welcome to the town of Littleton Board of Health meeting for June 26 2024 in attendance today we have Matt W and myself Dan Kane Kevin Baker our health director Francis dagel and our health administrator Jim graphy we have a quorum so we will start our 7 o'clock agenda item is a discussion on Board of Health regulations for private Wells we spent some time talking about this last meeting and I would like to spend more than 10 minutes on it but less than two hours on it tonight so if it's all right with my other members I think what we should do is once again uh look at it have Francis run the show and scroll through it and maybe approve small Corrections and stuff like that but um for anything larger I I want to identify those sections and say this section needs a discussion or B rewriting or redrafting with some different language um and then see if anybody's wildly interested in doing those things if we can get that work sent out so people can go redraft a sentence or two or a paragraph um or if we identified something that's particularly sticky that just needs a large discussion that way we could put it on the agenda potentially for a appointed topic for another date um especially if they're only three of us here tonight I don't want to make all the final decisions without all of our members necessarily so does that sound reasonable to try all right Francis would you be so kind as to pull it up and drive yeah I'm having some difficulty opening it I can go ahead and do it then I got it up okay yeah it's just not looking right sorry okay uh in that case while we go through can you make notes on where we stop in sections that we say we're going to come back and do a b or c to it yep all right I'll see okay I'm gonna scroll down through a lot of the stuff we already talked about um so definitions a lot of our conversation last time was out about agricultural slash and or irrigation Wells so I'm not sure exactly where we landed on it discussion wise but um what I would like to do is actually share something else real quick and see what you guys think I threw out the idea of should we kind of categorize it a little bit to help us quasi back into or at least um figure out how we should phrase things so that makes the language of the whole regulation as smooth as possible so if we this share so low budget here um one way I looked at it h everybody see this one now chart NOS okay uh one way I looked at as Wells okay we have residential Wells we have an agricultural section of wells we have other Wells within residential your well might be a drinking well it might be an irrigation well um I want to carve out rental as a different conversation topic so I put it there so I wouldn't forget it and then agricultural does that mean commercial in my head I think maybe um you could have an animal well or you could have a crop well and maybe if we decide that those don't need to be different in a definition based then great we can collapse these boxes uh and then I threw other like monitoring closed loop geothermal and abandoned again just so I wouldn't forget about it since we call these these kind of types out um I specifically put closed loop geothermal and not open loop geothermal because as soon as you have an open loop geothermal as far as I'm concerned open loop is connecting into your well in some of ways so you're access in that you have access to that water so I think if you have an open loop system you're probably going to fall under another category because you're also using that water for irrigation or something else potentially so that's why I left it off and then another way to kind of cut this would be I I just bucket wise I said okay well you could have drinking Wells which are either private or rental property you could have private non-drinking Wells which would be I think just be irrigation and then you could have Agricultural and again should that be commercial Agricultural and then another other category so thoughts does this help is this something we should do and a piece of me also thinks that regulations are always fun to read for members of the public and if we did adopt some sort of structure like this perhaps we could make some materials eventually to help people understand where they should be looking and what they should be following but uh I throw that out there just to see what your thoughts are go ahead Kevin uh thanks for putting these charts together uh it's it's great that uh you you took the time to do this I appreciate it I think I liked your first slide better I think I just thought it was a little bit more concise uh and uh left to hear what what what Jim and and Francis and and and other members of the board have to to say about it um I think I think rental falls under residential um I know there were some different testing requirements called out in the model rags I don't know that um we specifically need to do that for for pre-existing you know rental property Wells for new construction rental maybe um but yeah I think this is great I love that you you call out for you know agricultural for animals and and crops um and and even the abandoned Wells I think you you got everything covered here visual nice visual representation of uh what we're trying to cover no I agree I like having rental under there I think because uh there is a higher level of standard for a rental property than for an owner occupied that you know an owner occupied has some control over what happens in their own house where If I'm renting I can't control the water unless I know what's there so I think that's appropriate I think that's in the model RS um so I think having that under there as as a car about is a good reminder that it is treated slightly differently and we want to make sure that we call that out so I agree with that but yeah no I think this breakdown Works relatively well it may make the flow a little bit easier to