The primary focus of the meeting was the comprehensive review of the storm water management bylaw. The board scrutinized the revised draft, with particular attention given to recommendations from town counsel, Greg Corbo. His suggestion to relocate sections 7 and 8 from the bylaw to regulations was discussed, as this would allow for easier adjustments to fees through public hearings rather than requiring town meeting votes. The board examined language in section five, part A, to ensure clarity that the bylaw applies to any listed activities, not strictly all.

Members debated the use of “may” versus “shall” within the bylaw, as these terms carry different implications for enforcement. This led to considerations of whether consistency should be prioritized or if the language should reflect distinct circumstances.

Concerns were also raised about the involvement of the conservation agent in enforcement, with assurances given that coordination had occurred with relevant parties. The board planned further consultation with the building commissioner and the Department of Public Works director to finalize the draft before sending it to the town administrator for the upcoming spring meeting.

Another topic was the management issues surrounding a homeowners association for a small development of three homes. Board members expressed skepticism about the practicality of enforcing regulations within such a small association, especially compared to larger communities like Pine Hills. The challenges of imposing fines or liens for violations were discussed, with consensus on seeking town council guidance for navigating maintenance issues. Additionally, a complaint emerged about silt fences at the development site in disrepair, necessitating inspection and potential removal by the appropriate authority.

The meeting also touched on updates for specific properties, notably Five Harding and Ten Harding Street. For Five Harding, ongoing issues with a bond were discussed, with town council finding a suggestion acceptable, though clarity on the bond status remained pending. Meanwhile, work at Ten Harding Street was progressing well, with inspections scheduled to ensure continued advancement.

Economic development was another point of discussion, with updates from a recent committee meeting. The committee worked on revising a survey for residents and businesses to better understand community needs. The expansion from 10 to 20 questions aimed to gather comprehensive feedback, with inclusivity emphasized by providing paper copies at the senior center. A state-funded grant of $94,000 from the Rural Development Fund was announced, earmarked to support economic initiatives in Lakeville, including the development of a business guide to attract new enterprises.