My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/07/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
09/07/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2018 5:16:06 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 12:53:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/07/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
s <br /> September 2000 <br /> Page 5. <br /> compensation under Section 12 of 172 for independent services t <br /> reimburse the Board for services and time that he will have to spend o <br /> the site when the application is going on. That cones to a total of about <br /> $5300. <br /> This should be included in any motion and would have to be presented <br /> prior to any work starting, <br /> Ir. Rosenberg asked if there would be a write-up of the final program? <br /> Mr. Sherman stated this was discussed and he felt it would be <br /> appropriate to issue an order of Conditions, but no work is to start until <br /> the Scope of Work is approved by Bill Fisher and himself and Steve <br /> Furley has approved the wildlife habitat assessment. This is the only <br /> way it can be done this year. <br /> The Chair asked, since he is calling for a vote of the Commission, what <br /> would happen if there is any change or disagreement: Mr. Sherman <br /> stated if the Scope of Work is not approved, it will not go forward. <br /> Mr. 'Talbot asked if the Agent would be able to stopwork? Mr. Sherman <br /> stated on 21 September they will have the pre-mobilization work meeting <br /> with he and Bill Fisher. If it is not in order, it will not go forward, so the <br /> Commission is protected. If this goes forward tonight, the order can be <br /> issued tomorrow subject to final approval. fir. Sherman advised <br /> everyone is in agreement but the final language is not worked out. He is <br /> comfortable that we are close enough and would have veto power. We <br /> would also have veto power on the time of application and could stop it. <br /> Mr. Fisher stated in reviewing the proposal, everyone has ,been working <br /> on this since mid-July. AF'CBB has responded to all of our comments.. <br /> There was another meeting this afternoon to go over some of the final ley <br /> points. From a technical standpoint, in terms of the science, this <br /> approach has world before. He would like to feel that o% of the <br /> problems have been anticited, Until they hire the contractor, it is <br /> difficult to answer all the questions we came up with.' some of the key <br /> points are the schedule. His recommendation to AF'CBB was what they <br /> need to present tonight is that they are truly in command of all of the <br /> issues with implementing this project and who is responsible, who is the <br /> chain of command in the field so that if something isn't going the way <br /> that it should there is not a debate as to who has the authority. That is <br /> critically important, The other is the science behind designing the <br /> application and we leave comic to some resolution on that. Now it is <br /> important to get the contractor on board to finalize details. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.