understand so rather than looking at individual well it's looking at location I guess rather than my my was my grasswater well here at my house is going to be different than a commercial Farm or commercial grower so that's I think that's reasonable y Jim Francis thoughts are we missing anything so the only thing I've been seeing a few more of and I guess the water rates have gone up in town so that's why I'm seeing them are irrigation Wells for like the town uh soccer field on the corner of new estate and and Air Road and they're looking for an irrigation W for the little park in the center of town so I don't know where you would see those fitting this strictly for grass um we also had one for property on millroad a commercial property apartment complex on millroad so I'm not sure where You' see those fitting yeah rental if it's the rental bucket yeah I I didn't distinguish as to whether that's uh privately owned commercial owned effectively but um maybe we'll throw public in here just for now just so we don't lose it because we know that exists Y and we don't have any authority over Municipal Wells right if they're in your regulations you would regulate them right now they're not listed in there's no regulations for irrigation Wells so I'm using five when that's appropriate and issuing well permits based on that for irrigation okay I'm even beyond that so you know like the for a a municipal groundwater well serving the community is that it would be water and I that's D for it's a public water supply well yep yeah okay no that's kind of my questions I just want make sure that that was not in the mix so we want we are not going to necessarily write it into our regulation but it's worth knowing it exists okay I we could certainly put a line in going that Municipal groundwater supplies you know follow under the regulation of the D if we you know if if we're talking about residential well drinking water Municipal groundwater sources are regulated under EP and are outside the scope of this regulation we don't need to but just so we basically acknowledging that we know they exist and they're out there and we acknowledge that they are outside of our scope um how how do you feel uh how do people feel about agricultural really being a line is that commercial so that if I'm growing tomatoes in my backyard and eating him on my own tacos that's going to stay in my residential category or where's the line and and do we have guidance from somewhere else that says well as soon as you're selling products at a farm stand you're now commercial so you're falling under that category go ahead Kevin uh I would say that that's all determined by by zoning of where the well is and if you're on an agricultural parcel guess that's that's I guess that's my question what if you're not on agricultural parcel and you're not zoned for that you're zoned for residential but you grow a small quantity and and produce somehow does that push you over into your water sources being considered at least for your crops an agricultural category maybe well well see I was gonna say maybe it won't be important because maybe the residential irrigation and the agricultural crop irrigation would be the same but but I don't think so because if we say if we know you're growing crops to sell I'm guessing we're going to have higher monitoring and higher requirements than somebody who's watering their lawn but if all I have is residential drinking or irrigation and I'm technically using my my irrigation well to water my my plants I I don't know is it is there a clear line or do we look another way that's experience from communities I don't I don't know that they've actually divvied them out that differently I think they just have General category irrigation Agricultural and I don't think they get that detailed as to how they're being used how are other places splitting up that because that was a question we had last time was that different what is difference where is that line between Agricultural and irrigation is me watering my grass different than a commercial Farm watering their 20 acres versus water for their animals like that's all theoretically agricultural whether it's I'm growing my crop of grass or whether that's servicing animals in 20 acres how how that where that line is between those two and is there a line that we want to distinguish in the RS or should there be a line I mean I think certainly watering my grass is going to be different than a 20 or 30 or 50 acre commercial operation but I'm not sure how to break that down and have it makees sense and where that line is guess I would suggest using um you know Department Of Agricultural regulations to kind of come up with definitions Le you'll have definitions that are used across the board so if somebody questions what you mean by agriculture you've used their them as a resource for definition sorry I was changing that while you were talking Dan because I this is where your words were kind of framing this I went to the slide two again uh I think it looks cleaner Now Kevin but is does this actually then make more sense it's whether you have drinking water irrigation water which is not not connected to a food source at all and then agricultural yeah I think this is cleaner because that way you say I don't care whether you're a farm or a homeowner if you're Watering your lawn that's irrigation and I don't really care whether you're a farmer or homeowner if you are somehow producing foods for public consumption off of your water source then you are creating some crop yeah and then I think this covers Us on on irrigation Wells public irrigation Wells all right I'm gonna throw out then that we've chatt about it enough let's see how it works and if we like it we uh we use it as a tool and if not we can uh tweak it later sound good sounds good so we go back to so I think one of those key notes then Francis I would say is let's