One notable matters discussed was the veterans’ request for permission to conduct their annual fundraising event, including a new date for shooting activities. The veterans sought approval for specific dates, with a notable addition of August 25, which had not been previously included. This request led to a examination of noise concerns associated with the shooting events. The board referred to past mitigation efforts, specifically the installation of a noise-reducing tarp. A debate ensued over the tarp’s effectiveness and whether it should be reinstated. Ultimately, the board decided to approve the requested dates for the turkey shoots and restore the noise mitigation tarp, passing the motion without objections.

Another topic was the discussion of the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) grant application, which aims to secure $300,000 for addressing the Main Street bridge over Eastbrook. The board scrutinized the proposed educational component of the grant, particularly a $92,000 allocation for creating a video documentary of the process, which some members questioned as potentially excessive. Concerns were raised about whether committing to the grant would obligate the town to undertake expensive repairs or replacements without sufficient justification. The board referenced previous discussions with the highway superintendent, who suggested that some repairs could suffice instead of a full bridge replacement. The necessity of narrowing down repair costs was emphasized, with the suggestion to engage with the Department of Transportation for more precise estimates.

The board also considered a request for temporary assistance for the planning board, driven by new tasks arising from legislation affecting housing and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The qualifications and needs for this temporary position were discussed, with the possibility of expanding the role to assist other town departments, such as the Water Commission or Cemetery Commission.

Another noteworthy item was the reconsideration of a citizens’ petition regarding the purchase of land linked to a proposed self-storage facility. Ongoing litigation related to this matter necessitated a cautious approach, with the board expressing a preference to seek legal counsel before revisiting discussions to avoid jeopardizing any legal proceedings.

In relation to planning matters, the board mentioned that Kim Lane might not be a viable option for the fall, pending further discussions at the planning board meeting. Energy management proposals were also deliberated, including engaging a shared energy manager funded through an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant. This position would assist municipalities in energy conservation efforts. The board authorized the submission of the grant application while emphasizing that this step does not incur any immediate obligations.

The meeting also addressed liquor permit requests for various senior events, including a dinner dance and a retirement planning seminar. The logistics for issuing rolling liquor permits were briefly considered, confirming that the town had not yet reached its limit for one-day permits.

Updates on the Master Plan Committee’s efforts were provided, particularly an upcoming economic event aimed at engaging local businesses. The committee’s outreach efforts included home occupations, and it was noted that they had effectively gathered information about local businesses.

The board also discussed ongoing issues concerning a planned pump house and delays due to permitting processes. The fire department’s generator situation was brought up, with discussions suggesting that handling the project in-house could be more cost-effective. Identifying funding sources for this initiative was deemed necessary.

Lastly, the board touched on the implications of a new housing bill that may preempt local zoning bylaws regarding ADUs. Concerns were raised that the new regulations could lead to an increase in student housing in residential areas, affecting local infrastructure, particularly septic systems. The board agreed that further collaboration among various boards would be necessary to address the challenges posed by the new housing legislation.