed um Commissioners what is your uh what's your pleasure on this one motion for a stand order of

conditions uh per the most recently submitted plan that specific date that was December 16th December 16th 2022 there is an additional uh there are conditions um as described um I'll just go over that again uh so you can amend that uh motion Nat if you would um the conditions associated with this that that uh the plan was dated December 16 2022 um or a standard order of conditions with special conditions 20 through

42 with a uh planting date uh to be completed by May 19th and I believe Mark had mentioned that the fence should be in by then as well Mark if I'm not mistaken um so yes I did yes I did okay okay I I amend my motion then for a standard order conditions per the plan of December 16 2022 including special conditions 20 through 42 with a final planting date of May 19th which is also

inclusive of the construction of the split rail fence can I get a second to that motion second second all in favor any opposed hearing none that motion passes unanimously thank you very much okay thank you for your time thank you bye now well done thanks all right Mike you're back up I'm back up so we're on to our items for discussion first items are U as usual if we have any

bills no not no bills so that was easy the next are going to be um the 61a land at 29 Morton Street and then we'll have the booth Str from dnrt we need wet sigs and then we have a request from leberge so real briefly Mr chairman I sent to you a letter from attorney Chris Mary regarding a parcel of land that uh fronts on both all Old Westport Road

and Morton Street um the site a portion of the site supports the uh I think it's Town Auto on Morton Street all this land happens to be an a agriculture they're splitting out lots that that front on all Westport Road there are Halfacre lots and he they're requesting uh the release of one of those lots uh 61a I don't know that the entire parcel it's agricultural land I don't want to dismiss the value

of that but given the auto usage uh there are some complications uh with the site potentially uh so I'm recommending to the commission to send a letter to the uh select board recommending that they wave their right of first refusal yeah I I mean given given what you described Mark I think that's a reasonable position for conservation to take I don't know if any other department within the town would be interested in

that land but I'd certainly I concur with you um there's no point in US exercising our right of first refusal I would agree with that I get a vote on that all right we entertain a motion to uh send a letter to the select board at the Conservation Commission of Dartmouth recommends not exercising the right of first refusal second seconded motion all in favor post no mo that motion passes

unanimously Mark you have the booth CR it says wet sigs what does that mean well Nick Wildman came in last week uh sort of unannounced with the are we need at least four that signatures I have I believe I have Richard and I believe I have Michael uh your signatures I need at least four if I get more that's fine I could then get it notorized and we can move that along

to the select board this is a CR that we voted on and approved and supported through town meetings so this is just a uh housekeeping matter but I do need wet signatures um Mike I uh um Mark I will um I'm not able to drive right now but I will be going into town hall on Thursday at 4:30 for for a meeting um and uh we'll be happy to sign it at that point

and if I can get a ride in tomorrow I'm happy to do it but I'm not allowed to drive just yet that's just we need those signatures to move that along Marcus Joe Brook I was in there last week but I didn't see that to sign and you did not see it to sign because I hadn't gotten it yet oh okay but I I won't be back until um February 19th I'm in Florida and I have

to stay M muted because I'm in a library and it's just I almost can't even hear you talking four signatures I have to I'll be in there by Thursday I will if I if you don't have four by Thursday I will you know I'll do it on Thursday I'll try and get in a little early and take care of it I'll swing by tomorrow Mark Mark okay Jim I may or may not be there but Adam

knows where it is um okay the next item leers the N FYI uh Rodney Rodney Le on Old full River Road uh you know Rodney has been kind of a colorful character as as his family when it comes to Wetland uh issues uh but he reached out to me uh about doing some tree work and he said he would have a document to me by tonight but he didn't but he is he actually was uh very

proactive and reaching out to me so I'm just giving you a sense of you see EGS going up in and around property we are aware thank you Mark this is this is not on the agenda this is tell you it's been a whirlwind this week relative to the bylaws and the uh regulations um I was having a discussion with Brian Cruz Town Council and apparently my interpretation was not correct although I

W let me rephrase my interpretation of the uh regulations and the bylaw were not consistent with his uh he claims that we cannot issue a condition to post a performance bond for cleanup at this time the way the bylaw is written it we can't do that so we've issued two performance bonds one on the Webster case at Redwood Road and one at uh seven turn lane huder uh I need the Conservation Commission to authorize me send

correspondence to both of those applicants resending the condition requiring the performance bond for cleanup I want rain a motion to that effect so moved motion a second all in favor I iOS no opposition being heard that motion passes unanimously okay um I did engage Brian also in a conversation about the bylaws and the regulations he's all on board to get this you know for town meeting he's

going to wait until after the public hearing uh on Monday then for your information Monday February 13th at 6 o'clock we have a public hearing uh to get gain uh comments from the general public on what we're proposing I did receive a couple of comments uh one from uh the health department which or actually good little admin comments so I've Incorporated Incorporated them with red Redline

comments and they did get a comment from Steve melow who requested and it's one of the reasons why little moth is was continued tonight he would like is part of the submittal requirements uh to include uh spatial coordinates for the offshore ends of these docks to make it easier for him to compare to his moing Fields um I thought that was a really good suggestion I wrote up a quick little condition I

emailed it to you the language is pretty basic but uh I think it's something that we should consider Incorporated incorpor operating into the submission requirements as part of the plan preparation I thought it was a good suggestion as well I I didn't know the Genesis but when I saw when I read the email I just thought it made sense to to do something like that um I also noted that we had the one one comment why

don't we put our definitions in the beginning I don't think that's a bad idea actually so I I I I don't either so I think what we do there is if we moved section 10 into and made section 10 section three and those others just get an additional our definition right after jurisdiction which I think makes sense yep I agree I agree with that um Mark I'll I'll let you finish with