take that flow sheet which I'll send out when we're done and help make sure that we have a definition for each one of those boxes effectively that that make sense and then hopefully that'll remove we'll be able to clean up all of this discussion that we had about agricultural irrigation Etc Fair all right I'm going to keep going down past definitions because we otherwise nailed definitions so section four is well construction permit um I think there are very few changes in here it's a short section so I I believe I might have made uh this comment here because um it originally said a description of Prior incurrent land use is within 200 feet uh but later on there are there is some sort of condition that's within 400 feet that has to be checked so I just wanted this language to be the same number if it says 200 one place and 4 another they should all say 400 so this is one Francis that I I I'm not too worried about I think towards the end when we've really got things nailed down it's just going to require a final review of saying whichever distance we decide upon it's the maximum we just have to make sure it's updated throughout the document good yep okay uh and then we have the uh permit fee section um so similar to that flow chart we just made I think if those buckets make sense let's then tie these together which I think it does right um I think the question would be is where does we should add a line up them for agriculture then if those are the buckets we decide upon kind of drinking irrigation Agriculture and other we'll just make sure that we have a fee established for each of them and Francis are these fees uh where did they come from or actually you might not even know Kevin where do these come from oh I put those in they're from our latest list that was approved last year our fee schedule yeah awesome any questions comments concerns on the fees I'm going to assume if there are no other edits or comments in here that I'm going to keep rolling through so if somebody has a section that they particularly want to discuss please say something and I would really like to figure out how we can turn off the grammar suggestions [Music] because all these little dash of blue lines it's just it doesn't like how we're typing things which is you know a regulation so it should be that way we'll see next section water supply certificate I don't think there are any comments in here standard language short section anything any [Music] concern good good good okay uh well locations and use requirements here again is that comment about just the distances because in section two uh this is where we've established the distances for all the setback requirements so the 400 comes from the stable Barn nerd manure storage and the underground fuel storage or pesticide tank uh similar to above I'm not sure where all of these ideas came from Kevin do you know some of them uh Jim and I went over these these setbacks uh quite some time ago and these are in line with what we require now okay so that's how they differed from the model what model regs as they as they came out of the came out of the box and uh Jim went through these with with us and made sure they were in line with what we're what we're used to in Littleton okay I have never heard anybody express any concern about the numbers so I think since they come from are are established setbacks I think that's fine um the the conversation topic came up last time about what about a Clos Loop geothermal and should a drinking Source well have some setback from a Clos Loop geothermal well simply for cases of if the closed loop has a fracture and is then leaking I I have no idea what the risk would be to that I would ask our experts on the panel to make any suggestion there if that's something we should include or it's extremely low risk and unlikely so and then most towns don't well Harvard has some RS on geothermal um but you know in towns where there's not regulations on geothermal we generally use DS ground Source heat pump well guidance and they do have some offsets from Wells and um and septic systems in there they're much smaller than these I mean when the closed loop is installed It's usually the tubing goes so there's glycol that generally runs through the tube but the tubing is incased in like bent night clay so should be a relatively low risk but not a no risk um so as you're looking at where to put those things I guess keep that in mind I I can shoot you over Harvard section on GE thermals if you're interested so sure that makes sense especially if there's something at the Massachusetts level that's called out for the even from the geothermal Direction let's let's look at it and get that number in here as well does that make sense guys okay Francis and Jim you'll connect on that yep good um and similarly we didn't we didn't change the water supply lines um around sewer lines because that's a that's some that's a standard we already follow correct have a hand raised in the audience so I'm going to pause there since we're at the end of a section and invite you I can only see your number so I'm not sure who you are so if you please give your name and address to the board and let us know what you need can you see me oh is that you Gino I'm here can you hear me okay we can hear you we can't see you okay I'm I'm trying to figure thing out here mute L hand stay uh join okay join Zoom see me can can you hear us Gino we can't see you I can see you yeah start okay I'm trying to figure out the thing here I have it my computer here oh shoot okay you you work on that you can hear us and now uh we have another hand raised in the audience so I'm going to invite them in as well so there we go uh go ahead uh give your name and address for the record please and what do you need to to ask uh sure my name is Chris kowach uh 105 mwan Kei um just I wanted to ask a clarifying question about the previous section do