The committee’s original charge was scrutinized, with members noting that it no longer accurately represented their work. They discussed the importance of altering language to encompass a wider range of responsibilities, including the remediation of nutrient pollution in coastal waters and estuaries. The conversation revealed differing opinions on how to articulate the committee’s responsibilities, emphasizing the advisory role to the select board while recognizing the town manager and technical staff’s operational duties. A consensus emerged around broadening the scope to include contaminants beyond nitrogen.

Another topic was the potential expansion of the sewer service area, particularly in nitrogen-sensitive regions. The committee prepared for a joint meeting with the Board of Health to discuss draft regulations that could impact new constructions and property transfers involving failed systems. Concerns were raised about the implications of these regulations and their enforcement, with a call for public input similar to previous initiatives by the Board of Health. This joint meeting aims to ensure clarity and transparency between the boards, impacting public health regulations without requiring input from other town entities.

Additionally, the committee addressed the need for public engagement and input as a fundamental aspect of their mission. Members proposed turning the committee into a forum for public discussion, emphasizing the necessity of community involvement in water quality issues. The idea of acting as a facilitator for public input received broad support, with a focus on building consensus around solutions to water quality challenges. This approach was deemed essential for the committee’s legitimacy and effectiveness, especially given past failures attributed to a lack of public support.

Discussions also touched on the committee’s evolving role in managing environmental projects. In the past, the committee had financial authority and direct engagement with environmental projects. However, changes in funding and structure have shifted their responsibilities to a more consultative role, evaluating and recommending actions based on studies and proposals presented to them. The committee recognized the importance of clarity in their charge to ensure effective engagement with both consultants and the select board.

The meeting further included a review of the committee’s involvement in demonstration projects and the comprehensive water management plan. Members debated whether to continue monitoring the plan’s progress or amend the language to reflect their advisory capacity.

Lastly, the meeting concluded with discussions on the approval process for third-party studies, the necessity of responsible management entities for Innovative Alternative Systems (IAS), and updates on ongoing projects such as the wastewater treatment plant improvements and the Snug Harbor project. The committee agreed on the importance of continued dialogue and collaboration between various boards and committees to address critical water quality issues effectively, with a particular focus on securing grants and ensuring the success of innovative water management strategies.