your comments yeah very many more my just so you know we've put a legal advertisement in the paper we put a public notice on the web page on the town homepage conservation page we have the documents linked into the conservation web page so anybody can download them and access them uh I don't know if anybody's been by Town Hall but we have uh notice on the new digital sign for the meeting on the 13th so we'

broadcast this as best we can throughout um I don't know what kind of turnout we're going to have but uh we certainly can't be accused of doing this behind closed doors um relative to my suggestion of uh discussing the bylaws and regulations this evening because we have some extra time I will leave it to your discretion I don't know that I can sit through very much of a discussion given

the way I feel uh but uh I don't know that you need me for that discussion our minutes clerk will document whatever is said uh between commission members uh but uh the only thing I would say is that uh I think everybody needs to be up to speed on what we have as our draft document for Monday night just so we don't look you know like idiots we don't know what we're talking about so uh I

don't know how much public comment we're going to get uh yeah we're probably going to get some uh I did also distribute to all the engineers who do uh do do work so I feel that they've got you know everybody's got the information they need if they want to make comments you know I was just curious did did Brian have any um give us any more guidance as to the bylaw uh because it you know

again I'm going back to a to an old theme but I'll re I'll replay the theme um I I wondering if we could pair pair down a lot of what's here and put them in the regulations and just reference to the regulations rather than the bylaw creating because in my view I mean for what it's worth I see some duplication between the two so you have like a section five application for permits and

determinations well it's in both um and I think if we just said you know when written complete application shall conform to the filing requirements as described in the regulations at the time of application period we've done it now you go back to your regulations and you read how to do it so that's one of my my my Global comments not a specific comment but um I just always to me I

always liked my bylaw to be as short as possible and you can make a 50-page regulation if that's what you want um but I like the bylaw to be somewhat you the source the source of the power ter your initial question like no he did not he has not he has not reviewed anything so um I'm sure he'll come up with those and again this is an organic document uh we have we can make

changes we're to make changes I presume we're already making changes so uh what you have is nothing necessarily final no no I realize that I'm just I'm just saying this as sort of like a global thought which is a little more radical than than than what we I I mean radical in a bad way just it's significantly more change than than what um we may have thought of but the change actually makes the bylaw shorter easier

to read and it moves everything over to the regulation and and the reason why I like that is because the likelihood is if we have everything in the regulation that an applicant or the professional would need to know in terms of how to file and the timing and all that good stuff that's all they need to look at they don't have to be looking at two different documents to try to figure out

is there is it the same in both or is there a difference and God forbid we did have a difference and it wasn't intentional we we've just created an inherent conflict within our own laws but um you know from my standpoint um it just seems to me that a bylaw should be the source of the authority the source of the power and you when you have regulations that's where you get

into the Weeds on how to do things um but that's just a global comment of mine um and if I were if that comment were appropriate and the Commissioners thought it was appropriate and Town Council said you're not violating some mystical magical incantation from the forefathers um this document would be a simple simple document to present to town meeting um and you know and I'd say with the caveat that you would most of

your future amendments would be amendments to the regulations which wouldn't require town meeting which then sort of gets us away from this we've got to get this in before the warrant um deadline expires so I just point that out as my Global comment not as a specific and hey you know I'm certainly willing to entertain other suggestions but that's how I view bylaws that's just my personal thing um and I know when I'm

sitting down for a client like I was earlier this night but having to review the various insundry things that you have to do for the City of New Bedford it just struck me that it must have been there must have been tremendous amount of committees created to draft all these various documents because they didn't take anything out it's it's sometimes contradictory and it leaves you with a question of what do I

do what am I supposed to do what you know so anyway I'll stop talking enough talk um I think I I'd like to say something about uh the process um as we've gone through it it feels um I agree with you Mike uh that I think the bylaws should be very simple um because we really and we really need to be very careful and thoughtful as we're we're revising these bylaws the

last time these bylaws were revised I think was 2009 is that correct Mark the the overall bylaws and regulations in 2009 the doc and peers was a very small section that was revised in 2015 yeah but so it it's been a very very long time since since we have uh revised the bylaw um and for that matter the regulations and I guess and and Mark I've I've talked about this

with you but I think this is very rushed um and I know that you have been talking about bylaws and revising the bylaws and the regulations but it still seems terribly W to me and we've gone back and forth between putting um definitions in regulations or putting the definitions in the bylaw the way I the way I think about doing revising a bylaw um is that we really shouldn't revise it very often I

mean unless something gigantic happens uh and and we have to go back and revise the bylaw the bylaw should be a very simple document as Mike says I I do think that that's correct um and I think it's the regulations that that end end up changing and and that makes tremendous sense to me um because those regulations don't have to go to town meeting um and and so so to go to town

me the town meeting is is a biger deal I mean you so as we go through this I feel like and I've read through these you know I have read through these over and over and over again uh even in my feeble state in the last month um but I I still have some I still have some issues with whether or not with what the issues are surrounding bylaw changes and I think those need to be

identified and I think that there are some that are still outstanding uh which you know to me is I know that uh the harbor management implementation committee is is looking at Doc and Pier and I know that that that uh in in the harbor plan U and that's one of the things that we're we're talking about within the doc and Pierce focus group is is looking at this matter and I don't know if there

might be any changes that might be forthcoming as a result from this group we're not there yet we're we're just not there yet and it you know and I also think that there's been a lot of I try very hard to look at in the last month or so to look at what other towns have done um and see how they have modified uh their bylaw sometimes it seems to me that we're we're we seem to

be in in a bit of a rush and I feel like I just don't have enough time and given the fact that we're we really shouldn't be revising the bylaw very often like one once every five years at most I wonder if we're not missing some opportunity here and to go back and do maybe a little bit better study of things looking at at what other towns have done and and to make sure that