these apply to existing Wells and would these setbacks apply to existing Wells um or is this only for new construction uh getting a permit for well and all that um correct not we're not going to go back and and change Wells that already exist so if your wells are already in place then this would not be applying um clarification there would be and I haven't memorized the language is where do we cross the line board members for new versus a repair or a or a drill deeper is that called out I don't remember seeing a call out for that I mean I think you know simple repair is like a pump repair or something that that's we're not changing the existing well if we're going deeper then that means is the well is in adequate I think that may be a discussion um and certainly nothing in here saying that we still can't Grant waivers you know as always there's going to be places where wav is going to be required um but yeah no I think we certainly aren't going to say going back and checking every well in town and saying no but I think if it's a redrill or deeper a red a redrill is obviously a new well it's going to meet new requirements even the deeper I think that's a discussion if it's a simple pump replacement then that's that's repair that's I don't think would fall under the new well proposal the new well requirements but that's again just one MERS okay I think there would sorry go ahead um I think I think there was something on Section Five P page six just talking about what was um the water supply certificate I guess it doesn't apply to these setbacks and things but this said that the water supply certificate needs to be used for all private drinking Wells I the question was is this even for existing ones or only for new ones that are getting built new constructions new structures getting built okay that's a that's a different question let me make sure we get back to that when we talk about yes when we talk about um certificates and then use requirements and the scroll down I think what it's really going to come into is the quality water quality requirements um but that's a that's a good point to make and so Francis make a note to yourself if you would let's make sure we are clear because I'm scrolling around a little bit of apologies but in the definitions there is is you know definition on pump replacement so that has a purpose it's defined as a pump replacement and I believe there's another definition here that talks about um more significant repairs so let's make sure those are clearly defined so that then when we get down to these sections where we're talking about it we can be clear as to what they're applying to does that make sense okay okay and so we were asked so when when it says that the certificate should be applied like you're defining that in section five though you I'm not sure if you're answering my question sorry to belabor this but issued for well prior to the issuance of occupancy permit for an existing structure I mean if you're living in a house when are you issued an occupancy permit for an existing structure you know what I mean I I think Jim correct me if I'm wrong water supply certificates already exist they they do they do not I mean this is in the model R so so maybe to answer Chris's question I think the regular ations are designed for permitting a new well or that other the definition I think Matt you were looking for was alter which is in your and and that describes a more that would be like a deepening or a hydrofracking where you're actually changing the well in such a way that water characteristics may change um so I think the way I would view this water supply certificate is when somebody's drilling or altering a well in such a way that you're issuing a permit um and that may be with uh the construction a new house which would then get an occupancy permit it may be that they're putting a new well in because they're putting an addition on the house and that would require an occupancy permit but I think it's it's mostly tied to the issuance of the well permit okay so that's how I would view it then that then I want to make sure that language is clear on that it's referring to that Dan what did you need to add uh no just quick question on that one um property transfer would that be new occupancy permit with the property transfer and would require it same we do a Title 5 inspection there's generally a fire safety inspection for carbon oxide and smoke so is would water qual with water supply certificate be part of a property transfer with a with a purchase so it isn't currently so unless you're going to put it into your regulations gav I think that's what we what we try we want to get to so whatever the means of getting that into our our regulations are whether it goes in this well regulation uh or or another area please advise okay and Chris to address your um Point you're right I was not answering your question because we as a board haven't discussed it in order to land on what that answer would be and obviously Mr Baker just expressed his opinion on what we think it should be um but I'm just calling out to make sure we have that clear in the language when this is final um I agree we should figure that out to make sure it's clear obviously well construction permit you're building a well um but as Jim just mentioned I think this should make sure it's clear as to um somewhere that the altering where where does altering a well require a new permit so that that's included righty yeah thanks so much and then you hear me yes Gina we can hear you did you have something you need to say Gino well I was trying I was trying to figure that out I can't I can't see my face over here can you can you tell them that they gave me more volume and also the picture I can see in the picture in my computer something is wrong I don't I don't think I can help you volume at all and it says your camera is is not connected come I