Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> Toni Fudala responded the Sewer Commission is directing this study. The Selectmen will create <br /> the CAC as a sounding board. It is intended they meet nth the Sever Commission for <br /> comments and give opi ions of the groups they represent and report back to those groups. It is <br /> intended to establish communication and outreach to the community and 3 neighboring towns. <br /> They are not a separate organization; the Sever Commission is in charge of this project. <br /> Brie Virgillio asked why there are 14 people on the CAS; that seems burdensome'? <br /> Tom said the Sewer Commission looked at the types of representatives on CACs in other <br /> communities. They felt all the groups proposed to send a representative need to be represented <br /> and then one resident from each of the 5 precincts, it adds up quickly. This committee will not <br /> be voting and will not have a quorum requirement. This group will move mead whether 14 <br /> people show up on not.; 14 people have been invited. <br /> s part of the contract with Stearns and Wheler Regina Villas will be retained to do public <br /> relations work. <br /> Mr. Foster said he has a lot of experience with CACs and 14 is usually the minimum size we'd <br /> typically see to be effective and for broad based representation. <br /> This concludes the staff report. <br /> Mr. Schlaikjer asked if there were any State or local officials with questions or comments? <br /> Tom Fudala asked about comment 3. Hove sloes that get expressed in the scope' <br /> Phil said that comment is included because at this time it is unknown what the conclusion of this <br /> plan will be. It is a general comment that recognizes that further work may need to be done;the <br /> uncertainty of no infrastructure. <br /> 'one asked if there should be specific changes in the scope to reflect that's <br /> Mr. Foster said that is a provision MEPA review will put in as well. It is used when no project is <br /> defined. It is a caveat in the scope which gives permission to re-scope in the future to address <br /> issues more directly as the project develops. <br /> Feather McElroy added that at the end of the ME PA review process,MEpA will sign off on <br /> issued of Mate interest and then it ill move to the DRI review and the Cape Cod Commission <br /> will hold a hearing and then may raise issued that the State may not have addressed, i.e. <br /> community character or econornic issues. <br /> 'horn Fudala said this specific scope was funded with an S F loan and he is worried because <br /> there are no additional funds to change or add to the scope. <br /> Mr. Sehlaikjer then invited the public to speak, <br /> d faker, Captains Row, Mashpee presented the Cape Cod Commission,ME PA and the Sewer <br /> Commission with written comments. He has concerns after reading the ENE He sloes not see <br /> the goals defined in the ENF. Also, it concentrates on wastewater, He suspects, if you removed <br /> all the wastewater from the Mashpe River watershed, the river would still have a problem. <br /> Other sources should be addressed in more detail, including read runoff, fertilizers, flushing of <br /> the Bay. <br /> Ken Malloy of Cotuit asked, when this process is over will there Mill be engineering and design <br /> 4 <br />