we've we're really we really have consensus even among our own group um I know probably most everyone here is going to hate me for saying all of this but I really can't help myself because I think although there has been review and dis and discussion among ourselves uh at these meetings I I guess I feel that we could we should be exploring a bit more and it seems fast to me and seems uh like we're

in a r Rush that's all I have to say well first of all I want to say one thing really important no matter what anybody wants to say it's not a matter of whether it's a popular opinion it's your opinion it deserves to be heard understood everybody I want to be real clear on that if you want to say something don't worry about the temperature of the room you say it because that's what you're

that's what you're a commissioner for that's what you're supposed to be adding your your thoughts and that makes for a better conclusion if we all add our thoughts no matter what they are they may not be in total harmony with everyone else's that's a good thing sometimes people force you to look at a question from a different perspective um in that often makes for a better conclusion like I said so um yeah

don't don't ever apologize for for giving your thoughts in a meeting we deserve as Commissioners we deserve the right to be heard on our thoughts we volunteering our time to help the town and you just sat on your hands and didn't do anything and kept quiet that would be a disservice to the commission but I also if I could also add one other thing is that I think Mark you have done

an extraordinary job um and I you you are doing just an incredible job um going through these things and going through each parts of this and responding to uh some of my comments and uh that I have sent to you and I am very appreciative of your time and I I don't mean to say that you're rushing things I just I feel rushed I feel like perhaps we you know perhaps we could all

understand some of the issues or some of the uh the reasons why we need to change the bylaw so that we can address it properly you know I might want to ask a slightly nuanced question from that but I think you're on to something there I guess the question would be what is motivating us to make this particular upcoming Springtown meeting what what question needs to be resolved as quickly as it can be resolved and and

then we will have the answer to why we need to get in there early um but I understand this is not something that just propped up too I get that but I I want to make sure we do a good job a very good job um my my own personal philos I'm sort of fading here so let me you a couple of points all right what's motivating us is a couple of things we protect freshwater

wetlands we don't Define them in the bylaw as of yet okay I we have been challenged on that and fortunately it hasn't gone too too far but we we don't have that as a resource area defined we Define coastal wetlands we don't Define freshwater wetlands is an absolute necessity the second driving force here is we have current regulations which do not reflect the filing requirements that we are now

being uh charged with doing on the online portal somebody could make a big deal if we refuse them because they're not doing the online portal and they want to do it the old way understand and these are organic documents I mean the bylaw you don't want to be changing all that often but the regulations you can change every few years if you want um you know being rushed everybody's always rushed

when you have to write regulations and stuff we don't have the time to do the massive research we're learning on the Fly and we are putting forth in the regulations that are required changed over time need to be you know addressed now in terms of timing needs to be changed for the town meeting we have some time on the regulations still that's doesn't have to go to town meeting and frankly the bylaw should

bylaw changes be approved we have to wait for the AG to sign off on it so you're looking at six to eight months worth of time before those will be absolutely inacted so we have time to work on this but you know the impetus is to work on it and I don't know that we're really going that far out on a limb I think that you know the not many people have made changes to BS few

have and it's to their own Nuance I think we can use some of that information but we have a nuances okay um you know The Orleans bylaw was written I know Patty's been looking at that the Orleans bylaw was written Orleans doesn't have the number of docs we have the kind of issues that we have when it comes to docks so you know yeah we're being yeah we're rushed because the process is rushing us and

things are changing rather quickly I've done a lot of law committees in plth and you know you don't get it perfect you know out of the out of the box you improve it and you constantly want to improve it and I think that's what we're kind of doing here so uh having said that I don't dispute what I'm hearing but we're not going to get it all in one shot that's in my take I think we're

we're working to consolidate and reformat and be non repetitive I'm all in for that uh but I think I think we're actually doing a pretty good job of getting a refined package and we really need to have it done because it hasn't been done in 15 years in reality so that's my two cents uh as I'm fading away here uh well I appreciate your comments um and certainly they're valued so as

much as anything else I'd like to hear from someone others to and and maybe and maybe everyone's fading a little bit but we do have a meeting coming up shortly and you know whether or not there's a large attendance I tend to think there won't be but there will be some questions asked and we'll be on TV and all that great stuff so I'd like to make you know I just like to make one comment

it please everybody take a look at these things um and and write to me or Mark with your comments we really have to get we have to get some ideas from everybody and and if there's some good ideas that we haven't even discussed let's talk about them okay because we don't have I don't have a monopoly on good ideas that's for damn sure and I I just want

to be sure we get it right and we get it I know Mark you said you can change it but the fact that this hasn't been changed in 15 years just shows you how hard it is to change it once you've said it it's kind of set it and forget it like Ron poel guys I I I am fading I gotta go okay okay right so continue on and I will I

will see what said is said in the minutes very better Mark hope you feel better abolutely so you know from again I think what we're finding is we've we can we can we could word these documents which is what what what has been done to date by me okay freely admit word smithing is not the same as looking at it conceptually and saying is this really what we want and I'm not sure that word smithing

is what I really want to be candid with you and I don't know how um I don't know how much time we have to really do what I think would be the right job which is to make this bylaw as pithy as possible and reference everything into the uh regulations because I'd want to run it through Town Council you know you don't want to go and put something into the town meeting

that's going to be rejected by Town Council saying it's violating this or that and then they look at you like didn't you know that um which is why the easy way is just to Wordsmith this a little but I think from my standpoint I don't like the way I don't like the way it's set up okay and it's not something that we did it's something we inherited and I think there's a better mouse trap that's

me I I I agree with you I I also forgot to mention that one of the other uh things that I'm interested in is um definition of Aesthetics and definition of cumulative impact and where and and along with some those are the two major ones and uh you know I and now I think we have a couple of other comments I think uh about bond which I guess that that's maybe for regulation but do we the

