Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> k <br /> 7 - <br /> k' <br /> l <br /> Mrs Stanton continued by stating that that being solved and if that is the <br /> board"s position. Hewasn't sure if they were taking a vote on that at this <br /> point. He wouldn't be here to try and get a variance for this business. He <br /> didn't think that the regulations were designed to affect this business. He <br /> thought they were designed to affect this business where there were a lot <br /> of workers. Any worker that works in this business knows that there was <br /> going to be smoking on the premises. That was what it was all about. <br /> People buy cigars and smoke thein. In the last fear days since the <br /> regulation went into effect that they have had to tura away seventy <br /> people because they can't try out pipes or cigars. Nobody wants to smoke <br /> outside when it was cold. They were here to try and get an <br /> accommodation from the BOH for this peculiar business, which he <br /> believed was the only one in Mashpee. Whatever works, they would like to <br /> keep the business here* <br />. S <br /> Mr. Santos asked the other board members for recommendations. <br /> Mr. Harrington responded that he had several comments just upon his <br /> review of Attorney Stanton's letter. Back when the regulation was written <br /> during their research and review of other regulations* They specifically <br /> } mentioned this type of use. Granted whether they covered it properly or 4 <br /> } <br /> not in their regulation may be at hand. They did discuss the Tinderbox and <br /> uses like that in town. They believed it was their intent at that point to <br /> include this type of use in the regulation as to be prohibited. That was just <br /> his first comments The second thing in the letter was that Mr, Stanton <br /> mentioned that there was air filtration in place. should the board allow <br /> r <br /> this in some form, he would recommend venting to the outside rather than <br /> smoke eater. The filtration they have found is not recommended or <br /> effective. Another comment, regarding financial loss, financial loss, as he <br /> understood it, was originally stated by Governor Weld to be considered a <br /> hardship only for septic systems back when Title V was instituted, so, if <br /> someone has a financial loss it was not a basis for manifest injustice for <br /> the granting of a variance. (tight now the tobacco industries are obviously <br /> a� <br /> taking a larger hit as far as financial loss. Another thing regarding <br /> manifest injustice, he tended to disagree with Attorney Stanton's <br /> definition that any injustice is considered manifest, He didn't tend to <br /> agree with at. Manifest injustice would be applicable if the board did not <br /> alloy the variance. That would truly be depriving therm of the ability to d <br /> business period. They were still allowing therm a permit to sell tobacco <br /> products, which is their primary stated purpose. He felt that this could be <br /> ars injustice to the owners. But, it was not manifest as a basis to allow a <br /> variance. Again, if the board.were to allow this he would make this an <br /> exemption within the regulation. He would not grant it as a variance. He . <br /> would change the regulation. Barnstable did allow this to pre ci ting <br /> types of"smoking bars' granted whether the Tinderbox thinks that they , �,:::.., .,. . , . <br /> t <br /> .6, S <br />