don't know Doo Oh I raised my hand is not is nothing you can do there to make myself see well I inv I invited you to the group so that you can talk and we can hear you okay as okay your we we did not turn off your video I okay thank you so I looked at that um so to Kevin's Point water supply certificate this section as written really does it only apply to new construction does it apply to alterations and then does it apply to transfer of property I think this is one of those that we would want further convers ation uh with our whole board um so Francis if you could make a note of that and see what language we would have to to add just to make sure it's clear as to what what this covers okay I mean I'm not sure how how good our records are so if somebody sold a property that's got a well that a several decades old are we going to have the well construction permit that's required hopefully Matt probably the more challenging thing is that um water well completion report um in there they Dem used to be the regulating agent Department of Environmental Management they gave it over to D who started uploading a lot of the form so you can find a lot of them and probably from I don't know the 2000s on they're pretty good shape because they have to submit them electronically but when you get back into the 90s and Beyond you know backwards they're not as you know they were issued for a long time but they're not as obvious in the records yeah so that would be a challenge and I'm sure the pumping test report could be a challenge too right um depending on the age of the property in the well okay and it's also one that I I think that depending on how strongly people feel we could leave it this way to start and then try to see how it goes and modify the regulation the in the future if we think that it needs to be strengthened further anything else on water supply certificates Gino you have video yeah I mean people that have a well and they want to use it for drinking has to be filteries don't they suppos to in order to drink it don't they have to take care of it uh yes that's a part of the regulation for sure Gino um right we're getting to that section it's a little further because we're still right at the how do I get a construction permit how do I make sure that my water supply has a proper certificate and now well locations and used requirements so this is where we were thank you I think we're good on these distances there was no further conversation about that correct is I'm reading I'm reading what you reading yourself okay thank you thank you this this obviously says ptable water right here um so I think the other key thing this is a detail question of as we finalize this language if we go back to that flow shart of buckets are we making sure that every single bucket is called out the right or wrong way so this only says quotable right so do any of the other buckets need setback requirements that makes sense so Title 5 has offset requirements to irrigation Wells um they're less than well so I mean you'd want to include the I mean when I do an irrigation well now I look at that's the main thing I look at because that's there's no irrigation well part of your will rug so I make sure the irrigation Wells at least the distances Title Five wants it away from the system and I and if Title 5 cares about irrigation Wells then we should care about agricultural Wells used for crops for sure right so that's all in how you build those definitions so it and how you then tie them into your offsets so I think based upon this section I don't think we would have to rewrite a whole lot of it I think it's just this point too that we either have to convert this to a table or have different sections for pable versus irrigation or agricultural crop yeah I agree with that okay uh and Jim you said Title 5 at least has setback for septic any of these others if you're if you have an irrigation well do you are any of these other setbacks appropriate this would be the the mechanism for you to do that is in your well regulations yeah sorry just just to clarify these These offsets are uh for drinking water portable portable water and uh yeah I like your idea of having a chart or for all three I'd imagine just the irrigation in agriculture will be will be be less stringent uh than than these offsets here yeah that's kind of what I'm asking is it just going to be two lines for septic tanks and leeching Fields that's what I'm throwing out to this group do we think any of these offsets besides those two should apply to irrigation or agricultural crop water source so in Title 5 I think you have to be 10 feet from the septic tank and 25 feet from the leech fi to an agricultural I mean to an irrigation will so that's the offsets that's in title five and I guess I'm looking through the list for rationale like underground fuel storage or precize tank uh my gut is having some offset from those would seem reasonable you know if we have no listed then I can theoretically go six and a half inches away from one of those and we can't really say you can't um but I'm not sure what a reasonable is for either of those um yeah I'm not sure I feel like for at least some of them having some even if it's just an engineering offset as poos even contamination or anything else going there should be a buffer cuz as we know things don't always go on the ground exactly where they were planned so having some kind of just a some leeway here going yeah you need to be away enough that if you're off a foot that you don't hit something that you really didn't mean to but I'm not sure how we necessarily language that I I would also of course be if we're set off from pesticide sanct fuse storage the rationale is we're worried about contamination would be my assumption that would we also be that have that same level of concern for an irrigation well if we now have contamination from some underground potential