regulations always follow the the bylaw so we have to make sure that we know what we want in the regulations so that we're set up through the bylaw so that they flow um and so I I that so I just think that they're you know it just seems it just seems a little rush to me but um I do understand that there's reasons uh as Mark said and I think they're good reasons but I just

uh anyway I I'm gonna stop talking because I I think I think i' I've probably said plenty would love to hear from other folks anyone else have anything to say Richard fent to say I concur with what was said earlier sometimes there is a beauty of Simplicity keep them as simple as you can but you have to keep them with specificity because anything that we do that may cause confusion legitimate

confusion is going to cause nothing but grief and aggravation down the line and Mike I agree with you it's an art to revamp redefine rewrite these to the point where it doesn't Ramble On for two or three years of of paper reams of paper and I and Patty did bring up a point is it too soon to fine-tune this and then send it to Town Council for their opinion on our

opinions and it's it's it's it's it's it is a lot of work a lot of work which I think the collective mind would be of immense assistance I you know I I have to I have to say that that that's one of my biggest concerns that we really haven't involved Town Council in any review and that's one of the important things that you know intelligent businesses and intelligent people do before they act they seek advice

if they don't already know it themselves they seek advice and and I don't know it myself what we're allowed to do and what we're not allowed to do is a matter of law in terms of our bylaws that's what Town Council probably has right at the tip of their tongues because they they're always looking at those things um but truthfully that's something I've been concerned with from from Jump Street um

that we've not had anything looked at by Town Council yet and I they're busy so I I do get the fact that there might not be any Town Council availability between now and submission date for the warrant um articles but that's where I'm coming from I that's why I thought maybe just make I understand now for Mark we need keep some news whoops some news w h but you know I understand from

Mark we need some definitions that aren't there now okay okay then you know if we're going to just do that let's just do that but I think globally we have to look at we have to really study this and dig down make it a document that we can we think can let survive the test of time and have it reviewed competent Town Council to tell us what you know because that's what's

going to be I be if I were a town meting member I'd say has Town Council reviewed this is Town Council okay with this and if we find out for the first time at town meeting the Town Council thinks we're idiots that isn't a good look that's my I think a lot we're making you know the this draft is there's a lot of changes in it there are there's a lot of changes in

it and because I think we're kind of I mean I've I've read it and read it and made uh comments and comments and I know you have two Mike and and then we've gone back and forth about where definitions go and yeah but see I I I agree with you but when I looked at these comments and I'm looking at them now the vast majority of them are just little word smithing things here and

there okay substantively where have we changed things and that's the new definition um but fundamentally what I don't like is two documents having similar sections of provision Visions say it once and get it right yeah and do you need to say it in the bylaw the answer is no for the most part now if you want to have all the details in the bylaw and not have regulations then do it that way but that

means every single time you change you're going to town meeting okay so you have to be aware of the fact you can't make changes quickly and so to to the point that Mark raises oh we've been challenged now on uh you know the lack of definition of fresh water uh you know at Wetlands okay if we have to get it past muster at town meeting that could be six months before

you know I realized we're up coming up on this one but if this came up last fall you have to wait nearly six months to get the town meeting to put the definition in where if it's in your regulations you discuss it you adopt it at at a Conservation Commission meeting and it might only take a month and so if we're looking at things that can be adaptable to conditions as

they present themselves you want it in the regulation you don't want it in the bylaw I have a question about that Mike that specific that specific thing because if I'm if I'm not incorrect Aesthetics the definition for Aesthetics is in our bylaw is that correct yeah let me go get the let me tell you what what the um I I think it's in the bylaw and I and and uh from my

recollection some you know the fact that we had it in our bylaw helped us with a a violation um some time ago large violation some time ago C Smith Cecil Smith and so so the question to me is so where does it does it matter where it is so that definition of a IC so that's my that's my question that's and that's a great question and that's the kind of thing you ask Town Council right that's

what you would do you say Town Council if we had the definition of Aesthetics in our regulations and the the bylaw said for definitions blah blah blah look at the regulations is that going to make it less enforcable than if it were in a bylaw exactly and so I don't know the answer to that so that would be the type that's what I'm saying we don't have any input from Town Council on this yeah so

we're sticking everything into the bylaw by default okay and when I look at that and I say well that is that the way you want to run the ship because if that's what you're going to do then you're going to have to run to town meeting every time you want to make a change now maybe PE hey there may be some folks who say that's what we want to do we want

town meeting to be able to vote on all of this we're just the enforcers I don't believe that but that that's a position people can take we'll do whatever the town meeting tells us to do and I think if you talk to a town meeting member they say we're relying on you to do your job you know do your job um we wanted to be conservation Commissioners we would have asked to be put on that commission

um but you're absolutely right our bylaw has the definition of Aesthetics it's literally three three lines and our regulations under its definition section says Aesthetics see bylaws right yeah and and yet we're going to consider putting a cumulative impact definition in the regulations and not in the bylaw so I I guess I I don't understand why we're putting things where what's the reason what's what's the point I is

point which is why why are things set up the way they are is there a reason for it or was it just that's the way we just kind of fell into it because that's the way they did it in the beginning so we're just following a path that was worn I don't know that's a really good question but yes you're going to need some definitions in your bylaw but those would be definitions that are gener that

are like the ACT what are we talking about this is what we're talking about so it's when you're describing the source of the power okay or maybe defining the bylaw I mean the uh regulations excuse me so you can say these are the regulations promulgated as amended from time to time by the Conservation Commission boom I still think that your bulaw shouldn't be more than two or three pages

long and it should be everything should be in the regulations now if I'm wrong because of some legal technicality then I you know I'm certainly standing corrected and say good now I know why we're doing it but at this point I'm I'm in the dark as much as you are Patty why is it that we have definitions in two different documents why is it that we have the explanation of how you apply in two different documents

