The meeting’s central focus was the open space and recreation plan, which had been conditionally approved with edits requested at a prior session. The committee engaged in a thorough discussion of the goals and objectives of this plan. Concerns included the ranking of these goals and whether to represent them in both tabular and textual formats, which some members feared could cause confusion. The debate also delved into the methodology for pursuing grants and the reasoning behind the prioritization of certain objectives.

One of the plan’s goals that received attention was the fourth goal, which emphasizes community engagement. The committee underscored the importance of volunteer programs for maintaining trails, recreation facilities, and water bodies. Members discussed the possibility of enhancing community resilience and expanding these volunteer-based efforts.

Another topic was the plan’s vision statement and the language used to describe the goals. The committee encountered confusion over specific changes and feedback, which led to discussions about making the vision statement more general. Members requested that changes be highlighted in the next draft and also sought to review edited statements from the Clean Lakes Committee. Part of the debate focused on the language in the plan summary, with particular reference to preserving water supply and quality, reflecting concerns about sustainable drinking water and the implications for grant applications.

The distinction between water supply sources and water bodies sparked a discussion, with some members calling for a focus on improving the health of water bodies and wildlife habitats. The conversation touched on sedimentation and erosion issues in Littleton, although there was uncertainty about the extent of these problems. There was also concern about flooding due to construction on wetlands, and its relevance to the open space and recreation plan was questioned. Despite a proposal to approve the current draft of the plan, the need for further review and discussion before a vote was emphasized by some members.

The committee contemplated adding water bodies explicitly to the open space inventory, with discussions on whether to list the combined area of Littleton’s lakes and the ownership status of certain ponds. This highlighted the importance of clear definitions and categorizations of natural resources within the town’s planning documents.

Public input played a role in the meeting, with the committee receiving letters of support from various boards and committees. Additionally, there was a discussion about an ADA self-evaluation grant program, though there was uncertainty about the completeness of the facilities included in the evaluation.

A significant motion made during the meeting was to dissolve the committee and delegate the completion of the plan to staff. This motion was seconded and carried after a discussion on the deadline for public comments and the inclusion of current members in the final review process. Before adjourning, the committee expressed gratitude for the work completed.