Source it's less concerning than a than portable water but it's still for me anyway somewhat concerning if we've got contamination from a a known risk I I I agree with Dan's points because the same thing for I if you're watering crops with a water source that is near manure storage or pesticides or fuel tanks yeah I think it makes sense to have some sort of offset probably not 400 feet but some sort of protection there so Francis if you could take a stab at some numbers build that table out for us okay awesome uh and then I think the rest would still apply or Not Apply so like reserves the right to impose minimum s requirements I I feel like that shouldn't just be restricted to portable water if we're going to say we we want to have some setback requirement for based upon the usage of the well and then similar stuff like each private well should be located so it's accessible for repair maintenance testing and inspection that that's that should just be all Wells right I would agree with that oh okay sorry yes the only point two called out portable so the rest of these are all just every well every well every well uh every well and every well okay that brings us a water quantity requirements it's all about a pumping test and this one doesn't have whole lot of comments on it uh but it's a long section so I don't see any recommended changes or suggestions for this whole section um anybody have any thoughts or concerns or comments no you're doing a good job as I remember um fris and Jim probably know I I think the the quantity requirements isn't really significantly changed from from the past right it's fairly similar to what it was for quantity so what the state is kind of moved from as they move to this peak flow definition this is in the new reg and it was in the previous iteration of this sometimes have gone with you know like the VA had kind of requirements for you needed five gallons a minute for four hours kind of thing so I think what the state did is they looked at you know if you have this many bedrooms this many bathrooms it kind of indicates people may use that much water and and the idea is you need this amount of water when people start their day so the well should be able to have that much water as an engineer I only found it odd that you can't have two and a half bathrooms house but they decide not to have that column I guess then I'm going to roll past it which brings us to water quality requirements we are at 7:45 people still want to keep going with this for longer we don't have much on our agenda tonight Dan keep um I'm I'm okay maybe if you want to go to 8 o'clock on this one although I think this is going to be probably a longer discussion than we may want to start at this point unless we want to really commit to working through it I think this is going to be probably our most challenging piece maybe the thing to do then would be um before our next meeting we ask people to specifically read section8 um which is that long with that those that flowchart in mind and see some of like a table we're gonna have to come up and say well this is what should apply to this bucket this is what should apply to this bucket Etc would people be willing to do that in the off off meeting time okay um when I send out the flowchart I will spe specifically asked for that okay any other comments questions thoughts on our well regulations or anyone in the audience want to provide any further input at this time take that as a no brings us to our 710 agenda item discussion on mobile food truck regulations um so at the last meeting um it was requested that we do a red line from the original um I had a family emergency so I didn't get that ready for today right that case let's bump that to the next and now we are on our 7:15 p.m agenda item on the Infectious Disease decision support tool our data is still unavailable to us um but they have started uh tracking mosquitoes for mosquito born illnesses but no news is good news it's the start of the season so unless Jim has some Insider information to share I not aware of any uh any mosquito born illness cases in our vicinity nope like you say no news is good news no news is good news um new um covid variants are on the rise uh they have figured out that the acronym flirt works well for a couple of them and so that's what you're seeing in the news is that the flirt variants are going to be the popular ones this summer and going into the fall the CDC has asked our our vaccine producers to Pivot potentially to address these new variants because the JN variants are kind of uh fading and now we have some new popular variants to look for um but as is kind of typically the case these are the kp2 and kp3 and KP another number um each time you have a variant it changes how that that virus behaves and so will your vaccine work as well maybe maybe not um they're still contagious because that's why they grow in the population because they are contagious and they're spreading so um it looks like thus far there's not um as severe of disease with it which is nice um but it's early in the season and summer is typically a dip for this so some professionals are saying it's going to be a light summer for Co but I think we just never know our Wastewater numbers are just pretty low so it doesn't look like any um major changes happening from that perspective so that's what we have for infectious diseases any other input or questions Dam say not a lot of info but certainly the uh most recent data for the covid volume and weekending uh June 15th were 794 new cases and five deaths associated with covid so again a couple weeks out but that's the most recent that seen for quantitative for cases thank you nothing further on that that brings us to administrative matters what we have on our list is meeting minute approval for June 12th has everybody had a chance to review the meetings for June 12th um I did not make the