regulation Mike do me a favor I'll try we we see we see the road that we're trying to travel on this here but if we spend all of the time doing this and it is is something the Town Council should have been consulted in the beginning then we might have wasted a lot of good time good effort and good thinking I well I agree when you I I don't disagree I mean that's one of my

biggest concerns Richard we need I think we need to have at least some indication from Town Council that what we're doing is appropriate from a legal standpoint and that we didn't miss something that will then be used when somebody doesn't want to comply with the bylaw to say well it's illegal and the court says yeah they're right and you're like well I wish we knew that before we passed

that because I don't I can't say that with a straight face right now I couldn't tell you even whether the current bylaw is totally legal okay because I think we should have an opinion from our attorney right and we're a Regulatory Commission absolutely that is what we do so we you know I I recall I think I had just joined the commission maybe and we we started or maybe it was before my time I can't

remember but the the thought of looking at the bylaw and and really thinking hard about it I I it just wasn't on in my thoughts at that time it was many years ago and I I probably it probably went right over my head but as I've been on this commission for so long I realized that everything that we do um has to be in one of those two places has to be backed up in one of

those two places the bylaws and the regulations otherwise we look silly and because it hasn't been changed in so long I think it's I I you know I've looked at in an effort to try to get up to speed on these things I've I've uh contacted um Sam Haynes who's at czm uh who they they uh do a lot of these uh regs and they they and bylaws and asked them if there were any coastal

towns that you know similar to ours that have revised their bylaws recently and he had said that uh and talked about Aesthetics cumulative impact some of those things that have been hot sort of hot topics for us especially Aesthetics and uh he had pointed me in the direction of uh the town of Orleans and I had started to review uh their bylaw that was I think revised in maybe 2015 I

believe but they do have definitions all a lot of their definitions are in their bylaw interestingly enough but their regulations are very long as you know they there's a lot there's a lot of meat and potatoes in them and uh started to look at other uh other towns like Southampton New York and and other places look at their bylaws um and regulations and and just found that people were really all over the

place you know and wondering why that was so and I also noticed that they had a lot of narrative in their bylaw so I guess a lot of what what did you say a lot of narrative Nar you know which there's a lot of narrative that sort of explains why they've set up their bylaws and their regulations the way they have and I thought that was kind of interesting I'm

not saying that we should do that I I I'm just saying that um it seemed uh um that maybe there were a lot of lot of other towns uh out there that had had done these uh changes and that these are actually more important I'm ashamed to say because I'm ashamed that I years ago when we did this that I didn't plug in like I should have but I didn't really know anything and

um I probably don't now either well we grow we grow into our position because you know when you at least from my perspective when I first came on board I mean Michael Riley meetings were Friday that's what I would oh we're here on Friday I mean you know he was he' tell us what he thought was the right thing to do and by Godly that's what I did um because I don't even remember the

amendment to the bylaws and I was there I must have voted on it but I certainly don't remember a discussion about it um so but I look at things now a little differently because I realized and I didn't realize it then that the bylaw was very important to give Dartmouth things that the state doesn't give you gives you the ability to regulate so that the uniqueness of Dartmouth can still be here the state I

mean we would have had a Cecil Smith 85 foot mountain of trash y um if if we were just going on the state so that opened my eyes to the importance of the bylaw so we were able to convince well we Town Council but we voted we teed it up for them um Mike O'Reilly spent a lot of time crafting vote if you remember um we set it up so

that it was based on the town bylaw not just on the state and that's what we won the superior court judge found that we were correct that they didn't provide the evidence that it what they proposed wouldn't violate the Aesthetics portion of our bylaw amazing right um if we didn't have that there'd be a mountain of trash up out there and there's not a damn thing we could have done about

it so can I ask a question forgive my naiv take but I'm the the new member so I feel like I'm entitled to be naive what what is the problem that we're trying to solve by changing the bylaws I understand we've got some definition uh uncertainty but it seemed to me that that could be addressed through regulations um bylaws to me are are like the US Constitution it's something that you rarely

change uh and the regulations are the the legislation that gets passed you know by Congress I'm I'm just struggling to figure out what what's the actual driving um force behind the change in the bylaw other than that it hasn't been changed in a long time and there's a town meeting coming up Jim your you're uh Right On Target and your analysis of or comparison to the Constitution is very appr appropriate

that was what what I said when I was speaking with Patty uh last week I mean that's why the bylaw is not where you want to go into all the minute detail I mean that's why you've got 12,000 pages of federal code okay you wouldn't put at least you wouldn't put that under glass to show in a museum um but the fact is um that was why I asked the

question I mean why what what is the emergency that we're trying to address for town meeting and what Mark said it was the definition I I don't want to put words in his mouth but what I heard there was the definition of freshwater wetlands which we don't really talk about and we've been challenged not in court yet but challenged as to the validity of of our having jurisdiction over something we don't

Define which I get okay I mean I understand that but I I'm in agreement with your point why why can't we Define things in the regulations and I understand that you can put your definitions in the bylaw some people do um but if you want to have a document that you can amend if the definitions are are important to be able to address situations as they develop you don't want to wait for town meeting

it only comes twice a year and there's deadlines so if you miss the deadline for putting the warrant article into the warrant into together and they can't accept it you're waiting till the following town meeting but which point the problem may have already blossomed so to me organically the bylaw should just be the the source of of the power Express the fact that you have this Authority

and that the regulations that you vote upon and promulgate look to those for your definition look for those to those for your procedures as to how to apply how to appeal do all that in your in your regulations the other thing I was told is and Mark alluded to this we don't have anything in the bylaw or the regulations that speak to the issue of and I'm going to use the term

