At the heart of the debate was Dr. Oolo, the owner of Falls Farm, who was present along with the Building Commissioner to address the board. Dr. Oolo emphasized the agricultural nature of the building, while town representatives were concerned about the permit process and the work being carried out without the necessary documentation. This led to a broader discourse on the compliance with local regulations, financial burdens on startup businesses, and the town’s responsibility in guiding permit applicants.

The board was divided on how to address the fee issue, with discussions ranging from compassion and fairness to adhering strictly to regulations. There was discomfort among some members regarding the prospect of doubling the fee for unpermitted work or charging the full fee. Suggestions were made to refund a potential overcharge of the initial building permit fee, and the debate extended to the insurance coverage for the project. The owner provided details about the insurance certificate and worker coverage.

The situation remained unresolved at the conclusion of the meeting, despite a board member suggesting a fee reduction and another proposing a different approach. Members agreed to revisit the discussion at a later date after further consideration.

In addition to the building permit fee controversy, the board addressed several other issues. A home rule petition was amended to allow firefighter Scott Smith to continue serving beyond the age of 65, with the provision that he undergoes a mental and physical capability assessment, allowing him to serve until the age of 70.

The board also focused on the finalization of the annual town meeting warrant, including voting on budget articles and other outstanding articles. Two planning board articles related to battery storage and structure conversion bylaws received the board’s recommendation after appreciation was expressed for the planning board’s assistance.

A notable topic that garnered board approval was engaging younger members of the community in civic activities through a petition to allow 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in town elections. Discussions on budget-related articles included setting salaries for elected officials, operating budget appropriations, capital budget transfers, and the appropriation of funds for the restoration of the Sunderland Public Library and a feasibility study on the North-South East Path proposal.

Community preservation fund allocations, zoning bylaw amendments, and setting fiscal year spending limits for revolving funds were debated. The board also deliberated on a petition authorizing the select board to petition the general court to grant voting rights in municipal elections for 16 and 17-year-olds.

Further discussions included accepting and expending money for road improvement and equipment expenses (Article 15), authorizing the Select Board to enter into intermunicipal agreements (Article 16), and contracts for goods and services with a duration of more than 3 years (Article 17). The town treasurer was authorized to borrow money in anticipation of revenue for the upcoming financial year (Article 18).

The board recommended awarding a mowing contract to Hearn Landscaping, considering the percentage of electric equipment used by the bidders and the cost differentials. The topic of host community agreements with cannabis businesses was addressed, with debates about the effort required to collect community impact fees and the possibility of waiving them in light of new regulations.

The annual report for ARPA spending was mentioned, and the board decided not to hold a session to discuss bargaining until negotiations had taken place. Public comment raised during the meeting highlighted frustration over the meeting not being broadcast on FCAT channel 15, to which the board clarified their lack of control over broadcast scheduling.