changes and it was a process question I want checked um it seems to me I found a lot of instances in the minutes of of uh how would I say words written based upon pronunciation but not meaning if you know what I mean so I feel they just need a another review of a grammar check and spell check review just to make sure the right words are in there um so I'm not sure if that's just Mis types or what is leading to that problem but Francis would you mind taking I I'm not sure if you checked the June 12th I know you checked and sent out some meetings from March but if you looked at the June 12th minutes I can't remember I think they're more last minute um they just got up on Thursday I think so they were not not old yeah um I'll I'll look through it and make any changes thank you for that and then I know you emailed us the March 20 7th minutes oh apologies you emailed that just Kevin and I so you're getting ready for those we have not approved those minutes I know they're old right but that was a long meeting is that why you sent them out to us I thought we did approve them like two meetings or three meetings ago did we I'll double check with breno okay let me know what you need you sent them to Kevin and I Kevin Baker and I and so if you if you're need something from them just could you clarify that what you need from us um I think I think there was just a lot of changes that had to be made to them so okay I'll talk to Brenda and send out an update and if we need if we need to revote on them or vote on them let's just make sure they get on the agenda officially for the next meeting okay just one note on the March 27 meeting and it's uh Kevin Davis's name was spelled wrong uh up towards the top of those first page about halfway down I have no correspondence to report anybody else have any correspondence that case Round Table updates who wants to go first I only say everything is fine good good Kevin want to check in with Francis to see how everything went with the carnival uh good um inspections were done on Thursday morning um everything looked good so um it was actually more impressive than I thought it was going to be so good to hear yes um do we need to take more action on are portable toilet Rags um I don't believe so like do we do we need to have a public hearing and vote and approve them as Rags or I think we already did right because I think I posted it in the paper and stuff okay I just want to make sure we we followed all the proper steps because the regulations correct and now we just send them the D and we Post in the paper again okay any other any other updates for us Francis uh not I can think of nope all right that's all I have oh Dam I know we talked in the past about um if there's any way we can get just quick either you know monthly kind of just status report of you know conducted five title fives and 10 restaurant inspections and three complaints and cases of um reportable diseases you know obviously not person identifiable but just so we have have those numbers so we have a sense of the status of our community uh as the regulatory body we should know that our our professionals are inspecting restaurants and okay we've had cases come up and is this something that should be a safety signal that we should be looking at for either restaurants or food born or infectious disease or whatever um is there a way we can from Francis coordinating with Jim but Francis now that we now that you're in house and settled in a little bit of that sense of what kind of the activ that activity report of the department of what's happening and what's going on and just so we're aware because it's always it hasn't come up in a while but it's always challenging when we hear hey we heard there were five cases of something in the schools what are you guys doing about it I hate having that be the first we've heard about it now that's going to happen but those kind of things come up and it's and and you know when it comes for hey does anybody know oh yeah we know about this but it never makes it to the board so again it's been quite a while since anything like that's happen it's nothing been major but it's nice of RSI going yeah okay we know the the reg things that we are regulator responsible for are happening and the things that aren't necessarily regulations but just we're aware hey y we had a case of TB okay great not not great but it is it exists and it's being managed um would just be really helpful I think for me I'm not sure about the other board members but that status of what's happening in our community under our Authority thank you Dan work yes we've I think all expressed some desire to have some more of that um I would say maybe monthly is a little too often since it's every other meeting would something quarterly be okay for um uh low urgency just kind of summary projects but I agree as you're talking about the more urgent stuff I I would like to see those called out uh at the next available meeting basically as an alert would that work yeah brainstorm with Jim and figure out something okay and yeah let us know when I mean obviously you've been here how long you been here now Francis like a year and a half basically yeah like three years now so yes as you it doesn't have to be a long report for the first one but as we kind of grow and and be able to kind of produce something on a recurring basis so we can just see some of those numbers I don't think it would take long then I I agree with Dan there have been times in the past where where you kind of hear about things um through circuitous Roots just because there are a lot of people involved and no problem thank you anything further gav like to make a motion to adjourn I think that was a second by Gino yes sir motion to roll call vote Kevin Baker Kevin Baker votes yes Dino frone yes nice to see Dan Kane Dan Kane votes yes and Matt won votes yes meeting is adjourned thank you all