Patty you knew the actual ter ter the portal that everyone's supposed to apply in so again to me that's regulation it's not bylaw except for the fact that how to apply I'm sorry to interrupt you but this and I think this is an important Point how to apply um is not only stated in the regulations current regulations but also in the bylaw no it is that's exactly is but that's why what I said was you want

to keep that in there you want to keep that paragraph in there it's one sentence you apply in accordance with the regulations that are that have been promulgated at the time of application boom don't have to worry about it because something is as simple as changing from allp paper filing to digital filing shouldn't require an act of town meeting when the town's already converted the town is required ing it so

now was town meeting going to let us after the fact make that part I mean because we don't have that Authority right now technically we're caught between two worlds our bylaws and our regulations tell you how to apply in paper the town won't accept it anymore because everything's digital so as a consequence we're telling people apply through the portal and if any of them really didn't want to they could say

that's not what your bylaws say I'm a I'm going by your bylaw and so he's trying to get our bylaw in yeah in sync with what the reality what the reality is so I'm looking at it saying I agree with you mark but why don't we just take that out of the bylaw put it in the regulation we can vote on that at a meeting of Commissioners to say we want to change

it to say you're going to apply this way and here's how you do it and it's all through the portal and then on down the road if they decide to do it through mental telepathy we can change the regulations we don't have to go and change the bylaw you know because I I don't think this is the end all be all of applying things have changed Technology's changed and our

bylaw is not where you try to address it it's in the regulation in my view I still have the question about uh legal impact ramifications of things like Aesthetics and cumulative impact I I don't disagree with you in the bylaw and and again that's that maybe that's a attorney Cruz question like you know does it matter if you know and and what other definitions May matter I I just don't know I mean certainly you know

definition of coastal wetlands doesn't have to be in the in the bylaw um but are there any definitions that we should consider that should stay in the bylaw or or be written into the bylaw and and a reference let's just take a look at what our bylaw definitions are and we can and the definitions and the regulation so if we're going to go that route then are there any exceptions to the rule of all the

definitions ought to go in the regulations are there any exceptions this is what we have for our town uh Wetlands protection bylaw definitions so we have the word activity and definition we have the word Aesthetics and the thre line definition we have the word alter and we go through a series of numer of alphabet we go a through J of what that means we have the word applicant defined Coastal Wetland

defined commission defined adding freshwater Wetland we have the word person defined resource area okay now could you pair it down maybe okay so when I look at the I'll say one of the things I'd probably do is toine the act that allows you to have a Conservation Commission all right which is referenced in the beginning part of this but in the preface so I have that I guess you can say let's use let's

use activity that's fine y if you want to do that um but then what's distinguishing the activity from alter you know what I mean so so um oh I just did myself again I don't something so person okay you can probably do that resource areas H resource areas they Define as freshwater and coastal wetlands and the 100 foot buffer zones I think that's the definition I'd have and I'd say for

definitions of freshwater in coastal Wetland see the regulations I mean because what you're trying to say is we are the commission this is what we can govern this is our jurisdiction this is how we get it and we promulgated regulations to enforce the bylaw and go to the regulations for all the stuff you need to know like the definition of a of a coastal Wetland the definition of a freshwater Wetland

what's the application process what's the appeals process when do we conduct our meetings you know um what time start you know all that good stuff so I look at those particulars as things that you don't necessarily want to go to town meeting for it would say why you why are you bringing this before us you know you want to change your T you want to change your meeting date to a Wednesday instead of a

Tuesday I mean you know have at it there's nothing in the yeah go right ahead i' I've been quiet partly because I have strep and it's painful to talk toward and two um I've largely agreed with what everyone has said to this point whether they be statements or questions um you know agreed or or at least deeply understood and kind of um aligned with I guess what I'm kind of struggling with is like what are the

tangible things that we need to make decisions on in terms of kind of the what's ahead of us so like for example we have this meeting on the 13th are we concerned that we don't feel prepared to have that meeting and we need to have a discussion about that and a decision and if that's not the problem and we we we're fine going ahead with that but the the next question is well

we can get the public comments but we have to have legal review this before we go to town meeting and is there enough time to do that because I think like if if if that's the if that's the point but we don't but legal is doesn't have time to before town meeting then doesn't make sense to have the town meeting or or is it good to get public comment and you know maybe go again if

we if we feel like we need legal review before going to town meeting and it's it's going to be another you know six months before we do that I think that's a great question and and it's really one that does somewhat bother me um I'll give you my opinion what amendments or comments have been made to date I doubt very much any of that is of legal consequence this has been more

like you know painting the trim of the house you know it's not it's really looking at the minutia of the grammar but even there I would normally want to see some input from Town Council what I'm really concerned with is I I don't know whether the document we started with had been carefully reviewed I don't think we have an opinion on that it was voted okay nobody questioned it um and maybe nobody would

this time but the fact that we are having the discussion without the input of Town Council bothers me and I'm not trying to create jobs for lawyers um but I have to tell you you know it I I certainly wouldn't advise a client to just go do something and then come to me after the fact it's awfully difficult to get people out of trouble it's much easier to avoid the problem and so if we

were so because like I generally the sense I'm getting from the audience here is there's concerns about what we put in motion essentially and proceeding the way we are at least the pace we are and so I but I also appreciate Mark's perspective and if he feels there's some there's some risk we're taking on by not having certain things defined right correct that's right and so if we feel those are big enough

risks how how poorly would it look on us if we were to go to town meeting to only have the bylaw updated to include the key areas of risk that we feel need to be addressed the definitions we've kind of outlined and then in a year's time we go back and say okay we we've taken a more comprehensive look at this we've included Council we've compared it against other towns we've gotten you

know additional perspective from the public and interested parties and we'd like to again go to the town meeting for amendments to the the bylaw does that look poorly on us or or not because I kind of feel like that might be the more middle that might be more of a Middle Road we could take that kind of appeases everybody I like that idea okay I like that idea but I'm gonna say one

thing I don't think it reflects poorly if we let everybody know this is the first step in our in our bylaw amendment process we're putting it before you today because we need this definition or we need whatever it is but we'll be back with a more comprehensive bylaw change and you know whatever have you we don't have to go into the details and we want legal opinion because then they're going

to say you don't have it for this but I think that's a smart idea now you're addressing the immediate concern you're telegraphing to them the them being town meeting members you're telegraphing to them hey when we come back you won't be surprised we're telling you we're coming back now if you don't do that I think then it's a poor look they're going to say you just were before us a year ago

you know with the bylaw Amendment you're doing it again what what's the matter with you guys well we really didn't put it all in before why not no tell them you're gonna do it and just tell them the reason why you're here today is because there's a problem that has to be addressed right now and we'll address that problem but we want to do a comprehensive BW review and change um and will probably be

before you within a year or so with that and that comprehensive change when it comes is no surprise we don't look like fools for having been there before so your idea is a good one I mean let's address the problem we have and then worry about the rest of it when we have the time to really study it and give it some thought and get the review um I I think that's a great idea

I I think it's a terrific idea because I think it addresses the issues that we have before us that we have to take care of um but it allows us the time over the time period of a year or maybe less because we've already done a a good some work already um it allows the time to get legal counsel uh you know from Brian cruise and uh and to to really think hard and

so that our bylaw when we when we make those changes next year say we feel very confident about why we're putting things where M and all the questions that we have uh about that are answered and we all feel comfortable with it and we all understand the issues um which I I think is an important part of reviewing this uh comprehensively and I do think it takes a little time so I really like that idea

but I I agree with Mike we would have to explain that very carefully uh at town meeting if if we decided to go forward that way so that they understood we were coming back otherwise we'd look like dopes yeah I I I but I think you can do it because um you know that's why we're we're in this Rush we're not telling them a fib we're telling them the truth

we're in this rush because we need a and b um the regulation has to change we don't need their permission for that but since we've got it in the bylaw too we do need their permission um I'm not sure we should put it there but look for the the short term uh letting them know we're coming back to revisit this put in about the portal filing put in the definition of fresh waterer Let It Go

and with the knowledge that we're coming back after we've done a little more study in detail of what other changes the bws need we need this now we can't wait for this and let them vote on that when we come back they expected it we told them we forewarned them we'll be back it's not a mistake it's not we by the way we forgot no no um and and does that

approach then impact how we proceed on the 13th that's I think I think it uh it no the third the 13th I think is when we discuss in public uh again with any input from the citizenry if they want to give us input um our changes but I think at that point we have to then make a decision of what we're going to article that warrant article okay so Mar

Mark's going to be running out of time much after that he's got about a week or so to type it all up and get it all ready so the meeting on the 13th is going to be really a more formalized discussion like we're having right now where we're saying okay what are we going to do so if we direct it to address the problem and that's what we decide is the right way to go and we

draw it up that way with the knowledge we're going to come back that's the way it should get V that's the way it should go in on the Warren article um but we'll also he if there's anybody in the audience that wants the that wants to be heard on this and frankly you know when I saw Donna and Donna used to be our our our assistant here I saw her one of her comments was

why why why didn't you lead with your definitions it's like that's a very good point that's that's the way it usually is you don't put them in tuck them in at paragraph or article 20 whatever it is so she made a good point but then she had other comments we're going to get other comments probably internally probably from other departments in the town marks mentioned Steve melo's comment so I mean they're already

talking to us about things they'd like to see but let me tell you something Steve's comment is should go where in the regulations yeah okay not bylaw so the regulations weren't the rushed thing to get before town meeting the bylaw was and if we know there's only two reasons why the bylaw is going to be has to be amended right away let's put in those two amendments only and then tell the town we're going

to come back with a full-blown bylaw revision at some point within the next year or so so this isn't the last time you hear from us on this and I think we're fine I don't think they think we're idiots I think they they'll understand being careful I think they're going to think we're being careful that I think if we explain it properly which is we we haven't looked at this since 2009 and

2015 respectively um and and the bylaw itself you know we didn't make any changes since 2009 so it it needs a more comprehensive review and we're going to try and and address that over a period of months and we're going to be careful about it do our due diligence and um I I and and have a law that really makes a lot of sense with respect to its uh adjoining regulations um I think it just makes

sense I do too um so thank you for that it was a really good comment and a very insightful one yes and I think it gets right to the nub of the issue let's address two problems that that's all we have address those problems and then do a deeper dive to sort of do the Global fix on this thing um and that might be the best way to do it and it it solves

my it sort of satisfies me in one respect because I'm not as concerned about town council's input of those are the only two things we're doing and a definition for fresh water and talking about the portal um so it's something I could go I can go on board with very easily same same guys appreciate everyone's time want to take up too much more if anyone's got more let me know but otherwise you know

put your thinking caps on we'll see what we can do but I'd like to make it simple I think that's what I'm hearing and um let's address the problems that cause Mark to need to get this in Fast Fix those problems it's like a cold patch on a highway you know eventually you have to repave it but everyone knows because you tell them that I can I just say a

couple of words absolutely Joe I i' I've been listening very carefully and um I agree with everyone's suggestions and concerns and all the hard work everyone's done but all during this I've been thinking along the same lines as as n you know about fixing the the glowing problems that we have that Mark described and Patty described and then come back another day to do make the the

revisions and also review other um other towns by and see what how they've worded them I even felt confident in my own abilities to to change things because I don't I'm not familiar with federal state county um regulations and what would be defensible and court and what would not be um but I think everything will come together in this meeting if we keep it simple Joe I agree with you I think

we're I think we're we're in aord as a group it sounds like that we realize that there's a problem that Mark wants address quickly we can do that and reserve the right to come back with a bigger a bigger change but that bigger change needs a little more research and I definitely know it needs to have the review of legal councel and once we have that then we'll

be able to go to town meeting for a much bigger change let's solve this problem first so we don't end up with no definition of freshwater wetlands and and also the portal issue is a big one yeah we can do that with regs though but I think we want the ambiguity removed so I'm okay with just sticking it in both for now but eventually I'd like to see that taken out of B yeah

yeah well it gives us more control uh uh Mike uh Visa the regulations to make the appropriate changes uh a as times change and as we change as the situation changes we put it in the bylaws we're stuck keeping that which should be kept in the regulations again gives us control uh uh to to and ler to govern uh much more easily without asking too much permission on things that we shouldn't

ask permission on because we're there on the front line I I I agree with you there Richard but for the purpose of getting the temperature down so we don't have a conflict I'm okay with putting it in this time all right because what I really want to do is I want to have a legal opinion of whether it has to be there I'm not aware of any reason why it has to be there but

it's been there the past and that's where it is today and maybe there's something I'm unaware of that made it a requirement all I know is it's in two places now I'd like it to be in one at some point but for purposes of getting through the town meeting I'm okay with put amending the bylaw we're not putting things in that weren't there before we're changing it but I think at some

point we need to get it out of there that's my personal opinion but that let's defer that okay I and again I still have that question but that might go you know for another day obviously if we go forward with this particular change in process here as to what definitions are really important to have in the bylaw and what what shouldn't be to me that's a I just I just don't know well we're going

to find out because it sounds like from a commission standpoint we're saying we're willing to make the two changes that Mark needs at least for now as long as they know we're coming back and then we're going to be able to get the legal answers we need as to what our what the rules are for us can you put the B can you take these out of the bylaw and just

have them in the rags or do you is there something that's in the in the in the the law either town of dartmouth's laws or or the state or federal laws that say no it's got got to be in your bylaw and then we no and if there's no prohibition about making the bylaws closer to what I think bylaws should be not that i' the Emperor or anything but um was with Richard and

everyone else was saying you know make make your regulations where you go to do the how howt let's do it but we can't do it now there's not enough time and we don't have the resource of the Town Council there's no way you're going to get Town Council to aine on this between now and town meeting they're going be bus to aine on yeah just and we don't even know

all the questions but I think we need the answers to those questions before we do the complete house cleaning yeah agree all right that sounds very productive I appreciate that um I have to apologize in advance I teach on Monday evenings from 6:00 to 8 and so I will not be able toj join your Monday well I appreciate the heads up Jim if you have any comments please either send them to myself or Mark um so

your if your comments will certainly be uh welcomed um you know but I Hey listen I completely understand I almost missed the beginning of this meeting you you have commitments and sometimes they will take precedence and I I get that absolutely I won't be there on the 13th either I think I told you that yeah she did yes she did but I've talked enough no no but you know it's important it's

important for everybody to get their opinions out there and we listen to the opinion um you know great idea tonight thank you n that was a great idea that's the kind of stuff that when we work together and throw our ideas out all at once light bulbs start going off people start saying wait a minute there's a different way to solve the problem and and I love that that's that's what we're

that's what we do best when we collaborate we get the thing better than we would have on our own and that's important to me it is Mike you just said collaborate you're absolutely correct but with two people whose opinions are extremely valuable not being able to attend on the 13th uh this just somewhat problematic at least to me uh we need the input of both of everyone and and and and with two people

gone is this going to be somewhat an exercise exer of futility on the wrong date I don't think it's an exercise of futility for one reason I mean the real purpose of the meeting is to have public input yeah okay what we're doing tonight is essentially what we would do on the 13th if we didn't have tonight we're hearing from everybody but we're going to have public input now what we should do I mean you know

list listen if we haven't a consensus of what to do after the third 13 then Mark can't draft so if he has to wait a little bit for everybody to say I agree we're going to circulate I I in a perfect world we're all there but you know what it's there's seven Commissioners the chances of all the Commissioners being able to make that meeting we already know two camp but I

mean the chances in any other date all seven make it not very good okay somebody's going to have a commitment for something so we have to give the public a chance to talk it's that's required and that I think we go forward on the 13th and we understand that's that's why we're talking tonight that's frankly so I can hear Patty's made herself clear Jim's made himself clear and they may also provide something in

writing that amplifies that um with certainly not disregarding any Commissioners thoughts and now we get to hear from the general the great and general public if any of them want to give us their thoughts we may not get any we may get them only from internal and that's okay too I want to the more the more comments the better absolutely and I and I I agree with you I don't think it's as

important uh that we have everybody there because we're really there to listen to the public um it's an opportunity for them to uh say anything that they want to say about it and our job is to listen um and that'll all be recorded So I I I think I think it's important for a good bit of us to be there I wish I could be there if anything changes I

will be there um but at this time I'll miss you not picking on me Patty what's that I'll miss you not picking on me well if you want to I'll do it for you I can do that any other day I'll just call you and pick on you but but I do think there's also don't forget there's this invitation to to attend it's public of course but Mark sent an email and the folks that were on

the email were some of the engineers that come before this commission frequently I would love to hear their take because they're also boots on the ground and if they're saying I don't understand because you seem to I want to know that too all right it's like an IRS compliance audit I want to find out what you don't know or what you're confused by because I can straighten it out yeah

yeah it's important I think at this point it's it's our job to listen to them I think so too I agree this meeting this meeting is probably I have to say one of the the best I've been to in a long time um it's I I think it's been I think this has been a very good discussion I do too and I appreciate everyone's comments taking the time to about this it's important

and it's important well after our terms are up and we know someone else going to have to deal with what we gave them and hopefully we gave them good things so they don't get into trouble y that on that happy note I'll entertain a motion to adjourn

so